Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 14-07; BEACHWALK AT ROOSEVELT; PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP); 2018-01-01CITY OF CARLSBAD PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP) FOR BEACHWALK AT Roosevelt 2685, 2687 & 2715 Roosevelt Street CT 14-07/ RP 14-20 DWG 490-6A GR2017-0068 SWQMP No. 15-28 ENGINEER OF WORK: Brian Ardolino, Project Engineer Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates 535 N. Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 858.259.8212 117 Brian Ar,ojino, RCE 71651 PREPARED FOR: Geoff McComic Vesta Pacific Development 1818 First Avenue, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92131 619.481.3830 PREPARED BY: Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates 535 N. Highway 101, Suite A Solana Beach, CA 92075 858.259.8212 DATE: January 2018 CX RIlCE1IVE I) MAY 102018 LAND DEVELOPYTNT ENGINEERING e -c t'7 Beachwalk at Roosevelt Ct I I TABLE OF CONTENTS I Certification Page Project Vicinity Map FORM E-34 Storm Water Standard Questionnaire I Site Information FORM E-36 Standard Project Requirement Checklist Summary of PDP Structural BMPs Attachment 1: Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs 1 Attachment la: DMA Exhibit Attachment 1 b: Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1 c: Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening (when applicable) I Attachment id: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (when applicable) Attachment 1 e: Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets / Calculations Attachment 2: Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures I Attachment 2a: Hydromodification Management Exhibit Attachment 2b: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2c: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels I Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions Attachment 4: Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit I I Beachwalk at Roosevelt I I CERTIFICATION PAGE U Project Name: Beachwalk at Roosevelt Project ID: CT 14-07 I RP 14-20 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 (M54 Permit) or the current Order. I have read and understand that the City Engineer has adopted minimum requirements for I 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 I design BMPs proposed to minimize the potentially negative impacts of this projects 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 I Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design. Engineer'LWorks Sig PE Number & Expiration Date Brian Ardolino Print Name Pasco Laret Suiter & Associates Company Date Beachwalk at Roosevelt PROJECT VICINITY MAP - \ lkr / f 4 C) 03 U /Bum Vista Buena Vista Way Buena5 Vista Way Buena p1 ' Cynthia Ln. 'Knowles Ave Knowles A \\\ 10 \\ strotfordLe - Los ViKas ctr Laguna Or - Laguna Or iag \\\ a Denn 12685 Roosevelt St -I AreryNoffi US Putt Office. - n sport000nrptex 10.1 \ Carlsbad Vitage -í ' - S wltcircrrerwinery - 4 /5 01-11 Beachwalk at Roosevelt 11 I I City of Carlsbad STORM WATER STANDARDS QUESTIONNAIRE E-34 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov INSTRUCTIONS: To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from development projects, the city requires that new development and significant redevelopment priority projects incorporate Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) into the project design per Carlsbad BMP Design Manual (BMP Manual). To view the BMP Manual, refer to the Engineering Standards (Volume 5). This questionnaire must be completed by the applicant in advance of submitting for a development application (subdivision, discretionary permits and/or construction permits). The results of the questionnaire determine the level of storm water standards that must be applied to a proposed development or redevelopment project. Depending on the outcome, your project will either be subject to 'STANDARD PROJECT' requirements or be subject to 'PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT' (PDP) requirements. Your responses to the questionnaire represent an initial assessment of the proposed project conditions and impacts. City staff has responsibility for making the final assessment after submission of the development application. If staff determines that the questionnaire was incorrectly filled out and is subject to more stringent storm water standards than initially assessed by you, this will result in the return of the development application as incomplete. In this case, please make the changes to the questionnaire and resubmit to the city. If you are unsure about the meaning of a question or need help in determining how to respond to one or more of the questions, please seek assistance from Land Development Engineering staff. A completed and signed questionnaire must be submitted with each development project application. Only one completed and signed questionnaire is required when multiple development applications for the same project are submitted concurrently. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT NAME: Beachwalk at Roosevelt PROJECT ID: CT 14-07 I RP 14-20 ADDRESS: 2685, 2687 & 2715 Roosevelt Street APN: 203-101-02 & 203-101-05 The project is (check one): LI New Development II Redevelopment The total proposed disturbed area is: 35,390 ft2 (0.81 ) acres The total proposed newly created and/or replaced impervious area is: 21,566 ft2 (0.49 ) acres If your project is covered by an approved SWQMP as part of a larger development project, provide the project ID and the SWQMP # of the larger development project: Project ID SWQMP #: Then, go to Step 1 and follow the instructions. When completed, sign the form at the end and submit this with your application to the city. E-34 Page 1 of 4 REV 02/16 I I I STEP I TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL PROJECTS To determine if your project is a "development project", please answer the following question: YES NO Is your project LIMITED TO routine maintenance activity and/or repair/improvements to an existing building or structure that do not alter the size (See Section 1.3 of the BMP Design Manual for guidance)? If you answered "yes" to the above question, provide justification below then go to Step 5, mark the third box stating "my project is not a 'development project' and not subject to the requirements of the BMP manual" and complete applicant information. Justification/discussion: (e.g. the project includes only interior remodels within an existing building): If you answered "no" to the above question, the project is a 'development project', go to Step 2. STEP TO BE COMPLETED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS To determine if your project is exempt from PDP requirements pursuant to M54 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: Designed and constructed to direct storm water runoff to adjacent vegetated areas, or other non- erodible permeable areas; El 21 Designed and constructed to be hydraulically disconnected from paved streets or roads; 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 El 91 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? El E1 If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, provide discussion/justification below, then go to Step 5, mark the second box stating "my project is EXEMPT from PDP .....and complete applicant information. Discussion to justify exemption ( e.g. the project redeveloping existing road designed and constructed in accordance with the USEPA Green Street guidance): If you answered "no" to the above questions, your project is not exempt from PDP, go to Step 3. Eli E-34 Page 2 of 4 REV 02/16 Eli ri U U L I I I I U Eli I 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 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, El EZ and public development projects on public or private land. 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 21 El more of impervious surface? This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land. 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 El refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812). 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 El development project includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater. 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. 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 street, road, highway freeway or driveway? A street, road, highway, freeway or driveway is any paved impervious surface used for the automobiles, _transportation _of _trucks, _motorcycles, _and _other _vehicles. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that creates and/or replaces 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire site, and discharges directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)? "Discharging Directly to" includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of El li 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).* 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. 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 (AD T) of 100 or more vehicles per day. Is your project a new or redevelopment project that results in the disturbance of one or more acres of land El 91 and are expected to generate pollutants post construction? 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 El 21.203.040) If you answered "yes" to one or more of the above questions, your project is a PDP. If your project is a redevelopment project, go to step 4. If your project is a new project, go to step 5, check the first box stating "My project is a PDP ..." and complete applicant information. If you answered "no" to all of the above questions, your project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT.' Go to step 5, check the second box stating "My project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT'.....and complete applicant information. E-34 Page 3 of 4 REV 02/16 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) = 16,376 sq. ft. El W1 Total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area (B) = 21,566 sq. ft. Percent impervious area created or replaced (BIA)*1 00 = 131.7 If you answered "yes", the structural BMPs required for PDP apply only to the creation or replacement of impervious surface and not the entire development. Go to step 5, check the first box stating "My project is a PDP .....and complete applicant information. If you answered "no," the structural BMP's required for PDP apply to the entire development. Go to step 5, check the check the first box stating "My project is a PDP .....and complete applicant information. STEP 5 - CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX AND COMPLETE APPLICANT INFORMATION My project is a PDP and must comply with PDP stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. I understand I must prepare a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) for submittal at time of application. LI My project is a 'STANDARD PROJECT' OR EXEMPT from PDP and must only comply with 'STANDARD PROJECT' stormwater requirements of the BMP Manual. As part of these requirements, I will submit a "Standard Project Requirement Checklist Form E-36" and incorporate low impact development strategies throughout my project. Note: For projects that are close to meeting the PDP threshold, staff may require detailed impervious area calculations and exhibits to verify if 'STANDARD PROJECT' stormwater requirements apply. LI 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: Tara Goldberg Applicant Title: Project Engineer Applicant Signature: Date: 1-17-18 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. This Box for City Use Only City Concurrence: YES NO LI LI By: Date: Project ID: I E-34 Page 4 of 4 REV 02/16 SITE INFORMATION CHECKLIST Project mary Information - Project Name Beachwalk at Roosevelt Project ID CT 14-07 I RP 14-20 Project Address 2685, 2687 & 2715 Roosevelt Street Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s)) 203-101-02 & 203-101-05 Project Watershed (Hydrologic Unit) Carlsbad 904 Parcel Area 0.67 Acres (29,160 Square Feet) Existing Impervious Area (subset of Parcel Area) 0.24 Acres (10,608 Square Feet) Area to be disturbed by the project (Project Area) 0.81 Acres (35,390 Square Feet) Project Proposed Impervious Area (subset of Project Area) 0.49 Acres (21,566 Square Feet) Project Proposed Pervious Area (subset of Project Area) 0.32 Acres (13,824 Square Feet) Note: Proposed Impervious Area + Proposed Pervious Area = Area to be Disturbed by the Project. This may be less than the Parcel Area. Li I I I U I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Description of Existing Site Condition and Drainage Patterns Current Status of the Site (select all that apply): E Existing development I Previously graded but not built out E Agricultural or other non-impervious use I Vacant, undeveloped/natural Description / Additional Information: In the existing condition, the project site consists of 4 residential buildings, associated hardscape and accessory buildings, and vegetated and non-vegetated areas. Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply): R1 Vegetative Cover I Non-Vegetated Pervious Areas Impervious Areas Description / Additional Information: Underlying Soil belongs to Hydrologic Soil Group (select all that apply): I NRCS Type A I1NRCS Type B I NRCS Type C NRCS Type D Approximate Depth to Groundwater (GW): = GW Depth <5 feet 1 5 feet < GW Depth < 10 feet 1 10 feet < GW Depth < 20 feet 21 GW Depth > 20 feet Existing Natural Hydrologic Features (select all that apply): I Watercourses Li Seeps I Springs I Wetlands E None Description I Additional Information: Beachwalk at Roosevelt Description of Existing Site Topography and Drainage [How is storm water runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should answer (1) whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban; (2) describe existing constructed storm water conveyance systems, if applicable; and (3) is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? if so, describe]: In the existing condition, the project site consists of 4 residential buildings, associated hardscape and accessory buildings, and vegetated and non-vegetated areas. The existing topography varies with elevations ranging from approximately 42.1 feet at the high point at the southeast portion of the site, to approximately 39.0 feet at the western portion of the site. Storm water runoff flows away from the existing buildings and flows southwest overland onto the adjacent property. Runoff continues to State Street where it is collected in existing storm drain which flows north and ultimately discharges to Buena Vista Lagoon. Beachwalk at Roosevelt L I Description of Proposed Site Development and Drainage Patterns Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities: The project proposes to construct 16 condominium units, associated landscaping and hardscape improvements, and LID components including permeable paver driveways, pervious gutter and bioretention storm water BMPs designed to provide pollutant control. List/describe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features): 16 condominium units, P00 walkways, and portions of the proposed driveways have strips of PCC. Right-of-Way improvements include sidewalk widening, asphalt grind & overlay, street trees and PCC curb & pervious gutter. List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas): Proposed pervious features onsite include permeable paver driveways, landscape, and bioretention areas. Per direction from the City of Carlsbad, pervious gutter is proposed in the ROW to treat roadway runoff. Does the project include grading and changes to site topography? li Yes Li No Description /Additional Information: The proposed site will drain from west to east toward Roosevelt Street. Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)? EYes Li No Description /Additional Information: The proposed site changes the direction of the existing condition drainage flowing from west to east toward Roosevelt Street, from approximately 42.5 feet along the western property line to approximately 41.2 feet at the northeasterly corner of the site. In the proposed condition, runoff is diverted away from buildings and flows overland to proposed bioretention areas in the northeastern portion of the site. The treated storm water will be conveyed from the bioretention areas in drainage pipes that connect to the existing storm drain system in Roosevelt Street which discharges north to Buena Vista Lagoon. In the Right-of-Way, the existing half width of Roosevelt Street and new PCC sidewalk along the frontage of the property will drain to the proposed pervious gutter for pollutant control and ultimately be collected in the existing storm drain system in Roosevelt Street Beachwalk at Roosevelt Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply): lI On-site storm drain inlets E Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps IZI Interior parking garages E Need for future indoor & structural pest control 2 Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use Li Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Food service IEI Refuse areas 11 Industrial processes Outdoor storage of equipment or materials 11 Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning Ll Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance Fuel Dispensing Areas 11 Loading Docks li Fire Sprinkler Test Water lJ Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water E Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots Beachwalk at Roosevelt 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): In the proposed condition, storm water runoff from the project site is conveyed in proposed storm drain that connects to existing storm drain located in Roosevelt Street which flows northerly and discharges to Buena Vista 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 Buena Vista Creek Sediment Toxicity TMDL Buena Vista Creek Selenium TMDL Buena Vista Lagoon Indicator Bacteria TMDL Buena Vista Lagoon Nutrients TMDL Buena Vista Lagoon Sedimentation/Siltation TMDL 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 X Nutrients X X Heavy Metals X Organic Compounds X Trash & Debris X Oxygen Demanding Substances X OiI& Grease X Bacteria & Viruses _______ X X Pesticides X Beachwalk at Roosevelt I Hvdromodification Manaaement Reauirements Do hydromodification management requirements apply (see Section 1.6 of the BMP Design Manual)? DYes, hydromodification management flow control structural BMPs required. DNo, the project will discharge runoff directly to existing underground storm drains discharging directly to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean. ll 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. D 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 I Additional Information (to be provided if a 'No' answer has been selected above): Storm water runoff from the project flows to Roosevelt Street, enters existing storm drain at the frontage of the site, and ultimately discharges to Buena Vista Lagoon. Based on Figure 1-2 of the Carlsbad BMP Design Manual, the project directly discharges to an area identified in the WMAA, Buena Vista Lagoon. Pursuant to the study approved by the City of Carlsbad titled "Hydromodification Exemption Analyses for Select Carlsbad Watersheds" dated September 17, 2015 prepared by Chang Consultants, the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed showed that the hardened systems draining to the lagoon conveyed the 10-year storm event, the discharge points have proper energy dissipation and the outlets are within the 100-year flood limits. The study concluded and recommended that the Buena Vista Lagoon be exempt from hydromodification management requirements. I I I I I I Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas* *This Section only required if hydromodification management requirements apply Beachwalk at Roosevelt Based on the maps provided within the WMAA, do potential critical coarse sediment yield areas exist within the project drainage boundaries? H Yes E 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? H 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units (GLUs) Onsite 1 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment 1 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite r 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? H No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on verification of GLUs onsite H Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist but additional analysis has determined that protection is not required. Documentation attached in Attachment 8 of the SWQMP. H 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: I N/A I I I I I I I I I Beachwalk at Roosevelt I I I I I L I 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. Has a geomorphic assessment been performed for the receiving channel(s)? lI No, the low flow threshold is 0.102 (default low flow threshold) 11 Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.102 11 Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.302 11 Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.502 If a geomorphic assessment has been performed, provide title, date, and preparer: Discussion / Additional Information: (optional) N/A Beachwalk at Roosevelt 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. Driveway areas have been designed to meet the minimum widths and are mostly permeable paver areas. Landscaping areas are incorporated into the plans. The landscaping will consist of both native and non-native plants. The goal is to achieve plant establishment expeditiously to reduce erosion. The irrigation system for these landscaped areas will be monitored to reduce over irrigation. Lawn areas, natural vegetation and bioretention areas are proposed to reduce runoff and maximize infiltration. Per direction from the City of Carlsbad, pervious gutter is proposed in the ROW to treat roadway runoff. 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. Beachwalk at Roosevelt (City of Carlsbad STANDARD PROJECT REQUIREMENT CHECKLIST E-36 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov Project Information Project Name: Beachwalk at Roosevelt Project ID: CT 14-07 / RP 14-20 DWG No. or Building Permit No.: 490-6A Source Control BMPs All development projects must implement source control BMPs SC-1 through SC-6 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E.1 of the BMP Design Manual for information to implement source control BMPs shown in this checklist. Answer each category below pursuant to the following. Yes' means the project will implement the source control BMP as described in Chapter 4 and/or Appendix E.1 of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion/justification is not required. "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion/justification must be provided. Please add attachments if more space is needed. "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project has no outdoor materials storage areas). Discussion/justification may be provided. Source Control Requirement Applied? SC-1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 IZI Yes 0 No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SC-1 not implemented: SC-2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage 0 Yes 0 No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SC-2 not implemented: SC-3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall Run-On Runoff, and Wind El Yes [I No IN/A Dispersal Discussion/justification if SC-3 not implemented: E-36 Page 1 of 4 Revised 03/16 Source Control Requirement (continued) Applied' - - SC-4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from Rainfall Run-On Runoff, and Wind Dispersal Li Yes D No IZI N/A Discussion/justification if SC-4 not implemented: SC-5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal IZI Yes Li No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SC-5 not implemented: SC-6 Additional BMPs based on Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants must answer for each source listed below and identify additional BMPs. (See Table in Appendix E.1 of BMP Manual for guidance). IZI On-site storm drain inlets 0 Yes Li No Li N/A O Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps Li Yes Li No Z N/A lZl Interior parking garages Z Yes Li No Li N/A lZI Need for future indoor & structural pest control Z Yes Li No Li N/A IZI Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use 0 Yes Li No Li N/A o Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Li Yes Li No IZI N/A Li Food service Li Yes Li No 0 N/A IZI Refuse areas 0 Yes Li No Li N/A Li Industrial processes Li Yes Li No IZI N/A Li Outdoor storage of equipment or materials Li Yes Li No 121 N/A Li Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning Li Yes Li No 21 N/A Li Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance Li Yes Li No 21 N/A Li Fuel Dispensing Areas Li Yes Li No j 0 N/A Li Loading Docks Li Yes Li No 2] N/A 121 Fire Sprinkler Test Water 0 Yes Li No Li N/A 121 Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water 0 Yes Li No Li N/A 121 Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots 121 Yes Li No Li N/A For "Yes" answers, identify the additional BMP per Appendix El. Provide justification for "No' answers. Mark existing curb inlet on frontage with "No Dumping! Flows to Lagoon" or similar. If interior parking garage floor drains are proposed by architect, they will be plumbed to sanitary sewer. Provide Integrated Paste Management information to owners, lessees and operators. Landscaping to be designed to minimize irrigation and runoff and to promote surface infiltration where appropriate. Bioretention basins proposed to retain and treat stormwater. Proposed trash cans will be stored in interior garages. Fire sprinkler test water to drain to sanitary sewer. Condensate drain lines, roof downspouts, etc. to discharge to landscape areas. Plazas, sidewalks and driveways to be swept regularily I ['I I I I E-36 Page 2 of 4 Revised 03/16 Site Design BMPs All development projects must implement site design BMPs SD-1 through SD-8 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E.2 thru E.6 of the BMP Design Manual for information to implement site design BMPs shown in this checklist. Answer each category below pursuant to the following. "Yes" means the project will implement the site design BMPs as described in Chapter 4 and/or Appendix E.2 thru E.6 of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion /justification is not required. "No" means the BMPs is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion/justification must be provided. Please add attachments if more space is needed. "N/A" means the BMPs is not applicable at the project site because the project does not include the feature that is addressed by the BMPs (e.g., the project site has no existing natural areas to conserve). Discussion/justification may be provided. Source Control Requirement Applied? SD-I Maintain Natural Drainage Pathways and Hydrologic Features D Yes El No 0 N/A Discussion/justification if SD-1 not implemented: SD-2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation 0 Yes 0 No IZI N/A Discussion/justification if SD-2 not implemented: SD-3 Minimize Impervious Area I0 Yes 0 No I 0 N/A Discussion/justification if SD-3 not implemented: SD-4 Minimize Soil Compaction I IZI Yes I 0 No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SD-4 not implemented: SD-5 Impervious Area Dispersion 121 Yes LI No 0 N/A Discussion/justification if SD-5 not implemented: E-36 Page 3 of 4 Revised 03/16 I Source Control Requirement (continued) - Applied? -- SD-6 Runoff Collection 0 Yes D No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SD-6 not implemented: SD-7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species Z Yes D No LI N/A Discussion/justification if SD-7 not implemented: SD-8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation I LI Yes 0 No I0 N/A Discussion/justification if SD-8 not implemented: I I E-36 Page 4 of 4 Revised 03/16 SUMMARY OF PDP STRUCTURAL BMPS PDP Structural BMPs All PDPs must implement structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control (see Chapter 5 of the BMP Design Manual). Selection of PDP structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control must be based on the selection process described in Chapter 5. PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must also implement structural BMPs for flow control for hydromodification management (see Chapter 6 of the BMP Design Manual). Both storm water pollutant control and flow control for hydromodification management can be achieved within the same structural BMP(s). PDP structural BMPs must be verified by the City at the completion of construction. This may include requiring the project owner or project owner's representative to certify construction of the structural BMPs (see Section 1.12 of the BMP Design Manual). PDP structural BMPs must be maintained into perpetuity, and the City must confirm the maintenance (see Section 7 of the BMP Design Manual). Use this form to provide narrative description of the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the project site in the box below. Then complete the PDP structural BMP summary information sheet for each structural BMP within the project (copy the BMP summary information page as many times as needed to provide summary information for each individual structural BMP). Describe the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the site. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and designing storm water pollutant control BMPs presented in Section 5.1 of the BMP Design Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring hydromodification flow control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated together or separate. Step 1A: The DMA is not self-mitigating, de minimus, or self-retaining. Step 1 B: There are no site design BMPs proposed for the project for which the runoff factor can be adjusted. Step 2: Harvest and use is not applicable. Step 3: Infiltration is feasible and is therefore the BMP chosen for the project site for pollutant control. Step 3A&B: The BMP is proposed for the Full Infiltration Condition. Step 3C: The sizing requirement calculations are located in Attachment 1 e. Step 4: The BMP is designed to treat the full DCV. Step 4A: Design BMP for the required size, per design criteria and considerations listed in the fact sheets. Refer to Attachment 1 e for calculations. [Continue on next page as necessary.] Beachwalk at Roosevelt I I [Continued from previous page - This page is reserved for continuation of description of general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the site.] Beachwalk at Roosevelt I Structural BMP Summary Information [Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. BMP-A & B DWG 490-6A Sheet No. 2 & 3 Type of structural BMP: H Retention by harvest and use (H U-1) E Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1) Retention by bioretention (INF-2) H Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3) H Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) H Biofiltration (BF-1) : Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatmentlforebay 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) H Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management I Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: IZI Pollutant control only I Hydromodification control only Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control : Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP H Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): I I I I I I I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Structural BMP Summary Information [Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP] Structural BMP ID No. BMP-C DWG 490-6 Sheet No. 2 Type of structural BMP: Li Retention by harvest and use (H U-1) I Retention by infiltration basin (IN F-1) Li Retention by bioretention (lNF-2) E Retention by permeable pavement (lNF-3) I Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) I Biofiltration (BF-1) 1 Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/fore bay 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) I Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management I Other (describe in discussion section below) Purpose: 2 Pollutant control only I Hyd romodification control only I Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control P re-treatme nt/fore bay for another structural BMP I Other (describe in discussion section below) Discussion (as needed): Beachwalk at Roosevelt II I ATTACHMENT 1 I BACKUP FOR PDP POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS This is the cover sheet for Attachment 1. Check which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Contents Checklist Sequence Attachment la DMA Exhibit (Required) 0 Included See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. (24"x36" Exhibit typically required) Attachment lb Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing 0 Included on DMA Exhibit in DMA ID matching DMA Exhibit, DMA Attachment la Area, and DMA Type (Required)* 11 Included as Attachment 1 b, separate from DMA Exhibit *Provide table in this Attachment OR on DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1 a Attachment 1 Form 1-7, Harvest and Use Feasibility Included Screening Checklist (Required unless the entire project will use infiltration E Not included because the entire BMPs) project will use infiltration BMPs Refer to Appendix 13.3-1 of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form 1-7. Attachment 1 d Form 1-8, Categorization of Infiltration I1 Included Feasibility Condition (Required unless the project will use harvest and Not included because the entire use BMPs) project will use harvest and use BMPs Refer to Appendices C and 0 of the BMP Design Manual to complete Form 1-8. Attachment le Pollutant Control BMP Design Ii Included Worksheets / Calculations (Required) Refer to Appendices B and E of the BMP Design Manual for structural pollutant control BMP design guidelines Beachwalk at Roosevelt L I I Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the DMA Exhibit: I The DMA Exhibit must identify: I E Underlying hydrologic soil group I Approximate depth to groundwater I Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) I L Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) I Existing topography and impervious areas I Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite I L Proposed grading I Proposed impervious features I Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness I L 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) C Structural BMPs (identify location and type of BMP) I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Attachment la/lb I Beachwalk at Roosevelt T1 i BMP B: BIORETENTION BASINS SOIL ,lA tAA TkAA TYRF BMP A BIORETENTION BASINS SOIL DMA DMA DMA RF * TYPE NAME AREA PPST RF AREA B Al -7q3 SLP& O.cl 114 SF A2 154 BLP 0.1 106 AS 113 3L17& 0.1 714 A4 115 BLt75 0.1 116 A5 525 BLDcS 0.1 143 621 BLt& 0.1 566 Al 501 BLE)S 0.1 128 AS 501 BLP& 0.1 128 Al 424 PP 0.1 42 AIO 11 PGG 0.1 51 All 321 PP 0.1 32 Al2 112 PC..G 0.1 lOt AIS 316 PP 0.1 35 A14 101 PGO O.q qs AIS 212 PP 0.1 2 A16 11 Pcc, 0.1 51 All 151 PP 0.1 6 Alb 200 PGG 0.1 ISO All 455 PP o.i 41 A20 lOb PCG 0.1 15 A21 331 PP 0.1 34 A22 SO PGG 0.1 12 A23 166 PP OJ Il - A24 1601 L 0.3 453 A25 15 L 03 23 A26 12 L 0.3 4 A21 43 L 0.3 13 A28 12 L 03 4 A21 I L 03 3 A30 III L 03 1 60 ASI 23 L 0.3 1 A32 IS PGG 0.1 55 A33 14 L 03 2S A34 141 pc.c. 0.1 661 A35 321 L 0.3 11 ASS 404 L 0.3 121 A31 211 L 03 66 ASS 10 L 03 3 A31 402 03 121 A40 2S PGG 0.1 25 A41 66 pc.c. 0.1 51 A42 43 L 03 13 PROPOSED MIN TREATMENT = 8,451 = 254 * 0.03 SF V4EI6HTEC) AREA TOTAL AREA 5,451 = 5,451 rcf No. 71651 No. 12/31/17 BMP G: PERVIOUS &UTTER SOIL DMA DMA - DMA RF * TYPE NAME AREA PPST RF AREA1 B Cl 3815 AG 0.1 3458 -C2 1152 PCC 0.1 1151 CS 24 L 03 1 C4 24 L 0.3 1 CS 24 L 03 1 Gb 24 L 03 1 Cl 24 L 0.3 1 TOTAL 5,250 PROPOSED 1"EI61-ITEt7 AREA = 5,250 SF MIN TREATMENT AREA = 5,280 * 0.03 =151 SF civ OF cM.3 IErnE ; ff 7-m I 4 UJI PROPOSED k1EI&HThP AREA = 5,424 SF MIN TREATMENT AREA = 5,424 * 0.03 = 253 SF 6" THICK - PtRJ(S-\ ,- 6" NEE-30" HIGH FW C'cW'ETE \ / CLM FLU9I WITH - / ADJACENT PAVEfiENT - 18" / #4 9 16" O.C. VERT. 6 / (2) 14 CONT. ø?IZ. / 4" AC PAW)FJIT OVER 6w AB 31 ccw * - - - 1 #416"OC t/ERT .. r1 (3)#4 CONT. M?IZ. V H-H / NFE OR PVC GEaDER4AE wnii - THICICI'ESS CFAT LUST 3O NIL. 2B DEEP 3/4-3/16 ILRU OtLY TO BE USED ON TfE ON hf BOTTOW li 4V(O1IRIUWHJ1JUVVIJ - NOT TO SCALE DEEP-ROOTED CVOWHT OVERFLOW RISER TOLERANT PLANTS FOR IN comtI @V 1 ------------ .- ....&. o CD I- z cc 0 * 0 N '-I 0 w LU _I I-- < o En PLAN VIEW-DMA, BMP, LID EXHIBIT SCALE: V'=iO' if BIORETENTICW 'ENG11\EERED SOIL" LAYER SHALL BE M1NThU4 18" DEEP 'SAWY LOAM" SOIL MIX WITH MJ ME THAN 5% CLAY CONTENT. THE MIX 944LL CONTAIN 50-60% SAW, 20-30% CCWOST OR HAROWOCPD ?'UJN AW 20-30% TOPSOIL, FREE OF STOtES STUMPS ROOTS, OR SIMILAR O&ECTS AND ALSO FREE OF NOXIOUS WEEDS. N( 3/4" C7?L8ED ROCK LAYER SHALL BE A MIND" OF 6" BUT MAY BE DEEPENED TO INCREASE THE Il\FILTRATION AND STORAGE ABILITY OF THE DETAIL NNI( PER GE07ECII4IC4L REPORT, WALLS OF BASIN ALONG STRUCTURE SIDE SHALL BE LI!€O WITH AN 1WEflAEABLE t€?'fl4AE TO LIMIT FEAR SLWAE I/FILTRATION. GRAPHIC SCALE -n 0 10 20 30 BIORETENTION LANDSCAPE BMP - NTS SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS "C" CALCUL4T!ONS C= (ZIMPERVIOUS x 0.87) + ((1-ZIMPERVIOUS)xo .41) SUB-AREA 'Al' C=(0.87x0.87) + (0.13x0.41) C=0.81 SUB-AREA A2' C=(0,79x0.87) + (0.21x0.41) C=0.77 SUB-AREA 'BI' C=(0.64x0.87) + (0.36x0.41) C=0.70 SUB-AREA 82' C= (0 .35x0 .8 7) + (0 .65x0.41) C=0.57 SCALE: 111=20' J - M556.SF0.10 AC BASIN A = 6,756 SF = 0 15 AC A2=2196 SF=0.05 AC OUTLET 12 r—v' / C=O.77 L_ In -1iQft =3g - 0100= 0.82 CIS -- I - 17. L1OO ' I -L=70'. -: H -NODET-1 0- 39.9 HYDROLOGIC NODE MAP ROOSEVELT STREET PRE-DEVELOPMENT MAP BASIN BOUNDARY OUTLET 22—\ EL-36.6 \ / \ . - .\ • -*. SQB-AREA BOUNDARY - 0100=1.89 C.B x - \ L - _-------- , FLOP/LINE -- - IMPERVIOUS AREA E]16,376 SF= (10,608 SF QNSITE)+ (5,768 SF OFFSITE) HYDROLOGIC NODE MAP ROOSEVELT STREET POST-DEVELOPMENT MAP TMC11 CALCULATIONS C= (ZIMPERVIOUS x 0.87) + ((1-%IMPERVI0US)xo .41) SUB-AREA 'Al' C=(0.48x0.87) + (0.52x0.41) C=0.63 SUB-AREA A2 C=(0.62x0.87) + (0.38x0.41) C=0.70 WE 1.1 1=39.0 AI=1,726 SF=0.04 AC C=0.63 SCALE: 1"=20' LEGEND ASIN BOUNDARY L2-AFEA BOUNDARY - LOM..INE IMPERVIOUS AREA 21,566 SF (15.739 SF ONSITE)+ (5.827 SF I I Attachment 1 c L N/A I I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Attachment id I Form 1-8 hereafter provided by project Geotechnical Engineer, Geotek Inc. Refer to project Geotechnical report for further information. I I I I I [1 I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Appendix I: Forms and Checklists __ 1kflj Part I - 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 Yes No Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response 1 to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Pursuant to the letter report dated February 27, 2016 prepared by Geotek, Inc. which summarized the results of their infiltration analysis for the project, a percolation test was performed which showed an infiltration rate of 1.7 in/hr. Refer to the letter report for more details. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, 2 groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: The site is underlain by paralic deposits (GeoTek, 2014) which is generally dense granular material and are not subject to the following: Hydro collapse and calcareous soils; Expansive soils; Frost heave (due to climate); Consolidation; and Liquefaction. There are no nearby slopes to consider for stability issues. The groundwater depth in the downtown Carlsbad area can vary although depths on the order of 30 feet are typical. Groundwater mounding could potentially occur for brief periods however this would be a localize issue an and quickly dissipate due to the generally high permeablility of the paralic deposits. The water potential could enter Utility trench backfills however it should quickly disapate. No long term concerns are anticipated. Locally deepened foundations are appropriate based on proximity of foundatiojns and basin. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. '-3 February 2016 I Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteri Screening Question Yes No a Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: The rapid infiltration rate is based on the sandy nature of the soils encounter these sandy zones are typical within the paralic deposits although they are neither laterally nor vertically continuous due to the lensing and layering. Much cleansing action of these basins takes place in the man made bio-filtration materials so that the underlying paralic deposits provide secondary cleansing . The water potentially could enter Utility trench backfills however it would be expected to dissapate rapidly. No long term concerns are anticipated. Based on reveiw of records through the GeoTracker system there does not appear to be any active remediation either up or down gradient that need be considered. There is no indication of seasonal groundwater within 20 feet of the ground surface. No nearby water well records are indicated on the DWR Water Data Library Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: There are no nearby stream or surface waters in close proximity to the site. The Pacific Ocean is the nearest surface water is roughly 2000 feet to southwest. Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. If all answers to rows I - 4 are "Yes" a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. Part 1 The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration Result If any answer from row 1-4 is "No", infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a "full infiltration" design. Proceed to Part 2 *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. El I El 1-4 February 2016 I Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Part 2 - Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any 5 appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening El R Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope 6 stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) El F that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. '-5 February 2016 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists Criteria Screening Question Yes No Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability, and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream 8 water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be El F based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible. Part The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration. Result* If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration. I *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MF.P in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. 1-6 February 2016 Attachment le El Beachwalk at Roosevelt 2110 Roosevelt DCV Calculations 1 85t!1 percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.58 inches 2 Area tributary to BMP-A A= 0.32 acres 3 Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) C = 0.60 unitless 4 Street trees volume reduction TCV 0 cubic-feet 5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= 0 cubic-feet 6 Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) - TCV - RCV DCN7= 404 cubic-feet 1 85 percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.58 inches 2 Area tributary to BMP-B A= 0.34 acres 3 Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1. 1 and B.2.1) C= 0.58 unitless 4 Street trees volume reduction TCV= 0 cubic-feet 5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= 0 cubic-feet 6 Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) - TCV - RCV DCV= 415 cubic-feet 2110 Roosevelt 1 85" percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= 0.58 inches 2 Area tributary td BMP-B A= 0.14 acres 3 Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) C= 0.89 unitless 4 Street trees volume reduction TC\T 0 cubic-feet 5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCVZ 0 cubic-feet 6 Calculate DCV = (3630 x C x d x A) - TCV - RCV DCV= 262 cubic-feet I 2110 Roosevelt I Infiltration BMP Sizing I BMP-A ftgb aft- Thi31J OD&OEW Dim I DCV DCV= 404 cubic-feet 2 Estimated design infiltration rate (per Geotek perc testing) IK 0.5 in/hr 3 AvailableBMPsurfacearea A13\1 278 sq-ft 4 Average effective depth in the BMP footprint (DCV/ABNII') Davg 1.45 feet 5 1 Drawdown time, T(Davg T= 34.8 hours 6 Provide alternative calculation of drawdown time, if needed. I DCV DCV= 415 cubic-feet 2 Estimated design infiltration rate (per Geotek perc test) IK 0.5 in/hr 3 AvailableBMPsurfacearea ABMP= 311 sq-ft 4 Average effective depth in the BMP footprint (DCV/Aiuip) Davg 1.33 feet 5 Drawdown time, T(Davg *I2/Ii.) T= 31.9 hours 6 Provide alternative calculation of drawdown time, if needed. 2110 Roosevelt BMP-C I DCV DCV= 262 cubic-feet 2 Estimated design infiltration rate (per Geotek perc test) IKicsig 0.5 in/hr 3 AvailableBMPsurfacearea ABNIP= 283 sq-ft 4 Average effective depth in the BMP footprint (DCV/Aiuip) Da g 0.93 feet 5 Drawdown time, T(Dvg *12/I i ) T= 22.3 hours 6 Provide alternative calculation of drawdown time, if needed. I [H GeoTek, Inc. 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A Vista, CA 92081-8505 (760) 599M509 Off, (760) 5990593 F www.geotekusa.com February 27, 2016 Project No. 3447-SD3 Vesta Pacific Development I 1818 Second Avenue San Diego, California 92011 I Attention: Mr. Geoff McComic Subject: Infiltration Evaluation Beachwalk at Roosevelt 2685, 2687 and 2715 Roosevelt Street Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. McComic: As requested and authorized, GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) has performed an infiltration evaluation at the subject property. The intent of this study is to estimate the infiltration rate in the proposed infiltration area for the project site as indicated to us by Pasco, Laret Suitor and Associates. This report presents the results of the testing completed by GeoTek, and provides this recommendations from a geotechnical standpoint. The subject project is located at 2685, 2687 and 2715 Roosevelt Street in Carlsbad, California. The subject property is occupied by several old bungalow style residential structures. Two (2) excavations were dug by hand to a depth of about 3.5 and four (4) feet foot below existing grade in the area of the proposed storm water basins along Roosevelt Street, as provided to GeoTek. Percolation tests were performed in general accordance with San Diego County DEH procedures. A 6 inch diameter test hole was manually drilled and cleaned using an auger, the side walls were free from smeared soils, approximately 4 inches of fine gravel was placed in the hole, A 3 inch perforated pipe was set in the hole and fine gravel placed around the outside of the pipe. Water was then poured into the pipe to approximately 12 inches above the gravel. Water fell to below the top of the gravel. We continued to pour additional water in the gravel and a total of approximately 200 were used in P1 without ever maintaining a head. Approximately 35 gallons of water were used in P2. Water drained from holes completely. Testing was performed the following day. VESTA PACIFIC Project No. 3447-SD3 Infiltration Evaluation February 27, 2016 Beachwalk at Madison. Carlsbad Page 2 Testing (see attached) indicated a stabilized infiltration rate of approximately 3.0 gallons/hr/sf in P2. We were unable to determine an accurate rate in P1, data suggests a rate exceeding 5.0 gallons/hr/sf. It should be realized that rates should be expected to vary and may do so significantly. Over the lifetime of the storm water disposal area, the infiltration rate may be affected by silt build up and biological activities, as well as local variations in near surface soil conditions. LIMITATIONS The materials observed on the project site appear to be representative of the area; however, soil materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during site construction. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. GeoTek, Inc. assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing or recommendations performed or provided by others. Our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. I Respectfully submitted, GeoTek, Inc. EER I w ot No. 1142rn) Ti:~ ~-y~ alcEG 1142, OF C Principal Geologist Attachment: Test Data Figure I - Infiltration Test Location Map I Distribution: (I) Addressee via email (PDF file) I I I I I I I I I L I I C EOT E K GEOTEK, INC. PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET TEST HOLE NO. P 1 DEPTH OF TEST HOLE: 4 ft TEST HOLE SIZE 6 inch SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Light red Brown, si moist, clean SAND (SW PRESOAK PERIOD TIME INTERVAL AMOUNT OF WATER USED START 10:50 AM 2/19/16 200 Gallons STOP 9:15 AM 2/20/16 (no water left in test hole) Unable to fill hole TEST PERIOD Time Time Interval (mm) Initial Water Level (inches) Final Water Level (inches) Water Level (inches) Percolation Rate (mm/inch) Calculated Infiltration (gal/hr/sf) 9:20 AM Attempted to fill test hole unable to obtained a 10 inch head 10:00 AM TECHNICIAN: WD/TM DATE: 2/20/2016 TEST HOLE NO. P 2 DEPTH OF TEST HOLE: 4 TEST HOLE SIZE: 6 inch SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Red Brown, Slightly Clayey Sand, Moist (SC) PRESOAK PERIOD TIME INTERVAL AMOUNT OF WATER USED START 11:30 AM 2/19/16 35 Gallons STOP 10:15 AM 2/20/16 (no water left in test hole) TEST PERIOD Initial Water Final Water Water Percolation Calculated Time Time Interval (mm) Level Rate Infiltration Level (inches) Level (inches) (inches) (mm/inch) (gal/hr/sf) 10:20 AM 10 10.0 1.9 10:30 AM 8.1 1.2 3.0 10:32 AM 10 10.0 1.8 10:42 AM 8.2 1.2 3.1 10:45 AM 10 10.0 1.8 10:55 AM 8.2 1.2 3.1 10:58 AM 10 10.0 1.8 8.2 1.2 3.1 11:08 AM I TECHNICIAN: WDITM DATE: 2/20/2016 I Roosevelt I I F1 I I I I I I I I I I -.--...' • . __ ,,-- :- . r L . !... ir II tB % _1i I•' - 1 1G '1 ..:l 4,1 - £ 9 - M b b-NI :.4 m l - . rrrLrnnrnt. rLrslrrntrrr .- i: ti _________ .1 .;11: •1-, L- -.:--L_- lB - --- -s- _. fll .___. 9A A:q . .. . -. -. - L -. - z I - •i• ,-, •'- -' - I • -1-- 1 Not to • . I p.. Scale Geotechnical Legend \ I Percolation Test Location k P-2 All locations approximate - Beachwalk on Roosevelt Percolation Test PN:3447-SD3 Feb 2016 Location Map Figure 1 Appendix I: Forms and Checklists X1YiY iir __ __ Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 2 0.5 Predominant soil texture 0.25 2 0.5 Site soil variability 0.25 1 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = Sum of p 1.5 B Design Level of pretreatment! expected sediment loads 0.5 3 1.5 Redundancy/resiliency 0.25 1 0.25 Compaction during construction 0.25 2 0.5 Design Safety Factor, SB = Sum of p 2.25 Combined Safety Factor, Stotai= SAX SB 3.375 Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, Kobserved (corrected for test-specific bias) 1.7 Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, Kdesign = Kobserved / Stotai 0.50 Supporting Data Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms: A percolation test was performed in general accordance with San Diego County DEH procedures. Refer to the test summary report prepared by Geoteck dated February 27, 2016. I I ATTACHMENT 2 BACKUP FOR PDP HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES I [This is the cover sheet for Attachment 2.1 Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet: Attachment Contents Checklist Sequence Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management : Included Exhibit (Required) See Hydromodification Management Exhibit Checklist on the back of this Attachment cover sheet. Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse [i Exhibit showing project drainage Sediment Yield Areas (WMAA boundaries marked on WMAA Exhibit is required, additional Critical Coarse Sediment Yield analyses are optional) Area Map (Required) See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Optional analyses for Critical Manual. Coarse Sediment Yield Area Determination 1 6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units Onsite L 6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment Li 6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of I Not performed Receiving Channels (Optional) U Included See Section 6.3.4 of the BMP Design Manual. Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design and LI Included Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations (Required) See Chapter 6 and Appendix G of the BMP Design Manual Beachwalk at Roosevelt I Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the Hydromodification Management Exhibit: The Hydromodification Management Exhibit must identify: I El Underlying hydrologic soil group El Approximate depth to groundwater Ii Existing natural hydrologic features (watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) I E Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected (if present) E Existing topography Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite I E Proposed grading E Proposed impervious features Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness I E Point(s) of Compliance (POC) for Hydromodification Management Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions) Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, and I size/detail) I Beachwalk at Roosevelt Attachments 2a, b, c & d N/A I Beachwalk at Roosevelt U 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: E 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) E How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance E 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.) I Recommended equipment to perform maintenance I When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management L Beachwalk at Roosevelt Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions H I I I Inspection and Maintenance Activities for Treatment Control BMPs (TC-BMPs) The structural treatment control BMPs for the proposed project consists of bioretention basins and permeable payers. The discussions below provide inspection frequency, maintenance indicators and maintenance activities for the proposed structural BMPs. The proposed bioretention basins and permeable paver areas should be inspected and maintained to ensure proper functionality over time. The following tables provide recommendations for inspection and maintenance for the bioretention basins and permeable payers in order to ensure their lasting effectiveness. Bioretention Basins During inspection, the inspector shall check for the maintenance indicators given below and take the appropriate maintenance action: Accumulation of sediment, litter, or Remove and properly dispose of accumulated materials, without debris damage to the vegetation. Poor vegetation establishment Re-seed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation per original plans. Overgrown vegetation Mow or trim as appropriate, but not less than the design height of the vegetation per original plans when applicable Erosion due to concentrated irrigation Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas and adjust the irrigation flow system. Erosion due to concentrated storm Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas, and make appropriate water runoff flow corrective measures such as adding erosion control blankets, adding stone at flow entry points, or minor re-grading to restore proper drainage according to the original plan. If the issue is not corrected by restoring the BMP to the original plan and grade, the City Engineer shall be contacted prior to any additional repairs or reconstruction. Standing water in or bioretention basin Make appropriate corrective measures such as adjusting irrigation for longer than 96 hours following a system, removing obstructions of debris or invasive vegetation, storm event" clearing underdrains (where applicable), or repairing/replacing clogged or compacted soils. Obstructed inlet or outlet structure Clear obstructions. Damage to structural components Repair or replace as applicable. such as weirs, inlet or outlet structures *These BMPs typically include a surface ponding layer as part of their function which may take 96 hours to drain following a storm event. 1, I I L I H I I Li I Permeable Pavement During inspection, the inspector shall check for the maintenance indicators given below and take I the appropriate maintenance action: 1j± J*iis.nr1htflbii(Ø) Y1? ikn3 fti11ftTft'm IWrnirnr Aiithrn Accumulation of sediment, litter, or debris in infiltration basin, pre- treatment device, or on permeable Remove and properly dispose accumulated materials. pavement surface This condition requires investigation of why infiltration is not Standing water in subsurface occurring . If feasible, corrective action must be taken to restore infiltration gallery for longer than 96 infiltration (e.g. flush fine sediment or remove and replace clogged . hours following a storm event soils). BMP may require retrofit if infiltration cannot be restored. If retrofit is necessary, municipal staff must be contacted prior to any repairs or reconstruction. Standing water in permeable paving Flush fine sediment from paving and subsurface gravel. Provide area routine vacuuming of permeable paving areas to prevent clogging. Damage to permeable paving surface Repair or replace damaged surface as appropriate. Note: When inspection or maintenance indicates sediment is accumulating in an infiltration BMP, the DMA draining to the infiltration BMP should be examined to determine the source of the sediment, and corrective measures should be made as applicable to minimize the sediment supply. Inspection and Maintenance Frequency I The Table below lists the TC-BMPs to be inspected and maintained and the minimum frequency of inspection and maintenance activities. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Summary Table of Inspection and Maintenance Frequency BMP Inspection Frequency Maintenance Frequency Access to BMPS Inspection Features Maintenance Thresholds Recommended equipment to perform maintenance Routine maintenance to Basins located along Outlet pipes, area N/A - not Any typical remove accumulated materials Roosevelt Street drains, channel drains subject to equipment used in At a minimum: at the inlets and outlets: frontage can be and overflow inlets siltation or heavy landscape Bioretention annually, and after annually, on or before accessed by private are available for any trash maintenance (i.e. Basins major storm September 30th. As-needed driveways or inspection needs. shovel, etc.) events maintenance based on walkways or planted maintenance indicators area along ROW Routine maintenance to Payers are located in Gaps between payers N/A - not Vaccuum clean remove accumulated materials private driveways and provide material subject to surface using At a minimum: at the inlets, outlets and gaps are accessible accumulation to be siltation or heavy commercially Permeable annually, and after in payers: annually, on or anywhere they are visually inspected and trash available sweeping Pavement major storm before September 30,11. As- located on site, removed. machines events needed maintenance based on maintenance indicators The frequencies given in the Summary Table of Inspection and Maintenance Frequency are minimum recommended frequencies for inspection and maintenance activities for the project. Typically, the frequency of maintenance required for structural BMPs is site and drainage area specific. If it is determined during the regularly scheduled inspection and/or routine maintenance that a structural BMP requires more frequent maintenance (eg, to remove accumulated trash) it may be necessary to increase the frequency of inspection and/or routine maintenance. Recordkeeping Requirements The parry responsible to ensure implementation and funding of maintenance of structural BMPs shall maintain records documenting the inspection and maintenance activities. The records must be kept a minimum of 5 years and shall be made available to the City of Carlsbad for inspection upon request at any time. I I Li I I I I I I ATTACHMENT 4 City standard Single Sheet BMP (SSBMP) Exhibit [Use the City's standard Single Sheet BMP Plan.] Beachwalk at Roosevelt BMP NOTES: THESE BPS ARE MA!L1A TORY TO BE INSTALLED PER MAMFACTUPER S RECOF44EN)ATIONS OR THESE PLANS. NO CHANGES TO T1-E PROPOSED BMPS ON THIS SHEET WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER. NO SUBSTITUTIONS TO THE MATERIAL OR TYPES OR PLANTING TYPES WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM ThE CITY ENGINEER. NO OCCUPANCY WILL BE GRANTED UNTIL ThE CITY INSPECTION STAFF HAS INSPECTED THIS PROJECT FOR APPROPRIATE B' CONSTRUCTION ANJ INSTALLATION. REFER TO MA IN TENA MI AGREEI€NT DOCLh'ENT. - 6. SEE PROJECT SWA' FOR ADDITIONAL ThFOPJ4ATION. -- ROOSEVELT STREET 7r1Jr 7-7 ::: .; II 53 U 55 57 62 65 BMP TABLE BMP ID # BMP TYPE SYMBOL CASQA NO. QUANTITY DRAWING NO. SHEET NO.(S) INSPECTION MAINTENANCE TREATMENT CONTROL PERVIOUS PAVEMENT TC-10 5.616 SF. 490-6A 2 3 SEMI-AtWALL Y AtWALL V PERVIO IS GUTTER - - TC-10 283 SF 490-6 2 SEMI-ANtJALLY A!,NJALLY HYDROMODIFICATION & TREATMENT CONTROL ©-@ BIORAENTION TC-32 589 SF. 490-6A 2, 3 QUARTERLY SEMI-At'NJALLY HYDROMODIFICATION_____ LOW IMPACT DESIGN (LID.) _® ROOF T4IN/TO SD-lI 52 EA. 490-6A 2, 3 AMIUALLY AMVJALLY LANDSCAPI SOURCE CONTROL STENCILS SO-13 A!J U . •• J 37 JLJ N4~4 A t GRAPHIC SCALE 1=10 No. 71651 \Exp. 12/31/1917 0 10 20 30 cm "AS BUILT" RCE_______ EXP-_________ DATE REVIEWED BY: INSPECTOR DATE SHEET CITY OF CARLSBAD SHEETS 5 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7 GRADING PLANS FOR: BEACHWALK AT ROOSEVELT GR2017-0068 GRADING PLAN APPROVED: JASON S. GELDERT CITY ENGINEER RCE 63912 EXPIRES 9/30/18 DATE DWN . TR G, PROJECT No. DRAWING NO. RVWD ______ CT 14-07 490-6A DATE INITIAL REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL ENGINEER OF WORK OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL 1/17/Q15 PE 2110