Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
AMEND 2019-0004; CHICK-FIL-A; PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP); 2023-08-23
CITY OF CARLSBAD FINAL PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP) FOR CHICK-FIL-A, #4306 PROJECT ID: CUP2021-0017 DWG NO: 538-3A & 538-3 GR2022-0026 / ROW2022-0401 SWQMP No. PENDING ENGINEER OF WORK: RANDY J. DECKER P.E. 81077 PREPARED FOR: CHICK-FIL-A, INC. 105 PROGRESS IRVINE, CA 92618 PREPARED BY: JOSEPH C. TRUXAW & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1915 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE. SUITE 101 ORANGE, CA 92868 (714) 935-0265 DATE: August 23, 2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS Certification Page Project Vicinity Map FORM E-34 Storm Water Standard Questionnaire Site Information FORM E-36 Standard Project Requirement Checklist Summary of PDP Structural BMPs Attachment 1: Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit Attachment 1b: Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1c: Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening (when applicable) Attachment 1d: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (when applicable) Attachment 1e: Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets / Calculations Attachment 1f: Trash Capture 1-Year 1-Hour calculations Attachment 2: Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2a: Hydromodification Management Exhibit Attachment 2b: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2c: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design and Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions Attachment 4: Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit Attachment 5: Geotechnical Report CERTIFICATION PAGE Project Name: CHICK-FIL-A, #4306 Project ID: CUP2021-0017, GR2022-0026, DWG No. 538-3A & 538-3, ROW2022-0401 I hereby declare that I am the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, and that I have exercised responsible charge over the design of the project as defined in Section 6703 of the Business and Professions Code, and that the design is consistent with the requirements of the BMP Design Manual, which is based on the requirements of SDRWQCB Order No. R9-2013-0001 (MS4 Permit) or the current Order. I have read and understand that the City Engineer has adopted minimum requirements for managing urban runoff, including storm water, from land development activities, as described in the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this SWQMP has been completed to the best of my ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable source control and site design BMPs proposed to minimize the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water quality. I understand and acknowledge that the plan check review of this SWQMP by the City Engineer is confined to a review and does not relieve me, as the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design. ________________________________________________________ Engineer of Work's Signature, PE Number & Expiration Date RANDY J. DECKER ________________________________________________________ Print Name JOSEPH C. TRUXAW & ASSOCIATES, INC. ________________________________________________________ Company 8-23-23 ____________________________ Date C81077 EXP. 9-30-23 PROJECT VICINITY MAP RONALD PACKARD PKWY. LEGOLAND R E S O R T ---~ BM NO. CLSB-IJB Cf\t1 I AIRPORT ROAD VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 442-339-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the city requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) into the project design per Carlsbad BMP Design Manual (BMP Manual). To view the BMP Manual, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 5). This questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to ‘STANDARD PROJECT’ requirements, “PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) requirements or not considered a development project. This questionnaire will also determine if the project is subject to TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the city. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted with each development project application. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT NAME: APN: ADDRESS: The project is (check one): New Development Redevelopment The total proposed disturbed area is: ft2 ( ) acres The total proposed newly created and/or replaced impervious area is: ft2 ( ) acres If your project is covered by an approved SWQMP as part of a larger development project, provide the project ID and the SWQMP # of the larger development project: Project ID SWQMP #: Then, go to Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. This Box for City Use Only City Concurrence: YES NO Date: Project ID: By: E-34 Page 1 of 4 REV 08/22 INSTRUCTIONS: CHICK-FIL-A #4306 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS, CARLSBAD, CA 210-170-08-00, 210-170-09-00 210-170-23-00 X 47,647 1.094 34,398 0.790 N/A N/A C cityof Carlsbad □ I O I O I □ E-34 Page 2 of 4 REV 08/22 STEP 1 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL PROJECTS To determine if your project is a “development project”, please answer the following question: YES NO Is your project LIMITED TO routine maintenance activity and/or repair/improvements to an existing building or structure that do not alter the size (See Section 1.3 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance)? If you answered “yes” to the above question, provide justification below then go to Step 6, mark the box stating “my project is not a ‘development project’ and not subject to the requirements of the BMP manual” and complete applicant information. Justification/discussion: (e.g. the project includes only interior remodels within an existing building): If you answered “no” to the above question, the project is a ‘development project’, go to Step 2. STEP 2 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS To determine if your project is exempt from PDP requirements pursuant to MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(3), please answer the following questions: Is your project LIMITED to one or more of the following: YES NO 1. Constructing new or retrofitting paved sidewalks, bicycle lanes or trails that meet the following criteria: a) Designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non- erodible permeable areas; OR b) Designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from paved streets or roads; OR c) Designed and constructed with permeable pavements or surfaces in accordance with USEPA Green Streets guidance? 2. Retrofitting or redeveloping existing paved alleys, streets, or roads that are designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Streets guidance? 3. Ground Mounted Solar Array that meets the criteria provided in section 1.4.2 of the BMP manual? If you answered “yes” to one or more of the above questions, provide discussion/justification below, then go to Step 6, mark the second box stating “my project is EXEMPT from PDP …” and complete applicant information. Discussion to justify exemption (e.g. the project redeveloping existing road designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Street guidance): If you answered “no” to the above questions, your project is not exempt from PDP, go to Step 3. X X X X □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ E-34 Page 3 of 4 REV 08/22 STEP 3 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL NEW OR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS To determine if your project is a PDP, please answer the following questions (MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(1)): YES NO 1. Is your project a new development that creates 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces collectively over the entire project site? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. 2. Is your project a redevelopment project creating and/or replacing 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. 3. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a restaurant? A restaurant is a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812). 4. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a hillside development project? A hillside development project includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater. 5. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and supports a parking lot? A parking lot is a land area or facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally for business or for commerce. 6. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious street, road, highway, freeway or driveway surface collectively over the entire project site? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles. 7. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire site, and discharges directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)? “Discharging Directly to” includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the project to the ESA (i.e. not commingled with flows from adjacent lands).* 8. Is your project a new development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface that supports an automotive repair shop? An automotive repair shop is a facility that is categorized in any one of the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532-7534, or 7536-7539. 9. Is your project a new development or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious area that supports a retail gasoline outlet (RGO)? This category includes RGO’s that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles per day. 10. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction? 11. Is your project located within 200 feet of the Pacific Ocean and (1) creates 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface or (2) increases impervious surface on the property by more than 10%? (CMC 21.203.040) If you answered “yes” to one or more of the above questions, your project is a PDP. If your project is a redevelopment project, go to step 4. If your project is a new project, go to step 5, complete the trash capture question. If you answered “no” to all of the above questions, your project is a ‘STANDARD PROJECT’. Go to step 5, complete the trash capture question. * Environmentally Sensitive Areas include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (1994) and amendments); areas designated as preserves or their equivalent under the Multi Species Conservation Program within the Cities and County of San Diego; Habitat Management Plan; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the City. X X X X X X X X X X X □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ E-34 Page 4 of 4 REV 08/22 STEP 4 TO BE COMPLETED FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (PDP) ONLY Complete the questions below regarding your redevelopment project (MS4 Permit Provision E.3.b.(2)): YES NO Does the redevelopment project result in the creation or replacement of impervious surface in an amount of less than 50% of the surface area of the previously existing development? Complete the percent impervious calculation below: Existing impervious area (A) = sq. ft. Total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area (B) = sq. ft. Percent impervious area created or replaced (B/A)*100 = % If you answered “yes”, the structural BMPs required for PDP apply only to the creation or replacement of impervious surface and not the entire development. Go to step 5, complete the trash capture question. If you answered “no,” the structural BMP’s required for PDP apply to the entire development. Go to step 5, complete the trash capture question. STEP 5 TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Complete the question below regarding your Project (SDRWQCB Order No. 2017-0077): YES NO Is the Project within any of the following Priority Land Use (PLU) categories and not exempt from trash capture requirements per section 4.4.2.2 of the BMP Manual? R-23 (15-23 du/ac), R-30 (23-30 du/ac), PI (Planned Industrial), CF (Community Facilities), GC (General Commercial), L (Local Shopping Center), R (Regional Commercial), V-B (Village-Barrio), VC (Visitor Commercial), O (Office), VC/OS (Visitor Commercial/Open Space), PI/O (Planned Industrial/Office), or Public Transportation Station If you answered “yes”, the ‘PROJECT’ is subject to TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS. Go to step 6, check the first box stating, “My project is subject to TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS …” and the second or third box as determined in step 3. If you answered “no”, Go to step 6, check the second or third box as determined in step 3. List exemption if applicable for ‘no’ answer here: STEP 6 CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) AND COMPLETE APPLICANT INFORMATION My project is subject to TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS and must comply with TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS of the BMP Manual. I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP). My project is a ‘STANDARD PROJECT’ OR EXEMPT from PDP and must only comply with ‘STANDARD PROJECT’ stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. I will submit a “Standard Project Requirement Checklist Form E-36”. If my project is subject to TRASH CAPTURE REQUIREMENTS, I will submit a TRASH CAPTURE Storm Water Quality Management Plan (TCSWQMP) per E-35A. My project is a PDP and must comply with PDP stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) per E-35 template for submittal at time of application. Note: For projects that are close to meeting the PDP threshold, staff may require detailed impervious area calculations and exhibits to verify if ‘STANDARD PROJECT’ stormwater requirements apply. My project is NOT a ‘development project’ and is not subject to the requirements of the BMP Manual. Applicant Information and Signature Box Applicant Name: Applicant Title: Applicant Signature: Date: 28,376 34,398 121 X X X CARLOS ARIAS WEST REGION DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION X 8/24/2023 | 7:54 PM EDT □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Cati.11s d'iia.s STANDARD PROJECT REQUIREMENT CHECKLIST E-36 E-36 Page 1 of 4 Revised 02/22 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 442-339-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov STANDARD PROJECT REQUIREMENT CHECKLIST E-36 Project Information Project Name: Project ID: DWG No. or Building Permit No.: Baseline BMPs for Existing and Proposed Site Features Complete the Table 1 - Site Design Requirement to document existing and proposed site features and the BMPs to be implemented for them. All BMPs must be implemented where applicable and feasible. Applicability is generally assumed if a feature exists or is proposed. BMPs must be implemented for site design features where feasible. Leaving the box for a BMP unchecked means it will not be implemented (either partially or fully) either because it is inapplicable or infeasible. Explanations must be provided in the area below. The table provides specific instructions on when explanations are required. Table 1 - Site Design Requirement A. Existing Natural Site Features (see Fact Sheet BL-1) 1. Check the boxes below for each existing feature on the site. 1. Select the BMPs to be implemented for each identified feature. Explain why any BMP not selected is infeasible in the area below. SD-G Conserve natural features SD-H Provide buffers around waterbodies Natural waterbodies Natural storage reservoirs & drainage corridors -- Natural areas, soils, & vegetation (incl. trees) -- B. BMPs for Common Impervious Outdoor Site Features (see Fact Sheet BL-2) 1. Check the boxes below for each proposed feature. 2. Select the BMPs to be implemented for each proposed feature. If neither BMP SD-B nor SD-I is selected for a feature, explain why both BMPs are infeasible in the area below. SD-B Direct runoff to pervious areas SD-I Construct surfaces from permeable materials Minimize size of impervious areas Streets and roads Check this box to confirm that all impervious areas on the site will be minimized where feasible. If this box is not checked, identify the surfaces that cannot be minimized in area below, and explain why it is Sidewalks & walkways Parking areas & lots Driveways Patios, decks, & courtyards Hardcourt recreation areas I-5 & Palomar, Chick-fil-A FSU CUP2021-0017 538-3A & 583-3 X X X X X X X Runoff accumulated within the parking areas and outdoor dining areas will be routed to bio-filtration basins sized based on the DCV. □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ C cityof Carlsbad □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ E-36 Page 2 of 4 Revised 02/22 Other: _______________ infeasible to do so. C. BMPs for Rooftop Areas: Check this box if rooftop areas are proposed and select at least one BMP below. If no BMPs are selected, explain why they are infeasible in the area below. (see Fact Sheet BL-3) SD-B Direct runoff to pervious areas SD-C Install green roofs SD-E Install rain barrels D. BMPs for Landscaped Areas: Check this box if landscaping is proposed and select the BMP below SD-K Sustainable Landscaping If SD-K is not selected, explain why it is infeasible in the area below. (see Fact Sheet BL-4) Provide discussion/justification for site design BMPs that will not be implemented (either partially or fully): Baseline BMPs for Pollutant-generating Sources All development projects must complete Table 2 - Source Control Requirement to identify applicable requirements for documenting pollutant-generating sources/ features and source control BMPs. BMPs must be implemented for source control features where feasible. Leaving the box for a BMP unchecked means it will not be implemented (either partially or fully) either because it is inapplicable or infeasible. Explanations must be provided in the area below. The table provides specific instructions on when explanations are required. Table 2 - Source Control Requirement A. Management of Storm Water Discharges 1. Identify all proposed outdoor work areas below Check here if none are proposed 2. Which BMPs will be used to prevent materials from contacting rainfall or runoff? (See Fact Sheet BL-5) Select all feasible BMPs for each work area 3. Where will runoff from the work area be routed? (See Fact Sheet BL-6) Select one or more option for each work area SC-A Overhead covering SC-B Separation flows from adjacent areas SC-C Wind protection SC-D Sanitary sewer SC-E Containment system Other Trash & Refuse Storage Materials & Equipment Storage X X X Runoff accumulated within building roof areas will be routed to bio-filtration basins sized based on the DCV. X X X X XXX □ □ □ D □ □ □ D D □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ E-36 Page 3 of 4 Revised 02/22 Loading & Unloading Fueling Maintenance & Repair Vehicle & Equipment Cleaning Other: _________________ B. Management of Storm Water Discharges (see Fact Sheet BL-7) Select one option for each feature below: • Storm drain inlets and catch basins … are not proposed will be labeled with stenciling or signage to discourage dumping (SC-F) • Interior work surfaces, floor drains & sumps … are not proposed will not discharge directly or indirectly to the MS4 or receiving waters • Drain lines (e.g. air conditioning, boiler, etc.) … are not proposed will not discharge directly or indirectly to the MS4 or receiving waters • Fire sprinkler test water … are not proposed will not discharge directly or indirectly to the MS4 or receiving waters Provide discussion/justification for source control BMPs that will not be implemented (either partially or fully): X X X X □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ Form Certification This E-36 Form is intended to comply with applicable requirements of the city's BMP Design Manual. I certify that it has been completed to the best of my ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable BMPs proposed to minimize the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water quality. I understand and acknowledge that the review of this form by City staff is confined to a review and does not relieve me as the person in charge of overseeing the selection and design of storm water BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for oroiect desion. Preparer Signature: (~".__ I Date: 7-13-23 _--i ) Print preparer name: Randy J. Decker E-36 Page 4 of 4 Revised 02/22 SITE INFORMATION CHECKLIST Project Summary Information Project Name CHICK-FIL-A, #4306 Project ID CUP2021-0017 Project Address 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s))210-170-08-00 & 210-170-09-00 & 210-170-23-00 Project Watershed (Hydrologic Unit) Carlsbad 904 Parcel Area 0.970 Acres ( 42,256 Square Feet) Existing Impervious Area (subset of Parcel Area) 0.651 Acres ( 28,376 Square Feet) Area to be disturbed by the project (Project Area) 1.094 Acres ( 47,647 Square Feet) Project Proposed Impervious Area (subset of Project Area) 0.790 Acres ( 34,398 Square Feet) Project Proposed Pervious Area (subset of Project Area) 0.304 Acres ( 13,249 Square Feet) Note: Disturbed area includes improvements in the Public R/W and on the adjacent property which consists of both pervious and impervious surfaces. Proposed pervious and impervious values above reflect only proposed surfaces within property limits and therefore do not add up to the total disturbed area. Proposed pervious area includes the surface of the bio-filtration basins. Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns Current Status of the Site (select all that apply): X Existing development Previously graded but not built out Agricultural or other non-impervious use Vacant, undeveloped/natural Description / Additional Information: Site is currently a developed site with a two-story commercial office building, associated parking and landscaped areas (grass) Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply): X Vegetative Cover Non-Vegetated Pervious Areas X Impervious Areas Description / Additional Information: Impervious surfaces include AC pavement, concrete sidewalk, building roof Pervious surfaces include grassy areas in front of the building, planters around the building and shrubs around the property perimeter Underlying Soil belongs to Hydrologic Soil Group (select all that apply): NRCS Type A NRCS Type B NRCS Type C NRCS Type D Approximate Depth to Groundwater (GW): GW Depth < 5 feet 5 feet < GW Depth < 10 feet 10 feet < GW Depth < 20 feet GW Depth > 20 feet Existing Natural Hydrologic Features (select all that apply): Watercourses Seeps Springs Wetlands X None Description / Additional Information: X X Description of Existing Site Topography and Drainage [How is storm water runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should answer (1) whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban; (2) describe existing constructed storm water conveyance systems, if applicable; and (3) is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? if so, describe]: The project site is currently occupied by a two-story commercial building with parking stalls surrounding the building on the easterly and southerly sides. Drive access locations are located along Avenida Encinas, by a drive aisle from the adjacent property (In-N-Out) and a driveway into Avenida Encinas just north of the building. Parking stalls consist of asphalt concrete pavement that is in moderate condition and drains surface runoff via a concrete v-gutter. The v- gutter was found to have a high point at the southeast corner of the site where it drains in two directions: · Northerly to discharge surface runoff out the existing driveway and into Avenida Encinas. Once the surface runoff has entered the curb & gutter in Avenida Encinas it travels south to a municipal curb inlet where it is collected into the municipal storm drain system. · Westerly to convey runoff through the shared drive aisle and into an existing grated inlet catch basin. Once collected in the private catch basin it is then conveyed through an 18” private storm drain and travels north back onto the project site where it discharges into the same curb inlet in Avenida Encinas as stated above. The landscaped area in front of the two-story building drains toward the sidewalk eventually collecting into curb and gutter along Avenida Encinas. Total project site acreage is approximately 1.10 acres with 0.583 acre (53.0%) of imperviousness. The survey that was performed revealed that the parking row just south of the building collects runoff into the v-gutter on the project site. This parking row is outside property limits and therefore the project site is accepting offsite drainage. It was also found that the 18” private storm drain directs concentrated surface runoff from southern properties through the site, and it was also found that storm water clarifiers were installed in line with this private storm drain upstream of the project site. Therefore offsite surface flows collected upstream of the project site that travel through this private storm drain are anticipated to have been treated by these clarifiers. From private storm drain systems, drainage will continue on thru to public storm drain conveyance systems. Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities: The proposed development will consists of a complete site demolition and removal of existing features for the construction of a new single story restaurant. Proposed improvements will consist of a new building, trash enclosure, parking areas, outdoor patio, landscaped areas, and bio-filtration basins. The land use will be commercial and activities will include preparation of food & offsite/onsite food consumption. List/describe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features): Proposed impervious surfaces will include the rooftop of the building and trash enclosure, asphalt pavement in parking areas and concrete sidewalks. List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas): Proposed pervious surfaces will include landscaped areas planted with drought tolerant species and bio-filtration basin surfaces. Does the project include grading and changes to site topography? X Yes No Description / Additional Information: A complete demolition and removal of existing features will be done and grading will be performed to allow for the proposed features. Proposed grading will follow the existing site topography as best as possible. Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)? X Yes No Description / Additional Information: The site will be designed to follow the existing topography as best as possible, however to comply with Low Impact Development requirements the runoff will be intercepted by 2 bio- filtration basins before discharging from private storm drain systems into the municipal storm drain systems. Once the treated runoff leaves the bio-filtration basins it will enter the proposed onsite storm drain system where it will discharge into the existing inlet on Avenida Encinas, the same catch basin as the existing condition. Because of grading constraints, disturbed area in from Offsite Drainage Areas 3 (0.018 AC, 790 SF draining to existing 18-inch storm drain traversing northerly through the site), 4 (0.017 AC, 722 SF as a portion of southwest entry driveway fronting Avenida Encinas), and 5 (0.106 AC, 4,628 SF as small portions of Avenida Encinas street surface) will preserve their existing grading scheme. It will be infeasible to substantially re-grade these offsite disturbed areas to have runoffs there captured and conveyed to proposed biofiltration basins. In lieu of treating these disturbed offsite areas, the bio-filtration basins will be sized to treat the undisturbed impervious area of Offsite Drainage Areas 1 (0.112 AC, 4,895 SF) & 2 (0.018 AC, 873 SF). Accounting for undisturbed, treated areas, the total area treated for the project site will be 1.088 AC or 47,375 SF, out of a total disturbed area of 1.101 AC or 47,944 SF, leaving 0.013 AC or 569 SF untreated, approximately 1.2 percent of total disturbed area, not exceeding 2 percent as “de minimis DMAs” categorized in Section 5.2.2 of City of Carlsbad BMP Design Manual. Also, the catch basins in Offsite Drainage Area 3 accept runoffs from the existing southerly neighboring property. Proposed condition runoff to these catch basins will not increase from existing condition, since the existing southerly neighboring property will not be disturbed, and there will be no increase of onsite areas tributary to these catch basins. The primary change to the site drainage conditions are the bio-filtration basins and underground storm capture vaults that will treat and control the discharge flow of the site runoff. See calculation worksheets and SDHM for bio-filtration sizing and hydromodification calculations. For complete breakdown of treated, untreated, disturbed, and undisturbed areas, please see table on DMA Map in Attachment 1a of this report. Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply): On-site storm drain inlets Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps Interior parking garages Need for future indoor & structural pest control Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Food service Refuse areas Industrial processes Outdoor storage of equipment or materials Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fuel Dispensing Areas Loading Docks Fire Sprinkler Test Water Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots X X X X X X Identification of Receiving Water Pollutants of Concern Describe path of storm water from the project site to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable): Plans provided by the City of Carlsbad and the Storm Drain Atlas found on the City website were used to determine the ultimate flowpath of runoff leaving the project site. It was found that once the treated and controlled runoff discharge into the catch basin in Avenida Encinas, the storm water is directed through a storm drain in Avenida Encinas. The storm drain travels north and outlets runoff into a vegetated ditch where the runoff continues north, then appears to enter a second storm drain pipe that travels underneath the Encinas Power Plant. Finally the storm drain pipe discharges runoff into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. List any 303(d) impaired water bodies within the path of storm water from the project site to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable), identify the pollutant(s)/stressor(s) causing impairment, and identify any TMDLs for the impaired water bodies: 303(d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s) TMDLs Agua Hedionda Lagoon Toxicity None Listed Identification of Project Site Pollutants Identify pollutants anticipated from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see BMP Design Manual Appendix B.6): Pollutant Not Applicable to the Project Site Anticipated from the Project Site Also a Receiving Water Pollutant of Concern Sediment X Nutrients X Heavy Metals X Organic Compounds X Trash & Debris X Oxygen Demanding Substances X Oil & Grease X Bacteria & Viruses X X Pesticides P Hydromodification Management Requirements Do hydromodification management requirements apply (see Section 1.6 of the BMP Design Manual)? X Yes, hydromodification management flow control structural BMPs required. No, the project will discharge runoff directly to existing underground storm drains discharging directly to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean. No, the project will discharge runoff directly to conveyance channels whose bed and bank are concrete-lined all the way from the point of discharge to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean. No, the project will discharge runoff directly to an area identified as appropriate for an exemption by the WMAA for the watershed in which the project resides. Description / Additional Information (to be provided if a 'No' answer has been selected above): As the runoff from the subject site travels throughout the municipal storm drain system, there is a section that is a vegetated ditch that is not concrete lined. Therefore, by MS4 permit regulations this site is required control runoff flowrates to reduce sediment transport from this ditch into Agua Hedionda Lagoon Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas* *This Section only required if hydromodification management requirements apply Based on the maps provided within the WMAA, do potential critical coarse sediment yield areas exist within the project drainage boundaries? Yes No, No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on WMAA maps If yes, have any of the optional analyses presented in Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Manual been performed? 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units (GLUs) Onsite 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite No optional analyses performed, the project will avoid critical coarse sediment yield areas identified based on WMAA maps If optional analyses were performed, what is the final result? No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on verification of GLUs onsite Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist but additional analysis has determined that protection is not required. Documentation attached in Attachment 8 of the SWQMP. Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist and require protection. The project will implement management measures described in Sections 6.2.4 and 6.2.5 as applicable, and the areas are identified on the SWQMP Exhibit. Discussion / Additional Information: No critical coarse sediment yield areas exist onsite or upstream of the project site. X h Flow Control for Post-Project Runoff* *This Section only required if hydromodification management requirements apply List and describe point(s) of compliance (POCs) for flow control for hydromodification management (see Section 6.3.1). For each POC, provide a POC identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit and a receiving channel identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit. The SDHM program was used to design the hydromodification parameters of the storm water treatment system. After inputting the bio-filtration basin design characteristics, the system passed the hydromodification test using the outlet of the Storm Capture Vaults at the flow control device as the Point of Compliance. Has a geomorphic assessment been performed for the receiving channel(s)? X No, the low flow threshold is 0.1Q2 (default low flow threshold) Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.1Q2 Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.3Q2 Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.5Q2 If a geomorphic assessment has been performed, provide title, date, and preparer: Discussion / Additional Information: (optional) Other Site Requirements and Constraints When applicable, list other site requirements or constraints that will influence storm water management design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or City codes governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and drainage requirements. N/A Optional Additional Information or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous sections as needed. SUMMARY OF PDP STRUCTURAL BMPS PDP Structural BMPs All PDPs must implement structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control (see Chapter 5 of the BMP Design Manual). Selection of PDP structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control must be based on the selection process described in Chapter 5. PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must also implement structural BMPs for flow control for hydromodification management (see Chapter 6 of the BMP Design Manual). Both storm water pollutant control and flow control for hydromodification management can be achieved within the same structural BMP(s). PDP structural BMPs must be verified by the City at the completion of construction. This may include requiring the project owner or project owner's representative to certify construction of the structural BMPs (see Section 1.12 of the BMP Design Manual). PDP structural BMPs must be maintained into perpetuity, and the City must confirm the maintenance (see Section 7 of the BMP Design Manual). Use this form to provide narrative description of the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the project site in the box below. Then complete the PDP structural BMP summary information sheet for each structural BMP within the project (copy the BMP summary information page as many times as needed to provide summary information for each individual structural BMP). Describe the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the site. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and designing storm water pollutant control BMPs presented in Section 5.1 of the BMP Design Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring hydromodification flow control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated together or separate. A soils report was provided and analyzed to determine if infiltration of storm water runoff is a feasible option for this site. The report shows two percolation borings with infiltration rates found to be: 0.05 & 0.00 in/hr, giving an average of 0.025 in/hr. Using form I-9 from the City BMP Design Manual Appendices, the factor of safety to be used is 3.5 giving a design infiltration rate of 0.007 in/hr which is insufficient for infiltration purposes and therefore deeming infiltration infeasible. Form I-7 was used to determine the feasibility of harvest and use as a storm water treatment system. However, due to low demand of irrigation water usage and moderate facility usage, harvest and use is also not feasible as the demand will not allow for drawdown of collected storm water in the required time. Bio-filtration was decided as the proposed BMP for this project site. The site has sufficient landscaped areas to be used for bio-filtration basins however due to the topography certain areas were deemed infeasible, such as the landscape buffer between Avenida Encinas and the site parking fronting Avenida Encinas. The grading design required two (2) basins to be spaced out around the site instead with one basin within the drive-thru to capture the runoff from the building and trash enclosure roof and drive-thru pavement, and a second basin at the north corner of the site to capture the remainder of the parking lot and existing parking area that is to remain adjacent to the In-N-Out. The surface of each bio-filtration basin was maximized due to the fact that the invert of the existing catch basin invert elevation is approx. 3.6’ below finished surface. This requires the basins to be designed with the min. depths: · 3” mulch above engineered soil · 18” Engineered Soil · 12” Gravel (3” above perf. Pipe, 6” perf pipe, 3” below perf. Pipe) Due to very low infiltration rates the basins are proposed to be lined. Using the applicable worksheets it was found that with the min. depths the basin still provide the necessary storage for treatment. This BMP type was also selected using the BMP fact sheet BF-1 for pollutant control as is removes the anticipated pollutants from this site. To comply with hydromodification requirements underground storm capture vaults are proposed to store surface runoff and control the flow discharging from the site due to the fact that the basins do not provide enough storage for hydromodification. See HMP Exhibit for details of the storm capture vault and flow control device. As noted earlier in this report, because of grading constraints, disturbed area in from Offsite Drainage Areas 3 (0.018 AC, 790 SF draining to existing 18-inch storm drain traversing northerly through the site), 4 (0.017 AC, 722 SF as a portion of southwest entry driveway fronting Avenida Encinas), and 5 (0.106 AC, 4,628 SF as small portions of Avenida Encinas street surface) will preserve their existing grading scheme. It will be infeasible to substantially re-grade these offsite disturbed areas to have runoffs there captured and conveyed to proposed biofiltration basins. In lieu of treating these disturbed offsite areas, the bio-filtration basins will be sized to treat the undisturbed impervious area of Offsite Drainage Areas 1 (0.112 AC, 4,895 SF) & 2 (0.018 AC, 873 SF). Accounting for undisturbed, treated areas, the total area treated for the project site will be 1.088 AC or 47,375 SF, out of a total disturbed area of 1.101 AC or 47,944 SF, leaving 0.013 AC or 569 SF untreated, approximately 1.2 percent of total disturbed area, not exceeding 2 percent as “de minimis DMAs” categorized in Section 5.2.2 of City of Carlsbad BMP Design Manual. Also, the catch basins in Offsite Drainage Area 3 accept runoffs from the existing southerly neighboring property. Proposed condition runoff to these catch basins will not increase from existing condition, since the existing southerly neighboring property will not be disturbed, and there will be no increase of onsite areas tributary to these catch basins. The primary change to the site drainage conditions are the bio-filtration basins and underground storm capture vaults that will treat and control the discharge flow of the site runoff. See calculation worksheets and SDHM for bio-filtration sizing and hydromodification calculations. For complete breakdown of treated, untreated, disturbed, and undisturbed areas, please see table on DMA Map in Attachment 1a of this report. Structural BMP Summary Information [Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. T1 DWG: Conceptual Grading Plan Sheet No. 4 – Low Impact Development Plan Type of structural BMP: Retention by harvest and use (HU-1) Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) Retention by bioretention (INF-2) Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) Biofiltration (BF-1) Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: Pollutant control only Hydromodification control only Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): X X Structural BMP Summary Information [Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. T2 DWG: Conceptual Grading Plan Sheet No. 4 – Low Impact Development Plan Type of structural BMP: Retention by harvest and use (HU-1) Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) Retention by bioretention (INF-2) Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) Biofiltration (BF-1) Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: Pollutant control only Hydromodification control only Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): X X Structural BMP Summary Information [Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. T3 DWG: Conceptual Grading Plan Sheet No. 4 – Low Impact Development Plan Type of structural BMP: Retention by harvest and use (HU-1) Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) Retention by bioretention (INF-2) Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) Biofiltration (BF-1) Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below) Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: Pollutant control only Hydromodification control only Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): X X ATTACHMENT 1 BACKUP FOR PDP POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS This is the cover sheet for Attachment 1. Check which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Sequence Contents Checklist Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit (Required) See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. (24”x36” Exhibit typically required) Included Attachment 1b Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing DMA ID matching DMA Exhibit, DMA Area, and DMA Type (Required)* *Provide table in this Attachment OR on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1a Included on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1a Included as Attachment 1b, separate from DMA Exhibit Attachment 1c Form I-7, Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Checklist (Required unless the entire project will use infiltration BMPs) Refer to Appendix B.3-1 of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form I-7. Included Not included because the entire project will use infiltration BMPs Attachment 1d Form I-8, Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (Required unless the project will use harvest and use BMPs) Refer to Appendices C and D of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form I-8. Included Not included because the entire project will use harvest and use BMPs Attachment 1e Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets / Calculations (Required) Refer to Appendices B and E of the BMP Design Manual for structural pollutant control BMP design guidelines Included Attachment 1f Trash Capture BMP Manufacturer’s Specifications Included X X X X X X Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the DMA Exhibit: The DMA Exhibit must identify: X Underlying hydrologic soil group X Approximate depth to groundwater X Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) X Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) X Existing topography and impervious areas X Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite X Proposed grading X Proposed impervious features X Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness X Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, and DMA areas (square footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to BMP, self-retaining, or self-mitigating) X Structural BMPs (identify location and type of BMP) Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit * * * * * * ** ** ** ** IIIIA-1 (3UIJD SF • 4711 AC} 11EATBJ II BIR.111A TOI BAtJ/11 Tt 414 SI We I I .. --.... .... ...... ·, '-......,,.,. ...__ ...__ GRAPHIC SCALE ...__ (53J5) TC (4 . (52.70)f~-, (48.81) NICIPAL STO ST 10 20 <O BO I_I l __ ~I ( IN FEET ) I inch = 20 It. LID FEATURES lsc-11 lsc-21 PREVENT ILLICIT DISCHARGES TO THE MS4 ISC-31 PROTECT OUTDOOR MATERIAL STORAGE AREAS FROM RAINFALL, RUN-ON, RUNOFF AND WIND DISPERSAL ISC-51 PROTECT TRASH STORAGE AREAS FROM RAINFALL, RUN-ON, RUNOFF, AND WIND DISPERSAL ISC-61 ADDITIONAL BMPS -POTENTIAL SOURCES OF RUNOFF POLLUTION A. ON-SITE STORM DRAIN INLETS 02. LANDSCAPE/OUTDOOR PESTICIDE USE E. FOOD SERVICE G. REFUSE AREAS P. PLAZAS, SIDEWALKS, AND PARKING LOTS ISD-31 MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA ISD-51 DISPERSE IMPERVIOUS AREAS ISD-61 COLLECT RUNOFF lso 71 LANDSCAPE WITH NATIVE OR -DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES PLAN PREPARED BY: JOSEPH C. TRUXAW AND ASSOCIATES, INC. NOTES: VARIES b:, ' l ':-,., 1" • <D ' ·..-, NATIVE SOIL .. .. INTERSTATE ROUTE NO. /-5 SIZE VARIES VARIES .... - EL. VARIES t1< ' • I I • .• t--~5--".----:;;_~.-. . . I=-... . .. . .. . . . ·-..... , . -~~ ·-·~-. : ;.;->:>.•; .. _·,::./~.:·· MULCH LAY 1 1 "--~-1MEDIA LAYER r>-';i·<:::·:,;:._ • ------IMPERMEABLE LINER ... ' . ... .. , .• ~ .•• ; ~=; ;·; ~ •• : •• • ··~ LJ .. s;t"'~§::.<~,~'2_:'.·"@;:;,,!!:"-[· ::;\JCYS:. ',,,~c\~,:·3•-~~--~~~-3" LAYER ASTM C33 CHOCKER SAND Ov£R 3" LAYER ASTM NO. 8 AGGREGAlE (CAN BE REDUCED TO 4' WASHED PEA GRAv£L, 111TH 8' CLASS 2 PERMEABLE) PLAN OUTLET PIPE DIA. PER PLAN TO PROPOSED MANHOLE 6' CLASS 2 PERMEABLE PER CAL TRANS SPECIFlCA TION 68-1.025 Civil Engineers &:-La:nd. Surueyors 1915 W. ORANGEWOOO AVENUE, SUITE 101 ORANGE, CA 92868 MEDIA LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 60% TO 80% BY VOLUME SAND, UP TO 20% BY VOLUME TOPSOIL, AND UP TO 20% BY VOLUME COMPOST. SEE SECTION 803-2.1 OF THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BMP DESIGN MANUAL PHONE: (714) 935-0265 TRUXAW.COM BID--IL TR -IC-JI\J B :~;I\ A.P.N., 210-170-17-00 OWNER, SNYDER LEASJNG OFFS/TE AREA 1 _.· (I/NIJISTIJRBED, TREATED} 4,8116 SF • 0.112 AC IMPERVIOIIS TREATED BY B/OFl.11lA TION BASIN IN OMA-1 . .._ (56.09) Ff DOOR TOTAL DMA-1 g= (N:LIDN& ONSITE DMA-t (ffSITE ~ AREA 1, lfFSITE AREA 2) 31,096 SF • 0.714 AC 25,978 SF • 0.598 AC M'ERVDJS 5119 SF • 0.118 AC PERVDIS I I I \ \ NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASCERTAIN THE TRUE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOCATION AND SIZE OF ALL UTILITIES, PIPES, AND/OR STRUCT\JRES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE TO ANY PUBLIC OR PRIYATr UTILITIES, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN HEREON. IMPOIIIANT NOl1Ct: Section ,4216 of the Government Code requires o Dig Alert ldentlflootlon Number be Issued before a "Permit to Excavate" wlll bl valld. For your Dig Alert I.D. Number coll Underground Service Alert CALL 811 Two working days before you dig. * LEGEND • • • • LIMITS OF TRIBUTARY AREAS TO BIO-FILTRATION BASINS LIMITS OF OMA RONALD PACKARD PKWY. AIRPORT ROAD VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE STRUCTURAL BMPs FOR POLLUTANT CONTROL MANAGEMENT f-n\ BIO-FILTRATION BASIN-1 (LINED) - - - - - - -LIMITS OF DISTURBED AREAS ~ EXISTING STORM DRAIN © BIO-FILTRATION BASIN-2 (LINED) © DETENTION TANKS PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LAND COVER ~ DISTURBED SELF-MITIGATING ~ OLDCASTLE FLOGARD CATCH BASIN INSERTS IL.J::::SJ LANDSCAPE AREA ~ MODEL No. FGP-36F ~ DISTURBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS TREATIED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN G::j DISTURBED LANDSCAPE AREAS TREATIED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN ~ UNDISTURBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS TREATED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN l·::j DISTURBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS UNTREATED DIFFERENCE OF 0.6 PERCENT STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN INFORMATION OR LESS THAN 2 PERCENT "DE MIN/MIS DMAs" PER 1. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP 'B' 2. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER = 17 -18 ft. SECTION 5.2.2 OF CITY OF CARLSBAD BMP DESIGN MANUAL 3. NO NATURAL HYDROLOGIC FEATURES EXIST WITHIN THIS PROJECT SITE 4. NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS EXIST DOWNSTREAM OF THIS PROJECT SITE SURFACE TYPE AREA AC PERVIOUS AC IMPERVIOUS AC PROPOSED BMP ONSITIE AC/CONCRETIE 0.464 79.8% BIO-FILTRATION @ DMA-1 0.582 BASIN-1 LANDSCAPE 0.118 20.2" ONSITIE ROOF -PAVEMENT 0.187 59.8% BIO-FILTRATION@ DMA-2 0.313 BASIN-2 LANDSCAPE 0.126 40.2" SELF MITIGATING AREAS -0.061 AC, 2,640 SF TOTAL SURFACE TYPE AREA AC PERVIOUS AC IMPERVIOUS AC PROPOSED BMP SMA-1 LANDSCAPE 0.057 0.057 100.0% 0 0 N/A SMA-2 LANDSCAPE 0.004 0.004 100.0% 0 0 N/A OFFSITE AREAS TO BASIN -UNDISlURBED, lREATED IN DMA-1 -0.132 AC, 5,768 SF TOTAL SURFACE TYPE AREA AC PERVIOUS AC IMPERVIOUS AC PROPOSED BMP OFFSITIE AC PAVEMENT 0.112 0 0 0.112 100.0% BIO-FILTRATION@ AREA 1 BASIN-1 OFFSITIE AC PAVEMENT 0.020 0 0 0.020 100.0% BIO-FILTRATION@ AREA 2 BASIN-1 OFFSITE DRAINAGE AREAS -DISlURBED, UNTREATED -0.139 AC, 6,040 SF TOTAL SURFACE TYPE AREA AC PERVIOUS AC IMPERVIOUS AC PROPOSED BMP OFFSITIE CONCRETIE, 0.018 0 0 0.018 100.0% N/A AREA 3 AC PAVEMENT OFFSITIE AC PAVEMENT 0.017 0 0 0.017 100.0% N/A AREA 4 OFFSITIE CONCRETIE, 0.104 0 0 0.104 100.0% N/A AREA 5 AC PAVEMENT ~ ~ ~ Cl ~ S: ~ ~ .. § " .. ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ 0\ -;;;:---!::::.. ~ ~ ~ ~ 0\ ~ <'j ~ .,; (,j "" ~ "'l::J c::s § ...:: <::, -.....J - "'l::J ,I!! ~ § i ~ ..., .., Cb ~ Cb .5: ., t:J) ~ ~ ~ c::s :;::; l!:: ::.;: ~ ·-~ 0, - <( z 0:::: 0 LL. -...J u, <( c.o<Cu oZLL.. a.. ...,,c3 0 ;~w <:( I- ~ <C<( <( IOI-..,,J-u, <:( -Z LL. uJ ft ~ l>c ~<(<( 0 u m -cou, :::c -.;:t ...J Uco~ uiu LL. 0 >-I--u DATE 08-23-23 DRAWN BY RCH/SGC CHECKED BY RD JOB NO. CFA18050 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 SHEETS Attachment 1b Tabular Summary of DMAs (Table provided on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1a) Attachment 1c Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening X X X X X TOILET FLUSHING Per table B.3-1: 7 uses per day Assuming 3.45 gal/flush Total consumption over 36 Hrs 12 employees * 7 * 3.45 * 1.5 = 434.7 gal. IRRIGATION HA = 7,354 s.f. ETWU = 2.7in * ((0.4 * 7,354)/0.9) * 0.015 ETWU = 1323.7 gal. 1,715 X Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Harvest and Use Feasibility Checklist Form 1-7 1. Is there a demand for harvested water (check all that apply) at the project site that is reliably present during the wet season? D Toilet and urinal flushing □Landscape irrigation D Other: _____ _ 2. If there is a demand; estimate the anticipated average wet season demand over a period of 36 hours. Guidance for planning level demand calculations for toilet/urinal Q!,lshing and landscape irrigation is provided in Section B.3.2. [Provide a summary of calculations here] 3. Calculate the DCV using worksheet B.2-1. DCV =~~ ___ (cubic feet) 3a. Is the 36 hour demand greater than or equal to the DCV? D Yes / ~No c:> ~ Harvest and use appears to be feasible. Conduct more detailed evaluation and sizing calculations to confirm that DCV can be used at an adec1uate rate to meet drawdown criteria. 36. Is the 36 hour demand greater than 0.25DCV but less than the full DCV? D Yes I 5( No ~ -0- Harvest and use may be feasible. Conduct more detailed evaluation and sizing calculations to determine feasibility. Hatvest and use may only be able to be used for a portion of the site, or (optionally) the storage may need to be upsized to meet long term capture targets while draining in longer than 36 hours. Is harvest and use feasible based on further evaluation? D Yes, refer to Appencli, E to select and size harvest and use B:tvfPs. t:il No, select alternate BlvfPs. 1-2 3c. Is the 36 hour demand less than 0.25DCV? ~ Yes t Harvest and use is considered to be infeasible. Februa1y 2016 Attachment 1d Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X X Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, on-site infiltration is not suitable due to very low infiltration rates obtained during testing. Appendix I: Forrns and Checklists Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Form I-8 Condition Part 1 -Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Yes No Summarize fi.ndi11gs of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide n:irrntive discussion of sh1dy / data source applicability. 2 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of gcotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater 1nouncling, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to th.is Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of tl1e factors presented in Appendi.., C.2. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to sh1dies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of sh1cly / data source applicability. I-3 Febrnary 2016 Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteri a 3 ... ,,-.. Form I-8 _Page 2 of 4 Screening Question Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of grnundwater contamiuation (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based 011 a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented i.n Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Yes No Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to sn1dies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. l)rovide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability. 4 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface ·waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize fu1dings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability. Part 1 Result * If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are "Yes" a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening categorr is Full Infiltration If any answer from row 1-4 is~in£iltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or esirable to achieve a "full infiltration" design. Proceed to Part 2 *To be completed usmg gathered site 111formauon and best professional judgment considering the definition of rvillP in the i\1S4 Permit. Additional testing and/or st11dies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. I-4 Februa1y 2016 Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Appendix I: Fotms and Checklists fft::<.;,,,-o.1 ""1', •• -•,.• ... ""!;j ....,-. •·r-,t";•... " ..... v i F~rm I-8 Page 3 of 4 Part 2 -Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria 5 Screening Question Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to tJus Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of tJ1e factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendi.x D. Provide basis: Yes No Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study /data source applicability and why it was not feasible to nutigate low infiltration rates. 6 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of gcotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) tliat cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in .t\ppendix C.2. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of sh1dy / data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiJtrntion rates. 1-5 Februa1y 2016 Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Per soils report by Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. dated 11/16/2021, infiltration rates were determined to be 0.00 in/hr and 0.05 in/hr. X Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteria 7 Form I-8 Page 4 of 4 Screening Question Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in 1\ppendix C.3. Provide basis: Yes No Summarize findings of sh1dies; provide reference to sh1dies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/ data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rntes. 8 Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3 . Provide basis: Summari7.e findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide ni1rrative discussion of study /data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Part 2 Result* If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration. If all)' answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any vohune is considered to be infeasible withi11 the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is{No Infiltration) ·<To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of .MEP in the i\1S4 Permit. Additional testing and/ or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. I-6 Februaty 2016 Attachment 1e Pollution Control BMP Design Worksheets / Calculations Automated Worksheet B.1: Calculation of Design Capture Volume (V2.0) •· ... 1 Drainage Basin ID or Name 2 85th Percentile 24-hr Storm Dcoth 3 Impervious Surfaces 1'.T-i ... : _____ _. tn ... :~---~:--·-M cc-0.90 4 Semi-Pervious Surfaces u t-oo TY .. , cc-o.3o I !. :. 5 Eneineered Pervious Surfaces Nnt Servino-~<: n· (C 0.10 6 Natural Type A Soil t,.T_ .. c---= ·~ -i<.: nic:.n--: •·· cc-0.10 7 Natutal Type B Soil" < 1,, .. .. , cc-0.14 8 Natural Tvoc C Soil 1'.T,.... .. <::. ..... .;.,,.,. ~<: n ;,. ...... .,,.;,.. ... 4 .... ,. (C 0.23 9 Natutal Type D Soil e n;on•'"'~· , ... (C 0.30 10 Does Tributary Incorporate Dispersion, Tree Wells, and/or Rain Barrels? 11 Impervious Surfaces Directed to Disi,ersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.90 12 Semi-Pervious Surfaces Serving as Dispersion Arca per SD-B (Ci=0.30 13 En~eered Pervious Surfaces Servin2 as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10 I 14 Natural Type A Soil Servine-as Dispersion Area per SD-B (Ci=0.10 ' ,. 15 Natural Type B Soil Serving as Dispersion Area pee SD-B (Ci=0.14) 16 Natutal Type C Soil Servine: as Dispecsion Acea per SD-B (Ci=0.23 I• • 17 Natural Tvoe D Soil Serving as Disl)ersion Area pee SD-B (Ci=0.30 18 Number of Tree Wells Proposed per SD-A 19 Avcrwc Matute Tree Canopy Diameter 20 Number of Rain Barrels Proposed per SD-E 21 Average Rain Barrel Size 22 Total Tributary Area 23 Initial Rw10ff Factor for Standard Drainaee Areas 24 Initial Runoff Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 25 Initial Weighted Runoff Factor 26 Initial Desi2t1 Capture Volwne 27 Total Impervious Area Dispersed co Pervious Surface 28 Total Pervious Dispersion Area I • • Ratio of Dispersed Impervious Area to Pervious Dispersion Area 29 30 Adjustment Factor for Dispersed & Dispersion Areas 31 Runoff Factor After Dispersion Techniques 32 Desi2t1 Capture Volume Afcer Dispersion Techniques .. 33 Total Tree Well Volume Reduction ., 34 Total Rain Barrel Volume Reduction 35 Final Adiusted Runoff Factor 36 Final Effective Tributary Arca 37 Initial Desi.i;,i Capture Volume Retained by Site Desi£O Elements 38 Final Desi2t1 Capture Volume Tributarv co BMP IJS:g :11'.amilli: M,Hai:i:1 * Total Impervious Area in Onsite DMA-1 + Offsite Area 1 + Offsite Area 2 20,208 SF Onsite DMA-1 (0.464 AC) + 4,895 SF Offsite Area 1 (0.112 AC) + 873 SF Offsite Area 2 (0.020 AC) = 25,976 SF Total (0.596 AC) Onsite DMA-1 + Offsite Area 1 + Offsite Area 2 DMA-2 0.58 0.58 25,976 * 8,150 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,119 5,490 0 0 0 0 No No No No 31,095 13,640 0 0 0.77 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.59 0.00 0.00 1,157 389 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 0.59 n/a n/a 1,157 389 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.77 0.59 0.00 0.00 23,943 8,048 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,157 389 0 0 unitless inches sq-ft sq-ft SQ-ft sq-ft sq-ft SQ-ft sq-ft No No No No No No 1ves/no SQ-ft sq-ft sq-ft SQ-ft sq-ft sq-ft SQ-ft # ft # 1ga1 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ratio n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a unitless 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 unitless 0 0 0 0 0 0 sq-ft 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet Automated Worksheet B.2: Retention Requirements (V2.0) • . . 1 Drainage Basin ID or Name Onsicc DMA-1 + Offsitc Arca 1 + Offsitc Arca 2 DMA-2 unitlcss 2 85th Percentile Rainfall Depth 0.58 0.58 inches 3 Predominant NRCS Soil Type Within Bl\1P Location B B unitless .. : 4 Is proposed BMP location Restricted or Unrestricted for Infiltration Activities? Unrestricted Unrestricted unicless 5 Nature of Restriction n/a n/a unitless 6 Do Minimwn Retention Requirements Apply to this Project? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes yes/no 7 Are Habitable Strucrures Greater than 9 Stories Proposed? No No yes/no .. .. 8 Has Geotechnical Engineer Performed an Infiltration Analysis? Yes Yes yes/no 9 Design Infiltration Race Recommended by Geotechnical Engineei 0.007 0.007 in/hr 10 Design Infiltration Rate Used To Determine Retention Requirements 0.007 0.007 in/hr •. 11 Percent of Average Annual Runoff that Must be Retained within DMA 4.5% 4.5% percentage 12 Fraction ofDCV Requiring Retention 0.02 O.D2 ratio 13 Required Retention Volwne 23 8 cubic-feet No Warning Message1 I Autom ated Worksheet B.3: BMP Performance (V2.0) .. • . . 1 Drainae:e Basin ID or Name Onsite DMA-1 + Offshe Area 1 + Offsite Area 2 DMA-2 sa-ft 2 Desi(!n Infi1cration Rate Recommended 0.007 0.007 in/hr 3 Desi£{1 Capture Volwne Tributary to BMP 1,157 389 cubic-feet 4 Is BMP VC2Ctated or Unve2etated? Unvcectatcd Unvce:etatcd unitless 5 Is BMP lmoenneablv Lined or Unlined? Lined lined unitless 6 Does BMP Have an Underdrnin? Underdrain Underdrain unitless 7 Does BMP Utilize Standard or Soecialized Media? Standard Standard unitless 8 Provided Surface Area 823 364 sa-ft ; 9 Provided Surface Ponding Depth 6 6 inches 10 Provided Soil Media Thickness 18 18 inches 11 Provided Gravel Thickness (Total Thickness 12 12 inches 12 Underdrain Offset 3 3 inches 13 Diameter of Undcrdrain or Hvdromod Orifice (Select Smallest 6.00 6.00 inches 14 Soecialized Soil Media Filtration Rate in/hr 15 Specialized Soil Media Pore Space for Retention unitless 16 Snecialized Soil Media Pore Snace for Biofiltration unitless 17 Soecialized Gravel Media Pore Soace unitless 18 Volume Infiltrated Over 6 Hour Storm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 19 Ponding Pore Space Available for Retention 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 unitless 20 Soil Media Pore Soace Available for Retention 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 unitless 21 Gravel Pore Space Available for Retention (Above Underdrain 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 unitless •. 22 Gravel Pore Space Available for Retention (Below Underdrain 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 unitless 23 Effective Retention Deoth 2.10 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches 24 Fraction of DCV Retained a.ndepeodent of Drawdown Time 0.12 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 25 Calculated Retention StoraJ:!,:e Drawdown Time 120 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours 26 Efficacv of Retention Processes 0.14 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 27 Volume Retained bv BMP (Consideriniz Drawdown Time 163 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 28 Desie:n Capture Volwne Remaining for Biofiltration 994 319 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 29 Max Hvdromod Flow Rate throW!h Underdrain 1.4948 1.4948 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 efs 30 Max Soil Filtration Race Allowed bv Underdrain Orifice 78.47 177.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 in/hr 31 Soil Media Filtration Rate per Specifications 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 in/hr 32 Soil Media Filtration Rate to be used for Sizing 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 in/hr 33 Deoth Biofiltered Over 6 Hour Storm 30.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches 34 Ponding Pore Space Available for Biofiltracion 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 uoitless 35 Soil Media Pore Snace Available for Biofiltration 0.35 0.35 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 unitless '. 36 Gravd Pore Soace Available for Biofilcration (Above Underdrain 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 unitless 37 Effective Depth of Biofilttation Storaef 15.90 15.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches 38 Drawdown Time for Surface PondinJl 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours 39 Drawdown Time for Effective Bio.filtration Deoth 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 hours 40 Total Deoth Biofiltered 45.90 45.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 inches 41 Option 1 -Biofilter 1.50 DCV: TatJ?;et Volwne 1,491 478 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 42 Ootion 1 -Provided Biofiltration Volwne 1,491 478 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 43 Option 2 -Store 0.75 DCV: Tare:et Volwne 746 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 44 Option 2 -Provided Stot32e Volwne 746 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cubic-feet 45 Portion of Biofilttation Performance Standard Satisfiec 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 46 Do Site Desiizn Elements and BMPs Satisfv Annual Retention Requirements? Yes Yes Ives/no •. 47 Overall Portion of Pcrformancc Standard Satisfied (BMP Efficacy Factor 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ratio 48 Deficit ofEffectivelv Treated Stormwater 0 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a cubic-feet ~g ~mio2 M5iHi25iii Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods for Structural BMPs www.sandiegocounty.gov/stormwater B-7 Effective September 15, 2020 Figure B.1-1: 85th Percentile 24-hour Isopluvial Map San Diego County 85 th Percentile lsopluvials Legend --85th PERCENTILE ISOPLUVIAL c ·.·_~_'_J INCORPORATED CITY NOTE: The 85th percentile is a 24 hour rainfall total. It represetns a value such that 85% of the obseived 24 hour rainfall totals will be less than that value. N + ~Milts 0 1 2 4 8 8 THIS141\.PID'\T/AISPROVIOED1',!THOUTWl<RAANf'IOFAHYKIND,EITttER EX.PRE880ftlMPLIED.NO..UOM3BIJTNOTllWITEOTOTMEIMPLIB'.l WIRRAHTIES OF MERCH,I.NTABIUTY .o.NO FITNESS FOR /A PII.Rll::::UI.AFI PURPOSE Hdlllhlp,,:,,IUCl....,_rdon'N!ICl'lfrcrohtSt.NO,,l,Q ~-s,,,_.-........:11e_..._ .............. ,_, ~OISANOAG n,_pfOOIJClo,.,oo,uo,wo, ___ _ _ g,,.....,i,y~~-~~IOS..018 1"'5111P• <XJPl"V!l«l1>yR-1i1cN,-,&~R•~111cav,or,__ alor...,,pon,_ ...,_,.,,_,,.,...,.,_ w-..it.----ofRardM<:Nlll,I~ 0opyrw,cSlnGIS201• .\·Riglll-F'ullle>10lflilleglloatceCMbe --.~-oa,,g,a~-lllm OY\"201~ P'FbldOlNldrHOM_ATLAS_l4PCTIJi5_REVISITED_101"- 'f'CTIJi5_DISPI.AY11.a Attachment 1f Trash Capture BMP Manufacturer’s Specifications **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1537 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * CHICK-FIL-A #4306 * * POST DEVELOPMENT 1-YEAR * * SITE AREAS TRIBUTARY TO NORTH BIOFILTRATION BASIN (DMA-1) ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: X:\AES\18050\PlA.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 19:38 07/13/2023 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 1.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES)= 0.869 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00 * SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE= 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF-CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN-/ OUT-/PARK-HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE/ SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) -(Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint= 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.63 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.96 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.276 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.290 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.12 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.07 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.12 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 166.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.276 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.33 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.56 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.13 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.77 Tc(MIN.) = 5.05 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.41 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.800 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.53 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.13 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 4.22 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.59 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.21 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 220.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.276 NATURAL DESERT LANDSCAPING RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= .2500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 77 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.7782 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.01 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.54 TC(MIN.) = 5.05 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 62 »»>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< »»>(STREET TABLE SECTION# 1 USED)««< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 264.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF= 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section= 0.0200 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.74 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.28 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 6.34 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.33 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.37 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 3.30 Tc(MIN.) = 8.35 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.645 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.789 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.30 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.40 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.79 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.28 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 6.59 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.35 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 484.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.645 NATURAL DESERT LANDSCAPING RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= .2500 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 77 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.7518 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.05 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.02 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.81 TC(MIN.) = 8.35 **************************************************************************** ... FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.09 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 29.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.588 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.88 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET /SEC.) = 1.04 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.20 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 10.99 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.47 Tc(MIN.) = 8.82 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.15 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.759 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.93 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS : DEPTH(FEET) = 0.21 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.42 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.04 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.21 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 513.00 FEET. END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) 0.8 TC(MIN.) = 8.82 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = o.93 -----Less than 2.4 cfs filter capacity END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS ____________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1537 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * CHICK-FIL-A #4306 * * POST-DEVELOPMENT 1-YEAR * * SITE AREAS TRIBUTARY TO SOUTH BIOFILTRATION BASIN (DMA-2) * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: X:\AES\18050\P1B.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 15:20 04/25/2023 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 1.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES) = 0.869 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE = 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF- CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN- / OUT-/PARK- HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE / SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) === ===== ========= ================= ====== ===== ====== ===== ======= 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) - (Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint = 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE = 21 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS<<<<< ============================================================================ GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 101.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.60 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 2.30 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.620 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH = 77.77 (Reference: Table 3-1B of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 1 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.290 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc = 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.57 ============================================================================ END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TC(MIN.) = 3.62 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.57 ============================================================================ ============================================================================ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS Less than 2.4 cfs filter capacity Submittal Package FLOGARD® CATCH BASININSERT FILTER 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~~~-0 Owater 1 - Submittal Drawing 2 - Features & Benefits 3 - Accessories 4 - Inspection & Maintenance 5 - Product Specifications Table of ConTenTs Submittal Drawing seCTion 1 Features & Benefits seCTion 2 STORMWATER Removes Pollutants from Runoff Prior to Entering Waterways Two-part stainless-steel insert to filter solids and oils/grease. Easy to install, inspect and maintain, even on small and confined sites. Efficient System Catches pollutants where they are easiest to catch, at the inlet. Variable Design Able to be retrofitted or used in new projects. Treatment Train Can be incorporated as part of a “Treatment Train”. No Standing Water Helps to minimize bacteria and odor problems. Focused Treatment Removes petroleum hydrocarbons, trash and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Maximum Flexibility Available in a variety of standard sizes to fit round and square inlets. Economical Earn a higher return on system investment. By the Numbers*: Filter will remove up to 80% of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), at least 70% of oils and grease, and up to 40% of Total Phosphorus (TP) associated with organic debris as well as Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) from oil leaks and spills. *Approximate for urban street application. CATCH BASIN FILTER TEST RESULTS SUMMARY Testing Agency % TSS Removal % Oil & Grease Removal % PAH Removal UCLA 80 70 to 80 U of Auckland Tonking & Taylor, Ltd(for City of Auckland) 78 to 95 U of Hawaii (for City of Honolulu) 80 20 to 40 INLET FILTRATION PUT A STOP to TSS 0 Oklcastle lnfrast~~S!!;!~~· 0 PUT A STOPto TSS Multi-Purpose Catch Basin Insert Retains Sediment, Debris, Trash and Oils/Grease FloGard® catch basin insert filters are recommended for areas subject to silt and debris as well as low-to-moderate levels of petroleum hydrocarbons (oils and grease). Examples of such areas include vehicle parking lots, aircraft ramps, truck and bus storage yards, business parks, residential and public streets. Flat-Grated Inlet Circular Frame InletCaptured debris from FloGard catch basin insert filter in Dana Point, California. Combination Inlet CATCH BASIN FILTER COMPETITIVE FEATURE COMPARISON Evaluation of Catch Basin Filters (Based on flow-comparable units) (Scale 1-10) Oldcastle Other Insert Filter Types** Flow Rate 10 7 Removal Efficiency*80%45% Capacity - Sludge & Oil 7 7 Service Life 10 3 Installation - Ease of Handling / Installation 8 6 Ease of Inspections & Maintenance 7 7 Value 10 2 *Approximate, based on field sediment removal testing in urban street application **Average Long-Term Value Comparison (Based on flow-comparable units) (Scale 1-10) Oldcastle Other Insert Filter Types** Unit Value - Initial ($/cfs treated)10 4 Installation Value ($/cfs treated)10 7 Absorbent Replacement (annual avg ($/cfs treated)10 2 Materials Replacement Value (annual avg ($/cfs treated)10 10 Maintenance Value (annual avg ($/cfs treated)10 7 Total First Year ROI ($/cfs treated)10 5 Total Annual Avg Value ($/cfs treated, avg over 20 yrs)*10 5 (800) 579-8819 oldcastleinfrastructure.com (I Oldcastle lnfrast~~l\;!~f 0 STORMWATER INLET FILTRATION FLOGARD®Catch Basin Insert Filter Catch basin insert designed to capture sediment, gross solids, trash and petroleum hydrocarbons from low (“first flush”) flows, even during the most extreme weather conditions Flat-Grated Inlet Circular Frame Inlet Combination Inlet Example Types, Sizes and Capacities: Additional sizes, including regional and custom options are available. FloGard Combination Inlet STANDARD DEPTH INLET ID Inside Dimension (inch x inch) GRADE OD Outside Dimension (inch x inch) TOTAL BYPASS CAPACITY (cu. ft. / sec.) SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) SHALLOW DEPTH SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) FGP-1633FGO 16 X 33 18 X 36 7.0 2.5 1.7 FGP-1633FGO8 1.4 1.1 FGP-1836FGO 18 X 36 18 X 40 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1836FGO8 1.3 .9 FGP-2234FGO 22 X 34 24 X 36 8.1 3.6 2.1 FGP-2234FGO8 2.1 1.4 FGP-2436FGO 24 X 36 24 X 40 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2436FGO8 1.95 1.15 STANDARD DEPTH INLET ID Inside Dimension (inch x inch) GRADE OD Outside Dimension (inch x inch) TOTAL BYPASS CAPACITY (cu. ft. / sec.) SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) SHALLOW DEPTH SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) FGP-12F 12 X 12 12 X 14 2.8 0.3 0.4 FGP-12F8 .15 .25 FGP-16F 16 X 16 16 X 19 4.7 0.8 0.7 FGP-16F8 .45 .4FGP-18F 18 X 18 18 X 20 4.7 0.8 0.7 FGP-18F8 .45 .4 FGP-1836F 18 X 36 18 X 40 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1836F8 1.3 .9 FGP-21F 22 X 22 22 X 24 6.1 2.2 1.5 FGP-21F8 1.25 .85 FGP-24F 24 X 24 24 X 27 6.1 2.2 1.5 FGP-24F8 1.25 .85 FGP-2436F 24 X 36 24 X 40 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2436F8 1.95 1.15 FGP-2448F 24 X 48 24 X 48 9.3 4.4 2.4 FGP-2448F8 2.5 1.35 FGP-32F-TN 28 X 28 32 X 32 6.3 2.2 1.5 FGP-32F8-TN 1.25 .85 FGP-30F 30 X 30 30 X 34 8.1 3.6 2.0 FGP-30F8 2.05 1.15 FGP-36F 36 X 36 36 X 40 9.1 4.6 2.4 FGP-36F8 2.65 1.35 FGP-3648F 36 X 48 40 X 48 11.5 6.8 3.2 FGP-3648F8 3.9 1.85 FGP-48F 48 X 48 48 X 54 13.2 9.5 3.9 FGP-48F8 5.45 2.25 FGP-1633F 16 X 34 18 X 36 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1633F8 1.3 .9 FGP-2234F 22 X 34 24 X 36 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2234F8 1.95 1.15 FloGard Flat Grated Inlet SPECIFIER CHARTSTANDARD & SHALLOW DEPTH (Data in these columns is the same for both STANDARD & SHALLOW versions) STANDARD DEPTH -20 Inches- SHALLOW DEPTH -12 Inches-MODEL NO.MODEL NO. STANDARD DEPTH -20 Inches- SHALLOW DEPTH -12 Inches- SPECIFIER CHARTSTANDARD & SHALLOW DEPTH (Data in these columns is the same for both STANDARD & SHALLOW versions)MODEL NO.MODEL NO. MODEL NUMBER INLET ID (inches) GRADE OD (inches) SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (CU FT) FILTERED FLOW (CSF) TOTAL BYPASS CAPACITY (CFS) FGP-RF15F 15 18 0.3 0.4 2.8 FGP-RF18F 18 20 0.8 0.7 4.7 FGP-RF20F 20 23 0.8 0.7 4.7 FGP-RF21F 21 23.5 0.8 0.7 4.7 FGP-RF22F 22 24 0.8 0.7 4.7 FGP-RF24F 24 26 0.8 0.7 4.7 FGP-RF30F 30 32 2.2 1.5 6.1 FGP-RF36F 36 39 3.6 2.0 8.1 FloGard Circular Grated Inlet SPECIFIER CHART 0 Oklcastle lnfrast~~S!!;!~~· 0 Accessories seCTion 3 U.S. PATENT #6,551,023 & 6,872,029 FloGard® FILTER -INSTALLED INTO CATCH BASIN- GRATE ------~ "ULllMATE" BYPASS FEATURES GASKET STAINLl:SS STEEL SUPPORT BASKET - Fossil Rock7"' ABSORBENT POUCHES LINER ----- SUP-PORT BASKET --- CATQ-l BASIN (FLAT GRATE STYLE) DETAIL A EXPLODED VIEW NOTI:S; l f ilter insert shall have a high flow bypass feature. 2 Filter support frame shall l::e constructed from stainless steel Type 304. 3. 4. Filter medium shall l:e Fossil Rode installed and maintained h accordance with manufacturer specifications. Storage capacity reflects SY/4 of maximum solids collection prior to impeding filtering bypass. December 2018 v.1 Rubberizer® transforms spilled hydrocarbons into a rubber-like solid on contact, and does not re-release when it is retrieved. The solidification process is non-chemical in nature allowing the US EPA to classify Rubberizer as a sorbent. This product, which comes in booms, pillows or granular form, can be used to clean oil from bilges, deck spills, around hydraulic storage tanks, under hydraulic machinery, in all engineering spaces and most importantly, in any hydrocarbon fuel spill where leaking oil comes in contact with water. Rubberizer has been used in clean-up operations around the world and is patented in 22 countries. The key advantages of the Rubberizer product line when compared to many of the characteristics of the more conventional products include: •Works on land or water borne spills•Remains buoyant•Solidifies and is landfill approved •Resistant to leaching •Does not release solidified oils under pressure •Incinerates with less that .1% residual ash•Reduces overall clean-up time•Reduces overall costs Rubberizer products sorb and transform into a rubber-like material similar to many petroleum based products like: •Gasoline •Jet Fuel •Diesel Fuels •Transformer Oils•Hydraulic Oils•Lube Oils •Aromatic Solvents •Chlorinated Solvents •Light Crudes 1 How Rubberizer® (Fossil Rock) Products Work* Rubberizer particulate is a mixture of hydrocarbon polymers plus additives resulting in a grainy material used primarily for cleanup operations where sweeping and shoveling are involved. It can also be used for clarification of various emulsions, or solidification and removal of various petroleum based slicks from the surface of water which is in a controlled state. 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S~!'.( December 2018 v.12 This product, (and the booms and pillows) in which it is the filler, exhibit characteristics that include: •Lightweight enabling rapid deployment and retrieval (apparent specific gravity approximately = 0.4) •Rapid sorption and solidification (measured in minutes), hydrophobic (no affinity for water)•Permanently buoyant (both before and after sorption)•Will not release solidified liquids under pressure •Resistant to leaching upon aqueous contact •High sorbed liquid to sorbent ratios (nominally 5 parts liquid to 1 part sorbent)•Minimal incineration residue (less than .1%)•Little volume increase of sorbed liquids (15% in laboratory tests, nominally 25% in field applications) One pound of this product will solidify into a rubber-like material up to 2/3 gallon of jet fuel, diesel, gasoline,transformer oil, hydraulic oils, light crude and many other liquids. *Rubberizer® = Fossil Rock 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S~!'.( Inspection & Maintenance seCTion 4 Inspection and Maintenance Guide DRAIN A G E P ROTECTION SY S T E M S A division of Oldcastle Infrastructure FLOGARD+PLUS® CATCH BASIN INSERT FILTER 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S!~!'.( ()water SCOPE: Federal, State and Local Clean Water Act regulations and those of insurance carriers require that stormwater filtration systems be maintained and serviced on a recurring basis. The intent of the regulations is to ensure that the systems, on a continuing basis, efficiently remove pollutants from stormwater runoff thereby preventing pollution of the nation’s water resources. These specifications apply to the FloGard+Plus® Catch Basin Insert Filter. RECOMMENDED FREQUENCY OF SERVICE: Drainage Protection Systems (DPS) recommends that installed FloGard+Plus Catch Basin Insert Filters be serviced on a recurring basis. Ultimately, the frequency depends on the amount of runoff, pollutant loading and interference from debris (leaves, vegetation, cans, paper, etc.); however, it is recommended that each installation be serviced a minimum of three times per year, with a change of filter medium once per year. DPS technicians are available to do an on-site evaluation, upon request. RECOMMENDED TIMING OF SERVICE: DPS guidelines for the timing of service are as follows: 1.For areas with a definite rainy season: Prior to, during and following the rainy season. 2.For areas subject to year-round rainfall: On a recurring basis (at least three times per year). 3.For areas with winter snow and summer rain: Prior to and just after the snow season and during thesummer rain season.4.For installed devices not subject to the elements (wash racks, parking garages, etc.): On a recurring basis (no less than three times per year). SERVICE PROCEDURES: 1.The catch basin grate shall be removed and set to one side. The catch basin shall be visually inspectedfor defects and possible illegal dumping. If illegal dumping has occurred, the proper authorities and property owner representative shall be notified as soon as practicable. 2.Using an industrial vacuum, the collected materials shall be removed from the liner. (Note: DPS uses a truck-mounted vacuum for servicing FloGard+Plus catch basin inserts).3.When all of the collected materials have been removed, the filter medium pouches shall be removedby unsnapping the tether from the D-ring and set to one side. The filter liner, gaskets, stainless steel frame and mounting brackets, etc., shall be inspected for continued serviceability. Minor damage or defects found shall be corrected on-the-spot and a notation made on the Maintenance Record. More extensive deficiencies that affect the efficiency of the filter (torn liner, etc.), if approved by thecustomer representative, will be corrected and an invoice submitted to the representative along with theMaintenance Record. 4.The filter medium pouches shall be inspected for defects and continued serviceability and replaced as necessary, and the pouch tethers re-attached to the liner’s D-ring.5.The grate shall be replaced. REPLACEMENT AND DISPOSAL OF EXPOSED FILTER MEDIUM AND COLLECTED DEBRIS The frequency of filter medium exchange will be in accordance with the existing DPS-Customer Maintenance Contract. DPS recommends that the medium be changed at least once per year. During the appropriate service, or if so determined by the service technician during a non-scheduled service, the filter medium will be replaced with new material. Once the exposed pouches and debris have been removed, DPS has possession and must dispose of it in accordance with local, state and federal agency requirements. DPS also has the capability of servicing all manner of storm drain filters, catch basin inserts and catch basins without inserts, underground oil/water separators, stormwater interceptors and other such devices. All DPS personnel are highly qualified technicians and are confined-space trained and certified. Call us at (888) 950-8826 for further information and assistance. 2 Product Specifications seCTion 5 PART 1 — GENERAL 1.1 Section Includes FloGard® Catch Basin Insert Filter – catch basin filtration device for stormwater treatment. 1.2 References American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 1.ASTM A240 2.ASTM D3786 3.ASTM D4355 4.ASTM D4491 5.ASTM D4533 6.ASTM D4632 7.ASTM D4751 8.ASTM D4833 9.ASTM D4991 10.ASTM D5261 PART 2 — PRODUCTS 2.1 Description This specification describes a Catch Basin Filtration Device that removes sediment, debris, trash and petroleum hydrocarbons (oil and grease) from water flowing into the drainage inlets during low flows (first flush) without impeding the inlet’s maximum design flow. Hydraulic calculations shall be supplied upon request. The filtration device shall incorporate a sorbent capable of collecting and containing non- soluble pollutants including, but not limited to, petroleum hydrocarbons (oil and grease). Sorbent shall be contained in separate removable containers that can easily be replaced without removing the filter liner. Filtration device shall not rely on collected sediment, debris, trash or filter liner as the medium for hydrocarbon collection. High capacity filtration devices shall incorporate a debris trap, designed to retain floatable pollutants during high flow periods and both an initial filtering bypass for moderate flows and an ultimate bypass for peak design flows. The installed device shall not impede drainage inlet’s peak design flow prior to or after the device has reached its pollutant storage capacity. 2.2 Materials Filtration device support frame and hardware shall be manufactured from Type 304 stainless steel. It shall be designed to support maximum anticipated loads from the collected pollutants and water. Field modifications, welding or painting of the device shall not be allowed. Device shall incorporate a removable filter liner made from a woven polypropylene monofilament geotextile with an apparent opening size less than 35 US Mesh and a clean flow rate of not less than 145 gallons per minute (gpm) per square foot, or stainless steel screen with opening size between 4 and 200 US Mesh. The use of a non-woven geotextile filter liner shall not be allowed. Sorbent shall be a hydrophobic material treated to attract and retain petroleum hydrocarbons and other non-soluble pollutants. It shall be non-biodegradable and non- leaching and contain no hazardous ingredients as defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2.3 Manufacturer Each catch basin filter device shall be a FloGard as manufactured by Oldcastle Infrastructure, 7100 Longe St, Stockton, California 95206. Phone: (800) 579-8819. PART 3 — EXECUTION 3.1 Installation Installation of filtration device shall not require extensive modification of the catch basin and shall be performed by a manufacturer-approved installation contractor. Installation contractor shall be licensed and insured in accordance with agency requirements. Filtration devices installed into grated, or combination grate with curb opening inlets shall be either supported by resting the support brackets on the grate bearing ledge (installed without the use of bolts or other anchoring devices) or mounted to the catch basin wall with easily removable separate wall mount brackets to allow for quick access to the piping system in the event of an emergency. Devices for curb opening style inlets (no grate) shall be installed across the entire width of the curb opening and shall be secured to inlet wall, across and beneath the curb opening, using corrosion-resistant anchors (Type 304 stainless steel). The use of chains or cable to secure the device shall not be allowed. Filtration devices shall be installed in such a manner as to direct all flows into the device. Distance (gaps) between the inlet wall and the device shall not exceed one half inch. Gaps of less than one half inch shall be sealed with a flexible weatherproof sealant, as approved by agency. Installation contractor shall supply agency (engineer) with an installation record, denoting the date of installation, drainage inlet location, type of drainage inlet and type and/or size of filtration device. Kristar Enterprises 1219 Briggs AvenueSanta Rosa, CA95401 (800) 579-8819 www.kristar.com Street Deposited Sediment Typical Particle Size Distribution from urban runoff TSS survey data 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 10 10 0 1000 10000 Particle Size (micron) Fr a c t i o n Fi n e r b y We i g h t ( % ) Woodward-Clyde (1997)Honolulu StreetSediment(2004) FloGard +Plus® TSS Removal Typical Urban Runoff Distribution* *extrapolated from available field test data 020406080100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Flux (gpm/sq ft) % re m o v a l FloGard +Plus Linear (FloGard +Plus) Testing Agency % TSS Removal % Oil & Grease Removal UCLA 80*70-80 U of AucklandTonkin & Taylor Ltd(for City of Auck- land) 95**78-86*** U of Hawaii (for Cityof Honolulu) 80*** FloGard +PLUS ®Test Results Summary *Sand larger than ~575 µm**Sand distribution ~100-1000 µm***Local street sweep material (distribution consistent with NURP) FLOGARD +PLUS® Independent field tests conducted in Hawaii and New Zealand on FloGard +PLUS® Catch Basin Insert Filters to determine removal efficiency of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Results were extrapolated to a typical street deposited sediment particle size. Removal efficiencies were plotted and reflect effective TSS removal over a typical range of operating flow rates. Results are shown below as a function of unit internal surface area. % re m o v a l Kristar Enterprises 1219 Briggs Avenue Santa Rosa, CA 95401 (800) 579-8819 www.kristar.com Street Deposited Sediment Typical Particle Size Distribution from urban runoff TSS survey data 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 10 10 0 1000 10000 Particle Size (micron) Fr a c t i o n Fi n e r b y We i g h t ( % ) Woodward-Clyde (1997)Honolulu Street Sediment (2004) FloGard +Plus® TSS Removal Typical Urban Runoff Distribution* *extrapolated from available field test data 020406080100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Flux (gpm/sq ft) % re m o v a l FloGard +Plus Linear (FloGard +Plus) Testing Agency % TSS Removal % Oil & Grease Removal UCLA 80*70-80 U of AucklandTonkin & Taylor Ltd (for City of Auck- land) 95** 78-86*** U of Hawaii (for Cityof Honolulu) 80*** FloGard +PLUS ®Test Results Summary *Sand larger than ~575 µm**Sand distribution ~100-1000 µm***Local street sweep material (distribution consistent with NURP) Units are sized to fit most common styles of drainage inlet grate frames or inlet widths. Rated filtered flow capacities for each model typically exceed the required “first flush” treatment flow rate, and account for reduction in capacity as the unit accumulates suspended pollutants. Rated bypass capacity for each model also typically exceeds the inlet capacity of the catch basin. FloGard +PLUS® Catch Basin Insert Filter is an efficient inlet prefilter designed to remove suspended sediment and floatable trash and hydrocarbons from stormwater runoff in new or retrofit applications. It is ideally suited for removal of primary pollutants from paved surfaces in commercial and residential areas, or may form part of a treatment train. The device features a unique dual-bypass design, durable components, flexible installation options and easy maintenance access. Testing Agency %TSS Removal % Oil & Grease Removal UCLA 80*70-80 U of Auckland Tonkin & Taylor LTD (City of Auckland) U of Hawaii (City of Honolulu)80*** 95** 78-86*** FloGard +PLUS® Test Results Summary *Sand larger than ~ 575 um **Sand distribution ~ 100-1000 um ***Local street sweep material (distribution consistent with NURP) www.oldcastleinfrastructure.com | 800-579-8819 See product specifications for standard model details. ® 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S~!'.( • Owater STANDARD DEPTH INLET ID Inside Dimension (inch x inch) GRADE OD Outside Dimension (inch x inch) TOTAL BYPASS CAPACITY (cu. ft. / sec.) SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) SHALLOW DEPTH SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) FGP-1633FGO 16 X 33 18 X 36 7.0 2.5 1.7 FGP-1633FGO8 1.4 1.1 FGP-1836FGO 18 X 36 18 X 40 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1836FGO8 1.3 .9 FGP-2234FGO 22 X 34 24 X 36 8.1 3.6 2.1 FGP-2234FGO8 2.1 1.4 FGP-2436FGO 24 X 36 24 X 40 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2436FGO8 1.95 1.15 STANDARD DEPTH INLET ID Inside Dimension (inch x inch) GRADE OD Outside Dimension (inch x inch) TOTAL BYPASS CAPACITY (cu. ft. / sec.) SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) SHALLOW DEPTH SOLIDS STORAGE CAPACITY (cu. ft.) FILTERED FLOW (cu. ft. / sec.) FGP-12F 12 X 12 12 X 14 2.8 0.3 0.4 FGP-12F8 .15 .25 FGP-16F 16 X 16 16 X 19 4.7 0.8 0.7 FGP-16F8 .45 .4 FGP-18F 18 X 18 18 X 20 4.7 0.8 0.7 FGP-18F8 .45 .4 FGP-1836F 18 X 36 18 X 40 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1836F8 1.3 .9 FGP-21F 22 X 22 22 X 24 6.1 2.2 1.5 FGP-21F8 1.25 .85 FGP-24F 24 X 24 24 X 27 6.1 2.2 1.5 FGP-24F8 1.25 .85 FGP-2436F 24 X 36 24 X 40 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2436F8 1.95 1.15 FGP-2448F 24 X 48 24 X 48 9.3 4.4 2.4 FGP-2448F8 2.5 1.35 FGP-32F-TN 28 X 28 32 X 32 6.3 2.2 1.5 FGP-32F8-TN 1.25 .85 FGP-30F 30 X 30 30 X 34 8.1 3.6 2.0 FGP-30F8 2.05 1.15 FGP-36F 36 X 36 36 X 40 9.1 4.6 2.4 FGP-36F8 2.65 1.35 FGP-3648F 36 X 48 40 X 48 11.5 6.8 3.2 FGP-3648F8 3.9 1.85 FGP-48F 48 X 48 48 X 54 13.2 9.5 3.9 FGP-48F8 5.45 2.25 FGP-1633F 16 X 34 18 X 36 6.9 2.3 1.6 FGP-1633F8 1.3 .9 FGP-2234F 22 X 34 24 X 36 8.0 3.4 2.0 FGP-2234F8 1.95 1.15 STANDARD DEPTH -20 Inches- SHALLOW DEPTH -12 Inches- FloGard Combination Inlet SPECIFIER CHART STANDARD & SHALLOW DEPTH (Data in these columns is the same for both STANDARD & SHALLOW versions)MODEL NO.MODEL NO. FloGard Flat Grated Inlet SPECIFIER CHART STANDARD & SHALLOW DEPTH (Data in these columns is the same for both STANDARD & SHALLOW versions) STANDARD DEPTH -20 Inches- SHALLOW DEPTH -12 Inches- MODEL NO.MODEL NO. U.S. PATENT #6,551,023 & 6,872,029 * MANY OTHER STANDARD & CUSTOM SIZES AND DEPTHS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. . . • "ULTIMATE" BYPASS FEATURE (LOUVERS & OPENINGS) SEE DETAIL C ... DEPlli STANDARD = 20 INCHES SHALLOW = 12 INCHES *CUSTOM DETAIL B SECTION VIEW FloGard" FILTER -I NSTALLED- "ULTIMATE" BYPASS FEATURE (LOUVERS & OPENINGS) DETAIL C ''ULTIMATE" BYPASS FEATURE BUILDINGSTRUCTURES OUR MARKETS TRANSPORTATION WATER ENERGYCOMMUNICATIONS June 2019 v.1 www.oldcastleinfrastructure.com 800-579-8819 FLOGARD® CATCH BASININSERT FILTER I : I 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S!~~f I ()water ATTACHMENT 2 BACKUP FOR PDP HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES [This is the cover sheet for Attachment 2.] Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Sequence Contents Checklist Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management Exhibit (Required) X Included See Hydromodification Management Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (WMAA Exhibit is required, additional analyses are optional) See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Manual. X Exhibit showing project drainage boundaries marked on WMAA Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area Map (Required) Optional analyses for Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Area Determination 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units Onsite 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels (Optional) See Section 6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual. X Not performed Included Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design and Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations (Required) See Chapter 6 and Appendix G of the BMP Design Manual X Included Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the Hydromodification Management Exhibit: The Hydromodification Management Exhibit must identify: X Underlying hydrologic soil group X Approximate depth to groundwater X Existing natural hydrologic features ( watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) X Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) X Existing topography X Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite X Proposed grading X Proposed impervious features X Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness X Point(s) of Compliance (POC) for Hydromodification Management X Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions) X Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, and size/detail) Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management Exhibit ff. ...... -- ' --- ---- ------ 0.16' NOTCH 'MDTH ------------ (55.8) FG MUNICIPAL STORM DRAIN SYSTEM ------------0 " ~ " g " en ~ ' --: O' ' 0 LL '--.__ '-er- "-(St ...... EXISTING .(53.15) TC ( (52 70)'F~, ( 48_81) '~~" " 0.40' NOTCH HEIGHT7 _/J's;;;· =~=11 (51.80) RIM " V !, 100-YR W.S.E. (48.59) INV ---'-'!~"2) " I 15"¢ OU1LET PIPE ~z:'::=~l'_ ___ 0 15"¢ RISER " • PIPE '1._ 1 /2" ORIFICE DIAMETER I Cl 0:: <( 0 w m w w SECTION A-A TOTAL: 15 TANKS (7'X15') EA BASIN 1 GRATE· BASIN 2 GRATE· 51.98' 52.30' . RIM .59)'w 13, ~"\, / \ / \ " "' \ \ \ \ INTERSTATE ROUTE NO. 1-5 (55.2) FG (55.4) FG {55.1) FG \ \ ----\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0:: 0 LL AP' ;; "-', SMA-1 f-L-----=~~~-!-~~~~~~~ • I -,,.---.._ 0 0 J U: 0 N ~ n1 100 YR W.S.E. ' .... Al • 0/ 0) 100-YR W.S.E. .... 48.83 INV-1::s "-2,481 SF ~=0.057 AC ' PERVIOUS " " "' (53.46) (SJ.OB) 48.83 INV-OUT . 1 /2 ORIFICE DIAMETER (52.99) RIM ,o ~ (46.62) INV/ ~ /// 12" SDR-35 PVC PIPE FROM BIOFILTRATION BASIN OUTLET STRUCTURE, SEE SECTION A-A. OFFS/TE AREA 5 (DISTURBED, UNTREATED) 5,528 SF = 0.104 AC IMPERVIOIJS 12'' SDR-35 PVC PIPE FROM BIOFIL TRATION BASIN I I I I L _________ J I I : 15' : f-----------1 I I I I I I I I ,---------7 I I , I I o-, I I ""' L _________ J I I I I I I I I c--------+----------1 15' ii I I • • 11 JO'I I H--·-------f ---------~---------± --------~-------~~----------t--~ I I , ii 11 .._ ii 11 C'\ ii ~--------~ I 11 ii ~ I f1t =_ -=====JJ 90' 18" REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE PIPE TO EXISTING CATCH BASIN HYDROMODIFICATION TANK/FLOW CONTROL DEVICE NOT TO SCALE DETAIL , ~/, " \ \ \ \ ,,, '-..,: " " " " " " " SMA-2 f-4:.-~ '-'"'"'-' 179 SF -0.004 AC PERVIOUS NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR TliE CONTRACTOR SHAil ASCERTAIN TliE TRUE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOCATION AND SIZE OF ALL UTILITIES, PIPES, AND/DR STRUCTURES AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBII FOR DAMAGE TO ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITIES, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN HEREON. IMPOlll'.1111 NCIIICE Section 4216 of the GOMrnment Code requires a Dig Alert Identification Number be Issued before a •PermH to Excavate• wlll be YC1lld. For your Dig Alert I.D. Number call Underground Senlc■ Alert CAil B11 Two working days befon you dlg. No. a10n (61.43) TW (55.9) FG .,.......--(56.3) FG 20 10 0 20 .. . ~I~ I SCALE: 1 "=20 ' OFFSffE AREA 1 · (IJNOISTURBED, TREATED) 4,895 SF = 0.112 AC IMPERVIOIJS TR/BlJTARY TO / '. 8/0FIL TRA TION BASIN W DMA-1 -\ (56.09) FF 'rr ===-~~D~OO;!R== TOTAL DMA-1 r (INCLUDING ONSITE DMA-1. OFFSITE ..:: AREA 1, CFFSITE AREA 2) 31,095 SF = 0.714 AC 25.976 SF = 0.596 AC IMPERVDIS 5119 SF = 0.118 AC PERVIOUS OFFS/TE AREA 3 (DISTURBED, IJNTREA TED) 790 SF • 0.018 AC IMPERVIOUS OFFS/TE AREA 2 : (IJNDISTURBED, TREATED) 873 SF = 0.020 AC IMPERVIOUS TR/BlJTARY TO 8/0FIL TRA TION BASIN W DMA-1 OFFS/TE AREA 4 (DISTURBED, NOTES: 40 60 1-------<1 LEGEND ------- C) y LIMITS OF TRIBUTARY AREAS TO BIO-FILTRATION BASINS LIMITS OF OMA LIMITS OF DISTURBED AREAS EXISTING STORM DRAIN PROPOSED STORM DRAIN SOIL BORING LAND COVER IC7"'"):l DIS1URBED SELF-MITIGATING 1£....nJ LANDSCAPE AREA RONALD PACKARD PKWY. of' VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE STRUCTURAL BMPs FOR HYDROMODIFICATION MANAGEMENT 0 BIO-FILTRATION BASIN-1 (LINED) @ BIO-FILTRATION BASIN-2 (LINED) @ STORM CAPTURE VAULTS ~ DIS1URBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS TREATED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN i:::;:::i DIS1URBED LANDSCAPE AREAS TREATED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN ~ UNDIS1URBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS TREATED IN BIO-FILTRATION BASIN [>:::j DIS1URBED IMPERVIOUS AREAS UNTREATED HYDROMODIFICATION MANAGEMENT PLAN INFORMATION 1. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP 'B' 2. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER = 17 -18 ft. 3. NO NATURAL HYDROLOGIC FEATURES EXIST WITHIN THIS PROJECT SITE 4. NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS EXIST DOWNSTREAM OF THIS PROJECT SITE VARIES NATIVE SOIL - OUTLET PIPE DIA. PER PLAN TO PROPOSED MANHOLE 6" CLASS 2 PERMEABLE PER CALlRANS SPECIFICATION 68-1.025 MEDIA LAYER SHALL CONSIST OF 60% TO 80% BY VOLUME SAND, UP TO 20% BY VOLUME TOPSOIL, AND UP TO 20% BY VOLUME COMPOST. SEE SECTION 803-2.1 OF Tl-IE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BMP DESIGN MANUAL BIO-Fl LTRATION BASIN DETAIL NOT TO SCALE ~ ~ ~ Cl ~ S: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (,j 'l::J § -......J 'l::J § ~ Cb Cb .5: t:1-. ~ :;::: ::.;: ·-~ DATE 08-23-23 DRAWN BY RCH § " .. ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ 0\ -;;;:---!::::.. ~ ~ 0\ <'j .,; "" ~ c::s ...:: <::, -,I!! ~ i ""' .., ~ ., ~ ~ c::s l!:: ~ 0\ - <( z 0:::: 0 LL. -...J LL. 0 >-1---u CHECKED BY RJD JOB NO. CFA18050 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 SHEETS .. Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas CARLSBADCARLSBAD DELDELMARMAR ENCINITASENCINITAS ESCONDIDOESCONDIDO OCEANSIDEOCEANSIDE POWAYPOWAY S.D. COUNTYS.D. COUNTY S.D.S.D.COUNTYCOUNTY S.D. COUNTYS.D. COUNTY S.D. COUNTYS.D. COUNTY SAN DIEGOSAN DIEGO SAN MARCOSSAN MARCOS VISTAVISTA S a n t a M a r g arita River S an Marcos C r e ek E s c o n d idoCr e e k E s c o n d i d o C r e e k Rat t l esnakeCree k Agua He d i o n d a Creek S a n Lui s Re yRive r B u e na Vista Cr e e k Lusardi Creek Enci n i t a s C reek S a n t a Y s a b e l C r eek S a nDiegu i t o Rive r S an Dieguito R i ver Receiving Waters and Conveyance Systems Exemptfrom Hydromodification Management Requirements Exhibit Date: Sept. 8, 2014Revised Date: Sept. 6, 2018 Aerial Imagery Source: DigitalGlobe, 06/2012 NORTH Key Map (Not to Scale) Legend Municipal Boundaries Water Storage Reservoirs, Lakes,Enclosed Embayments, PacificOcean, Buena Vista Lagoon Reaches of San Luis Rey River, SanDieguito River, San Diego River,Forester Creek, Sweetwater River,Otay River 0 5 102.5 Miles Watershed Boundaries Regional WMAA Streams Exempt River Reaches: Existing underground storm drains orconveyance channels whose bedand bank are concrete-lined,discharging directly to exempt waterbodies, exempt rivers, or localizedareas of Agua Hedionda Lagoon andBatiquitos Lagoon Exempt Conveyance Systems: Exempt Bodies: Carlsbad Watershed Management AreaHU 904.00, 211 mi2 $,Vii.I ANA 1,101/NTAiNS MLnli oata Geosyntec l> consultants I Cahu.ll11 Reaeivatc,n $.Oi7A JWSA MCIJ1(T,1(}/fj s.rta~ooa-S&n Jac,fflD Mau...aln!. Nat10n~ Mofll/mool ;y. An:r.Q.f,-ga _peaert Stall9 Pak ~ I " ( 1' RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY :. • J' r ~ f ' ~ >-. ? *CCSYA info is .kmz file uploaded into Google Earth, provided by www.projectcleanwater.org 1 Jose h C. Truxaw and Associates, Inc. Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors 265 S. AniJa Or .. S,,U, HI, °'"11//~ ~ 92868 (7,.}9J5-026S fcm(l1')9JS-0106 Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Exhibit 5850 Avenida Encinas, Carlsbad, CA Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels (N/A) Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design and Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations SDHM 3.1 PROJECT REPORT Tributary areas to Biofiltration Basin 1: Onsite DMA-1: 25,327 SF = 0.582 AC Offsite Area 1: 4,895 SF = 0.112 AC Offsite Area 2: 873 SF = 0.020 AC Total Basin 1: 31,095 SF = 0.714 AC Tributary Area to Biofiltration Basin 2: Onsite DMA-2: 13,640 SF = 0.313 AC Total Tributary Areas to Biofiltration Basins: 44,735 SF = 1.027 AC For each of the two biofiltration basins, tributary runoffs surface drain to concrete gutters, then surface drain along the gutters, curb opening, energy dissipating gravel to the biofiltration basin. Once in the basin, the low BMP flows will drain down via media layer and gravel for treatment, then discharge via 6" subdrains to a 12" outlet pipe leaving the basin and draining to the Stormcapture underground vault. Higher flows (hydromod and 100-year) will pond above the 36" square grate (less than 0.20' above) and discharge via the grated inlet to the same 12" outlet pipe towards the Stormcapture underground vault. Once in the vault, hydromod flows (up to 25-year) will be mitigated (via temporary storage in the vault) and discharged via a 15" riser. 100-year flow will discharge via the riser unmitigated. All runoffs will then discharge via the proposed 18" pipe to the existing street curb inlet in Avenida Encinas, then further downstream via the existing public storm drain system. See 25-year and 100-year AES flow calculations and "Ponding Depth Above Riser" calculations following this SDHM report which will determine maximum depth above the 36" square grate in biofiltration basins and 15" riser grate in the Stormcapture vault. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 2 General Model Information Project Name:CFA18050(2) Site Name:CFA I-5 & Palomar Site Address:5850 Avenida Encinas City:Carlsbad Report Date:8/23/2023 Gage:OCEANSID Data Start:10/01/1959 Data End:09/30/2004 Timestep:Hourly Precip Scale:1.000 Version Date:2020/04/07 POC Thresholds Low Flow Threshold for POC1:10 Percent of the 2 Year High Flow Threshold for POC1:10 Year CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 3 Landuse Basin Data Predeveloped Land Use Basin 1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre B,NatVeg,Flat 1.027 Pervious Total 1.027 Impervious Land Use acre Impervious Total 0 Basin Total 1.027 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 4 Mitigated Land Use DMA-1 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre B,NatVeg,Flat 0.118 Pervious Total 0.118 Impervious Land Use acre IMPERVIOUS-FLAT 0.596 Impervious Total 0.596 Basin Total 0.714 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Surface iltration 1 Surface iltration 1 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 5 DMA-2 Bypass:No GroundWater:No Pervious Land Use acre B,NatVeg,Flat 0.126 Pervious Total 0.126 Impervious Land Use acre IMPERVIOUS-FLAT 0.187 Impervious Total 0.187 Basin Total 0.313 Element Flows To: Surface Interflow Groundwater Surface Biofilter 2 Surface Biofilter 2 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 6 Routing Elements Predeveloped Routing CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 7 Mitigated Routing Biofiltration 1 Bottom Length: 41.15 ft. Bottom Width: 20.00 ft. Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Material type for first layer: ESM Material thickness of second layer: 1 Material type for second layer: GRAVEL Material thickness of third layer: 0 Material type for third layer: GRAVEL Underdrain used Underdrain Diameter (feet):0.5 Orifice Diameter (in.):6 Offset (in.):3 Flow Through Underdrain (ac-ft.):19.49 Total Outflow (ac-ft.):20.619 Percent Through Underdrain:94.53 Discharge Structure Riser Height:0.5 ft. Riser Diameter:27.1 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Storm Capture 1 Biofilter Hydraulic Table Stage(feet)Area(ac.)Volume(ac-ft.)Discharge(cfs)Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.0189 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0440 0.0189 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0879 0.0189 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.1319 0.0189 0.0007 0.0000 0.0000 0.1758 0.0189 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.2198 0.0189 0.0012 0.0000 0.0000 0.2637 0.0189 0.0015 0.0000 0.0000 0.3077 0.0189 0.0017 0.0000 0.0000 0.3516 0.0189 0.0020 0.0000 0.0000 0.3956 0.0189 0.0022 0.0000 0.0000 0.4396 0.0189 0.0025 0.0000 0.0000 0.4835 0.0189 0.0027 0.0000 0.0000 0.5275 0.0189 0.0030 0.0000 0.0000 0.5714 0.0189 0.0032 0.0000 0.0000 0.6154 0.0189 0.0035 0.0000 0.0000 0.6593 0.0189 0.0037 0.0000 0.0000 0.7033 0.0189 0.0040 0.0000 0.0000 0.7473 0.0189 0.0042 0.0000 0.0000 0.7912 0.0189 0.0045 0.0000 0.0000 0.8352 0.0189 0.0047 0.0000 0.0000 0.8791 0.0189 0.0050 0.0000 0.0000 0.9231 0.0189 0.0052 0.0000 0.0000 0.9670 0.0189 0.0055 0.0000 0.0000 1.0110 0.0189 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000 1.0549 0.0189 0.0060 0.0000 0.0000 1.0989 0.0189 0.0062 0.0000 0.0000 1.1429 0.0189 0.0065 0.0000 0.0000 1.1868 0.0189 0.0067 0.0000 0.0000 1.2308 0.0189 0.0070 0.0000 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 8 1.2747 0.0189 0.0072 0.0000 0.0000 1.3187 0.0189 0.0075 0.0000 0.0000 1.3626 0.0189 0.0077 0.0000 0.0000 1.4066 0.0189 0.0080 0.0000 0.0000 1.4505 0.0189 0.0082 0.0000 0.0000 1.4945 0.0189 0.0085 0.0000 0.0000 1.5385 0.0189 0.0088 0.0000 0.0000 1.5824 0.0189 0.0092 0.0000 0.0000 1.6264 0.0189 0.0095 0.0000 0.0000 1.6703 0.0189 0.0098 0.0000 0.0000 1.7143 0.0189 0.0102 0.0000 0.0000 1.7582 0.0189 0.0105 0.0000 0.0000 1.8022 0.0189 0.0109 0.0000 0.0000 1.8462 0.0189 0.0112 0.0000 0.0000 1.8901 0.0189 0.0116 0.0000 0.0000 1.9341 0.0189 0.0119 0.0000 0.0000 1.9780 0.0189 0.0123 0.0000 0.0000 2.0220 0.0189 0.0126 0.0000 0.0000 2.0659 0.0189 0.0130 0.0000 0.0000 2.1099 0.0189 0.0133 0.0000 0.0000 2.1538 0.0189 0.0136 0.0000 0.0000 2.1978 0.0189 0.0140 0.0000 0.0000 2.2418 0.0189 0.0143 0.0000 0.0000 2.2857 0.0189 0.0147 0.0000 0.0000 2.3297 0.0189 0.0150 0.0000 0.0000 2.3736 0.0189 0.0154 0.0000 0.0000 2.4176 0.0189 0.0157 0.0000 0.0000 2.4615 0.0189 0.0161 0.0000 0.0000 2.5000 0.0189 0.0164 0.0000 0.0000 Biofilter Hydraulic Table Stage(feet)Area(ac.)Volume(ac-ft.)Discharge(cfs)To Amended(cfs)Infilt(cfs) 2.5000 0.0189 0.0164 0.0000 0.0953 0.0000 2.5440 0.0189 0.0172 0.0000 0.0953 0.0000 2.5879 0.0189 0.0180 0.0000 0.1008 0.0000 2.6319 0.0189 0.0188 0.0000 0.1036 0.0000 2.6758 0.0189 0.0197 0.0000 0.1064 0.0000 2.7198 0.0189 0.0205 0.0000 0.1092 0.0000 2.7637 0.0189 0.0213 0.0000 0.1120 0.0000 2.8077 0.0189 0.0222 0.0000 0.1148 0.0000 2.8516 0.0189 0.0230 0.0000 0.1176 0.0000 2.8956 0.0189 0.0238 0.0000 0.1204 0.0000 2.9396 0.0189 0.0247 0.0000 0.1232 0.0000 2.9835 0.0189 0.0255 0.0000 0.1260 0.0000 3.0275 0.0189 0.0263 0.0000 0.1288 0.0000 3.0714 0.0189 0.0272 0.0000 0.1315 0.0000 3.1154 0.0189 0.0280 0.0000 0.1343 0.0000 3.1593 0.0189 0.0288 0.0000 0.1371 0.0000 3.2033 0.0189 0.0296 0.0000 0.1399 0.0000 3.2473 0.0189 0.0305 0.0059 0.1427 0.0000 3.2912 0.0189 0.0313 0.0065 0.1455 0.0000 3.3352 0.0189 0.0321 0.0080 0.1483 0.0000 3.3791 0.0189 0.0330 0.0095 0.1511 0.0000 3.4231 0.0189 0.0338 0.0113 0.1539 0.0000 3.4670 0.0189 0.0346 0.0133 0.1567 0.0000 3.5110 0.0189 0.0355 0.0154 0.1595 0.0000 3.5549 0.0189 0.0363 0.0178 0.1622 0.0000 3.5989 0.0189 0.0371 0.0204 0.1650 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 9 3.6429 0.0189 0.0379 0.0232 0.1678 0.0000 3.6868 0.0189 0.0388 0.0262 0.1706 0.0000 3.7308 0.0189 0.0396 0.0295 0.1734 0.0000 3.7747 0.0189 0.0404 0.0330 0.1762 0.0000 3.8187 0.0189 0.0413 0.0367 0.1790 0.0000 3.8626 0.0189 0.0421 0.0407 0.1818 0.0000 3.9066 0.0189 0.0429 0.0449 0.1846 0.0000 3.9505 0.0189 0.0438 0.0494 0.1874 0.0000 3.9945 0.0189 0.0446 0.0541 0.1902 0.0000 4.0000 0.0189 0.0447 0.0592 0.1905 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 10 Surface iltration 1 Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Storm Capture 1 Biofiltration 1 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 11 Biofilter 2 Bottom Length: 18.20 ft. Bottom Width: 20.00 ft. Material thickness of first layer: 1.5 Material type for first layer: ESM Material thickness of second layer: 1 Material type for second layer: GRAVEL Material thickness of third layer: 0 Material type for third layer: GRAVEL Underdrain used Underdrain Diameter (feet):0.5 Orifice Diameter (in.):6 Offset (in.):3 Flow Through Underdrain (ac-ft.):6.497 Total Outflow (ac-ft.):6.711 Percent Through Underdrain:96.81 Discharge Structure Riser Height:0.5 ft. Riser Diameter:27.1 in. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Storm Capture 1 Biofilter Hydraulic Table Stage(feet)Area(ac.)Volume(ac-ft.)Discharge(cfs)Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.0084 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0440 0.0084 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0879 0.0084 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.1319 0.0084 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.1758 0.0084 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.2198 0.0084 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.2637 0.0084 0.0007 0.0000 0.0000 0.3077 0.0084 0.0008 0.0000 0.0000 0.3516 0.0084 0.0009 0.0000 0.0000 0.3956 0.0084 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.4396 0.0084 0.0011 0.0000 0.0000 0.4835 0.0084 0.0012 0.0000 0.0000 0.5275 0.0084 0.0013 0.0000 0.0000 0.5714 0.0084 0.0014 0.0000 0.0000 0.6154 0.0084 0.0015 0.0000 0.0000 0.6593 0.0084 0.0017 0.0000 0.0000 0.7033 0.0084 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.7473 0.0084 0.0019 0.0000 0.0000 0.7912 0.0084 0.0020 0.0000 0.0000 0.8352 0.0084 0.0021 0.0000 0.0000 0.8791 0.0084 0.0022 0.0000 0.0000 0.9231 0.0084 0.0023 0.0000 0.0000 0.9670 0.0084 0.0024 0.0000 0.0000 1.0110 0.0084 0.0025 0.0000 0.0000 1.0549 0.0084 0.0026 0.0000 0.0000 1.0989 0.0084 0.0028 0.0000 0.0000 1.1429 0.0084 0.0029 0.0000 0.0000 1.1868 0.0084 0.0030 0.0000 0.0000 1.2308 0.0084 0.0031 0.0000 0.0000 1.2747 0.0084 0.0032 0.0000 0.0000 1.3187 0.0084 0.0033 0.0000 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 12 1.3626 0.0084 0.0034 0.0000 0.0000 1.4066 0.0084 0.0035 0.0000 0.0000 1.4505 0.0084 0.0036 0.0000 0.0000 1.4945 0.0084 0.0037 0.0000 0.0000 1.5385 0.0084 0.0039 0.0000 0.0000 1.5824 0.0084 0.0041 0.0000 0.0000 1.6264 0.0084 0.0042 0.0000 0.0000 1.6703 0.0084 0.0044 0.0000 0.0000 1.7143 0.0084 0.0045 0.0000 0.0000 1.7582 0.0084 0.0047 0.0000 0.0000 1.8022 0.0084 0.0048 0.0000 0.0000 1.8462 0.0084 0.0050 0.0000 0.0000 1.8901 0.0084 0.0051 0.0000 0.0000 1.9341 0.0084 0.0053 0.0000 0.0000 1.9780 0.0084 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 2.0220 0.0084 0.0056 0.0000 0.0000 2.0659 0.0084 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000 2.1099 0.0084 0.0059 0.0000 0.0000 2.1538 0.0084 0.0060 0.0000 0.0000 2.1978 0.0084 0.0062 0.0000 0.0000 2.2418 0.0084 0.0063 0.0000 0.0000 2.2857 0.0084 0.0065 0.0000 0.0000 2.3297 0.0084 0.0066 0.0000 0.0000 2.3736 0.0084 0.0068 0.0000 0.0000 2.4176 0.0084 0.0069 0.0000 0.0000 2.4615 0.0084 0.0071 0.0000 0.0000 2.5000 0.0084 0.0072 0.0000 0.0000 Biofilter Hydraulic Table Stage(feet)Area(ac.)Volume(ac-ft.)Discharge(cfs)To Amended(cfs)Infilt(cfs) 2.5000 0.0084 0.0072 0.0000 0.0421 0.0000 2.5440 0.0084 0.0076 0.0000 0.0421 0.0000 2.5879 0.0084 0.0080 0.0000 0.0446 0.0000 2.6319 0.0084 0.0083 0.0000 0.0458 0.0000 2.6758 0.0084 0.0087 0.0000 0.0471 0.0000 2.7198 0.0084 0.0091 0.0000 0.0483 0.0000 2.7637 0.0084 0.0094 0.0000 0.0495 0.0000 2.8077 0.0084 0.0098 0.0000 0.0508 0.0000 2.8516 0.0084 0.0102 0.0000 0.0520 0.0000 2.8956 0.0084 0.0105 0.0000 0.0532 0.0000 2.9396 0.0084 0.0109 0.0000 0.0545 0.0000 2.9835 0.0084 0.0113 0.0000 0.0557 0.0000 3.0275 0.0084 0.0116 0.0000 0.0569 0.0000 3.0714 0.0084 0.0120 0.0000 0.0582 0.0000 3.1154 0.0084 0.0124 0.0000 0.0594 0.0000 3.1593 0.0084 0.0127 0.0000 0.0606 0.0000 3.2033 0.0084 0.0131 0.0000 0.0619 0.0000 3.2473 0.0084 0.0135 0.0026 0.0631 0.0000 3.2912 0.0084 0.0138 0.0029 0.0644 0.0000 3.3352 0.0084 0.0142 0.0035 0.0656 0.0000 3.3791 0.0084 0.0146 0.0042 0.0668 0.0000 3.4231 0.0084 0.0149 0.0050 0.0681 0.0000 3.4670 0.0084 0.0153 0.0059 0.0693 0.0000 3.5110 0.0084 0.0157 0.0068 0.0705 0.0000 3.5549 0.0084 0.0160 0.0079 0.0718 0.0000 3.5989 0.0084 0.0164 0.0090 0.0730 0.0000 3.6429 0.0084 0.0168 0.0103 0.0742 0.0000 3.6868 0.0084 0.0172 0.0116 0.0755 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 13 3.7308 0.0084 0.0175 0.0130 0.0767 0.0000 3.7747 0.0084 0.0179 0.0146 0.0779 0.0000 3.8187 0.0084 0.0183 0.0162 0.0792 0.0000 3.8626 0.0084 0.0186 0.0180 0.0804 0.0000 3.9066 0.0084 0.0190 0.0199 0.0816 0.0000 3.9505 0.0084 0.0194 0.0218 0.0829 0.0000 3.9945 0.0084 0.0197 0.0239 0.0841 0.0000 4.0000 0.0084 0.0198 0.0262 0.0843 0.0000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 14 Surface Biofilter 2 Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Storm Capture 1 Biofilter 2 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 15 Storm Capture 1 Dimensions Depth:2 ft. Length:225 ft. Width:7 ft. Discharge Structure Riser Height:1.33 ft. Riser Diameter:15 in. Notch Type:Rectangular Notch Width:0.160 ft. Notch Height:0.400 ft. Orifice 1 Diameter:0.5 in.Elevation:0 ft. Element Flows To: Outlet 1 Outlet 2 SCapture Hydraulic Table Stage(feet)Area(ac.)Volume(ac-ft.)Discharge(cfs)Infilt(cfs) 0.0000 0.036 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0222 0.036 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.0444 0.036 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.0667 0.036 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.0889 0.036 0.003 0.002 0.000 0.1111 0.036 0.004 0.002 0.000 0.1333 0.036 0.004 0.002 0.000 0.1556 0.036 0.005 0.002 0.000 0.1778 0.036 0.006 0.002 0.000 0.2000 0.036 0.007 0.003 0.000 0.2222 0.036 0.008 0.003 0.000 0.2444 0.036 0.008 0.003 0.000 0.2667 0.036 0.009 0.003 0.000 0.2889 0.036 0.010 0.003 0.000 0.3111 0.036 0.011 0.003 0.000 0.3333 0.036 0.012 0.003 0.000 0.3556 0.036 0.012 0.004 0.000 0.3778 0.036 0.013 0.004 0.000 0.4000 0.036 0.014 0.004 0.000 0.4222 0.036 0.015 0.004 0.000 0.4444 0.036 0.016 0.004 0.000 0.4667 0.036 0.016 0.004 0.000 0.4889 0.036 0.017 0.004 0.000 0.5111 0.036 0.018 0.004 0.000 0.5333 0.036 0.019 0.005 0.000 0.5556 0.036 0.020 0.005 0.000 0.5778 0.036 0.020 0.005 0.000 0.6000 0.036 0.021 0.005 0.000 0.6222 0.036 0.022 0.005 0.000 0.6444 0.036 0.023 0.005 0.000 0.6667 0.036 0.024 0.005 0.000 0.6889 0.036 0.024 0.005 0.000 0.7111 0.036 0.025 0.005 0.000 0.7333 0.036 0.026 0.005 0.000 0.7556 0.036 0.027 0.005 0.000 0.7778 0.036 0.028 0.006 0.000 0.8000 0.036 0.028 0.006 0.000 0.8222 0.036 0.029 0.006 0.000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 16 0.8444 0.036 0.030 0.006 0.000 0.8667 0.036 0.031 0.006 0.000 0.8889 0.036 0.032 0.006 0.000 0.9111 0.036 0.032 0.006 0.000 0.9333 0.036 0.033 0.006 0.000 0.9556 0.036 0.034 0.008 0.000 0.9778 0.036 0.035 0.012 0.000 1.0000 0.036 0.036 0.016 0.000 1.0222 0.036 0.037 0.021 0.000 1.0444 0.036 0.037 0.027 0.000 1.0667 0.036 0.038 0.033 0.000 1.0889 0.036 0.039 0.039 0.000 1.1111 0.036 0.040 0.046 0.000 1.1333 0.036 0.041 0.054 0.000 1.1556 0.036 0.041 0.061 0.000 1.1778 0.036 0.042 0.069 0.000 1.2000 0.036 0.043 0.078 0.000 1.2222 0.036 0.044 0.086 0.000 1.2444 0.036 0.045 0.095 0.000 1.2667 0.036 0.045 0.104 0.000 1.2889 0.036 0.046 0.114 0.000 1.3111 0.036 0.047 0.123 0.000 1.3333 0.036 0.048 0.134 0.000 1.3556 0.036 0.049 0.186 0.000 1.3778 0.036 0.049 0.270 0.000 1.4000 0.036 0.050 0.377 0.000 1.4222 0.036 0.051 0.502 0.000 1.4444 0.036 0.052 0.643 0.000 1.4667 0.036 0.053 0.797 0.000 1.4889 0.036 0.053 0.962 0.000 1.5111 0.036 0.054 1.137 0.000 1.5333 0.036 0.055 1.319 0.000 1.5556 0.036 0.056 1.507 0.000 1.5778 0.036 0.057 1.698 0.000 1.6000 0.036 0.057 1.892 0.000 1.6222 0.036 0.058 2.085 0.000 1.6444 0.036 0.059 2.276 0.000 1.6667 0.036 0.060 2.463 0.000 1.6889 0.036 0.061 2.643 0.000 1.7111 0.036 0.061 2.816 0.000 1.7333 0.036 0.062 2.980 0.000 1.7556 0.036 0.063 3.133 0.000 1.7778 0.036 0.064 3.275 0.000 1.8000 0.036 0.065 3.403 0.000 1.8222 0.036 0.065 3.519 0.000 1.8444 0.036 0.066 3.622 0.000 1.8667 0.036 0.067 3.713 0.000 1.8889 0.036 0.068 3.792 0.000 1.9111 0.036 0.069 3.862 0.000 1.9333 0.036 0.069 3.925 0.000 1.9556 0.036 0.070 4.025 0.000 1.9778 0.036 0.071 4.094 0.000 2.0000 0.036 0.072 4.161 0.000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:15 PM Page 17 Analysis Results POC 1 + Predeveloped x Mitigated Predeveloped Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:1.027 Total Impervious Area:0 Mitigated Landuse Totals for POC #1 Total Pervious Area:0.244 Total Impervious Area:0.783 Flow Frequency Method:Cunnane Flow Frequency Return Periods for Predeveloped. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.142553 5 year 0.32637 10 year 0.453797 25 year 0.562769 Flow Frequency Return Periods for Mitigated. POC #1 Return Period Flow(cfs) 2 year 0.023525 5 year 0.18357 10 year 0.291172 25 year 0.48803 o•s ,. 1-..--1 " • 0.3-< .. £ ~ 023 0 J u. 0.12 0.01 11:t·< 11:t·J 1tt•2 10E·1 10 100 . ... +++++ . .. /_.• .. " ~ I _,r ~ / u. / ~ *•••*-~ 0.001 "" P-ro-not: -W.m-Ex.c..--dfng ,., 1 2 10 ,. 30 .. 10 ., .. " " 99 99S 1 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 18 Duration Flows The Facility PASSED Flow(cfs)Predev Mit Percentage Pass/Fail 0.0143 333 245 73 Pass 0.0187 271 186 68 Pass 0.0231 189 143 75 Pass 0.0276 157 115 73 Pass 0.0320 141 92 65 Pass 0.0365 137 77 56 Pass 0.0409 133 61 45 Pass 0.0453 128 54 42 Pass 0.0498 121 45 37 Pass 0.0542 110 36 32 Pass 0.0587 107 36 33 Pass 0.0631 101 32 31 Pass 0.0675 97 31 31 Pass 0.0720 92 28 30 Pass 0.0764 87 25 28 Pass 0.0809 84 24 28 Pass 0.0853 76 24 31 Pass 0.0897 71 24 33 Pass 0.0942 68 24 35 Pass 0.0986 63 24 38 Pass 0.1031 59 22 37 Pass 0.1075 59 21 35 Pass 0.1119 57 21 36 Pass 0.1164 54 21 38 Pass 0.1208 52 21 40 Pass 0.1253 47 21 44 Pass 0.1297 46 21 45 Pass 0.1341 41 21 51 Pass 0.1386 38 21 55 Pass 0.1430 36 20 55 Pass 0.1474 34 20 58 Pass 0.1519 33 20 60 Pass 0.1563 31 20 64 Pass 0.1608 30 20 66 Pass 0.1652 28 19 67 Pass 0.1696 27 19 70 Pass 0.1741 26 19 73 Pass 0.1785 24 19 79 Pass 0.1830 24 19 79 Pass 0.1874 24 19 79 Pass 0.1918 23 19 82 Pass 0.1963 20 18 90 Pass 0.2007 20 18 90 Pass 0.2052 16 17 106 Pass 0.2096 15 16 106 Pass 0.2140 15 15 100 Pass 0.2185 15 15 100 Pass 0.2229 15 15 100 Pass 0.2274 15 14 93 Pass 0.2318 14 14 100 Pass 0.2362 13 14 107 Pass 0.2407 12 12 100 Pass 0.2451 12 12 100 Pass CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 19 0.2496 12 12 100 Pass 0.2540 11 11 100 Pass 0.2584 11 11 100 Pass 0.2629 11 10 90 Pass 0.2673 11 10 90 Pass 0.2718 10 10 100 Pass 0.2762 10 10 100 Pass 0.2806 10 9 90 Pass 0.2851 10 9 90 Pass 0.2895 10 9 90 Pass 0.2940 10 9 90 Pass 0.2984 10 9 90 Pass 0.3028 10 9 90 Pass 0.3073 10 9 90 Pass 0.3117 9 9 100 Pass 0.3162 9 7 77 Pass 0.3206 9 7 77 Pass 0.3250 9 7 77 Pass 0.3295 9 7 77 Pass 0.3339 8 7 87 Pass 0.3384 6 6 100 Pass 0.3428 6 6 100 Pass 0.3472 6 6 100 Pass 0.3517 6 6 100 Pass 0.3561 6 5 83 Pass 0.3606 5 5 100 Pass 0.3650 5 5 100 Pass 0.3694 5 5 100 Pass 0.3739 5 4 80 Pass 0.3783 5 4 80 Pass 0.3828 5 4 80 Pass 0.3872 5 4 80 Pass 0.3916 5 4 80 Pass 0.3961 5 4 80 Pass 0.4005 5 4 80 Pass 0.4050 5 4 80 Pass 0.4094 5 4 80 Pass 0.4138 5 3 60 Pass 0.4183 5 3 60 Pass 0.4227 5 3 60 Pass 0.4272 4 3 75 Pass 0.4316 4 3 75 Pass 0.4360 4 3 75 Pass 0.4405 4 3 75 Pass 0.4449 4 3 75 Pass 0.4494 4 3 75 Pass 0.4538 4 3 75 Pass CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 20 Water Quality CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 21 POC 2 POC #2 was not reported because POC must exist in both scenarios and both scenarios must have been run. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 22 POC 3 POC #3 was not reported because POC must exist in both scenarios and both scenarios must have been run. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 23 Model Default Modifications Total of 0 changes have been made. PERLND Changes No PERLND changes have been made. IMPLND Changes No IMPLND changes have been made. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 24 Appendix Predeveloped Schematic CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:22 PM Page 25 Mitigated Schematic iofiltration arm apture 1 Biofilter 2 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 26 Predeveloped UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1959 10 01 END 2004 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 CFA18050(2).wdm MESSU 25 PreCFA18050(2).MES 27 PreCFA18050(2).L61 28 PreCFA18050(2).L62 30 POCCFA18050(2)1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:60 PERLND 10 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Basin 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** END OPCODE PARM # # K *** END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 10 B,NatVeg,Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 10 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 27 PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 10 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 10 0 4 0.07 100 0.05 2.5 0.915 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 10 0 0 2 2 0 0.05 0.05 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 10 0 0.6 0.04 1 0.3 0 END PWAT-PARM4 MON-LZETPARM <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 10 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 END MON-LZETPARM MON-INTERCEP <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.1 0.1 0 END MON-INTERCEP PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 10 0 0 0.01 0 0.4 0.01 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC END IWAT-PARM2 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 28 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** Basin 1*** PERLND 10 1.032 COPY 501 12 ******Routing****** END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 29 END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 501 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 12 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 12 END MASS-LINK END RUN CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 30 Mitigated UCI File RUN GLOBAL WWHM4 model simulation START 1959 10 01 END 2004 09 30 RUN INTERP OUTPUT LEVEL 3 0 RESUME 0 RUN 1 UNIT SYSTEM 1 END GLOBAL FILES <File> <Un#> <-----------File Name------------------------------>*** <-ID-> *** WDM 26 CFA18050(2).wdm MESSU 25 MitCFA18050(2).MES 27 MitCFA18050(2).L61 28 MitCFA18050(2).L62 30 POCCFA18050(2)1.dat END FILES OPN SEQUENCE INGRP INDELT 00:60 PERLND 10 IMPLND 1 GENER 2 RCHRES 1 RCHRES 2 GENER 4 RCHRES 3 RCHRES 4 RCHRES 5 COPY 1 COPY 501 DISPLY 1 END INGRP END OPN SEQUENCE DISPLY DISPLY-INFO1 # - #<----------Title----------->***TRAN PIVL DIG1 FIL1 PYR DIG2 FIL2 YRND 1 Storm Capture 1 MAX 1 2 30 9 END DISPLY-INFO1 END DISPLY COPY TIMESERIES # - # NPT NMN *** 1 1 1 501 1 1 END TIMESERIES END COPY GENER OPCODE # # OPCD *** 2 24 4 24 END OPCODE PARM # # K *** 2 0. 4 0. END PARM END GENER PERLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name------->NBLKS Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 10 B,NatVeg,Flat 1 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section PWATER*** CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 31 ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC *** 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ***************************** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW PWAT SED PST PWG PQAL MSTL PEST NITR PHOS TRAC ********* 10 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO PWAT-PARM1 <PLS > PWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP UZFG VCS VUZ VNN VIFW VIRC VLE INFC HWT *** 10 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 END PWAT-PARM1 PWAT-PARM2 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # ***FOREST LZSN INFILT LSUR SLSUR KVARY AGWRC 10 0 4 0.07 100 0.05 2.5 0.915 END PWAT-PARM2 PWAT-PARM3 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN INFEXP INFILD DEEPFR BASETP AGWETP 10 0 0 2 2 0 0.05 0.05 END PWAT-PARM3 PWAT-PARM4 <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 4 *** # - # CEPSC UZSN NSUR INTFW IRC LZETP *** 10 0 0.6 0.04 1 0.3 0 END PWAT-PARM4 MON-LZETPARM <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 10 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 END MON-LZETPARM MON-INTERCEP <PLS > PWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC *** 10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.1 0.1 0 END MON-INTERCEP PWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation ran from 1990 to end of 1992 (pat 1-11-95) RUN 21 *** # - # *** CEPS SURS UZS IFWS LZS AGWS GWVS 10 0 0 0.01 0 0.4 0.01 0 END PWAT-STATE1 END PERLND IMPLND GEN-INFO <PLS ><-------Name-------> Unit-systems Printer *** # - # User t-series Engl Metr *** in out *** 1 IMPERVIOUS-FLAT 1 1 1 27 0 END GEN-INFO *** Section IWATER*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL *** 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 32 PRINT-INFO <ILS > ******** Print-flags ******** PIVL PYR # - # ATMP SNOW IWAT SLD IWG IQAL ********* 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO IWAT-PARM1 <PLS > IWATER variable monthly parameter value flags *** # - # CSNO RTOP VRS VNN RTLI *** 1 0 0 0 0 1 END IWAT-PARM1 IWAT-PARM2 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 2 *** # - # *** LSUR SLSUR NSUR RETSC 1 100 0.05 0.011 0.1 END IWAT-PARM2 IWAT-PARM3 <PLS > IWATER input info: Part 3 *** # - # ***PETMAX PETMIN 1 0 0 END IWAT-PARM3 IWAT-STATE1 <PLS > *** Initial conditions at start of simulation # - # *** RETS SURS 1 0 0 END IWAT-STATE1 END IMPLND SCHEMATIC <-Source-> <--Area--> <-Target-> MBLK *** <Name> # <-factor-> <Name> # Tbl# *** DMA-1*** PERLND 10 0.118 RCHRES 1 2 PERLND 10 0.118 RCHRES 1 3 IMPLND 1 0.596 RCHRES 1 5 DMA-2*** PERLND 10 0.126 RCHRES 3 2 PERLND 10 0.126 RCHRES 3 3 IMPLND 1 0.187 RCHRES 3 5 ******Routing****** RCHRES 1 1 RCHRES 5 7 RCHRES 1 COPY 1 17 RCHRES 1 1 RCHRES 2 8 RCHRES 4 1 RCHRES 5 6 RCHRES 4 COPY 1 16 RCHRES 3 1 RCHRES 5 7 RCHRES 3 COPY 1 17 RCHRES 3 1 RCHRES 4 8 RCHRES 5 1 COPY 501 16 END SCHEMATIC NETWORK <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 DISPLY 1 INPUT TIMSER 1 GENER 2 OUTPUT TIMSER .0002778 RCHRES 1 EXTNL OUTDGT 1 GENER 4 OUTPUT TIMSER .0002778 RCHRES 3 EXTNL OUTDGT 1 <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** END NETWORK RCHRES CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 33 GEN-INFO RCHRES Name Nexits Unit Systems Printer *** # - #<------------------><---> User T-series Engl Metr LKFG *** in out *** 1 Surface iltratio-020 2 1 1 1 28 0 1 2 Biofiltration 1-019 1 1 1 1 28 0 1 3 Surface Biofilte-022 2 1 1 1 28 0 1 4 Biofilter 2 1 1 1 1 28 0 1 5 Storm Capture 1-025 1 1 1 1 28 0 1 END GEN-INFO *** Section RCHRES*** ACTIVITY <PLS > ************* Active Sections ***************************** # - # HYFG ADFG CNFG HTFG SDFG GQFG OXFG NUFG PKFG PHFG *** 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 END ACTIVITY PRINT-INFO <PLS > ***************** Print-flags ******************* PIVL PYR # - # HYDR ADCA CONS HEAT SED GQL OXRX NUTR PLNK PHCB PIVL PYR ********* 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 END PRINT-INFO HYDR-PARM1 RCHRES Flags for each HYDR Section *** # - # VC A1 A2 A3 ODFVFG for each *** ODGTFG for each FUNCT for each FG FG FG FG possible exit *** possible exit possible exit * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** 1 0 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 3 0 1 0 0 4 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 2 4 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 5 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 END HYDR-PARM1 HYDR-PARM2 # - # FTABNO LEN DELTH STCOR KS DB50 *** <------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------><--------> *** 1 1 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 2 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 3 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 4 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 5 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 END HYDR-PARM2 HYDR-INIT RCHRES Initial conditions for each HYDR section *** # - # *** VOL Initial value of COLIND Initial value of OUTDGT *** ac-ft for each possible exit for each possible exit <------><--------> <---><---><---><---><---> *** <---><---><---><---><---> 1 0 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 4.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 END HYDR-INIT END RCHRES SPEC-ACTIONS *** User-Defined Variable Quantity Lines *** addr *** <------> CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 34 *** kwd varnam optyp opn vari s1 s2 s3 tp multiply lc ls ac as agfn *** <****> <----> <----> <-> <----><-><-><-><-><--------> <><-> <><-> <--> *** UVQUAN vol2 RCHRES 2 VOL 4 UVQUAN v2m2 GLOBAL WORKSP 1 3 UVQUAN vpo2 GLOBAL WORKSP 2 3 UVQUAN v2d2 GENER 2 K 1 3 *** User-Defined Variable Quantity Lines *** addr *** <------> *** kwd varnam optyp opn vari s1 s2 s3 tp multiply lc ls ac as agfn *** <****> <----> <----> <-> <----><-><-><-><-><--------> <><-> <><-> <--> *** UVQUAN vol4 RCHRES 4 VOL 4 UVQUAN v2m4 GLOBAL WORKSP 3 3 UVQUAN vpo4 GLOBAL WORKSP 4 3 UVQUAN v2d4 GENER 4 K 1 3 *** User-Defined Target Variable Names *** addr or addr or *** <------> <------> *** kwd varnam ct vari s1 s2 s3 frac oper vari s1 s2 s3 frac oper <****> <----><-> <----><-><-><-> <---> <--> <----><-><-><-> <---> <--> UVNAME v2m2 1 WORKSP 1 1.0 QUAN UVNAME vpo2 1 WORKSP 2 1.0 QUAN UVNAME v2d2 1 K 1 1.0 QUAN *** User-Defined Target Variable Names *** addr or addr or *** <------> <------> *** kwd varnam ct vari s1 s2 s3 frac oper vari s1 s2 s3 frac oper <****> <----><-> <----><-><-><-> <---> <--> <----><-><-><-> <---> <--> UVNAME v2m4 1 WORKSP 3 1.0 QUAN UVNAME vpo4 1 WORKSP 4 1.0 QUAN UVNAME v2d4 1 K 1 1.0 QUAN *** opt foplop dcdts yr mo dy hr mn d t vnam s1 s2 s3 ac quantity tc ts rp <****><-><--><><-><--> <> <> <> <><><> <----><-><-><-><-><--------> <> <-><-> GENER 2 v2m2 = 1169.64 *** Compute remaining available pore space GENER 2 vpo2 = v2m2 GENER 2 vpo2 -= vol2 *** Check to see if VPORA goes negative; if so set VPORA = 0.0 IF (vpo2 < 0.0) THEN GENER 2 vpo2 = 0.0 END IF *** Infiltration volume GENER 2 v2d2 = vpo2 *** opt foplop dcdts yr mo dy hr mn d t vnam s1 s2 s3 ac quantity tc ts rp <****><-><--><><-><--> <> <> <> <><><> <----><-><-><-><-><--------> <> <-><-> GENER 4 v2m4 = 517.31 *** Compute remaining available pore space GENER 4 vpo4 = v2m4 GENER 4 vpo4 -= vol4 *** Check to see if VPORA goes negative; if so set VPORA = 0.0 IF (vpo4 < 0.0) THEN GENER 4 vpo4 = 0.0 END IF *** Infiltration volume GENER 4 v2d4 = vpo4 END SPEC-ACTIONS FTABLES FTABLE 2 58 4 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.018893 0.000000 0.000000 0.043956 0.018893 0.000249 0.000000 0.087912 0.018893 0.000498 0.000000 0.131868 0.018893 0.000747 0.000000 0.175824 0.018893 0.000997 0.000000 0.219780 0.018893 0.001246 0.000000 0.263736 0.018893 0.001495 0.000000 0.307692 0.018893 0.001744 0.000000 0.351648 0.018893 0.001993 0.000000 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 35 0.395604 0.018893 0.002242 0.000000 0.439560 0.018893 0.002491 0.000000 0.483516 0.018893 0.002741 0.000000 0.527473 0.018893 0.002990 0.000000 0.571429 0.018893 0.003239 0.000000 0.615385 0.018893 0.003488 0.000000 0.659341 0.018893 0.003737 0.000000 0.703297 0.018893 0.003986 0.000000 0.747253 0.018893 0.004235 0.005901 0.791209 0.018893 0.004485 0.006541 0.835165 0.018893 0.004734 0.007950 0.879121 0.018893 0.004983 0.009538 0.923077 0.018893 0.005232 0.011311 0.967033 0.018893 0.005481 0.013277 1.010989 0.018893 0.005730 0.015442 1.054945 0.018893 0.005979 0.017814 1.098901 0.018893 0.006229 0.020397 1.142857 0.018893 0.006478 0.023200 1.186813 0.018893 0.006727 0.026226 1.230769 0.018893 0.006976 0.029483 1.274725 0.018893 0.007225 0.032975 1.318681 0.018893 0.007474 0.036709 1.362637 0.018893 0.007723 0.040688 1.406593 0.018893 0.007973 0.044917 1.450549 0.018893 0.008222 0.049402 1.494505 0.018893 0.008471 0.054146 1.538462 0.018893 0.008816 0.059153 1.582418 0.018893 0.009160 0.064426 1.626374 0.018893 0.009505 0.069967 1.670330 0.018893 0.009850 0.075775 1.714286 0.018893 0.010194 0.081846 1.758242 0.018893 0.010539 0.088162 1.802198 0.018893 0.010883 0.094598 1.846154 0.018893 0.011228 0.127006 1.890110 0.018893 0.011573 0.127006 1.934066 0.018893 0.011917 0.127006 1.978022 0.018893 0.012262 0.127006 2.021978 0.018893 0.012607 0.127006 2.065934 0.018893 0.012951 0.127006 2.109890 0.018893 0.013296 0.127006 2.153846 0.018893 0.013641 0.127006 2.197802 0.018893 0.013985 0.127006 2.241758 0.018893 0.014330 0.127006 2.285714 0.018893 0.014675 0.127006 2.329670 0.018893 0.015019 0.127006 2.373626 0.018893 0.015364 0.127006 2.417582 0.018893 0.015709 0.127006 2.461538 0.018893 0.016053 0.127006 2.500000 0.018893 0.026851 0.127006 END FTABLE 2 FTABLE 1 36 5 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Outflow2 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.018893 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.043956 0.018893 0.000830 0.000000 0.095255 0.087912 0.018893 0.001661 0.000000 0.100837 0.131868 0.018893 0.002491 0.000000 0.103629 0.175824 0.018893 0.003322 0.000000 0.106420 0.219780 0.018893 0.004152 0.000000 0.109211 0.263736 0.018893 0.004983 0.000000 0.112003 0.307692 0.018893 0.005813 0.000000 0.114794 0.351648 0.018893 0.006644 0.000000 0.117585 0.395604 0.018893 0.007474 0.000000 0.120377 0.439560 0.018893 0.008305 0.000000 0.123168 0.483516 0.018893 0.009135 0.000000 0.125960 0.527473 0.018893 0.009966 0.109153 0.128751 0.571429 0.018893 0.010796 0.457231 0.131542 0.615385 0.018893 0.011627 0.937967 0.134334 0.659341 0.018893 0.012457 1.520245 0.137125 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 36 0.703297 0.018893 0.013288 2.186438 0.139916 0.747253 0.018893 0.014118 2.923402 0.142708 0.791209 0.018893 0.014949 3.719715 0.145499 0.835165 0.018893 0.015779 4.564524 0.148290 0.879121 0.018893 0.016610 5.447026 0.151082 0.923077 0.018893 0.017440 6.356249 0.153873 0.967033 0.018893 0.018271 7.280999 0.156664 1.010989 0.018893 0.019101 8.209921 0.159456 1.054945 0.018893 0.019932 9.131631 0.162247 1.098901 0.018893 0.020762 10.03491 0.165038 1.142857 0.018893 0.021593 10.90895 0.167830 1.186813 0.018893 0.022423 11.74359 0.170621 1.230769 0.018893 0.023254 12.52969 0.173412 1.274725 0.018893 0.024084 13.25940 0.176204 1.318681 0.018893 0.024914 13.92657 0.178995 1.362637 0.018893 0.025745 14.52709 0.181786 1.406593 0.018893 0.026575 15.05935 0.184578 1.450549 0.018893 0.027406 15.52465 0.187369 1.494505 0.018893 0.028236 15.92761 0.190160 1.500000 0.018893 0.028340 16.27670 0.190509 END FTABLE 1 FTABLE 4 58 4 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.008356 0.000000 0.000000 0.043956 0.008356 0.000110 0.000000 0.087912 0.008356 0.000220 0.000000 0.131868 0.008356 0.000331 0.000000 0.175824 0.008356 0.000441 0.000000 0.219780 0.008356 0.000551 0.000000 0.263736 0.008356 0.000661 0.000000 0.307692 0.008356 0.000771 0.000000 0.351648 0.008356 0.000882 0.000000 0.395604 0.008356 0.000992 0.000000 0.439560 0.008356 0.001102 0.000000 0.483516 0.008356 0.001212 0.000000 0.527473 0.008356 0.001322 0.000000 0.571429 0.008356 0.001433 0.000000 0.615385 0.008356 0.001543 0.000000 0.659341 0.008356 0.001653 0.000000 0.703297 0.008356 0.001763 0.000000 0.747253 0.008356 0.001873 0.002610 0.791209 0.008356 0.001983 0.002893 0.835165 0.008356 0.002094 0.003516 0.879121 0.008356 0.002204 0.004218 0.923077 0.008356 0.002314 0.005003 0.967033 0.008356 0.002424 0.005872 1.010989 0.008356 0.002534 0.006830 1.054945 0.008356 0.002645 0.007879 1.098901 0.008356 0.002755 0.009021 1.142857 0.008356 0.002865 0.010261 1.186813 0.008356 0.002975 0.011600 1.230769 0.008356 0.003085 0.013040 1.274725 0.008356 0.003196 0.014585 1.318681 0.008356 0.003306 0.016236 1.362637 0.008356 0.003416 0.017995 1.406593 0.008356 0.003526 0.019866 1.450549 0.008356 0.003636 0.021850 1.494505 0.008356 0.003747 0.023948 1.538462 0.008356 0.003899 0.026162 1.582418 0.008356 0.004051 0.028495 1.626374 0.008356 0.004204 0.030945 1.670330 0.008356 0.004356 0.033514 1.714286 0.008356 0.004509 0.036199 1.758242 0.008356 0.004661 0.038993 1.802198 0.008356 0.004814 0.041839 1.846154 0.008356 0.004966 0.056173 1.890110 0.008356 0.005118 0.056173 1.934066 0.008356 0.005271 0.056173 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 37 1.978022 0.008356 0.005423 0.056173 2.021978 0.008356 0.005576 0.056173 2.065934 0.008356 0.005728 0.056173 2.109890 0.008356 0.005881 0.056173 2.153846 0.008356 0.006033 0.056173 2.197802 0.008356 0.006185 0.056173 2.241758 0.008356 0.006338 0.056173 2.285714 0.008356 0.006490 0.056173 2.329670 0.008356 0.006643 0.056173 2.373626 0.008356 0.006795 0.056173 2.417582 0.008356 0.006948 0.056173 2.461538 0.008356 0.007100 0.056173 2.500000 0.008356 0.011876 0.056173 END FTABLE 4 FTABLE 3 36 5 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Outflow2 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.008356 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.043956 0.008356 0.000367 0.000000 0.042130 0.087912 0.008356 0.000735 0.000000 0.044599 0.131868 0.008356 0.001102 0.000000 0.045833 0.175824 0.008356 0.001469 0.000000 0.047068 0.219780 0.008356 0.001837 0.000000 0.048303 0.263736 0.008356 0.002204 0.000000 0.049537 0.307692 0.008356 0.002571 0.000000 0.050772 0.351648 0.008356 0.002938 0.000000 0.052006 0.395604 0.008356 0.003306 0.000000 0.053241 0.439560 0.008356 0.003673 0.000000 0.054475 0.483516 0.008356 0.004040 0.000000 0.055710 0.527473 0.008356 0.004408 0.109153 0.056944 0.571429 0.008356 0.004775 0.457231 0.058179 0.615385 0.008356 0.005142 0.937967 0.059414 0.659341 0.008356 0.005510 1.520245 0.060648 0.703297 0.008356 0.005877 2.186438 0.061883 0.747253 0.008356 0.006244 2.923402 0.063117 0.791209 0.008356 0.006612 3.719715 0.064352 0.835165 0.008356 0.006979 4.564524 0.065586 0.879121 0.008356 0.007346 5.447026 0.066821 0.923077 0.008356 0.007713 6.356249 0.068056 0.967033 0.008356 0.008081 7.280999 0.069290 1.010989 0.008356 0.008448 8.209921 0.070525 1.054945 0.008356 0.008815 9.131631 0.071759 1.098901 0.008356 0.009183 10.03491 0.072994 1.142857 0.008356 0.009550 10.90895 0.074228 1.186813 0.008356 0.009917 11.74359 0.075463 1.230769 0.008356 0.010285 12.52969 0.076698 1.274725 0.008356 0.010652 13.25940 0.077932 1.318681 0.008356 0.011019 13.92657 0.079167 1.362637 0.008356 0.011387 14.52709 0.080401 1.406593 0.008356 0.011754 15.05935 0.081636 1.450549 0.008356 0.012121 15.52465 0.082870 1.494505 0.008356 0.012489 15.92761 0.084105 1.500000 0.008356 0.012534 16.27670 0.084259 END FTABLE 3 FTABLE 5 92 4 Depth Area Volume Outflow1 Velocity Travel Time*** (ft) (acres) (acre-ft) (cfs) (ft/sec) (Minutes)*** 0.000000 0.036157 0.000000 0.000000 0.022222 0.036157 0.000842 0.001011 0.044444 0.036157 0.001653 0.001430 0.066667 0.036157 0.002456 0.001752 0.088889 0.036157 0.003260 0.002023 0.111111 0.036157 0.004063 0.002261 0.133333 0.036157 0.004867 0.002477 0.155556 0.036157 0.005670 0.002676 0.177778 0.036157 0.006474 0.002860 0.200000 0.036157 0.007277 0.003034 0.222222 0.036157 0.008081 0.003198 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 38 0.244444 0.036157 0.008884 0.003354 0.266667 0.036157 0.009688 0.003503 0.288889 0.036157 0.010491 0.003646 0.311111 0.036157 0.011295 0.003784 0.333333 0.036157 0.012098 0.003917 0.355556 0.036157 0.012902 0.004045 0.377778 0.036157 0.013705 0.004170 0.400000 0.036157 0.014509 0.004291 0.422222 0.036157 0.015312 0.004408 0.444444 0.036157 0.016116 0.004523 0.466667 0.036157 0.016919 0.004634 0.488889 0.036157 0.017723 0.004744 0.511111 0.036157 0.018526 0.004850 0.533333 0.036157 0.019330 0.004954 0.555556 0.036157 0.020133 0.005057 0.577778 0.036157 0.020937 0.005157 0.600000 0.036157 0.021740 0.005255 0.622222 0.036157 0.022544 0.005351 0.644444 0.036157 0.023347 0.005446 0.666667 0.036157 0.024151 0.005539 0.688889 0.036157 0.024954 0.005631 0.711111 0.036157 0.025758 0.005721 0.733333 0.036157 0.026561 0.005810 0.755556 0.036157 0.027365 0.005897 0.777778 0.036157 0.028168 0.005983 0.800000 0.036157 0.028972 0.006068 0.822222 0.036157 0.029775 0.006152 0.844444 0.036157 0.030579 0.006234 0.866667 0.036157 0.031382 0.006316 0.888889 0.036157 0.032186 0.006396 0.911111 0.036157 0.032989 0.006476 0.933333 0.036157 0.033793 0.006657 0.955556 0.036157 0.034596 0.008797 0.977778 0.036157 0.035400 0.012219 1.000000 0.036157 0.036203 0.016514 1.022222 0.036157 0.037007 0.021506 1.044444 0.036157 0.037810 0.027089 1.066667 0.036157 0.038613 0.033190 1.088889 0.036157 0.039417 0.039752 1.111111 0.036157 0.040220 0.046730 1.133333 0.036157 0.041024 0.054087 1.155556 0.036157 0.041827 0.061793 1.177778 0.036157 0.042631 0.069820 1.200000 0.036157 0.043434 0.078145 1.222222 0.036157 0.044238 0.086747 1.244444 0.036157 0.045041 0.095606 1.266667 0.036157 0.045845 0.104707 1.288889 0.036157 0.046648 0.114032 1.311111 0.036157 0.047452 0.123568 1.333333 0.036157 0.048255 0.134394 1.355556 0.036157 0.049059 0.186089 1.377778 0.036157 0.049862 0.270382 1.400000 0.036157 0.050666 0.377290 1.422222 0.036157 0.051469 0.502505 1.444444 0.036157 0.052273 0.643214 1.466667 0.036157 0.053076 0.797197 1.488889 0.036157 0.053880 0.962480 1.511111 0.036157 0.054683 1.137177 1.533333 0.036157 0.055487 1.319415 1.555556 0.036157 0.056290 1.507297 1.577778 0.036157 0.057094 1.698890 1.600000 0.036157 0.057897 1.892231 1.622222 0.036157 0.058701 2.085341 1.644444 0.036157 0.059504 2.276249 1.666667 0.036157 0.060308 2.463025 1.688889 0.036157 0.061111 2.643816 1.711111 0.036157 0.061915 2.816882 1.733333 0.036157 0.062718 2.980650 1.755556 0.036157 0.063522 3.133755 1.777778 0.036157 0.064325 3.275096 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 39 1.800000 0.036157 0.065129 3.403893 1.822222 0.036157 0.065932 3.519742 1.844444 0.036157 0.066736 3.622681 1.866667 0.036157 0.067539 3.713248 1.888889 0.036157 0.068343 3.792554 1.911111 0.036157 0.069146 3.862347 1.933333 0.036157 0.069950 3.925087 1.955556 0.036157 0.070753 4.025849 1.977778 0.036157 0.071557 4.094435 2.000000 0.036157 0.072360 4.161855 2.022222 0.036157 0.073164 4.228167 END FTABLE 5 END FTABLES EXT SOURCES <-Volume-> <Member> SsysSgap<--Mult-->Tran <-Target vols> <-Grp> <-Member-> *** <Name> # <Name> # tem strg<-factor->strg <Name> # # <Name> # # *** WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 PERLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 1 IMPLND 1 999 EXTNL PETINP WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 RCHRES 1 EXTNL PREC WDM 2 PREC ENGL 1 RCHRES 3 EXTNL PREC WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.5 RCHRES 1 EXTNL POTEV WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.7 RCHRES 2 EXTNL POTEV WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.5 RCHRES 3 EXTNL POTEV WDM 1 EVAP ENGL 0.7 RCHRES 4 EXTNL POTEV END EXT SOURCES EXT TARGETS <-Volume-> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult-->Tran <-Volume-> <Member> Tsys Tgap Amd *** <Name> # <Name> # #<-factor->strg <Name> # <Name> tem strg strg*** RCHRES 5 HYDR RO 1 1 1 WDM 1000 FLOW ENGL REPL RCHRES 5 HYDR STAGE 1 1 1 WDM 1001 STAG ENGL REPL COPY 1 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 701 FLOW ENGL REPL COPY 501 OUTPUT MEAN 1 1 12.1 WDM 801 FLOW ENGL REPL END EXT TARGETS MASS-LINK <Volume> <-Grp> <-Member-><--Mult--> <Target> <-Grp> <-Member->*** <Name> <Name> # #<-factor-> <Name> <Name> # #*** MASS-LINK 2 PERLND PWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 2 MASS-LINK 3 PERLND PWATER IFWO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 3 MASS-LINK 5 IMPLND IWATER SURO 0.083333 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 5 MASS-LINK 6 RCHRES ROFLOW RCHRES INFLOW END MASS-LINK 6 MASS-LINK 7 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 1 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 7 MASS-LINK 8 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 2 RCHRES INFLOW IVOL END MASS-LINK 8 MASS-LINK 16 RCHRES ROFLOW COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 16 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 40 MASS-LINK 17 RCHRES OFLOW OVOL 1 COPY INPUT MEAN END MASS-LINK 17 END MASS-LINK END RUN CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 41 Predeveloped HSPF Message File CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 42 Mitigated HSPF Message File ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1962/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 1 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 3.0175E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1962/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 3 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 3.2221E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 43 DATE/TIME: 1963/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 1 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 3.1553E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1963/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 3 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 3.3693E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1971/11/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 1 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 1.5133E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 44 REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1971/11/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 3 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 1.6159E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1975/ 5/31 24: 0 RCHRES : 1 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 8.0885E-12 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 45 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1976/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 1 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 1.2384E-11 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. The count for the WARNING printed above has reached its maximum. If the condition is encountered again the message will not be repeated. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: DATE/TIME: 1976/ 6/30 24: 0 RCHRES : 3 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 1.3224E-11 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. ERROR/WARNING ID: 238 1 The continuity error reported below is greater than 1 part in 1000 and is therefore considered high. Did you specify any "special actions"? If so, they could account for it. Relevant data are: CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 46 DATE/TIME: 1977/ 7/31 24: 0 RCHRES : 3 RELERR STORS STOR MATIN MATDIF -1.000E+00 0.00000 0.0000E+00 0.00000 1.1685E-11 Where: RELERR is the relative error (ERROR/REFVAL). ERROR is (STOR-STORS) - MATDIF. REFVAL is the reference value (STORS+MATIN). STOR is the storage of material in the processing unit (land-segment or reach/reservior) at the end of the present interval. STORS is the storage of material in the pu at the start of the present printout reporting period. MATIN is the total inflow of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. MATDIF is the net inflow (inflow-outflow) of material to the pu during the present printout reporting period. The count for the WARNING printed above has reached its maximum. If the condition is encountered again the message will not be repeated. CFA18050(2)8/23/2023 2:21:23 PM Page 47 Disclaimer Legal Notice This program and accompanying documentation are provided 'as-is' without warranty of any kind. The entire risk regarding the performance and results of this program is assumed by End User. Clear Creek Solutions Inc. and the governmental licensee or sublicensees disclaim all warranties, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of program and accompanying documentation. In no event shall Clear Creek Solutions Inc. be liable for any damages whatsoever (including without limitation to damages for loss of business profits, loss of business information, business interruption, and the like) arising out of the use of, or inability to use this program even if Clear Creek Solutions Inc. or their authorized representatives have been advised of the possibility of such damages. Software Copyright © by : Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 2005-2023; All Rights Reserved. Clear Creek Solutions, Inc. 6200 Capitol Blvd. Ste F Olympia, WA. 98501 Toll Free 1(866)943-0304 Local (360)943-0304 www.clearcreeksolutions.com Calculations for Drawdown Time at OldCastle StormCapture Vaults Volume in Gravel Layers of Biofiltration Basins (DMA-1 = 823 ft2, DMA-2 = 364 ft2): 0.4 x 1.0 ft x 1,187 ft2 = 474.8 ft3 Approximately half (237.4 ft3) above notch elevation (1 ft from bottom), half below Volume in 12” Pipes from Biofiltration Basins to Vaults (DMA-1 = 20.88 ft, DMA-2 = 35.27 ft): 3.14 x (0.5 ft)2 x 56.15 ft = 44.1 ft3 All below notch Volume in 14 vaults below top of riser (1.5 ft from bottom): 14 x 15 ft x 7 ft x 1.5 ft = 2,205 ft3 One-third (735 ft3) above notch, two-thirds (1,470 ft3) below Drawdown time from top of riser to bottom of 0.43’ by 0.13’ notch (1.07 ft from bottom): Orifice Equation: Q = 0.6 x (0.43 ft x 0.13 ft) x (64.4 x 0.43)0.5 = 0.1765 cfs (237.4 + 735) ft3 / 0.1765 cfs = 5,509 sec 5,509 sec x 1 hr / 3,600 sec = 1.53 hr Drawdown time from bottom of notch to vault bottom via 1/2-in hole (1.0 ft total depth): Orifice Equation: Q = 0.6 x 3.14 x (1/24 ft)2 x (64.4 x 1.0)0.5 = 0.006565 cfs (237.4 + 44.1 + 1,470) ft3 / 0.006565 cfs = 266,793 sec 266,793 sec x 1 hr / 3,600 sec = 74.11 hr Total Drawdown Time = 1.53 hr + 74.11 hr = 75.64 hr (Less than 96 hours) **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1537 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * CHICK-FIL-A #4306 * * POST-DEVELOPMENT 25-YEAR * * * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: X:\AES\18050\P25.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 17:08 07/13/2023 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 25.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES)= 2.000 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE= 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF-CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN-/ OUT-/PARK-HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE/ SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) -(Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint= 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.63 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.96 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.276 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.07 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.28 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 166.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.75 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.75 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.15 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 6.09 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.58 Tc(MIN.) = 4.86 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.95 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.800 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.23 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.18 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 8.97 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.90 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.34 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 220.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.8000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.05 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.28 TC(MIN.) = 4.86 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 62 »»>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< »»>(STREET TABLE SECTION# 1 USED)««< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 264.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section= 0.0200 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 1.76 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.34 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 10.20 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.57 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.54 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.80 Tc(MIN.) = 7.66 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.004 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.800 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.30 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.97 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.94 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.35 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 10.66 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.60 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.57 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 484.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.004 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0 .8000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.05 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.14 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.09 TC(MIN.) = 7.66 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.09 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 29.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.871 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.27 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.18 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.27 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 18.33 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0.41 Tc(MIN.) = 8 .07 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.37 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.800 Q25 tributary to TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.39 +(---Biofiltration Basin 1 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.28 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 18.76 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.19 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.33 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 513.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 101.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.60 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 2.60 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.541 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH= 80.74 (Reference: Table 3-lB of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 Q25 tributary to TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.32 ~<---Biofiltration Basin 2 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.85 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.25 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.60 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.542 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.07 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 400.00 TO NODE 401.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 32.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.25 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.56 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.69 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.365 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.04 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.04 **************************************************************************** "' FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 500.00 TO NODE 501.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.48 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.72 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.209 25 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.269 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.04 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.04 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTALAREA(ACRES) 0.0 TC(MIN.) = 2.21 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.04 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS **************************************************************************** RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE Reference: SAN DIEGO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT 2003,1985,1981 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (c) Copyright 1982-2016 Advanced Engineering Software (aes) Ver. 23.0 Release Date: 07/01/2016 License ID 1537 Analysis prepared by: ************************** DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ************************** * CHICK-FIL-A #4306 * * POST-DEVELOPMENT 100-YEAR * * * ************************************************************************** FILE NAME: X:\AES\18050\Pl00.DAT TIME/DATE OF STUDY: 13:53 07/13/2023 USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: 2003 SAN DIEGO MANUAL CRITERIA USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 6-HOUR DURATION PRECIPITATION (INCHES)= 2.500 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 6.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE= 0.90 SAN DIEGO HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED FOR RATIONAL METHOD NOTE: USE MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD PROCEDURES FOR CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS *USER-DEFINED STREET-SECTIONS FOR COUPLED PIPEFLOW AND STREETFLOW MODEL* HALF-CROWN TO STREET-CROSSFALL: CURB GUTTER-GEOMETRIES: MANNING WIDTH CROSSFALL IN-/ OUT-/PARK-HEIGHT WIDTH LIP HIKE FACTOR NO. (FT) (FT) SIDE/ SIDE/ WAY (FT) (FT) (FT) (FT) (n) 1 30.0 20.0 0.018/0.018/0.020 0.67 2.00 0.0313 0.167 0.0150 GLOBAL STREET FLOW-DEPTH CONSTRAINTS: 1. Relative Flow-Depth = 0.00 FEET as (Maximum Allowable Street Flow Depth) -(Top-of-Curb) 2. (Depth)*(Velocity) Constraint= 6.0 (FT*FT/S) *SIZE PIPE WITH A FLOW CAPACITY GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE UPSTREAM TRIBUTARY PIPE.* **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 101.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 54.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.63 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.96 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.276 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.35 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.07 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.35 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.67 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 166.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 0.94 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.82 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.17 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 7.39 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 1.52 Tc(MIN.) = 4.80 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.22 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.19 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.800 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 1.53 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.20 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 10.55 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.91 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.38 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 102.00 = 220.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 101.00 TO NODE 102.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.8000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.06 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.3 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.60 TC(MIN.) = 4.80 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 62 »»>COMPUTE STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< »»>(STREET TABLE SECTION# 1 USED)««< UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.47 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 STREET LENGTH(FEET) = 264.00 CURB HEIGHT(INCHES) = 8.0 STREET HALFWIDTH(FEET) = 30.00 DISTANCE FROM CROWN TO CROSSFALL GRADEBREAK(FEET) = 20.00 INSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 OUTSIDE STREET CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.018 SPECIFIED NUMBER OF HALFSTREETS CARRYING RUNOFF = 1 STREET PARKWAY CROSSFALL(DECIMAL) = 0.020 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Streetflow Section(curb-to-curb) = 0.0150 Manning's FRICTION FACTOR for Back-of-Walk Flow Section= 0.0200 **TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.22 STREETFLOW MODEL RESULTS USING ESTIMATED FLOW: STREET FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.37 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.37 AVERAGE FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.64 PRODUCT OF DEPTH&VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.60 STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 2.68 Tc(MIN.) = 7.48 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.082 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT= 0.800 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.30 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.23 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.6 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 2.46 END OF SUBAREA STREET FLOW HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.38 HALFSTREET FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 11.91 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.69 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC.) = 0.63 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 103.00 = 484.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 102.00 TO NODE 103.00 IS CODE= 81 »>»ADDITION OF SUBAREA TO MAINLINE PEAK FLOW««< 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 5.082 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0 .8000 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.05 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.18 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.7 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.65 TC(MIN.) = 7.48 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 103.00 TO NODE 104.00 IS CODE= 91 »»>COMPUTE "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA««< UPSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.15 DOWNSTREAM NODE ELEVATION(FEET) = 52.09 CHANNEL LENGTH THRU SUBAREA(FEET) = 29.00 "V" GUTTER WIDTH(FEET) = 4.00 GUTTER HIKE(FEET) = 0.100 PAVEMENT LIP(FEET) = 0.031 MANNING'S N = .0150 PAVEMENT CROSSFALL(DECIMAL NOTATION)= 0.02000 MAXIMUM DEPTH(FEET) = 0.50 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.917 GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 TRAVEL TIME COMPUTED USING ESTIMATED FLOW(CFS) = 2.88 TRAVEL TIME THRU SUBAREA BASED ON VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.23 AVERAGE FLOW DEPTH(FEET) = 0.30 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 20.49 "V" GUTTER FLOW TRAVEL TIME(MIN.) = 0 .39 Tc(MIN.) = 7.87 SUBAREA AREA(ACRES) = 0.12 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.47 AREA-AVERAGE RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = 0.800 Q100 tributary to TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.8 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 3.03 +<---Biofiltration Basin 1 END OF SUBAREA "V" GUTTER HYDRAULICS: DEPTH(FEET) = 0.30 FLOOD WIDTH(FEET) = 20.93 FLOW VELOCITY(FEET/SEC.) = 1.25 DEPTH*VELOCITY(FT*FT/SEC) = 0.37 LONGEST FLOWPATH FROM NODE 100.00 TO NODE 104.00 = 513.00 FEET. **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 200.00 TO NODE 201.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 101.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 55.60 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.00 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 2.60 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 3.541 WARNING: INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW PATH LENGTH IS GREATER THAN THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH= 80.74 (Reference: Table 3-lB of Hydrology Manual) THE MAXIMUM OVERLAND FLOW LENGTH IS USED IN Tc CALCULATION! 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.65 Q100 tributary to TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.65 +(---Biofiltration Basin 2 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 300.00 TO NODE 301.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 33.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.85 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.25 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.60 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.542 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.08 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.02 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.08 **************************************************************************** FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 400.00 TO NODE 401.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 32.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.25 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.56 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.69 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.365 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.05 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.05 **************************************************************************** "' FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 500.00 TO NODE 501.00 IS CODE= 21 »>»RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< GENERAL COMMERCIAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8000 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" S.C.S. CURVE NUMBER (AMC II) = 92 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH(FEET) = 30.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 54.20 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION(FEET) = 53.48 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE(FEET) = 0.72 SUBAREA OVERLAND TIME OF FLOW(MIN.) = 2.209 100 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 6.587 NOTE: RAINFALL INTENSITY IS BASED ON Tc= 5-MINUTE. SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.05 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) = 0.01 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 0.05 END OF STUDY SUMMARY: TOTALAREA(ACRES) 0.0 TC(MIN.) = 2.21 PEAK FLOW RATE(CFS) = 0.05 END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS PONDING DEPTH ABOVE RISER TOP OF GRATE Weir Equa�on: Q = C x L x H3/2 Where Q’s are from AES calcula�ons C = Weir Coefficient = 3.0 L = Riser Perimeter H = Ponding Depth above Riser Top of Grate H = [Q100 / (C x L)]2/3 Biofiltra�on Basin 1 Q100 = 3.03 cfs Q25 = 2.39 cfs L (36” by 36” riser) = 12.00’ H100 = [3.03 / (3.0 x 12.00)]2/3 = 0.192’ H25 = [2.39 / (3.0 x 12.00)]2/3 = 0.164’ Biofiltra�on Basin 2 Q100 = 1.65 cfs Q25 = 1.32 cfs L (36” by 36” riser) = 12.00’ H100 = [1.65 / (3.0 x 12.00)]2/3 = 0.128’ H25 = [1.32 / (3.0 x 12.00)]2/3 = 0.110’ Stormcapture Vault for Hydromodifica�on Q100 = 4.68 cfs Q25 Mi�gated = 0.456 cfs L (15” riser) = 4.73’ H100 = [4.68 / (3.0 x 4.73)]2/3 = 0.477’ H25 = [0.456 / (3.0 x 3.14)]2/3 = 0.101’ ATTACHMENT 3 Structural BMP Maintenance Information Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included in the Structural BMP Maintenance Information Attachment: Preliminary Design/Planning/CEQA level submittal: Attachment 3 must identify: Typical maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s) based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual Final Design level submittal: Attachment 3 must identify: Specific maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s). This shall be based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual and enhanced to reflect actual proposed components of the structural BMP(s) How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt posts, or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds) Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable Maintenance thresholds for BMPs subject to siltation or heavy trash(e.g., silt level posts or other markings shall be included in all BMP components that will trap and store sediment, trash, and/or debris, so that the inspector may determine how full the BMP is, and the maintenance personnel may determine where the bottom of the BMP is . If required, posts or other markings shall be indicated and described on structural BMP plans.) Recommended equipment to perform maintenance When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management EXHIBIT B BMP MAINTENANCE PROGRAM I. Bio-Retention Basins The principal maintenance objective is to prevent sediment buildup and clogging. Routine maintenance activities, and the frequency at which they will be conducted, are shown in Table 1. Table - 1 Maintenance Indicators & Actions The bio-retention basins are the first stage of treatment and will capture the majority of trash, debris and sediment. Indicators will include a noticeable building up trash and debris. Maintenance actions will include removing all visible trash and debris. The plants and soil are also designed uptake pollutants that are captured in the soil media. Dying plants are an indicator that the plant uptake of pollutants has been exhausted and action items include replacing the planting and soil media. Access The bio-retention basins are accessible from the surface and can be accessed by foot. Inspection Features Maintenance indicators and thresholds are visible from the surface of the basin and can be inspected anywhere where the basin is visible. Manufacturer & Proprietary Parts Bio-Retention basins are a standard structural BMP by County standards. No proprietary parts are required. Maintenance Thresholds Thresholds that indicate immediate maintenance are: dead plants, a noticeable build up of sediment on the surface, water appears to remain in the basin for extended periods of time (<48 hours) Recommended Equipment No special equipment is needed to remove trash or debris. A BMP specialist is recommended to complete maintenance related to replanting or replacing soil media and powered construction equipment may be necessary. Training or Certification None II. Underground Storm Capture Vaults The principal maintenance objective is to prevent sediment buildup and clogging. Routine maintenance activities, and the frequency at which they will be conducted, are shown in Table 2. Table - 2 Maintenance Indicators & Actions The underground Storm Capture Vaults and the second stage of treatment designed to allow sediment to settle and control runoff leaving the site. Maintenance Indicators include very slow draining of the vaults indicating that sediment has built up and is clogging the outlets of the vaults. Action items include inspecting the vaults for large amounts of sediment buildup and removing as necessary and cleaning outlets. Access The Storm Capture Vaults can be accessed by manhole ports on the surface of the parking lot. Inspection Features None. Manufacturer & Proprietary Parts Storm Capture Vaults (4’H x 7’W x 15’L). The flow control devices are not proprietary devices and is constructed entirely of standard parts. See Construction Documents for detail of flow control device and parts. Maintenance Thresholds Threshold that indicates immediate maintenance are a noticeable build up of sediment on the floor of the vaults, water appears to remain in the vaults for extended periods of time (<1 week) Recommended Equipment A vacuum truck is the recommended equipment to clean the vaults of sediment buildup. Training or Certification OSHA training to work in a Confined Space is required. Working inside the vaults can be dangerous to untrained individuals STORMCAPTURE® Inspection and Maintenance Guide 0. Oklcastle lnfrast~~S~~-0 ()water Description The StormCapture® system is an underground, modular, structural precast concrete storage system for stormwater detention, retention, infiltration, harvesting and reuse, and water quality volume storage. The system’s modular design utilizes multiple standard precast concrete units with inside dimensions of 7 feet by 15 feet (outside dimensions of 8 feet by 16 feet) to form an underground storage system. The inside height of the StormCapture system can range from 2 feet to 14 feet. This modular design provides limitless configuration options for site- specific layouts. StormCapture components can be provided as either open-bottom modules to promote infiltration or closed-bottom modules for detention. In some cases, StormCapture modules can be placed in a checkerboard configuration for an even more efficient design. A Link Slab, with a footprint of 9 feet by 17 feet, is then used to bridge each space without a module. The standard StormCapture design incorporates lateral and longitudinal passageways between modules to accommodate internal stormwater conveyance throughout the system. These passageways may be classified as either a “window configuration” with standard 12-inch tall sediment baffles extending up from the floor of the module to the bottom of the window, or a “doorway configuration” without the sediment baffles. The function and drainage rate of a StormCapture system depends on site-specific conditions and requirements. Stormwater typically enters the StormCapture system through an inlet pipe. Grated inlets can also be used for direct discharge into the system. The StormCapture system is rated for H-20 traffic loading with limited cover. Higher load requirements can also be accommodated. In addition, StormCapture systems are typically equipped with a limited number of maintenance modules that provide access to the system for ongoing inspection and maintenance. Function The StormCapture system is primarily used to manage water quantity by temporarily storing stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces to prevent flooding, slow down the rate at which stormwater leaves the site, and reduce receiving stream erosion. In addition, the StormCapture system can be used to capture stormwater runoff for water quality treatment. Regardless of how the StormCapture system is used, some sedimentation may occur in the modules during the time water is stored. Configurations The configuration of the StormCapture systems may vary, depending on the water quality and/or quantity requirements of the site. StormCapture configurations for detention, retention/infiltration, and retention/ harvesting are described below. Detention StormCapture Detention systems are designed with a closed bottom to detain stormwater runoff for controlled discharge from the site. This design may incorporate a dead storage sump and a permanent pool of water if the outlet pipe is higher than the floor elevation. Discharge from the system is typically controlled by an outlet orifice and/or outlet weir to regulate the rate of stormwater leaving the system. StormCapture Detention systems are typically designed with silt-tight joints, however when conditions exist that require a StormCapture system to be watertight, the system may be wrapped in a continuous, impermeable geomembrane liner. If the StormCapture Detention system includes Link Slabs, a liner must be used to detain water since the chambers under each Link Slab have no floor slab. In this case, care must be taken by maintenance personnel not to damage the exposed liner beneath each Link Slab. 2 3 Retention/Infiltration StormCapture Retention/Infiltration systems are designed with an open bottom to allow for the retention of stormwater onsite through infiltration into the base rock and surrounding soils. For infiltration systems, the configuration of the base of the StormCapture system may vary, depending on the needs of the site and the height of the system. Some systems may use modules that have fully open bottoms with no concrete floor, while other systems may use modules that incorporate floor openings in the base of each module. These are typically 24-inch by 24-inch openings. For open-bottom systems, concrete splash pads may be installed below inlet grate openings and pipe inlets to prevent erosion of base rock. A StormCapture Infiltration system may have an elevated discharge pipe for peak overflow. Retention/Harvesting StormCapture Retention/Harvesting systems are similar to detention systems using closed-bottom modules, but stormwater is typically retained onsite for an extended period of time and later reused for non-potable applications or irrigation. For rainwater harvesting systems, an impermeable geomembrane liner is typically installed around the modules to provide a water-tight system. Inspection and Maintenance Overview State and local regulations typically require all stormwater management systems to be inspected on a regular basis and maintained as necessary to ensure performance and protect downstream receiving waters. Inspections should be used to evaluate the conditions of the system. Based on these inspections, maintenance needs can be determined. Maintenance needs vary by site and system. Using this Inspection & Maintenance Guide, qualified maintenance personnel should be able to provide a recommendation for maintenance needs. Requirements may range from minor activities such as removing trash, debris or pipe blockages to more substantial activities such as vacuuming and removal of sediment and/or non-draining water. Long-term maintenance is important to the operation of the system since it prevents excessive pollutant buildup that may limit system performance by reducing the operating capacity and increasing the potential for scouring of pollutants during periods of high flow. Only authorized personnel shall inspect and/or enter a StormCapture system. Personnel must be properly trained and equipped before entering any underground or confined space structure. Training includes familiarity with and adherence to any and all local, state and federal regulations governing confined space access and the operation, inspection, and maintenance of underground structures. Inspection and Maintenance Frequency The StormCapture system should be inspected on a regular basis, typically twice per year, and maintained as required. The maintenance frequency will be driven by the amount of runoff and pollutant loading encountered by a given system. Local jurisdictions may also dictate inspection and maintenance frequencies. 4 Inspection Equipment The following equipment is helpful when conducting StormCapture inspections: • Recording device (pen and paper form, voice recorder, iPad, etc.) • Suitable clothing (appropriate footwear, gloves, hardhat, safety glasses, etc.) • Traffic control equipment (cones, barricades, signage, flagging, etc.)• Manhole hook or pry bar• Confined space entry equipment, if needed • Flashlight • Tape measure • Measuring stick or sludge sampler• Long-handled net (optional) Inspection Procedures A typical StormCapture system provides strategically placed access points that may be used for inspection. StormCapture inspections are usually conducted visually from the ground surface, without entering the unit. This typically limits inspection to the assessment of sediment depth, water drain down, and general condition of the modules and components, but a more detailed assessment of structural condition may be conducted during a maintenance event. To complete an inspection, safety measures including traffic control should be deployed before the access covers are removed. Once the covers have been removed, the following items should be inspected and recorded (see form provided at the end of this document) to determine whether maintenance is required: • Observe inlet and outlet pipe penetrations for blockage or obstruction.• If possible, observe internal components like baffles, flow control weirs or orifices, and steps or ladders to determine whether they are broken, missing, or possibly obstructed. • Observe, quantify, and record the sediment depths within the modules. • Retrieve as much floating trash as possible with a long-handled net. If a significant amount of trash remains, make a note in the Inspection & Maintenance Log.• For infiltration systems, local regulations may require monitoring of the system to ensure drain down is occurring within the required permit time period (typically 24 to 72 hours). If this is the case, refer to local regulations for proper inspection procedure. Maintenance Indicators Maintenance should be scheduled if any of the following conditions are identified during the inspection: • Inlet or outlet piping is blocked or obstructed.• Internal components are broken, missing, or obstructed. • Accumulation of more than six inches of sediment on the system floor or in the sump, if applicable. • Significant accumulation of floating trash and debris that cannot be retrieved with a net. • The system has not drained completely after it hasn’t rained for one to three days, or the drain down does not meet permit requirements.• Any hazardous material is observed or reported. 5 Maintenance Equipment The following equipment is helpful when conducting StormCapture maintenance: • Suitable clothing (appropriate footwear, gloves, hardhat, safety glasses, etc.) • Traffic control equipment (cones, barricades, signage, flagging, etc.) • Manhole hook or pry bar• Confined space entry equipment, if needed• Flashlight • Tape measure • Vacuum truck Maintenance Procedures Maintenance should be conducted during dry weather when no flow is entering the system. Confined space entry is usually required to maintain the StormCapture. Only personnel that are OSHA Confined Space Entry trained and certified may enter underground structures. Once safety measures such as traffic control have been deployed, the access covers may be removed and the following activities may be conducted to complete maintenance: • Remove trash and debris using an extension on the end of the boom hose of the vacuum truck. Continue using the vacuum truck to completely remove accumulated sediment. Some jetting may be necessary to fully evacuate sediment from the system floor or sump. Jetting is acceptable in systems with solid concrete floors or base slabs (referred to as closed-bottom systems). However, jetting is not recommended for open-bottom systems with a gravel foundation since it may cause bedding displacement, undermining of the foundation, or internal disturbance. • All material removed from the system during maintenance must be disposed of in accordance with local regulations. In most cases, the material may be handled in the same manner as disposal of material removed from sumped catch basins or manholes. • Inspect inlet and outlet pipe penetrations for cracking and other signs of movement that may cause leakage. • Inspect the concrete splash pads (applicable for open-bottom systems only) for proper function and placement.• Inspect the system for movement of modules. There should be less than 3/4-inch spacing between modules. • Inspect the general interior condition of modules for concrete cracking or deterioration. If the system consists of horizontal joints as part of the modules, inspect those joints for leakage, displacement or deterioration. Be sure to securely replace all access covers, as appropriate, following inspection and/or maintenance. If the StormCapture modules or any of the system components show significant signs of cracking, spalling, or deterioration or if there is evidence of excessive differential settlement between modules, contact Oldcastle Infrastructure at 800-579-8819. StormCapture Inspection & Maintenance Log Refer to as-built records for details about system size and location onsite Location Inspection Date Condition of Internal Components Notes: Good Damaged Missing Detention Infiltration Retention/Harvesting Inlet or Outlet Blockage or Obstruction System Configuration: Notes: Yes No Trash and Debris Accumulation Sediment Depth Observed Notes: Significant Not Significant Drain Down Observations Notes: Appropriate Time Frame Inappropriate Time Frame Maintenance Requirements Yes - Schedule Maintenance No - Inspect Again in _______ Months Notes: Inches of Sediment: ___________ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ BUILDINGSTRUCTURES OUR MARKETS TRANSPORTATION WATER ENERGYCOMMUNICATIONS February 2019 v.1 www.oldcastleinfrastructure.com 800-579-8819 STORMCAPTURE® I : I 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~~S!~~f I ()water 1 WEATHERthe Storm StormCapture® System STORMWATERSTORMCAPTURE® Modular Stormwater Management System for Infiltration, Detention, Retention, Treatment and Harvesting Backfill Requirements–Modules are typically backfilled with existing site materials. Custom Sizes–Available in internal heights from 2’ to 14’ to best-fit site needs. Design Assistance–Let our professionals customize for your specific needs. Easy to Install–Fast installation with minimal handling. Large Storage Capacity–Smaller system footprint for greater design flexibility. Modular Design–Precast concrete modules measure 8’ wide by 16’ long OD, (7’ x 15’ ID), with customizable heights. Traffic Loading–Only requires 6” of cover. Treatment Train–Available with pre-treatment, post-treatment, or both. StormCapture® System 0 Oldcastle lnfrast~';!S!~!~· 2 StormCapture Advantages Fast Service – Get help from our national engineering team with layouts and specifications to meet your project's requirements. Cost Savings – Highly competitive installation and maintenance costs. Codes – Designed to the latest codes for HS-20-44 (full truckload plus impact). Sustainability – The system is maintainable for long-term sustainability. LID – Ideal for Low-Impact Development (LID). LEED – Manufactured locally with recycled material for potential LEED credits. LEED 2009 for New Construction & Major Renovation, U.S. Green Building Council: Sustainable Sites (5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2), Materials & Resources (4.1, 4.2, 5.1, 5.2), Water Efficiency (1.1, 1.2, 3.1, 3.2). Same-day staging and installation of StormCapture project. StormCapture modules are designed for HS20 traffic loading. StormCapture offers fast installation with minimal handling. StormCapture detention system installed beneath office parking lot. StormCapture offers numerous options for infiltration, detention, retention, treatment and harvesting to solve your stormwater management needs. Let us show you how we can design and customize a solution for you. Maintenance ModuleDetention Filtration Pre-Treatment Applications RETENTION INFILTRATION HARVESTING TREATMENT Maintenance Module Pump Module Modules with Floor Openings Harvesting Equipment Skid with Sanitation, Pumps and Controls Pre-Treatment DETENTION 0 Olclcastle lnfrast~~l~!~- 0 4 PERMECAPTURE CISTERNS INSTALLED IN JUST ONE DAY Modules with HydraPorts™ Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavers Inlet Pump Outlet 4 Link Slab - Unique design allows for significant reduction in the quantity of modules and associated costs, while providing maximum storage capacity. StormCapture Modules SC1 - Single piece modules can be used for applications from 2' to 7' tall. Appropriate for cisterns, infiltration, detention and retention systems. SC1 modules are typically installed on minimally compacted gravel base, depending on specific project requirements. SC2 - Two piece modules can be used for applications from 7' to 14' tall for maximum storage capacity in a condensed footprint. Appropriate for cisterns, infiltration, detention and retention systems. SC2 modules are typically installed on compacted native subgrade. Contact us today to start designing your system! Module Sizes & Capacities Endless Configurations Modules are 8'x16' outside dimensions. Capacity varies by configuration of openings. INSIDE DIMENSIONS (FT)CAPACITY RANGE (FT3) 7x15x2 210-212 7x15x3 315-325 7x15x4 420-442 7x15x5 525-559 7x15x6 630-678 7x15x7 735-793 7x15x8 840-910 INSIDE DIMENSIONS (FT)CAPACITY RANGE (FT3) 7x15x9 945-1,027 7x15x10 1,050-1,140 7x15x11 1,155 - 1,257 7x15x12 1,260 - 1,374 7x15x13 1,365 -1,491 7x15x14 1,470 - 1,608 6 ATTACHMENT 4 City standard Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit [Use the City’s standard Single Sheet BMP Plan.] INCLUDES 0.132 ACRES OF OFFSITE DRAINAGE AREAS OUTSIDE OF DISTURBED AREA (OFFSITE DRAINAGE AREAS 1 & 2) * * ff_ ------- SWMP NO. PENDING PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE: NAME TBD (STORE OPERA TOR) ADDRESS 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA PHONE NO. TBD PLAN PREPARED BY: NAME RANDY J. DECKER CONTACT TBD COMPANY JOSEPH C. TRUXAW & ASSOCIATES, INC. ADDRESS 1915 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE, SUITE 101 ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE NO. (714) 935-0265 SIGNATURE BMPNOTES: CERTIFICATION ____ _ 1. THESE BMPS ARE MANDATORY TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS OR THESE PLANS. 2. NO CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED BMPS ON THIS SHEET WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. 3. NO SUBSTITUTIONS TO THE MATERIAL OR TYPES OR PLANTING TYPES WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. 4. NO OCCUPANCY WILL BE GRANTED UNTIL THE CITY INSPECTION STAFF HAS INSPECTED THIS PROJECT FOR APPROPRIATE BMP CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION. 5. REFER TO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT DOCUMENT. 6. SEE PROJECT SWMP FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. ff_ '- •• . (4 . '•" (48.81 •·. DISTURBED AREA= 1.101 AC, 47,647 SF SELF TREATING AREA= 0.061 AC, 2,640 SF TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA TO BASINS= 1.088 AC, 47,375 SF BMP TABLE DRAWING NO. SHEET NO.(S) INSPECTION * MAINTENANCE * BMPID# BMPTYPE SYMBOL BMPMANUAL QUANTITY FREQUENCY FREQUENCY HYDROMODIFICATION & TREATMENT CONTROL ® ® BIOFILTRATION •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:•:•:•:•:•:-: BF-1 1,143SF. --QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY ·:. ·:. ·:. ·:. ·: .. ' · ...... : :: ::: :. AREA .. -.·:.·:.·:.·:.•,•.·:.·:::::::. HYDROMODIFICATION ® STORM CAPTURE r-------, I 1' MP-50 4 --QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY I 1' VAULTS L j LOW IMPACT DESIGN (L.1.D.) @ ROOF DRAIN TO llilll SD-B 2 --QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY LANDSCAPING SOURCE CONTROL ® TRASH ENCLOSURE rn SC-3 1 --WEEKLY MONTHLY , ~ (1§ STENCILS NO DUMPING SC-2 2 --ANNUALLY ANNUALLY ® @ DRAJNS TO OCEAN TRASH CAPTURE BMP @ @) OLDCASTLE FLOGARD ® @ CATCH BASIN INSERT ~ T4 4 --QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY MODEL No. FGP-36F HYDROMODIFICATION & TREATMENT CONTROL @ SUSTAINABLE [ .,.~ .,. ... I SD-K LANDSCAPE 10,498 SF. --QUARTERLY SEMI-ANNUALLY LOCATIONS I LEGEND I ■■■■■■■■ LIMITS OF TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA LIMITS OF OMA LAND COVER G:J PERVIOUS -LANDSCAPING B] SELF MITIGATING LANDSCAPE AREA (61.43) 1W r--=(5~5·~~~ I I I -1:2 Ir-: ·~ I I I I I I I I \ I I \ I \ \ \ ff_ / -!· ..,._ I ', , ..... -..,._ \ \ -..... _ ----,_ --___ .:::,. * 20 10 0 20 40 60 ~I ~~--1 __ 1------,1 SCALE: 1 "=20' I I I ' I I I ,--- \ --- \ --- \ \ I I ' I '-J * -y C 5 RONALD PACKARD PKWY. ,<) w 12, of' ~ 1i "(" ~ ~ y \'~ S!Tt ? \ "\, ecss !Ja ("!BAD 0 '\\ r, I\ fi l , V '\ ;,-'If ur' \ ~~;-f--"'"--1-----+-- \, AIRPORT ROAD '\\ " \\ . VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE NOTlCE TO CONTRACTOR lllE CONTRACTOR SHAU. ASCERTAIN THE TRUE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOCATION AND SIZE OF AU. UTILITIES, PIPES, AND/OR STRUCTURES AND SHAU. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE TO ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITIES, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN HEREON. lll'ORTANT NCJl1CE Section -4216 of the Government Code raqulm a Dig Alert ldanHflootlon Number b, Issued btfor1 a •Pennlt to Excavate• wlll be valid. For your Dig Alert I.D. Number call Underground S.rvice Alert CALJ. 811 Two working days befort you dtg, ~ c1i ~ S:1 ~ :,; ~ ~ , !! "' !:l ~ ,-:: ~ ~ I ~ -;;;,---!::::. I:! ~ ~ ~ "' ~ ~ c;l .; ~ ~ ~ § _, <::, -.J - ~ cl!! ~ § i I:! ""< -., lb ~ lb -~ ., ~ :g, .§i L.:i :-;::: "" :::,;: ""' ·--c:..5 0, - z <( <( -_J z a... a:: 0 L,_ w ....J (/) <( I---w<C u (/) oZL,.... t,I') u 0 a... ~~w ~ 1-- <C<( <( CD I C 1--_J-(/) -Z I--L,....w ~ l>c w ~<(<( w u aJ :::r:: -co(/) :::c "'-=I" ....J (/) Uoo~ LOU w L,_ _J 0 ~ >-z 1----(/) u ' DATE 08-23-23 DRAWN BY PJS/SGC CHECKED BY RD JOB NO. CFA18050 SHEET NO. 1 OF 1 SHEETS . ATTACHMENT 5 Geotechnical Report GREEN Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU5850 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, California Prepared for: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Irvine, California Prepared by: Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. November 16, 2021 Revised November 23, 2022 Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 GILES E:NGINEERING A ssocrATEs. rNc . GILES E:NGINEERING Assoc1ATES, INC. • Dallas, TX GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CONSULTANTS • Los Angeles. CA • Manassas, VA • Milwaukee, WI November 16, 2021 Revised November 23, 2022 Chick-fil-A, Inc. 105 Progress, Suite 100 Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Subject: Dear Ms. Clay: Ms. Leslie Clay Development Coordinator Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 1-5 and Palomar FSU 5850 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. (Giles) is pleased to present our Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis report prepared for the above-referenced project. Conclusions and recommendations developed from the exploration and analysis are discussed in the accompanying report. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If we may be of additional assistance, should geotechnical related problems occur or to provide construction observation and testing services, please do not hesitate to call at any time. Respectfully submitted, GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. John L. Maier, P.E., G.E. Branch Manager Distribution: Chick-fil-A, Inc. Walter M. Lopez, P.E . Project Engineer 11 Attn: Ms. Leslie Clay (email: Leslie.Clay@cfacorp.com) Attn: Mr. Carlos Arias (email: Carlos.Arias2@cfacorp.com) Attn: Mr. Brent Ryhlick (email: Brent.Ryhlick@cfacorp.com ) 1965 North Main Street • Orange, CA 92865 714/279-0817 • Fax 714/279-9687 • E-Mail losangeles@gilesengr.com _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 I-5 AND PALOMAR FSU 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 2G-1808005-R2 Description Page No. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OUTLINE ................................................................................ 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................................. 3 3.0 SITES AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 3 3.1 Site Description ................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Proposed Project Description .............................................................................. 4 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION .................................................................................... 4 4.1 Subsurface Exploration ....................................................................................... 4 4.2 Subsurface Conditions ........................................................................................ 5 4.3 Photoionization Detector (PID) Screening ........................................................... 6 4.4 Infiltration Testing................................................................................................ 6 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................... 7 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 9 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations ........................................................................... 9 6.2 Site Improvement Recommendations ............................................................... 11 6.3 Construction Considerations ............................................................................. 14 6.4 Foundation Recommendations ......................................................................... 14 6.5 Floor Slab Recommendations ........................................................................... 16 6.6 Retaining Wall Recommendations (If Required) ................................................ 17 6.7 New Pavement ................................................................................................. 18 6.8 Recommended Construction Materials Testing Services .................................. 20 6.9 Basis of Report ................................................................................................. 20 APPENDICES Appendix A – Figure (3), Boring Logs (6) and Liquefaction Analysis Appendix B – Field Procedures Appendix C – Laboratory Testing and Classification Appendix D – General Information (Modified Guideline Specifications) and Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report ~------ _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EXPLORATION AND ANALYSIS CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 I-5 AND PALOMAR FSU 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 2G-1808005-R2 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OUTLINE The executive summary is provided solely for purposes of overview. Any party who relies on this report must read the full report. The executive summary omits a number of details, any one of which could be crucial to the proper application of this report. Subsurface Conditions • Site Class designation D is recommended for seismic design considerations. • Our review of the Geology of San Diego Quadrangle indicates that the site is mapped as being underlain by Old Paralic Deposits consisting generally of poorly sorted, moderately permeable, reddish-brown, interfingered strand like, beach, estuarine and colluvial deposits composed of siltstone, sandstone and conglomerate. • Possible fills were encountered within our test borings to depths of about 3 feet below existing ground surfaces and were noted to be moist, medium dense in relative density clayey sand and silty sand, and firm in comparative consistency sandy clay. • Native soils encountered below the possible fills were generally moist, medium dense to dense silty sand and sand, and very stiff sandy clay. • Old Paralic Deposits were encountered within test borings B-1 and B-4 to depths of about 18 to 20 feet below existing ground surface and generally consisted of very dense silty sandstone materials. • Groundwater was encountered during our subsurface exploration to a depth of about 17 and 18 feet below existing grade within test borings B-1 and B-4. Site Development • The proposed site development will include the demolition of existing building for the construction of a new Chick-fil-A single-story building and site improvements that include new concrete walkways, parking stalls, driveways, drive thru lane, and trash enclosure. • Building Area: Due to the presence of variable strength characteristics of the near surface soils and likely disturbance of site soils during clearing operations, it is recommended that the soils within the proposed new building and an appropriate distance beyond (5 feet minimum) be over-excavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade or planned grade and 1 foot below bottom of footings, whichever is greater. The soils exposed at the base of this recommended over-excavation should be examined by the geotechnical engineer to document that the soils are suitable for building support. Prior to placement of fill, the exposed surfaces approved for fill placement should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture conditioned and then recompacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557-00). • Due to the presence of dense to very dense onsite soils some excavation difficulties should be expected. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 2 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Building Foundation • Shallow spread footing foundation systems or turned-down slabs may be designed for a maximum, net allowable soil pressure of 3,000 psf soil bearing pressure supported on newly placed structural compacted fill. • Minimum reinforcing in the strip footings is recommended to consist of four No. 5 bars (2 top and 2 bottom). Building Floor Slab • It is recommended that on grade slab be a minimum 4-inch thick slab-on-grade or turned-down slab, underlain by properly prepared subgrade. • Minimum slab reinforcing recommended consisting of No. 3 rebars spaced at 18 inches on center, each way. Parking Improvement • Asphalt Pavements: 3 inches of asphaltic concrete underlain by 5 and 8 inches of base course aggregate in parking stalls and driveways, respectively. • Portland Cement Concrete: 6 inches in thickness underlain by 4 inches of base course in high stress areas such as entrance/exit aprons, trash enclosure-loading zone, and the drive through area. GREEN - This site has been given a Green designation to indicate that there are no significant geotechnical related construction or recognized problems foreseen which are unusual or not typical to this general area. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 3 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES This report provides the results of the Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis that Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. (“Giles”) conducted regarding the proposed development. The Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis included several separate, but related, service areas referenced hereafter as the Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration Program, Geotechnical Laboratory Services, and Geotechnical Engineering Services. The scope of each service area was narrow and limited, as directed by our client and in consideration of the proposed project. The scope of each service area is briefly explained in this report. Geotechnical-related recommendations for design and construction of the foundation and ground-bearing floor slab for the proposed building are provided in this report. Geotechnical-related recommendations are also provided for the proposed parking lot. Site preparation recommendations are also given; however, those recommendations are only preliminary since the means and methods of site preparation will depend on factors that were unknown when this report was prepared. Those factors include the weather before and during construction, the water table at the time of construction, subsurface conditions that are exposed during construction, and finalized details of the proposed development. Giles conducted a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment for the subject site. The results of that assessment were provided under separate cover (2E-1808009). 3.0 SITES AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Description The proposed Chick-fil-A site is currently an active two-story office building, about 10,977 square feet, and located at 5850 Avenida Encinas, in the city of Carlsbad, California. The roughly triangular shaped property is bounded on the north and west by Avenida Encinas, on the south by In-N-Out restaurant, and on the east by the I-5 freeway. The existing building is situated within the central portion of the site and bordered with parking stalls and drive ways to the north, east and south sides, and landscape area to the west by Avenida Encinas. . Based upon a review of the ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey prepared by Joseph Truxaw and Associates, elevations at the site range from El. 56 feet to El. 58 feet. The site is relatively level and slopes to the northwest by the adjacent street (Avenida Encinas). The subject property is situated at approximately latitude of 33.1255o North and longitude of -117.3247o West. The site is currently covered with asphalt pavement, curbs and few landscape planters that contain shrubs and trees. Other existing site improvements include asphalt pavement along with curbs and gutter, concrete v-gutter, concrete walkways, lighting poles, chain linked fence, trash enclosure, landscape areas containing grass, shrubs and trees, and underground utilities. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 4 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 3.2 Proposed Project Description The proposed development includes the demolition of existing building for the construction of a new, single-story Chick-fil-A restaurant building with drive through lane to be located along the southeasterly portion of the site adjacent to I-5 freeway and within a portion of the southerly side of the existing building (Figure 1). The drive through lane will be located to the northerly side of the new building. The new building will be a single-story wood-frame structure, 3,201 square feet, with no basement or underground levels to be located within the northern end of the property. We were not provided with specific loading information for this project at the time of this report; however, based on previous Chick-fil-A projects, we expect maximum combined dead and live loads supported by the bearing walls and columns of 2 to 3 kips per lineal foot (klf) and 40 to 50 kips, respectively. The live load supported by the floor slab is expected to be a maximum of 100 pounds per square foot (psf). Other planned improvements include new parking lot, menu board signs, outdoor dining area, a playground area, concrete walkways and planter areas, and a trash enclosure. Parking lot improvement within the property will include curbs and gutters, and underground utilities. Two bio-filtration basins are planned at the site. According to the Conceptual Grading Plan, prepared by Joseph C. Truxaw & Associates, dated November 8, 2022, the planned finish floor elevation for the proposed building will be at El. 55.68 feet. Therefore, site grading will consist of minor cut and fill in order to establish the necessary site grade to accommodate the planned floor elevation exclusive of site preparation or over-excavation requirements necessary to create a stable site suited for the proposed development. The traffic loading on the proposed parking lot improvement is understood to predominantly consist of automobiles with occasional heavy trucks resulting from deliveries and trash removal. The parking lot pavement sections have been designed on the basis of daily traffic intensity equivalent to five 18-kip single axle loads and 1,500 automobiles within the main drive lanes and only automobiles of a lesser intensity within the parking stalls. Pavement designs are based on a 20-year design period. Therefore, the parking lot pavement sections have been designed on the basis of a Traffic Index (TI) of 4.0 for the automobile traffic parking stalls (light duty) and a TI of 5.0 for drive lane areas (medium duty). 4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4.1 Subsurface Exploration Our subsurface exploration consisted of the drilling of six (6) exploratory test borings to depths of about 5 to 35½ feet below existing ground surfaces. The approximate test boring locations are shown in the Test Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). The Test Boring Location Plan and Test Boring Logs (Records of Subsurface Exploration) are enclosed in Appendix A. Field and laboratory test procedures and results are enclosed in Appendix B and C, respectively. The terms and symbols used on the Test Boring Logs are defined on the General Notes in Appendix D. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 5 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Our subsurface exploration included the collection of relatively undisturbed samples of subsurface soil materials for laboratory testing purposes. Bulk samples consisted of composite soil materials obtained at selected depth intervals from the borings. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected (per ASTM D-3550) using a 3-inch outside-diameter, modified California split-spoon soil sampler (CS) lined with 1-inch high brass rings. The sampler was driven with successive 30-inch drops of a hydraulically operated, 140-pound automatic trip hammer. Blow counts for each 6-inch driving increment were recorded on the field exploration logs. The central portions of the driven core samples were placed in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for testing. Where deemed appropriate, standard split-spoon tests (SS), also called Standard Penetration Test (SPT), were also performed at selected depth intervals in accordance with the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) Standard Procedure D 1586. This method consists of mechanically driving an unlined standard split-barrel sampler 18 inches into the soil with successive 30-inch drops of the 140-pound automatic trip hammer. Blow counts for each 6-inch driving increment were recorded on the exploration logs. The number of blows required to drive the standard split-spoon sampler for the last 12 of the 18 inches was identified as the uncorrected standard penetration resistance (N). Disturbed soil samples from the unlined standard split-spoon samplers were placed in plastic containers and transported to our laboratory for testing. 4.2 Subsurface Conditions The subsurface conditions as subsequently described have been simplified somewhat for ease of report interpretation. A more detailed description of the subsurface conditions at the test boring locations is provided by the logs of the test borings enclosed in Appendix A of this report. Pavement Existing pavement encountered within our test borings consisted of approximately 2½ to 5 inches thick asphalt concrete over 4½ to 5 inches of aggregate base. No aggregate base was noted within test borings B-2, B-3 and B-4. Based on our visual observation, the existing asphalt pavement is in fair to poor condition. Soil Our review of the Geology of San Diego Quadrangle indicates that the site is mapped as being underlain by Old Paralic Deposits consisting generally of poorly sorted, moderately permeable, reddish-brown, interfingered strand like, beach, estuarine and colluvial deposits composed of siltstone, sandstone and conglomerate. Possible fills were encountered within our test borings to depths of about 3 feet below existing ground surfaces and were noted to be moist, medium dense in relative density clayey sand and silty sand, and firm in comparative consistency sandy clay. Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 6 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Native soils encountered below the possible fills were generally moist, medium dense to dense silty sand and sand, and very stiff sandy clay. Old Paralic Deposits were encountered within test borings B-1 and B-4 to depths of about 18 to 20 feet below existing ground surface and generally consisted of very dense silty sandstone materials. Groundwater Groundwater was encountered during our subsurface investigation to depths of about 17 and 18 feet below existing grade. However, fluctuations of the groundwater table, localized zones of perched water, and rise in soil moisture content should be anticipated during and after the rainy season. Irrigation of landscape areas on or adjacent to the site can also cause fluctuations of local or shallow perched groundwater levels. 4.3 Photoionization Detector (PID) Screening Soil samples taken from our subsurface exploration were screened with a Photoionization Detector (PID) to check for the possible presence of volatile vapors. No volatile vapors were detected during the screening of soil samples collected from any of the borings with a PID. Additionally, no odors detected or stains observed that might suggest some form of contamination. PID field-screening results are included on the soil boring logs. 4.4 Infiltration Testing It is our understanding that an on-site below grade storm water infiltration system is being considered for the subject site. Therefore, percolation tests were performed to assess the infiltration characteristics of the site soils. Two percolation tests (designated as B-5 and B-6) were conducted and involved the drilling of the test boring utilizing a hollow-stem auger drill rig with an outside diameter of approximately 8 inches. The percolation test procedure by City of San Diego BMP Design Manual (2018) was used in our percolation tests. The approximate percolation test boring locations are shown in the Test Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). A perforated 2-inch diameter pvc pipe was installed inside each of the test boring with gravel placed below and on the sides of the perforated pipe. The percolation tests involved presoaking the boring and filling the test holes with water, recording the drop in water surface with time, and refilling the holes with water. The results of the percolation test are presented on the following table. The drop in water level over time is the percolation rate at the test location. The percolation rates were reduced to account for the discharge of water from both the sides and bottom of the boring. The formula below was used to calculate for the infiltration rate. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 7 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Infiltration Rate = ∆H (60r) / ∆t (r + 2Havg) Where: r is the radius of the test hole (in) ∆H is the change in height over the time interval (in) ∆t is the time interval (min) Havg is the average head height over the time interval The design infiltration rate noted below has not been reduced to account for a factor safety (FS). TABLE 1 – PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS Test Hole Test Depth1 (feet) Percolation Rate (in/hr) Infiltration Rate (in/hr) Soil Type B-5 5.0 0.48 0.05 Clayey Sand B-6 5.0 0.00 0.00 Sandy Clay 1) Depth is referenced to the existing surface grade at the test location. It should be noted that the infiltration rate of the on-site soils represents a specific area and depth tested and may fluctuate throughout other parts of the site. Based on the results of the infiltration, it is our opinion that an on-site stormwater infiltration system is not suitable due to very low infiltration rates obtained during our testing. 5.0 LABORATORY TESTING Several laboratory tests were performed on selected samples considered representative of those encountered in order to evaluate the engineering properties of on-site soils. The following are brief descriptions of our laboratory test results. In Situ Moisture and Density Tests were performed on select samples from the test borings to determine the subsoils dry density and natural moisture contents in accordance with Test Method ASTM 2216-05. The results of these tests are included in the Test Boring Logs enclosed in Appendix A. Sieve Analysis Sieve Analyses including Passing No. 200 sieve were performed on selected samples from various depths within Test Borings B-1 and B-5 to assist in soil classification and aid in the liquefaction analysis. These tests were performed in accordance with Test Method ASTM D 1140-00 (Reapproved 2006) and ASTC C 1369-96. The results of the sieve analysis are graphically presented as Figure 2 and passing no. 200 results are presented in Test Boring Logs. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 8 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Expansion To evaluate the expansive potential of the near surface soils encountered during our subsurface exploration, a composite sample collected from Test Boring B-1 (1 to 5 feet) was subjected to Expansive Index (EI) testing in accordance with Test Method ASTM D 4829-08a. The result of our expansion index (EI) test indicates that the near surface sample has a very low expansion potential (EI= 14). Consolidation Test Settlement prediction under anticipated load was made on the basis of one-dimensional consolidation test. These tests were performed in general accordance with Test Method ASTM D 2435 and ASTM D5333. The test sample was inundated at 2,000 psf pressure in order to evaluate the sudden increase in moisture condition (collapse potential). Result of this test indicated that the tested on-site soils exhibit a slight degree of collapse (1.25%) potential. The Consolidation test curve, Figure 3 is included in Appendix A. Soluble Sulfate Analysis and Soil Corrosivity A representative sample of the near surface soils which may contact shallow buried utilities and structural concrete was performed to determine the corrosion potential for buried ferrous metal conduits and the concentrations present of water soluble sulfate which could result in chemical attack of cement. The following table presents the results of our laboratory testing. Parameter B-2 1 to 5 feet pH 7.48 Chloride 134 ppm Sulfate 0.0162% Resistivity 800 ohm-cm The chloride content of the near-surface soils was determined for a selected sample in accordance with California Test Method No. 422. The results of this test indicated that tested on-site soil has a Low exposure to chloride. The results of limited in-house testing of soil pH and resistivity were determined in accordance with California Test Method No. 643 and indicated that on-site soil is moderately alkaline with respect to pH and soil resistivity was found to possess a severe degree of corrosivity. These test results have been evaluated in accordance with criteria established by the Cast Iron Pipe Research Association, Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association, the American Concrete Institute and the National Association of Corrosion Engineers. The test results on a near surface bulk sample from the site generally indicate that tested on-site soils have severe corrosive potential when in contact with ferrous materials. Therefore, special protection for underground cast iron pipe or ductile pipe may ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 9 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. be warranted depending on the actual materials in contact with the pipe. We recommend that a corrosion engineer review these results in order to provide specific recommendations for corrosion protection as well as appropriate recommendations for other types of buried metal structures. Corrosivity testing also included determination of the concentrations of water-soluble sulfates present in the tested soil sample in accordance with California Test Method No. 417. Our laboratory test data indicated that near surface soils contain approximately 0.0162 percent of water soluble sulfates. Based on the 2019 California Building Code (CBC), concrete that may be exposed to sulfate containing soils shall comply with the provisions of ACI 318-05, Section 4.3. Therefore, according to Table 4.3.1 of the ACI 318-05, a low exposure to sulfate corrosivity can be expected for concrete placed in contact with the tested on-site soils. No special sulfate resistant cement is considered necessary for concrete which will be in contact with the tested on-site soils. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing, the planned development for the subject site is considered feasible from a geotechnical point of view provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated in the design and project specifications. Conditions imposed by the proposed improvement have been evaluated on the basis of the engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials encountered during our subsurface investigation and their anticipated behavior both during and after construction. Conclusions and recommendations, along with site preparation recommendations and construction considerations are discussed in the following sections of this report. Impact of Site on Stability of Adjacent Properties It is our opinion that the proposed grading and construction for the subject site will not affect adversely impact the stability of adjoining properties provided that grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations provided herein and in accordance with local code guidelines. 6.1 Seismic Design Considerations Faulting/Seismic Design Parameters Research of available maps published by the California Geological Survey (CGS) indicates that the subject site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The potential for fault rupture through the site is, therefore, considered to be low. The site may however be subject to strong groundshaking during seismic activity. The proposed structure should be designed in accordance with the current version of the California Building Code (CBC) and applicable local codes. In accordance with ASCE 7, Chapter 20, a Site Classification D is recommended for this site based upon the mapped geological features of the site also verified by test borings. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 10 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. According to the maps of known active fault near-source zones (ICBO, 1998) to be used with the CBC, the Rose Canyon, Newport Inglewood, Coronado Bank and Elsinore faults are the closest known active faults and are located about 4.11, 4.11, 20.04 and 23.55 miles, respectively, to the site. The Newport Inglewood Fault would probably generate the most severe site ground motions at the site with an anticipated maximum moment magnitude (Mw) of 7.50. The proposed structure should be designed in accordance with the current version of the California Building Code (CBC), Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures ASCE 7, and applicable local codes. The following values are determined by using the SEAOC/OSHPD Seismic Design Map Tool based upon the CBC 2019 and ASCE 7-16. CBC 2019, Earthquake Loads Site Class Definition (Table 20.3-1) D Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, Ss (for 0.2 second) 1.107 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, S1 (for 1.0 second) 0.398 Site Coefficient, Fa short period 1.057 Site Coefficient, Fv 1-second period 1.902 Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SMS 1.17 Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SM1 0.758 Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SDS 0.78 Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SD1 0.505 According to Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7-16, a ground motion hazard analysis is required and should be performed in accordance with Section 21.2 for structures on Site Class D with S1 greater than or equal to 0.2. However, as an exception to performing the ground motion hazard analysis, the value of the Seismic Response Coefficient (Cs) must be determined by Equation (12.8-2) for values of the fundamental period of the building (T) ≤ 1.5Ts, and taken as 1.5 times the value computed in accordance with either Equation (12.8-3) for TL ≥ 1.5Ts, or Equation (12.8-4) for T > TL. Liquefaction A site liquefaction evaluation consistent with the guidelines contained in CDMG Special Publication 117A along with a report by Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) has been performed as part of the current investigation. Our site-specific probabilistic seismic hazard analysis was derived using data published by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The liquefaction analysis was performed utilizing the computer software program LiquefyPro and based on the 2019 CBC. The predominant earthquake magnitude of 6.72 was obtained from the USGS Interactive Deaggregation web site using 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. The site acceleration (PGAM) for the site used in our liquefaction analysis was determined to be 0.544g. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 11 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Our liquefaction analysis was performed using the computer program Liquefypro (version 5) developed by Civil Tech Software. The program is based on the most recent publications of the NCEER Workshop and SP117 Implementation. Corrected SPT blow counts based upon hammer energy ratio, borehole diameter and sampling method were used in analysis calculations. Although groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 17 to 18 feet below existing ground surfaces during our drilling operations, groundwater of 10 feet was used in our liquefaction analysis. The liquefiable layers at the location of boring B-1 are presented graphically in Plate A1 of Appendix A. The computer output files are also included. In order to estimate the amount of post-earthquake settlement, methods proposed by Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) were used for the settlement calculations. Based on our analysis and under the current site conditions, we estimate that the maximum total seismic-induced ground settlement at the site would be negligible (0.01 inch) and therefore, not significant to the proposed development. 6.2 Site Improvement Recommendations The following recommendations for site development have been based upon the assumed floor elevation and foundation bearing grades and the conditions encountered at the test boring locations. Site Clearing Clearing and demolition operations should include the removal of all landscape vegetation and existing structural features such as asphaltic concrete pavement, concrete curb and gutters within the area of the proposed new building and site improvements. Existing pavement within areas of proposed development should be removed or processed to a maximum 3-inch size and stockpiled for use as compacted fill or stabilizing material for the new development. Processed asphalt may be used as fill, sub-base course material, or subgrade stabilization material beyond the building perimeter. Processed concrete or existing base may be used as fill, sub-base course material, or subgrade stabilization material both within and outside of the building perimeter. Due to the moisture sensitivity, the pavement is recommended to remain in-place as long as possible to help protect the subgrade from construction traffic disturbance. All soils disturbed by the demolition of the existing improvements should be removed to expose a competent subgrade, as determined by the project geotechnical engineer. Debris resulting from the demolition and clearing operations should be legally exported from the site. Existing Utilities All existing utilities should be located. Utilities that are not reused should be capped off and removed or properly abandoned in-place in accordance with local codes and ordinances. The excavations made for removed utilities that are in the influence zone of new construction are recommended to be backfilled with structural compacted fill. Underground utilities, which are to be reused or abandoned ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 12 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. in-place, are recommended to be evaluated by the structural engineer and utility backfill is recommended to be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer, to determine their potential effect on the new improvement. If any existing utilities are to be preserved, grading operations must be carefully performed so as not to disturb or damage the existing utility. Building Area Due to the presence of variable strength characteristics of the near surface soils and likely disturbance of site soils during clearing operations, it is recommended that the soils within the proposed new building area and an appropriate distance beyond (5 feet minimum) be over-excavated to a depth of at least 2 feet below existing grade or planned grade and 1 foot below bottom of footings, whichever is greater. The soils exposed at the base of this recommended over-excavation should be examined by the geotechnical engineer to document that the soils are suitable for building support. Prior to placement of fill, the exposed surfaces approved for fill placement should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture conditioned and then recompacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557-00). A representative of the project geotechnical engineer should be present on site during grading operations to verify proper placement and adequate compaction of all fills. Proofroll and Compact Subgrade The subgrades within the new pavement area should be proofrolled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer with appropriate rubber-tire mounted heavy construction equipment or a loaded dump truck to detect very loose/soft yielding soil which should be removed to a stable subgrade. Following proofrolling and completion of any necessary overexcavation, the subgrades should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and recompacted to at least 90 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density. In accordance with the enclosed Guide Specifications and in the event that new pavement is constructed within the site, the top 12 inches of the pavement subgrade soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum density, or, 5 percent higher than the underlying fill materials. Low areas and excavations may then be backfilled in lifts with suitable very low expansive structural compacted fill. The selection, placement and compaction of structural fill should be performed in accordance with the project specifications. The Guide Specifications included in Appendix D (Modified Proctor) of this report should be used as a minimum in developing the project specifications. The need may arise to recompact the floor slab and pavement subgrades immediately prior to construction due to the effects of weather and construction traffic on a previously prepared subgrade. Reuse of On-site Soil On-site material may be reused as structural compacted fill within the proposed building and pavement improvement area provided they are moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended, and do not contain oversized materials, significant quantities of organic matter, or ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 13 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. other deleterious materials. Care should be used in controlling the moisture content of the soils to achieve proper compaction for pavement support. All subgrade soil compaction as well as the selection, placement and compaction of new fill soils should be performed in accordance with the project specifications under engineering controlled conditions. Import Structural Fill Any soil imported to the site (if required) for use as structural fill should consist of very low expansive soils (EI less than 21). Material designated for import should be submitted to the project geotechnical engineer no less than three working days prior to placement for evaluation. In addition to expansion criteria, soils imported to the site should exhibit adequate characteristics for the recommended pavement support characteristics and soluble sulfate content. Subgrade Protection The near surface soils that are expected to comprise the subgrade are sensitive to water. Unstable soil conditions will develop if these soils are exposed to moisture increases or are disturbed (rutted) by construction traffic. The site should be graded to prevent water from ponding within construction areas and/or flowing into excavations. Accumulated water must be removed immediately along with any unstable soil. Foundation concrete should be placed and excavations backfilled as soon as possible to protect the bearing grade. The degree of subgrade instability and associated remedial construction is dependent, in part, upon precautions taken by the contractor to protect the subgrade during site development. Silt fences or other appropriate erosion control devices should be installed in accordance with local, state and federal requirements at the perimeter of the development areas to control sediment from erosion. Since silt fences or other erosion control measures are temporary structures, careful and continuous monitoring and periodic maintenance to remove accumulated soil and/or replacement should be anticipated. Fill Placement Material for engineered fill should be moisture conditioned and compacted in accordance with the specifications, be free of organic material, debris, and other deleterious substances, and should not contain fragments greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension. On-site excavated soils that meet these requirements may be used to backfill the excavated pavement areas. All fill should be placed in 8-inch-thick maximum loose lifts, moisture conditioned and then compacted in accordance with recommendation herein and with the enclosed “Guide Structural Fill Specifications”. A representative of the geotechnical engineer should be present on-site during grading operations to verify proper placement and compaction of all fill, as well as to verify compliance with the other geotechnical recommendations presented herein. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 14 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 6.3 Construction Considerations Construction Dewatering As mentioned previously, groundwater was encountered at depths of about 17 and 18 feet below existing grade during our subsurface investigation. In the event that shallow perched water is encountered, filter sump pumps placed within pits in the bottoms of excavations are expected to be the most feasible method of construction dewatering. Soil Excavation Some slope stability problems may be encountered for shallow unbraced excavations considering the nature of the subsoils. All excavations must be performed in accordance with CAL-OSHA requirements, which is the responsibility of the contractor. Shallow excavations may be adequately sloped for bank stability while deeper excavations or excavations where adequate back sloping cannot be performed may require some form of external support such as shoring or bracing. Due to the presence of dense to very dense on-site soils at shallow depths, some difficulty may be encountered during excavation with conventional equipment. The use of specialized excavation equipment may be necessary. 6.4 Foundation Recommendations Vertical Load Capacity Upon completion of the building pad preparation, the proposed structure may be supported by a shallow foundation system. The foundation system may consist of either independently constructed spread footings or monolithically constructed foundation and floor slab thereby using a turned-down slab construction technique. Foundations may be designed for a maximum, net, allowable soil-bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). Minimum foundation widths for walls and columns should be 18 and 24 inches, respectively, regardless of the calculated soil bearing pressure. The recommended allowable soil bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for short term wind and/or seismic loads. Reinforcing The recommended minimum quantity of longitudinal reinforcing for geotechnical considerations within continuous strip footing is four No. 5 bars (2 top and 2 bottom) continuous through column pads within the strip footings. The recommended quantity of longitudinal reinforcing pertains to a minimum 12-inch thick and a maximum 24-inch wide footing pad; additional reinforcing may be necessary if a thinner or wider footing pad is used to develop equivalent rigidity. Conventional reinforcing is ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 15 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. considered suitable in isolated column pad footings. The final design of the foundations as well as determination of the actual quantity of steel reinforcing and the footing dimensions should be performed by the structural engineer. Lateral Load Resistance Lateral load resistance will be developed by a combination of friction acting at the base of foundations and slabs and the passive earth pressure developed by footings below grade. Passive pressure and friction may be used in combination, without reduction, in determining the total resistance to lateral loads. A one-third increase in the passive pressure value may be used for short duration wind or seismic loads. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces for footings placed on competent native soil and/or newly placed compacted fill soil. An allowable passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of footing depth (pcf) below the lowest adjacent grade may be used for the sides of footings placed against newly placed structural fill. The maximum recommended allowable passive pressure is 2,000 psf. Bearing Material Criteria Soil suitable to serve as the foundation bearing grade should exhibit at least a loose relative density (average N value of at least 10) for non-cohesive soils or possess a stiff consistency (average unconfined compressive strength of 1.50 tsf) for cohesive soils for the recommended 3,000 psf allowable soil bearing pressure. For design and construction estimating purposes, suitable bearing soils are expected to be encountered at nominal foundation depths following the recommended site preparation activities. However, field testing by the Geotechnical Engineer within the foundation bearing soils is recommended to document that the foundation support soils possess the minimum strength parameters noted above. If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered, they should be recompacted in-place, if feasible, or excavated to a suitable bearing soil subgrade and to a lateral extent as defined by Item No. 3 of the enclosed Guide Specifications, with the excavation backfilled with structural compacted fill to develop a uniform bearing grade. Foundation Embedment The California Building Code (CBC) requires a minimum 12-inch foundation embedment depth. However, it is recommended that exterior foundations extend at least 18 inches below the adjacent exterior grade for bearing capacity consideration. Interior footings may be supported at nominal depth below the floor. All footings must be protected against weather and water damage during and after construction, and must be supported within suitable bearing materials. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 16 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Estimated Foundation Settlement Post-construction total and differential static movement (settlement) of a shallow foundation system designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report are estimated to be less than ¾ and ½ inch, respectively, for static conditions. The estimated differential movement is anticipated to result in an angular distortion of less than 0.002 inches per inch on the basis of a minimum clear span of 20 feet. The maximum estimated total and differential movement is considered within tolerable limits for the proposed structure provided it is considered in the structural design. 6.5 Floor Slab Recommendations Subgrade The floor slab subgrade should be prepared in accordance with the appropriate recommendations presented in the Site Development Recommendations section of this report. Foundation, utility trenches and other below-slab excavations should be backfilled with structural compacted fill in accordance with the project specifications. Design The floor of the proposed building may be designed and constructed as a conventional slab-on-grade supported on a properly prepared subgrade. If desired, the floor slab may be poured monolithically with perimeter foundations where the foundations consist of thickened sections thereby using a turned-down slab construction technique. The minimum slab reinforcing for geotechnical considerations is recommended to consist of No. 3 rebars at 18 inches on center, each way. Based on the recommended reinforcing and the assumed live loading, the slab is recommended to be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness. A qualified structural engineer should perform the actual design of the slab to ensure proper thickness and reinforcing. If desired, a Subgrade Modulus of 150 pci may be used for floor slab design. The floor slab is recommended to be underlain by a 4 inch thick layer of granular material. A minimum 10-mil synthetic sheet should be placed below the floor slab to serve as a vapor retarder where required to protect moisture sensitive floor coverings (i.e. tile, or carpet, etc.). It is recommended that a structural engineer or architect specify the vapor retarder location with careful consideration of concrete curing and the effects of moisture on future flooring materials. The vapor retarder is recommended to be in accordance with ASTM E 1745-11, which is entitled: Standard Specification for Plastic Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Soil or Granular Fill under Concrete Slabs. The sheets of the vapor retarder material should be evaluated for holes and/or punctures prior to placement and the edges overlapped and taped. If materials underlying the synthetic sheet contain sharp, angular particles, a layer of coarse sand (Sand Equivalent>30) approximately 2 inches thick or a geotextile should be provided to protect it from puncture. An additional 2-inch thick layer of coarse sand may be needed between the slab and the vapor retarder to promote proper curing. Proper curing techniques are recommended to reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking and slab curling. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 17 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Estimated Movements Post-construction total and differential movements of the floor slab designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations provided in this report are estimated to be less than ½ and ⅓ inch, respectively. Movements on the order of those estimated for foundations should be expected when the foundation and floor slab are structurally connected or constructed monolithically. The estimated differential movement is anticipated to occur across the short dimension of the structure. The maximum total and differential movement is considered within tolerable limits for the proposed structure, provided that the structural design adequately considers this distortion. 6.6 Retaining Wall Recommendations (If Required) It is possible that retaining walls may be needed for this site. The retaining wall(s) may be supported by conventional shallow spread footings designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. A higher allowable soil bearing pressure may be possible, but that determination should be based on a review of the locations and details of the planned wall and foundation elevations. Design of walls should incorporate an adequate factor-of-safety against both over-turning and sliding (FS=1.5). The overturning resultant should also fall within the center third (kern) of the retaining wall footing for stability, or the design must be re-evaluated with a reduced bearing area. Static Lateral Earth Pressures Retaining walls should be designed to resist the applicable lateral earth pressures. On-site soil materials may be used as backfill behind walls, provided they are confirmed to have very low expansive characteristic and allow for a drainage layer as discussed in subsequent paragraphs. For on-site soils and/or imported soils (EI less than 21) to be used as backfill materials, an active earth pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot (equivalent fluid pressure) should be used assuming a level adjacent backfill and drained conditions. For walls to be restrained at the top, an at-rest pressure of 55 pcf should be used for design. All retaining walls should be supplied with a proper subdrain system. All walls should be designed to support any adjacent structural surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or footings and vehicles in addition to the above recommended active earth pressure. Crushed rock or clean sand and gravel exhibiting a sand equivalent of 30 or greater may also be used for retaining wall backfill. If these materials are used as backfill within the active zone, the retaining wall may be designed for an active earth pressure of 30 pounds per cubic foot (equivalent fluid pressure) and 45 pounds per cubic foot for at rest pressure. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 18 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Drainage and Damp-proofing Retaining walls are recommended to be designed for drained earth pressures and therefore, adequate drainage should be provided behind the walls. This can be accomplished by installing subdrains at the base of the walls. Wall footing-drains should consist of a system of filter material and perforated pipe. The perforated pipe system should consist of 4-inch diameter, schedule 40, PVC pipe or equivalent, embedded in 1 cubic foot of Class II Permeable Material (CALTRANS Standard Specifications, latest edition) or equivalent per lineal foot of pipe. Alternatively, ¾-inch open graded gravel or crushed rock enveloped in Mirafi 140 geofabric or equivalent may be used instead of the Class II Permeable Material. The pipe should be placed at the base of the wall, and then routed to a suitable area for discharge of accumulated water. Wall backfill should be protected against infiltration of surface water. Backfill adjacent to walls should be sloped so that surface water drains freely away from the wall and will not pond. Damp-proofing of walls below-grade is recommended especially where moisture control is required by an approved waterproofing compound or covered with similar material to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Wall Backfill Retaining wall backfill behind the drainage layers should consist of low expansive soils with an E.I. less than 21, as determined by ASTM D 4829-03 method. Wall backfill should not contain organic material, rubble, debris, and rocks or cemented fragments larger than 3 inches in greatest dimension. A 1 foot thick low-expansive cohesive layer or pavement should be placed at the surface to help prevent surface water intrusion. A geotextile or filter fabric should be placed between the granular drainage layers and adjacent soils (excavated face or compacted materials) to prevent fines from migrating into the drainage layers. Backfill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, moisture conditioned and mechanically compacted throughout to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557). Retaining walls should be properly braced prior to placement and compaction of backfill should be performed with extreme care not to damage the walls. 6.7 New Pavement The following recommendations for the new pavement are intended for vehicular traffic associated with the restaurant development within the subject property. New Pavement Subgrades Following completion of the recommended subgrade preparation procedures, the subgrade in areas of new pavement construction are expected to consist of existing on-site soil that exhibit a very low to low expansion potential. An R-value of 20 has been assumed in the preparation of the pavement design. It should however, be recognized that the City of Carlsbad may require a specific R-value test to verify the use of the following design. It is recommended that this testing, if required, be conducted ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 19 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. following completion of rough grading in the proposed pavement areas so that the R-value test results are indicative of the actual pavement subgrade soils. Alternatively, a minimum code pavement section may be required if a specific R-value test is not performed. To use this R-value, all fill added to the pavement subgrade must have pavement support characteristics at least equivalent to the existing soils, and must be placed and compacted in accordance with the project specifications. Asphalt Pavements The following table presents recommended thicknesses for a new flexible pavement structure consisting of asphaltic concrete over a granular base, along with the appropriate CALTRANS specifications for proper materials and placement procedures. An alternate pavement section has been provided for use in parking stall areas due to the anticipated lower traffic intensity in these areas. However, care must be used so that truck traffic is excluded from areas where the thinner pavement section is used, since premature pavement distress may occur. In the event that heavy vehicle traffic cannot be excluded from the specific areas, the pavement section recommended for drive lanes should be used throughout the parking lot. Pavement recommendations are based upon CALTRANS design parameters for a twenty-year design period and assume proper drainage and construction monitoring. It is, therefore, recommended that the geotechnical engineer monitors and tests subgrade preparation, and that the subgrade be evaluated immediately before pavement construction. Portland Concrete Pavements Portland Cement Concrete pavements are recommended in areas where traffic is concentrated such as the entrance/exit aprons as well as areas subjected to heavy loads such as the trash enclosure loading zone. The preparation of the subgrade soils within concrete pavement areas should be performed as previously described in this report. Portland Cement Concrete pavements in high stress areas are recommended to be at least 6 inches thick containing No. 3 bars at 18-inch on-center both ASPHALT PAVEMENTS Materials Thickness (inches) CALTRANS Specifications Parking Stalls (TI=4.0) Drive Lanes (TI=5.0) Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course (b) 1 1 Section 39, (a) Asphaltic Concrete Binder Course (b) 2 2 Section 39, (a) Crushed Aggregate Base Course 5 8 Section 26, Class 2 (R-value at least 78) NOTES: (a) Compaction to density between 95 and 100 percent of the 50-Blow Marshall Density (b) The surface and binder course may be combined as a single layer placed in one lift if similar materials are utilized. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 20 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. ways placed at mid-height. The pavement should be constructed in accordance with Section 40 of the CALTRANS Standard Specifications. A minimum 4-inch thick layer of base course (CALTRANS Class 2) is recommended below the concrete pavement. This base course should be compacted to at least 95% of the material’s maximum dry density. The maximum joint spacing within all of the Portland Cement Concrete pavements is recommended to be 15 feet to control shrinkage cracking. Load transfer reinforcing is recommended at construction joints perpendicular to traffic flow if construction joints are not properly keyed. In this event, ¾-inch diameter smooth dowel bars, 18 inches in length placed at 12 inches on-center are recommended where joints are perpendicular to the anticipated traffic flow. Expansion joints are recommended only where the pavement abuts fixed objects such as light standard foundations. Tie bars are recommended at the first joint within the perimeter of the concrete pavement area. Tie bars are recommended to be No. 4 bars at 42-inch on-center spacings and at least 48 inches in length. General Considerations Pavement recommendations assume proper drainage and construction monitoring and are based on traffic loads as indicated previously. Pavement designs are based on either PCA or CALTRANS design parameters for twenty (20) year design period. However, these designs are also based on a routine pavement maintenance program and significant asphalt concrete pavement rehabilitation after about 8 to 10 years, in order to obtain a reasonable pavement service life. 6.8 Recommended Construction Materials Testing Services The report was prepared assuming that Giles will perform Construction Materials Testing (CMT) services during construction of the proposed development. In general, CMT services are recommended (and expected) to at least include observation and testing of foundation and pavement support soil and other construction materials. It might be necessary for Giles to provide supplemental geotechnical recommendations based on the results of CMT services and specific details of the project not known at this time. 6.9 Basis of Report This report is based on Giles’ proposal, which is dated August 17, 2018 and is referenced by Giles’ proposal number 2GEP-1808006. The actual services for the project varied somewhat from those described in the proposal because of the conditions that were encountered while performing the services and in consideration of the proposed project. This report is strictly based on the project description given earlier in this report. Giles must be notified if any parts of the project description or our assumptions are not accurate so that this report can be amended, if needed. This report is based on the assumption that the facility will be designed and constructed according to the codes that govern construction at the site. ~------ Geotechnical Engineering Exploration and Analysis Proposed Chick-fil-A Restaurant #4306 I-5 and Palomar FSU Carlsbad, California Project No. 2G-1808005-R2 Page 21 _________________________________________________________________________ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on estimated subsurface conditions as shown on the Records of Subsurface Exploration. Giles must be notified if the subsurface conditions that are encountered during construction of the proposed development differ from those shown on the Records of Subsurface Exploration because this report will likely need to be revised. General comments and limitations of this report are given in the appendix. © Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. 2022 ~------ APPENDIX A FIGURES AND TEST BORING LOGS The Test Boring Location Plan contained herein was prepared based upon information supplied by Giles’ client, or others, along with Giles’ field measurements and observations. The diagram is presented for conceptual purposes only and is intended to assist the reader in report interpretation. The Test Boring Logs and related information enclosed herein depict the subsurface (soil and water) conditions encountered at the specific boring locations on the date that the exploration was performed. Subsurface conditions may differ between boring locations and within areas of the site that were not explored with test borings. The subsurface conditions may also change at the boring locations over the passage of time. EX I S T I N G BU I L D I N G IL E S N G I N E E R I N G S S O C I A T E S , I N C . DA T E CA D N o . 10 - 0 1 - 1 8 2G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 TE S T B O R I N G L O C A T I O N P L A N PR O J E C T N O . : CA R L S B A D , C A L I F O R N I A DE S I G N E D JL M PR O P O S E D C H I C K - F I L - A R E S T A U R A N T N O . 0 4 3 0 6 FI G U R E 1 DR A W N SC A L E ap p r o x . 1 " = 3 0 ' RE V I S E D 2g 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 - b l p 3 11 - 1 6 - 2 2 I- 5 A N D P A L O M A R F S U 0 15 ' 30 ' AP P R O X I M A T E SC A L E 19 6 5 N . M A I N S T R E E T OR A N G E , C A 9 2 8 6 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 2 7 9 - 0 8 1 7 NO T E S : 1. ) T E S T B O R I N G L O C A T I O N S A R E A P P R O X I M A T E . 2. ) B A S E M A P D E V E L O P E D F R O M T H E " G R A D I N G P L A N " ( D W G . N O . 5 3 8 - 3 A ) , D A T E D 1 1 - 8 - 2 0 2 2 , P R E P A R E D B Y ww w . g i l e s e n g r . c o m 58 5 0 A V E N I D A E N C I N A S LE G E N D : GE O T E C H N I C A L T E S T B O R I N G PE R C O L A T I O N T E S T B O R I N G GE O T E C H N I C A L T E S T B O R I N G / J O S E P H C . T R U X A W & A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . 3. ) E X I S T I N G B U I L D I N G I S A P P R O X I M A T E B A S E D O N T H E " E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S " ( D W G . N O . 5 3 8 - 3 A ) , D A T E D 1 1 - 8 - 2 0 2 2 , P R E P A R E D B Y J O S E P H C . T R U X A W & A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . If. M ~ • Dil 54.4 573')>0 ~ ,e~~FG~• ,I, ,r),~_'.__ ___ ·'._ ___ f ~l''.fl_' 54,'5 •~ _ ,'" --.,.. >1-Il. FC '>!,_ _ ''°' '•-=---;c UNo'J"'UND ;, 6D re 541710 7 / -;,_ -~ ---'=• o ,#-"!2 •11 55.65 '~-5 io··w 48.80 4 -"",-"');. ~ -c;;:;---,-<-t''so ~ -- "n~ 55.68 FS ~ " DOOR ~c~ 55.63 FS "' ~*~ ~ (55.1±) FGIDfl (61.43) lW (55.9) FG_ -~----- I ) F$. • :f-liDlt r -_ .... -· . ·,: : . :f "'= .17±) FS TC FS -i' ±)FSIDI ' ,1c -ii 1r~ \S -l , 5469±~ 11 \ jwA - \ -!, \ I -Lss.7B re \ 1' 55.28 G._ \ 11 If. -rl r--~ I 47 TC II .97 FS I, - 66 TC II (-..... ::::-----11 .16 FL :1 \. ',~ .52 TC °'l!.1•1 (54.34±) FS .02 FL 55 TC .05 FS d)± TC ~)± FS .• 9 TC :1 IDll(54 74±) TC I (54.35±) FS il,(54.26±) FS\DR 9 FS 4.14 TC 3.64 FS IDl(54.14)± /: .. ., --·. ,,. : • ," iJ1\•._: ~ o% I~ J]]J 0-C - /' <t < r.s-,v 3: f' ~ U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 3/4 112 3/8 3 4 6 810 14!_6 20 30 40 50 70100140200 100 I I I I I I I IT l I I I I \ 90 \ 80 \ \ p I E R70 C \ E \ N T60 \ F I \ N E50 R \ B ~ y 40 w \ E \ I I G30 H T 20 10 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium I fine Specimen Identification Classification MC% LL PL Pl Cc Cu • B-5 3.5 Clayey Sand to Silty Sand Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • B-5 3.5 1.18 0.24 0.0 69.0 31.0 PROJECT Proposed CFA#4306-Carlsbad, CA JOB NO. 2G-1808005 FIGURE2 DATE 10/4118 GRADATION CURVES Giles Engineering Associates, Inc I.. A Classification Clayey Sand Boring No.B-3 Sample No.2-CS Initial Moisture Content (%)11.2 Depth (ft.)3.0 Final Moisture Content (%)15.5 Elevation Natural Density (pcf)123.4 Liquid Limit Initial Dry Density (pcf)110.9 Plastic Limit Final Dry Density (pcf)119.4 Specimen Diameter (in.)2.42 Collapse @ 2000 psf 1.25% Initial Specimen Thickness (in.)1.00 Sample inundated at 2000 psf pressure Project:CFA Carlsbad Client:Chick-fil-A Project No.:2G-1808005 Figure No.:3 CONSOLIDATION / COLLAPSE TEST ASTM D2435/ASTM D5333 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. -GEOTECHNICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS- 1965 NORTH MAIN STREET, ORANGE, CALIFORNIA OFFICE: 714-279-0817 FAX : 714-279-9687 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.035 0.040 0.045 0.050 0.055 0.060 0.065 0.070 0.075 0.080 0.085 0.090 0.095 0.100 10 100 1000 10000 100000 CO N S O L I D A T I O N S T R A I N ( i n / i n ) VERTICAL LOAD (psf) ~ . ......____ ......... ~1' r-. ~~ "' \. ◄ \ \ \ ·~ ' 1'--i,,. \ ~I"-. \ ....... ' \ ' r--. \ .... I'-~► Approximately 2.5 inches of asphaltic concrete over 4.5 inches of aggregate base Brown Clayey fine Sand - Moist (Possible Fill) Gray fine Sand, some Silt, some layers of Silty Sand - Moist (Native) Light Brown Silty Sand to fine to medium Sand, trace Silt - Moist Light Yellowish Silty Sandstone - Moist (Old Paralic Deposits) Groundwater encountered at 18 feetBoring Terminated at about 35.5 feet (EL.21') 1-SS 2-SS 3-SS 4-SS 5-SS 6-SS 7-SS 8-SS P200=40% P200=23% P200=20% P200=27% P200=23% 18 20 32 51 50/3" 50/6" 50/5" 50/4" 13 13 13 14 16 15 15 10 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-1 56.5 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 El e v a t i o n 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: 18' Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 ~ I ~~ .... l --- I L f- I\ - f-.... -.... --.... f---f--.... f-- f- f-- f--.... f---f--.... f--.... f-- f---f-.... --f-- f- f--.... f--.... -f- f---.... -.... f-- f- f--.... --.... ' I f---f--f-.... -.... f-- f---.... ' I f---f--f- f-- f-.... -.... -- f- f- f- f-- f- f- f- f- 'SJ_ ,___ '51-,___ ,___ _y_ ~ ~ Approximately 4 inches of asphaltic concrete Light Brown Clayey Sand - Moist (Possible Fill) Brown Clayey fine Sand - Moist (Native) Light Brown Silty Sand to fine Sand with Silt -Moist No groundwater encountered Boring Terminated at about 10 feet (EL. 47') 1-SS 2-CS 3-CS 4-CS Dd=124.9 pcf Dd=104.5 pcf Dd=116.8 pcf 11 48 53 63 17 14 8 12 BDL BDL BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-2 57 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 5 10 El e v a t i o n 55 50 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e CS = California Split Spoon SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: None Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 ,... ~ -,... ,... ~ -- -f--~ ,... ~ -,... -~ -,- ½ -,... ,... -- ,... -f-- ,... -,... ,... ,... ,... f-- _y_ ~ Approximately 5 inches of asphaltic concrete Brown Clayey fine Sand - Moist (Possible Fill) Brown to Light Brown Clayey fine Sand -Moist (Native) Yellowish Brown fine Sand to Silty fine Sand,some iron oxide staining - Moist No groundwater encountered Boring Terminated at about 10 feet (EL.46.8') 1-SS 2-CS 3-CS 4-CS Dd=111.0 pcf Dd=112.3 pcf Dd=104.7 pcf 9 27 40 46 20 17 8 13 BDL BDL BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-3 56.8 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 5 10 El e v a t i o n 55 50 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e CS = California Split Spoon SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: None Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 ~ ,... ,... - -,... ~ - ,... -~ ~ ,... ,... - ~ ,... -- ½ ,... - -,... - ,... ,... - ,... ,... - ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... - ,... ,... ,... ,... _y_ ~ Approximately 5 inches of asphaltic concrete Brown Clay fine Sand - Moist (Possible FIll) Light Brown fine Sand, trace of Clay, some layers of Silty Sand - Moist (Native) Brown fine Sand, trace to little Silt - Moist Yellowish Brown Silty Sandstone - Moist (Old Paralic Deposits) Groundwater encountered at 17 feetBoring Terminated at about 21.5 feet (EL. 36') 1-SS 2-SS 3-SS 4-SS 5-SS 15 25 30 35 50/5" 17 10 10 16 11 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-4 57.5 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 5 10 15 20 El e v a t i o n 55 50 45 40 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: 17' Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 I\ >- - - - --- - - - - - - - _y_ ~ Approximately 3 inches of asphaltic concrete over 5 inches of aggregate base Brown Clayey fine Sand to Silty fine Sand - Moist (Possible Fill to Native) No groundwater encountered Boring Terminated at about 5 feet (EL. 51.3') 1-SS 2-SS P200=30% 17 38 14 7 BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-5 56.3 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 2.5 5.0 El e v a t i o n 55.0 52.5 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: None Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 ~ .... -\ ? .... .... ~ --.... ~ -~ .... .... ? - .... -~ -~ .... .... -~ .... .... ? - ~ -.... -~ .... .... ~ - v'. .... .... .... .... .... - .... .... .... .... - .... .... .... .... - .... .... .... .... 'SJ_ ....--- '51-....--- ....---_y_ ~ ~ Approximately 4 inches of asphaltic concrete over 5 inches of aggregate base Brown fine Sandy Clay - Moist (Possibble Fill to Native) No groundwater encountered Boring Terminated at about 5 feet (EL. 51.4') 1-SS 2-SS 5 18 25 22 BDL BDL Water Observation Data GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Remarks: TEST BORING LOGB-6 56.4 feet 09/11/18 De p t h ( f t ) 2.5 5.0 El e v a t i o n 55.0 52.5 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Sa m p l e No . & T y p e SS = Standard Penetration Test BDL - Below Detection Level PROJECT NO: 2G-1808005 PROPOSED CHICK-FIL-A RESTAURANT #4306 Changes in strata indicated by the lines are approximate boundary between soil types. The actual transition may be gradual and may vary considerably between test borings. Location of test boringis shown on the Boring Location Plan. BORING NO. & LOCATION: Water Level At End of Drilling: Water Level After Drilling: FIELD REP: NOTES TREVOR SLAZAS N 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA Qu (tsf) Qp (tsf) Qs (tsf) W (%)PID SURFACE ELEVATION: COMPLETION DATE: Water Encountered During Drilling: None Cave Depth At End of Drilling: Cave Depth After Drilling:GI L E S L O G R E P O R T 2 G - 1 8 0 8 0 0 5 . G P J G I L E S . G D T 1 0 / 5 / 1 8 ~ >--\ I >-->- >--~ >-I _>- -_>- >-I ->- >-->- >-I -- >-~ ->- >- >- >- >- >- - >- >- >- >-- >- >- >- >-- >- >- >- >- 'SJ_ >---'51->--- _y_ ~ ~ LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS CFA Carlsbad, CA Hole No.=B-1 Water Depth=10 ft Magnitude=6. 72 Acceleration=0.544g Shear Stress Ratio Factor of Safety Settlement (ft) ~o--~-----~--------~------------1 o 1 s o (in.) 0 \ I I I I I I I ,--,1--,1.,-l--,l~I ~I -r-1-r-1 ,...,1 5 10 f--------------4---------------------><'---l 15 20 25 <( 3 30 fs1=1 e t 35 CRR -CSR fs~ :3" Shaded Zone has Liquefaction Potential CivilTech Corporation S = 0.01 in. Saturated Unsaturat. - Plate A-1 CFA Carlsbad, CA ************************************************************************************ ******************* LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY Copyright by CivilTech Software www.civiltechsoftware.com ************************************************************************************ ******************* Font: Courier New, Regular, Size 8 is recommended for this report. Licensed to, 11/16/2021 11:20:03 AM Input File Name: P:\John Maier\Chick-fil-A\Geo\Carlsbad\CFA Carlsbad, CA.liq Title: CFA Carlsbad, CA Subtitle: Surface Elev.= Hole No.=B-1 Depth of Hole= 35.00 ft Water Table during Earthquake= 10.00 ft Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 18.00 ft Max. Acceleration= 0.54 g Earthquake Magnitude= 6.72 Input Data: Surface Elev.= Hole No.=B-1 Depth of Hole=35.00 ft Water Table during Earthquake= 10.00 ft Water Table during In-Situ Testing= 18.00 ft Max. Acceleration=0.54 g Earthquake Magnitude=6.72 No-Liquefiable Soils: CL, OL are Non-Liq. Soil 1. SPT or BPT Calculation. 2. Settlement Analysis Method: Tokimatsu/Seed 3. Fines Correction for Liquefaction: Idriss/Seed 4. Fine Correction for Settlement: During Liquefaction* 5. Settlement Calculation in: All zones* 6. Hammer Energy Ratio, 7. Borehole Diameter, 8. Sampling Method, 9. User request factor of safety (apply to CSR) , Plot one CSR curve (fsl=l) 10. Use Curve Smoothing: Yes* * Recommended Options Page 1 Ce= 1.25 Cb= 1 Cs= 1.2 User= 1 CFA Carlsbad, CA In-Situ Test Data: Depth SPT gamma Fines ft pcf % 2.00 18.00 120.00 40.00 5.00 20.00 120.00 23.00 10.00 32.00 120.00 20.00 15.00 51.00 120.00 20.00 20.00 50.00 120.00 27.00 25.00 50.00 120.00 27.00 30.00 50.00 120.00 23.00 35.00 50.00 120.00 23.00 Output Results: Settlement of Saturated Sands=0.00 in. Settlement of Unsaturated Sands=0.01 in. Total Settlement of Saturated and Unsaturated Sands=0.01 in. Differential Settlement=0.007 to 0.009 in. Depth CRRm CSRfs F.S. S_sat. S_dry S all ft in. in. in. 2.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 2.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 3.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 3.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 4.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 4.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 5.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 5.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 6.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 6.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 7.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 7.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 8.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.50 2.65 0.35 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.00 2.65 0.36 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.50 2.65 0.37 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 2.65 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50 2.65 0.38 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.00 2.65 0.39 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13.50 2.65 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Page 2 CFA Carlsbad, CA 14.00 2.65 0.40 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.50 2.65 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.00 2.65 0.41 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.50 2.65 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.00 2.65 0.42 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.50 2.65 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.00 2.65 0.43 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17.50 2.65 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.00 2.65 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.50 2.65 0.44 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.00 2.65 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19.50 2.65 0.45 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 2.65 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.50 2.65 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.00 2.65 0.46 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.50 2.65 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.00 2.65 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.50 2.65 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.00 2.65 0.47 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23.50 2.65 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 2.65 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.50 2.65 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 2.65 0.48 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.50 2.65 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.00 2.65 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 26.50 2.65 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.00 2.65 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.50 2.65 0.49 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.50 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.00 2.65 0.50 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 * F.S.<1, Liquefaction Potential Zone (F.S. is limited to 5, CRR is limited to 2, CSR is limited to 2) Units: Unit: qc, fs, Stress or Pressure = atm ( 1. 0581tsf); Unit Weight = Page 3 CFA Carlsbad, CA pcf; Depth= ft; Settlement= in. (atmosphere)= 1 tsf (ton/ft2) 1 atm CRRm CSRsf Cyclic Cyclic request factor of safety) resistance ratio from soils stress ratio induced by a given earthquake (with user F.S. Factor of Safety against liquefaction, F.S.=CRRm/CSRsf s sat S_dry S all Noliq Settlement from saturated sands Settlement from Unsaturated Sands Total Settlement from Saturated and Unsaturated Sands No-Liquefy Soils Page 4 APPENDIX B FIELD PROCEDURES The field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation D 420 entitled “Standard Guide for Sampling Rock and Rock” and/or other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to Giles’ laboratory in general accordance with the procedures recommended by ASTM designation D 4220 entitled “Standard Practice for Preserving and Transporting Soil Samples.” Brief descriptions of the sampling, testing and field procedures commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL FIELD PROCEDURES Test Boring Elevations The ground surface elevations reported on the Test Boring Logs are referenced to the assumed benchmark shown on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). Unless otherwise noted, the elevations were determined with a conventional hand-level and are accurate to within about 1 foot. Test Boring Locations The test borings were located on-site based on the existing site features and/or apparent property lines. Dimensions illustrating the approximate boring locations are reported on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). Water Level Measurement The water levels reported on the Test Boring Logs represent the depth of “free” water encountered during drilling and/or after the drilling tools were removed from the borehole. Water levels measured within a granular (sand and gravel) soil profile are typically indicative of the water table elevation. It is usually not possible to accurately identify the water table elevation with cohesive (clayey) soils, since the rate of seepage is slow. The water table elevation within cohesive soils must therefore be determined over a period of time with groundwater observation wells. It must be recognized that the water table may fluctuate seasonally and during periods of heavy precipitation. Depending on the subsurface conditions, water may also become perched above the water table, especially during wet periods. Borehole Backfilling Procedures Each borehole was backfilled upon completion of the field operations. If potential contamination was encountered, and/or if required by state or local regulations, boreholes were backfilled with an “impervious” material (such as bentonite slurry). Borings that penetrated pavements, sidewalks, etc. were “capped” with Portland Cement concrete, asphaltic concrete, or a similar surface material. It must, however, be recognized that the backfill material may settle, and the surface cap may subside, over a period of time. Further backfilling and/or re-surfacing by Giles’ client or the property owner may be required. ~------ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. FIELD SAMPLING AND TESTING PROCEDURES Auger Sampling (AU) Soil samples are removed from the auger flights as an auger is withdrawn above the ground surface. Such samples are used to determine general soil types and identify approximate soil stratifications. Auger samples are highly disturbed and are therefore not typically used for geotechnical strength testing. Split-Barrel Sampling (SS) – (ASTM D-1586) A split-barrel sampler with a 2-inch outside diameter is driven into the subsoil with a 140- pound hammer free-falling a vertical distance of 30 inches. The summation of hammer- blows required to drive the sampler the final 12-inches of an 18-inch sample interval is defined as the “Standard Penetration Resistance” or N-value is an index of the relative density of granular soils and the comparative consistency of cohesive soils. A soil sample is collected from each SPT interval. Shelby Tube Sampling (ST) – (ASTM D-1587) A relatively undisturbed soil sample is collected by hydraulically advancing a thin-walled Shelby Tube sampler into a soil mass. Shelby Tubes have a sharp cutting edge and are commonly 2 to 5 inches in diameter. Bulk Sample (BS) A relatively large volume of soils is collected with a shovel or other manually-operated tool. The sample is typically transported to Giles’ materials laboratory in a sealed bag or bucket. Dynamic Cone Penetration Test (DC) – (ASTM STP 399) This test is conducted by driving a 1.5-inch-diameter cone into the subsoil using a 15- pound steel ring (hammer), free-falling a vertical distance of 20 inches. The number of hammer-blows required to drive the cone 1¾ inches is an indication of the soil strength and density, and is defined as “N”. The Dynamic Cone Penetration test is commonly conducted in hand auger borings, test pits and within excavated trenches. - Continued - ~------ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Ring-Lined Barrel Sampling – (ASTM D 3550) In this procedure, a ring-lined barrel sampler is used to collect soil samples for classification and laboratory testing. This method provides samples that fit directly into laboratory test instruments without additional handling/disturbance. Sampling and Testing Procedures The field testing and sampling operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and/or other relevant specifications. Results of the field testing (i.e. N-values) are reported on the Test Boring Logs. Explanations of the terms and symbols shown on the logs are provided on the appendix enclosure entitled “General Notes”. ~------ APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING AND CLASSIFICATION The laboratory testing was conducted under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer in accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and/or other relevant specifications. Brief descriptions of laboratory tests commonly performed by Giles are provided herein. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. LABORATORY TESTING AND CLASSIFICATION Photoionization Detector (PID) In this procedure, soil samples are “scanned” in Giles’ analytical laboratory using a Photoionization Detector (PID). The instrument is equipped with an 11.7 eV lamp calibrated to a Benzene Standard and is capable of detecting a minute concentration of certain Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) vapors, such as those commonly associated with petroleum products and some solvents. Results of the PID analysis are expressed in HNu (manufacturer’s) units rather than actual concentration. Moisture Content (w) (ASTM D 2216) Moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water contained within a soil sample to the weight of the dry solids within the sample. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage. Unconfined Compressive Strength (qu) (ASTM D 2166) An axial load is applied at a uniform rate to a cylindrical soil sample. The unconfined compressive strength is the maximum stress obtained or the stress when 15% axial strain is reached, whichever occurs first. Calibrated Penetrometer Resistance (qp) The small, cylindrical tip of a hand-held penetrometer is pressed into a soil sample to a prescribed depth to measure the soils capacity to resist penetration. This test is used to evaluate unconfined compressive strength. Vane-Shear Strength (qs) The blades of a vane are inserted into the flat surface of a soil sample and the vane is rotated until failure occurs. The maximum shear resistance measured immediately prior to failure is taken as the vane-shear strength. Loss-on-Ignition (ASTM D 2974; Method C) The Loss-on-Ignition (L.O.I.) test is used to determine the organic content of a soil sample. The procedure is conducted by heating a dry soil sample to 440°C in order to burn-off or “ash” organic matter present within the sample. The L.O.I. value is the ratio of the weight loss due to ignition compared to the initial weight of the dry sample. L.O.I. is expressed as a percentage. ~------ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. Particle Size Distribution (ASTB D 421, D 422, and D 1140) This test is performed to determine the distribution of specific particle sizes (diameters) within a soil sample. The distribution of coarse-grained soil particles (sand and gravel) is determined from a “sieve analysis,” which is conducted by passing the sample through a series of nested sieves. The distribution of fine-grained soil particles (silt and clay) is determined from a “hydrometer analysis” which is based on the sedimentation of particles suspended in water. Consolidation Test (ASTM D 2435) In this procedure, a series of cumulative vertical loads are applied to a small, laterally confined soil sample. During each load increment, vertical compression (consolidation) of the sample is measured over a period of time. Results of this test are used to estimate settlement and time rate of settlement. Classification of Samples Each soil sample was visually-manually classified, based on texture and plasticity, in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2488-75). The classifications are reported on the Test Boring Logs. Laboratory Testing The laboratory testing operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and/or other relevant specifications. Results of the laboratory tests are provided on the Test Boring Logs or other appendix enclosures. Explanation of the terms and symbols used on the logs is provided on the appendix enclosure entitled “General Notes.” ~------ GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test ASTM D-1833 The CBR test is used for evaluation of a soil subgrade for pavement design. The test consists of measuring the force required for a 3-square-inch cylindrical piston to penetrate 0.1 or 0.2 inch into a compacted soil sample. The result is expressed as a percent of force required to penetrate a standard compacted crushed stone. Unless a CBR test has been specifically requested by the client, the CBR is estimated from published charts, based on soil classification and strength characteristics. A typical correlation chart is below. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO -CBR 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100 I I I I I I I I GP GW~8 ASTM SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GM ;~ (Unified Classfication) GC I I I 11 SW SM SP SC ~~ OH ML ~~ CH CL ;::j'. OL "I"' MH AASHTO SOIL CLASSIFICATION I A-1-0 ~~ I I I I A-1-0 I I A-2-4 A-2-5 ~8 II A-2-6 A-2-7 I A-3 A-4 ,~ A-5 '"' A-6 I ,~ A-7-5 A-7-6 I I I I I I I I FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION E-1 ;~ E-2 ;~ SOIL CLASSIFICATION I E-3 ·~ I I I I ! E-4 ;~ I E-5 E-6 I E-7 I E-8 E-9 E-10 I E-11 E-12 RESISTANCE VALUE -R 5 10 20 0 0 50 160 I 70 I I I I' I I I I I MODULUS OF SUBGRADE REACTION K PSI PER IN 11 0 150 290 I 2~0 00 400 5 0 E 00 70b I I I II I I BEARING VALUE PSI 1) 2) 30 40 5D ep CIALIFO1RNIIA BEARl~G RA11O -CfR 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 8090100 APPENDIX D GENERAL INFORMATION GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SUBGRADE AND PREPARATION FOR FilL, FOUNDATION, FLOOR SLAB AND PAVEMENT SUPPORT; AND SELECTION, PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF FlLL so~ USING MODIFIED PROCTOR PROCEDURES 1. Construction monitoring and testing of subgrades and grades for fill, foundation, floor slab and pavement; and fill selection, placement and compaction shall be perfonned by an experienced soils engineer and/or his representatives. 2. All compacted fill, subgrades, and grades shall be (a) underlain by suitable bearing material. (b) free of all organic frozen, or other deleterious material, and (c) observed, tested and approved by qualified engineering personnel representing an experienced soils engineer. Preparation of subgrades after stripping vegetation, organic or other unsuitable materials shall consist of (a) proofrolling to detect soft, wet, yielding soils or other unstable materials that must be undercut, (b) scarifying top 6 to 8 inches, ( c) moisture conditioning the soils as required, and (d) recompaction to same minimum in•situ density required for similar material indicated under Item 5. Note: Compaction requirements for pavement subgrade are higher than other areas. Weather and construction equipment may damage compacted fill surface and reworking and retesting may be necessary for proper performance. 3. In overexcavation and fill areas, the compacted fill must extend (a) a minimum I foot lateral distance beyond the exterior edge of the fmmdation at bearing grade or pavement at subgrade and down to compacted fill subgrade on a maximum 0.5(H): I (v) slope, (b) 1 foot above footing grade outside the building, and ( c) to floor sub grade inside the building. Fill shall be placed and compacted on a S(H): 1 M slope or must be stepped or benched as required to flatten if not specifically approved by qualified personnel under the direction of an experienced soils engineer. 4. The compacted fill materials shall be free of deleterious, organic, or frozen matter, shall contain no chemicals that may result in the material being classified as "contaminated". and shall be !ow-expansive with a maximum Liquid Limit (ASTM D-423) and Plasticity Index (ASTM D-424) of30 and 15, respectively, unless specifically tested and found to have low expansive properties and approved by an experienced soils engineer. The top 12 inches of compacted fill should have a maximwn 3 inch particle diameter and all underlying compacted fill a maximum 6 inch diameter unless specifically approved by an experienced soils engineer. All fill material must be tested and approved under the direction of an experienced soils engineer prior to placement. If the fill is to provide non-frost susceptible characteristics, it must be classified as a clean GW, GP, SW or SP per Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D-2487). 5. For structural fill depths less than 20 feet, the density of the structural compacted fill and scarified subgrade and grades shall not be less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density as detennined by Modified Proctor (ASTM D-1557) with the exception of the top 12 inches of pavement subgrade which shall have a minimum in-situ density of 95 percent of maximum dry density, or 5 percent higher than underlying structural fill materials. Where the structural fill depth is greater than 20 feet, the portion below 20 feet should have a minimwn in-place density of95 percent of its maximwn dry density or 5 percent higher than the top 20 feet. Cohesive soils shall not vary by more than -I to +3 percent moisture content and granular soil ±3 percent from the optimum when placed and compacted or recompacted, unless specifically recommended/approved by the soils engineer observing the placement and compaction. Cohesive soils with moderate to high expansion potentials {Pl> 15) should, however, be placed, compacted and maintained prior to construction at a 3± 1 percent moisture content above optimum moisture content to limit future heave. Fill shall be placed in layers with a maximwn loose thickness of 8 inches for foundations and IO inches for floor slabs and pavements, unless specifically approved by the soils engineer taking into consideration the type of materials and compaction equipment being used. The compaction equipment should consist of suitable mechanical equipment specifically designed for soil compaction. Bulldozers or similar tracked vehicles are typically not suitable for compaction. 6. Excavation, filing, subgrade grade preparation shall be performed in a manner and sequence that will provide drainage at all times and proper control of erosion. Precipitation, springs, and seepage water encountered shall be pumped or drained to provide a suitable working platform. Springs or water seepage encountered during grade/foundation construction must be called to the soils engineer's attention immediately for possible construction procedure revision or inclusion of an underdrain system. 7. Non-structural fill adjacent to structural fill should typically be placed in unison to provide lateral support. Backfill along walls must be placed and compacted with care to ensure excessive unbalanced lateral pressures do not develop. The type of fill material placed adjacent to below grade walls (i.e. basement walls and retaining walls) must be properly tested and approved by an experienced soils engineer with consideration for the lateral pressure used in the wall design. 8. Wherever, in the opinion of the soils engineer or the Owner's Representatives, an unstable condition is being created either by cutting or filling, the work should not proceed into that area until an appropriate geotechnical exploration and analysis has been performed and the grading plan revised, if found necessary. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC . GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL COMMENTS The soil samples obtained during the subsurface exploration will be retained for a period of thirty days. If no instructions are received, they will be disposed of at that time. This report has been prepared exclusively for the client in order to aid in the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and preparation of the project plans and specifications. Copies of this report may be provided to contractor(s), with contract documents, to disclose information relative to this project. The report, however, has not been prepared to serve as the plans and specifications for actual construction without the appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer. Reproduction and distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Giles. This report has been based on assumed conditions/characteristics of the proposed development where specific information was not available. It is recommended that the architect, civil engineer and structural engineer along with any other design professionals involved in this project carefully review these assumptions to ensure they are consistent with the actual planned development. When discrepancies exist, they should be brought to our attention to ensure they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations provided herein. The project plans and specifications may also be submitted to Giles for review to ensure that the geotechnical related conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been correctly interpreted. The analysis of this site was based on a subsoil profile interpolated from a limited subsurface exploration. If the actual conditions encountered during construction vary from those indicated by the borings, Giles must be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter the recommendations contained herein. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report have been promulgated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practices in the field of geotechnical engineering. No other warranty is either expressed or implied. ~------ With Dust Palliative With Bituminous Treatment GW Good: tractor, rubber-tired, steel wheel or vibratory roller 125-135 Almost none Good drainage, pervious Very stable Excellent Good Fair to poor Excellent GP Good: tractor, rubber-tired, steel wheel or vibratory roller 115-125 Almost none Good drainage, pervious Reasonably stable Excellent to good Poor to fair Poor GM Good: rubber-tired or light sheepsfoot roller 120-135 Slight Poor drainage, semipervious Reasonably stable Excellent to good Fair to poor Poor Poor to fair GC Good to fair: rubber-tired or sheepsfoot roller 115-130 Slight Poor drainage, impervious Reasonably stable Good Good to fair ** Excellent Excellent SW Good: tractor, rubber-tired or vibratory roller 110-130 Almost none Good drainage, pervious Very stable Good Fair to poor Fair to poor Good SP Good: tractor, rubber-tired or vibratory roller 100-120 Almost none Good drainage, pervious Reasonably stable when dense Good to fair Poor Poor Poor to fair SM Good: rubber-tired or sheepsfoot roller 110-125 Slight Poor drainage, impervious Reasonably stable when dense Good to fair Poor Poor Poor to fair SC Good to fair: rubber-tired or sheepsfoot roller 105-125 Slight to medium Poor drainage, impervious Reasonably stable Good to fair Fair to poor Excellent Excellent ML Good to poor: rubber-tired or sheepsfoot roller 95-120 Slight to medium Poor drainage, impervious Poor stability, high density required Fair to poor Not suitable Poor Poor CL Good to fair: sheepsfoot or rubber- tired roller 95-120 Medium No drainage, impervious Good stability Fair to poor Not suitable Poor Poor OL Fair to poor: sheepsfoot or rubber- tired roller 80-100 Medium to high Poor drainage, impervious Unstable, should not be used Poor Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable MH Fair to poor: sheepsfoot or rubber- tired roller 70-95 High Poor drainage, impervious Poor stability, should not be used Poor Not suitable Very poor Not suitable CH Fair to poor: sheepsfoot roller 80-105 Very high No drainage, impervious Fair stability, may soften on expansion Poor to very poor Not suitable Very poor Not suitable OH Fair to poor: sheepsfoot roller 65-100 High No drainage, impervious Unstable, should not be used Very poor Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable Pt Not suitable Very high Fair to poor drainage Should not be used Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable * "The Unified Classification: Appendix A - Characteristics of Soil, Groups Pertaining to Roads and Airfields, and Appendix B - Characteristics of Soil Groups Pertaining to Embankments and Foundations," Technical Memorandum 357, U.S. Waterways Ixperiment Station, Vicksburg, 1953. ** Not suitable if subject to frost. GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. CHARACTERISTICS AND RATINGS OF UNIFIED SOIL SYSTEM CLASSES FOR SOIL CONSTRUCTION * Value as Temporary Pavement Class Compaction Characteristics Max. Dry Density Standard Proctor (pcf) Compressibility and Expansion Drainage and Permeability Value as an Embankment Material Value as Subgrade When Not Subject to Frost Value as Base Course ~----------- Giles Engineering Associates, Inc. UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) Major Divisions Group Symbols Typical Names Laboratory Classifi cation Criteria Co a r s e - g r a i n e d s o i l s (m o r e t h a n h a l f o f m a t e r i a l i s l a r g e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) Gr a v e l s (M o r e t h a n h a l f o f c o a r s e f r a c t i o n i s l a r g e r th a n N o . 4 s i e v e s i z e ) Cl e a n g r a v e l s (l i t t l e o r n o fi n e s ) GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fi nes De t e r m i n e p e r c e n t a g e s o f s a n d a n d g r a v e l f r o m g r a i n - s i z e c u r v e . De t e r m i n e p e r c e n t a g e s o f s a n d a n d g r a v e l f r o m g r a i n - s i z e c u r v e . De p e n d i n g o n p e r c e n t a g e o f f i n e s ( f r a c t i o n s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) , c o a r s e - De p e n d i n g o n p e r c e n t a g e o f f i n e s ( f r a c t i o n s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) , c o a r s e - De p e n d i n g o n p e r c e n t a g e o f f i n e s ( f r a c t i o n s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) , c o a r s e - De p e n d i n g o n p e r c e n t a g e o f f i n e s ( f r a c t i o n s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) , c o a r s e - De p e n d i n g o n p e r c e n t a g e o f f i n e s ( f r a c t i o n s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) , c o a r s e - gr a i n e d s o i l s a r e c l a s s i f i e d a s f o l l o w s : L e s s t h a n 5 p e r c e n t : G W , G P , S W , S P L e s s t h a n 5 p e r c e n t : G W , G P , S W , S P L e s s t h a n 5 p e r c e n t : G W , G P , S W , S P L e s s t h a n 5 p e r c e n t : G W , G P , S W , S P M o r e t h a n 1 2 p e r c e n t : G M , G C , S M , S C M o r e t h a n 1 2 p e r c e n t : G M , G C , S M , S C M o r e t h a n 1 2 p e r c e n t : G M , G C , S M , S C M o r e t h a n 1 2 p e r c e n t : G M , G C , S M , S C 5 t o 1 2 p e r c e n t : 5 t o 1 2 p e r c e n t : Bo r d e r l i n e c a s e s r e q u i r i n g d u a l s y m b o l s b Cu = greater than 4; Cc = between 1 and 3 GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtrues, little or no fi nes Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW Gr a v e l s w i t h f i n e s (a p p r e c i a b l e a m o u n t o f fi n e s ) GMa d Silty gravels, gravel- sand-silt mixtures Atterberg limits below “A” line or P.I. less than 4 Limits plotting within shaded area, above “A” line with P.I. between 4 and 7 are borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols u GC Clayey gravels, gravel- sand-clay mixtures Atterberg limits above “A” line or P.I. greater than 7 Sa n d s (M o r e t h a n h a l f o f c o a r s e f r a c t i o n i s sm a l l e r t h a n N o . 4 s i e v e s i z e ) Cl e a n s a n d s (L i t t l e o r n o fi n e s ) SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fi nes Cu = greater than 4; Cc = between 1 and 3 SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fi nes Not meeting all gradation requirements for SW Sa n d s w i t h f i n e s (A p p r e c i a b l e a m o u n t of f i n e s ) SMa d Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Atterberg limits below “A” line or P.I. less than 4 Limits plotting within shaded area, above “A” line with P.I. between 4 and 7 are borderline cases requiring use of dual symbols u SC Clayey sands, sand-clay Clayey sands, sand-clay Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures Atterberg limits above “A” line or P.I. greater than 7 Fi n e - g r a i n e d s o i l s (M o r e t h a n h a l f m a t e r i a l i s s m a l l e r t h a n N o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) Si l t s a n d c l a y s (L i q u i d l i m i t l e s s t h a n 5 0 ) ML Inorganic silts and very fi ne sands, rock fl our, silty or clayey fi ne sands, or clayey silts with slight plasticity CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Si l t s a n d c l a y s (L i q u i d l i m i t g r e a t e r t h a n 5 0 ) MH Inorganic silts, mica- ceous or diatomaceous fi ne sandy or silty soils, elastic silts CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts Hi g h l y or g a n i c so i l s Pt Peat and other highly organic soils D = greater than 4; CD = greater than 4; C60 = greater than 4; C60 = greater than 4; CD = greater than 4; CD = greater than 4; C 10 = greater than 4; C (D = between 1 and 3 (D = between 1 and 330 = between 1 and 330 = between 1 and 3) = between 1 and 3) = between 1 and 3 2 D = between 1 and 3D = between 1 and 3 10 x D = between 1 and 3 x D = between 1 and 3 60 = between 1 and 3 D60 = greater than 4; C60 = greater than 4; CD = greater than 4; CD = greater than 4; C 10 = greater than 4; C (D = between 1 and 3 (D = between 1 and 330 = between 1 and 330 = between 1 and 3) = between 1 and 3) = between 1 and 3 2 D = between 1 and 3D = between 1 and 3 10 x D = between 1 and 3 x D = between 1 and 3 60 = between 1 and 3 Plasticity Chart Pla s t i c i t y I n d e x 0 10 50 1000 10 50 10020900 10 50 1000 10 50 100800 10 50 10020900 10 50 100800 10 50 1000 10 50 100700 10 50 10020900 10 50 100700 10 50 1000 10 50 100600 10 50 10020900 10 50 100600 10 50 1000 10 50 100400 10 50 10020900 10 50 100400 10 50 1000 10 50 100300 10 50 10020900 10 50 100300 10 50 1000 10 50 60 40 20 30 CH OH and MHOH and MH CL ML and OLML and OL CL-ML “A” l i n e Liquid Limit a Division of GM and SM groups into subdivisions of d and u are for roads and airfi elds only. Subdivision is based on Atterberg limits, suffi x d used when L.L. is 28 or less and the P.I. is 6 or less; the suffi x u is used when L.L. is greater than 28. b Borderline classifi cations, used for soils possessing characteristics of two groups, are designated by combinations of group sympols. For example GW-GC, well-graded gravel-sand mixture with clay binder. -60 ,-30' ~ - OU • .:SU' ;=;--- - / / / / / / / / / / / / 20 30 40 60 70 80 90 GILES ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL NOTES SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION All samples are visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487-75 or D-2488-75) DESCRIPTIVE TERM (% BY DRY WEIGHT) PARTICLE SIZE (DIAMETER) Trace: 1-10% Boulders: 8 inch and larger Little: 11-20% Cobbles: 3 inch to 8 inch Some: 21-35% Gravel: coarse - ¾ to 3 inch And/Adjective 36-50% fine – No. 4 (4.76 mm) to ¾ inch Sand: coarse – No. 4 (4.76 mm) to No. 10 (2.0 mm) medium – No. 10 (2.0 mm) to No. 40 (0.42 mm) fine – No. 40 (0.42 mm) to No. 200 (0.074 mm) Silt: No. 200 (0.074 mm) and smaller (non-plastic) Clay: No 200 (0.074 mm) and smaller (plastic) SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS Dd: Dry Density (pcf) SS: Split-Spoon LL: Liquid Limit, percent ST: Shelby Tube – 3 inch O.D. (except where noted) PL: Plastic Limit, percent CS: 3 inch O.D. California Ring Sampler PI: Plasticity Index (LL-PL) DC: Dynamic Cone Penetrometer per ASTM LOI: Loss on Ignition, percent Special Technical Publication No. 399 Gs: Specific Gravity AU: Auger Sample K: Coefficient of Permeability DB: Diamond Bit w: Moisture content, percent CB: Carbide Bit qp: Calibrated Penetrometer Resistance, tsf WS: Wash Sample qs: Vane-Shear Strength, tsf RB: Rock-Roller Bit qu: Unconfined Compressive Strength, tsf BS: Bulk Sample qc: Static Cone Penetrometer Resistance Note: Depth intervals for sampling shown on Record of (correlated to Unconfined Compressive Strength, tsf) Subsurface Exploration are not indicative of sample PID: Results of vapor analysis conducted on representative recovery, but position where sampling initiated samples utilizing a Photoionization Detector calibrated to a benzene standard. Results expressed in HNU-Units. (BDL=Below Detection Limit) N: Penetration Resistance per 12 inch interval, or fraction thereof, for a standard 2 inch O.D. (1⅜ inch I.D.) split spoon sampler driven with a 140 pound weight free-falling 30 inches. Performed in general accordance with Standard Penetration Test Specifications (ASTM D-1586). N in blows per foot equals sum of N-Values where plus sign (+) is shown. Nc: Penetration Resistance per 1¾ inches of Dynamic Cone Penetrometer. Approximately equivalent to Standard Penetration Test N-Value in blows per foot. Nr: Penetration Resistance per 12 inch interval, or fraction thereof, for California Ring Sampler driven with a 140 pound weight free-falling 30 inches per ASTM D-3550. Not equivalent to Standard Penetration Test N-Value. SOIL STRENGTH CHARACTERISTICS COHESIVE (CLAYEY) SOILS NON-COHESIVE (GRANULAR) SOILS UNCONFINED COMPARATIVE BLOWS PER COMPRESSIVE RELATIVE BLOWS PER CONSISTENCY FOOT (N) STRENGTH (TSF) DENSITY FOOT (N) Very Soft 0 - 2 0 - 0.25 Very Loose 0 - 4 Soft 3 - 4 0.25 - 0.50 Loose 5 - 10 Medium Stiff 5 – 8 0.50 - 1.00 Firm 11 - 30 Stiff 9 – 15 1.00 - 2.00 Dense 31 - 50 Very Stiff 16 – 30 2.00 - 4.00 Very Dense 51+ Hard 31+ 4.00+ DEGREE OF DEGREE OF EXPANSIVE PLASTICITY PI POTENTIAL PI None to Slight 0 - 4 Low 0 - 15 Slight 5 - 10 Medium 15 - 25 Medium 11 - 30 High 25+ High to Very High 31+ Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. The following information is provided to help you manage your risks. Geotechnical Services Are Performed tor Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one -not even you -should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set ol Project-Specil1c Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac- tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth- erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for the specific site explored, or • completed before important project changes were made. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse, • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the design team, or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they were not informed. Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer- ing reportwhose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly- from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Nat Final Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi- neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con- tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci- plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron- mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen- vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man- agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com- prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num- ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services per- formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's study were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved. Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial Engmeer tor Additional Assistance Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information. ASFE TIii 1111 P111ll II Urtll 8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: info@asfe.org www.asfe.org Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with ASFE's specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation. IIGER06045.0M Geotechnical, Environmental & Construction Materials Consultants MILWAUKEE, WI (262) 544-0118 GILES €:NGINEERING A ssOCIATES, INC. w w w. g i Iese n gr.com ATLANTA, GA (770) 458-3399 ORLANDO, FL (407) 321-5356 DALLAS, TX (214) 358-5885 TAMPA, FL (813) 283-0096 LOS ANGELES, CA (714) 279-0817 BALTIMORE/WASHINGTON, D.C. (410) 636-9320