Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBook 15 Page 726 WQMP Warehouse at Creekside Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan For: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 42081 Third St. Temecula Ca DEVELOPMENT NO. PA 08-0115, LOTS 17-22, BLOCK 29 OF MB15/726 DESIGN REVIEW NO. LDOS-063GR Prepared for: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 Sth Street Temecula, CA 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner Prepared by: HECTOR CORREA, PRINCIPAL HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 28465 Old Town Front Street, Suite 315 Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: 951.506.4869 WQMP Preparation/Revision Date:October 2, 2008 Tr WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) INITIAL APPLICABILITY CHECKLIST Applicant Name: BILL (D A LT b N a15 � TW a 1999 h'/ Planning Application Number: PA O 8 — O 115 Project Name: WAREN0l1SE AT CREE_KSIDE Does the proposed project incorporate any of the following categories? Yes No (All questions must be answered) Modifications to Existing Developments—This category includes projects that create, add, or replace 5,000 sq. ft. or more of impervious surface on an already developed site. This category includes: (a) Expansion of a building footprint,or addition or replacement of a structure; (b)Increase in the gross floor area,or major exterior construction or remodeling; 1 (c)Replacement of impervious surfaces that are not part of routine maintenance activities; X (d)Land disturbing activities related to a structure or impervious surface. Note: If modifications create less than 50% of the impervious surface of a previously existing development, and the existing development was not originally subject to WQMP requirements, a WQMP shall be required only to the addition, and not to the entire development. 2 Residential Development - This category includes subdivisions of single-family homes, multi-family homes,condominiums,and apartments consisting of 10 or more dwelling units. X 3 Non-Residential Development - This category includes projects where the land area for development is greater v than 100,000 sq. ft. Automotive Maintenance and Repair Shops - This category includes facilities engaged in general maintenance 4 and mechanical repairs; body and upholstery repair; painting; transmission and exhaust repair; tire servicing; glass repair. Restaurants-This category includes all eating and drinking establishments where the land area for development 5a is greater than 5,000 sq. ft. X Restaurants where the land area for development is less than 5,000 sq. ft. are only required to follow the site 5b design and source control requirements of the WQMP. Hillside Development—This category includes any developments that create 5,000 sq. ft. of impervious surface, 6 are located in an area with known erosive soil conditions, and where the project will require grading natural slopes X of 25%(4:1)or steeper. Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) — This category includes all development located within or directly adjacent to or discharging directly to an ESA which either creates 2,500 sq. ft. of impervious surface or increases the area of imperviousness by 10%or more of its naturally occurring condition. 7 Note: "Directly adjacent" means within 200 feet of the ESA. "Discharging directly to" means outflow from a drainage conveyance system that is composed entirely of flows from the subject development or modification, and not commingled with flows from adjacent lands. Parking Lots—This category includes projects where the land area for development creates 5,000 sq. ft. or more S for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles. This category includes parking areas associated with any of the developments outlined above. Routine maintenance, including removal and replacement,is exempt. Streets, Roads, Highways & Freeways — This category includes projects that create 5,000 sq. ft. or more of JX 9 impervious surface for transportation of motor vehicles. Routine maintenance, including removal andreplacement, is exem t. 10 Retail Gasoline Outlets—This category applies if either of the following criteria is met: (a) 5,000 sq. ft. or more, or(b)a projected `Average Daily Traffic' count of 100 or more vehicles per day. If you answered "YES" to any of the questions above, a project-specific Water Quality Management Plan must be prepared and submitted. Pane I of I RPv Al (07/101R1 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Public Works Department NPDES Program �i_A 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA. The purpose of this checklist is to provide a format for uniform, comprehensive, and well-documented reviews of project-specific Water Quality Management Plans (WQMPs) submitted by project owners. The completed checklist should accompany the WQMP and submitted to the City of Temecula. SUMMARY OF WOMP REQUIREMENTS (PLEASE LIST THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION) Section I. Watershed and Sub-Watershed: Santa Margarita River and MURRIETA CREEK Section II. Land-Use Category(from Initial Checklist): OLD TOWN SP-5 Section III. Pollutants(expected and potential): SEDIMENTITURBIDITY,NUTRIENTS,ORGANIC COMPOUNDS TRASH& DEBRIS, OXYGEN DEMANDING SUBSTANCES,PATHOGENS (BACTERIA&VIRUSES), OILS&GREASE,PESTICIDES METALS Section IV. Exemption Category(A, B, C,or Not Exempt): CONDITON C Section V. Treatment BMP Category(ies): PRECAST 48 INCH MANHOLE BY CONTECH STORMFILTER Section VI. Party(ies) responsible for BMP maintenance: PROPERTY OWNER Section VIL Funding source(s)for BMP maintenance: PROPERTY OWNER NOTES: (a) The WQMP will NOT be accepted unless all of the items requested above and throughout this checklist are completed. (b) Section VI must be accompanied by notarized proof of the entity(ies)assuming direct responsibility or oversight for the long-term maintenance of the BMPs. (c) Section VII must be accompanied by notarized proof demonstrating the funding mechanism(s) proposed(i.e.Assessments,Homeowner Association,Property Management,etc.)for the BMP maintenance. Page 1 of 5 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Public Works Department NPDES Program :._ 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA. Requirement Satisfied? WQMP REQUIREMENT Yes No Not Applicable Title Page Name of project with Tract,Parcel,or other I.D.number 0 0 0 Owner/Developer name,address&telephone number 0 0 0 Consulting/Engineering firm,address&phone number 0 0 0 Pre arer's Registered Professional Engineers' Stamp and Signature 0 0 0 Date W MP was prepared 0 0 0 Owner's Certification Signed certification statement 0 0 0 Table of Contents Complete and includes all figures,Appendices A-H ,and design worksheets 0 0 0 Section I. Project Description in narrative form Project location 0 0 0 Project size to the nearest 1/10 acre 0 0 0 Standard Industrial Classification SIC Code 0 0 0 Description and location of facilities 0 0 0 Activities,locations of activities,materials and products to be used and stored for each 0 0 0 activity and at each facility,delivery areas,and what kinds of wastes will be enem ed Project watershed and sub-watershed 0 0 0 Formation of a Home Owner's Association or Property Owner's Association 0 0 0 Additional permits/approvals required for the project including: • State Department of Fish and Game, 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement; • State Water Resources Control Board,Clean Water Act(CWA)section 401 0 0 0 Water Quality Certification; • US Army Corps of Engineers,CWA section 404 permit; • US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act section 7 biological opinion; • Municipal Conditions of Approval(Appendix A). Section II. Site Characterization in narrative form Land use designation or zoning 0 0 0 Current and proposed property use 0 0 0 Soils report(Appendix E). (Note: A soils report is required if infiltration BMPs are 0 0 0 utilized Phase I Site Assessment or summaries of assessment or remediation (Appendix H 0 0 0 Identification of Receiving waters(including 303(d) listed waters,Designated 0 0 0 beneficial uses,and any RARE beneficial use waters)and their existing im airments Page 2 of 5 F WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Public Works Department � a NPDES Program 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA. �i wav Requirement Satisfied? WQMP REQUIREMENT Yes No Not Applicable Section Ill. Pollutants of Concern(in narrative form) Potential and expected pollutants from the proposed project Q Q O Presence of legacy pesticides,nutrients,or hazardous substances in the site's soils as a O O O result of past uses Section IV.Hydrologic Conditions of Concern in narrative form Conditions A,B,or C exempt the WQMP from this section O' O O If the project is not exempt, evaluation of impacts to downstream erosion or stream habitat discharge flow rates, velocities, durations, and volumes from a 2-year and 10- Q O Q year,24-hour rainfall event is included Section V.Best Management Practices Vl. Site Design BMPs Table 1. Site Design BMPs is complete O' O O Narrative describing the site design BMPs proposed for the project O' Q O Narrative describing the site design BMPs that were not applicable and why they O O O cannot be implemented Narrative describing how each individual BMP proposed for the project will be implemented and maintained, including inspection and maintenance frequency, Q Q 0 inspection criteria,and the responsible entity or party Site Design BMPs shown on the WQMP Site Plan(Appendix B) 0' O O V2. Source Control BMPs _ - Table 2. Source Control BMPs is complete O' O O Narrative describing the source control BMPs proposed for the project Q O O Narrative describing the source control BMPs that were not applicable and why O O O they cannot be implemented Narrative describing how each individual BMP proposed for the project will be implemented and maintained,including inspection and maintenance frequency, Q O 0 inspection criteria,and the responsible entity or party Structural source control BMPs shown on the WQMP Site Plan(Appendix B) Q O O Copies of Educational Materials(Appendix D) Q O O V3. Treatment Control BMP. Table 3.Treatment Control BMPs is complete Q M Q 0 Page 3 of 5 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Public Works Department NPDES Program 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA. I YX9 � j Re uirement Satisfied? WQMP REQUIREMENT Yes No Not Applicable Narrative describing the treatment control BMPs of medium or high effectiveness O O O proposed for the project Narrative describing how each individual treatment control BMP proposed for the project will be implemented and maintained,including locations,sizing criteria, inspection and maintenance frequency, inspection criteria,long-term O&M,and the responsible entity or party Treatment Control BMPs shown on the WQMP Site Plan(Appendix B) O O O Copy of the property/project soils report(Appendix E). (Note: This requirement O O O applies only if infiltration-based Treatment Control BMPs are utilized) Calculations for Treatment Control BMPs(Appendix F) O Q O V4.Equivalent Treatment Control Alternatives Narrative describing equivalent treatment control alternatives O Q 0 Calculations for Equivalent Treatment Control Alternatives(Appendix F) Q O 1 Q V5. Regionally-Based Treatment Control BMPs Narrative describing regionally-based treatment control BMPs O O Q Calculations for Regionally-Based Treatment Control BMPs(Appendix F) Q O Q Section VI.Operation and Maintenance(0&M)Responsibility for Treatment Control BMPs BMPs requiring O&M are identified O O O Description of O&M activities, the O&M process, and the handling and placement of O O O any wastes BMP start-up dates Q O O Schedule of the frequency of O&M for each BMP Q O O Parties responsible for O&M Q O O Notarized proof of the entities responsible for O&M(Appendix G) Q O O Inspection and record-keeping requirements for BMPs including responsible parties. Q O O Description of water quality monitoring,if required Q O O Section VII.Funding Notarized proof of the funding source(s)for the O&M of each Treatment Control BMP O Q 1 O Appendix A (Section 1) Complete copy of the final Municipal Conditions of Approval O Q O Appendix B (Sections I and V) Vicinity Map identifying the project site and surrounding planning areas Q Q 1 O Page 4 of 5 "t+ WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECKLIST Public Works Department NPDES Program 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA. �97i4 Requirement Satisfied? WQMP REQUIREMENT Yes No Not Applicable Site Plan depicting the following project features: - Location and identification of all structural BMPs,including Treatment Control O O 0 BMPs. Landscaped areas. 0 0 0 Paved areas and intended uses. 0 0 0 Number and type of structures and intended uses. (ie: buildings,tenant spaces, O O 0 dwelling units,community facilites such as pools,recreations facilities,tot lots,etc.) Infrastructure(ic: streets,storm drains,etc.)that will revert to public agency 0 0 0 ownership and operation. Location of existing and proposed public and private storm drainage facilities including catch basins and other inlet/outlet structures.(Existing and proposed 0 0 0 drainage facilities should be clearly differentiated.) Receiving Waters locations that the project directly or indirectly discharges into. 0' 0 0 Discharge points where onsite or tributary offsite flows exit the site. 0 0 0 Proposed drainage areas boundaries,including tributary offsite areas,for each 0' 0 0 location where flows exit the site. (Each tributary area should be clearly denoted.) Pre-and post-project topography. 0 0 0 Appendix C (Section IV) Supporting engineering studies,calculations,reports,etc. 0 0 0 Appendix D (Section V) Educational materials proposed in implementing the project-specific WQMP 0 0 0 Appendix E (Sections 11 and V) Summary of Soils Report information if infiltration BMPs are proposed 0 0 0 Appendix F (Section V) Treatment Control BMP sizing calculations and design details 0' 0 0 Appendix G (Sections I and VI) CC&Rs,Covenant and Agreements,or other mechanisms used to ensure the ongoing operation,maintenance,funding,and transfer of the WQMP requirements Appendix H (Section 11) Summary of Environmental Site Assessment, Remediation,and Use Restrictions. 0 0 0 (End of Checklist) Page 5 of 5 a H -" Civil Engineering 28465 Old Town Front Street Suite 315 Temecula, CA 92590 (951) 506-4869 (951) 506-4979 Fax TRANSMITTAL LETTER J.N.: DALTON004 RECEIVED Date: April 21, 2009 APR 21 2009 CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. To: Aldo Licitra Public Works City of Temecula Re: LDo8-o63GR, PA o8-oit5, THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LOT Si -22, BLOCK 29 MBt 726 1 Ea. WQMP Exhibit 1 Ea. Table 3 Remarks: Submitted per our phone conversation, please call me if you have any questions. Hector L. orrea Project Manager Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan For: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 42081 Third St. Temecula Ca DEVELOPMENT NO. PA 08-0115, LOTS 17-22, BLOCK 29 OF MB15/726 DESIGN REVIEW NO. LDOS-063GR Prepared for: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 Sth Street • Temecula, CA 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner Prepared by: HECTOR CORREA, PRINCIPAL HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 28465 Old Town Front Street, Suite 315 Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: 951.506.4869 I WQMP Preparation/Revision Date:October 2, 2008 i I Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION • "I certify under a penalty of law that this document and all attachments and appendices were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. HEC OR L. CORREA Date QpOf ESSIONq��y HECTOR y\ LUCIO CORREA R No. 363C6 CIVIL ENGINEERING • q�OF CAUE � • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC OWNER'S CERTIFICATION • This project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for: The Warehouse at Creekside, LLC by HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING for the project known as The Warehouse at Creekside at 42081 Third Street, Temecula CA. This WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of City of Temecula for Lots 17-22, Block 29 of MB15/726, which includes the requirement for the preparation and implementation of a project-specific WQMP. The undersigned, while owning the property/project described in the preceding paragraph, shall be responsible for the implementation of this WQMP and will ensure that this WQMP is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site. This WQMP will be reviewed with the facility operator, facility supervisors, employees, tenants, maintenance and service contractors, or any other party (or parties) having responsibility for implementing portions of this WQMP. At least one copy of this WQMP will be maintained at the project site or project office in perpetuity. The undersigned is authorized to certify and to approve implementation of this WQMP. The undersigned is aware that implementation of this WQMP is enforceable under City of Temecula Water Quality Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.28.500). If the undersigned transfers its interest in the subject property/project, its successor in interest the undersigned shall notify the successor in interest of its responsibility to implement this WQMP. • "I, the undersigned, certify under penalty of law that the provisions of this WQMP have been reviewed and acgepted and that the WQMP will be transferred to future successors in interest." Owner's Signature Date William R. Dalton Partner. Warehouse at Creekside LLC Owner's Printed Name Owner's Title/Position WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 Sth Street Temecula Ca 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner I I I CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT erco�.erercccr�r,�r.�,�,�t�r.,�e.:sl�t�c'�rkrcococebrcc:e�,ceerer.�,rcrercrcocrcrcr�eres=.��cwr.Greccr��c.�. • State of California Countyof Zvp,�?s(pe I On 5•I0• mug before me, LAURIE LgITyVI�LE)Z, NQ7�rZy �g�aG Data Here Insert Name and Ttlle of the Olficer personally appeared WILLIAAA f2/rLpN T?,q eme(a)of Signers) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personKwhose name(e)-is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/tbey executed the same in his/ber/their authorized capacity(iI and that by his/her/theesignature(sj on the instrument the person(,%Y,-or the entity upon behalf of tAURIE ttRlmEtER which the person(s)-acted, executed the instrument. CommbNa,t 01785712 e Notary PuDRe-CaliforniaI certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws RlvenWe County of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is conn.B Oec17,2D11 true and correct. WITNESS my nd and official se Signature 11: � • Place Notary Seal Abele sign e of NoNa Public OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document r Title or Type of Document:��� 1�( G 1. —T F� C`}n t) Document Date: MAY I-q / 9003 Number of Pages: f Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: NONE Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)`` S�ners Name: lxx11 CAM 1t. DA LTA Signer's Name: -?i Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee Top of thumb here ❑Trustee Top of numb here ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: . C DeOtt%Ave,PC•t.x240%-Ch:�.��/.. 'otaryo(,�4@ Reorder CaCz�P/..�/�Z,62c ©200]National Notary Assoaa0on•9350 De Soto Ave.,R0.Box 2402•Chatsworth,CA 91313-2402 �nvv,.NaLonalNolaryory Item 45907 Reorder Call Toll Free 1 800-6]6.662] Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC • Contents Section Page I PROJECT DESCRIPTION A-1 II SITE CHARACTERIZATION A-5 III POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN A-7 IV HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN A-9 V BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES A-10 VA Site Design BMPs A-10 V.2 Source Control BMPs A-14 V.3 Treatment Control BMPs A_18 V.4 Equivalent Treatment Control Alternatives A-21 V.5 Regionally-Based Treatment Control BMPs A-21 VI OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR TREATMENT CONTROL BMPs A-22 VII FUNDING A-24 APPENDICES • A. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL B. VICINITY MAP,WQMP SITE PLAN,AND RECEIVING WATERS MAP C. SUPPORTING DETAIL RELATED TO HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS OF CONCERN D. EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS E. SOILS REPORT F. TREATMENT CONTROL BMP SIZING CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN DETAILS G. AGREEMENTS — CC&R.S, COVENANT AND AGREEMENTS AND/OR OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ENSURING ONGOING OPERATION,MAINTENANCE,FUNDING AND TRANSFER OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS PROJECT-SPECIFIC WQMP H. PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT — SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND USE RESTRICTIONS • A-i Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC I. Project Description Instructions: The project description shall be completely and accurately described in narrative form. In the field provided on page A-3, describe and with supporting figures (maps or exhibits), where facilities will be located, what activities will be conducted and where, what kinds of materials will be used and/or stored, how and where materials will be delivered, and the types of wastes that will be generated. The following information shall be described and/or addressed in the "Project Description" section of the project-specific WQMP: Project owner and WQMP preparer; Project location; Project size; Standard Industrial Classification(SIC), if applicable; Location of facilities; Activities and location of activities; Materials Storage and Delivery Areas; Wastes generated by project activities. • Project Owner: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 5th Street Temecula Ca 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner WQMP Preparer: Hector Correa,RCE HLC Civil Engineering 28465 Old Town Front Street Suite 315 Temecula, CA 92590 (951) 506-4869 voice (951)506-4979 fax Contact: Hector Correa, Principal Engineer • A-1 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Project Site Address: 42081 Third St.,Temecula, CA 92591 Planning Area/Community Name: Old Town • Development Name: The Warehouse at Creekside APN Number(s): 922-246-012 Thomas Bros. Map: Page 978, Gride H-1, 2006 Project Watershed: Santa Margarita River,( Hydrologic Unit 902) Sub-watershed: Murrieta Creek (HAS 902.32) Project Site Size: 0.51 AC gross and net disturbed area Standard Industrial Classification(SIC)Code: At this time specific tenants are not(mown but anticipated uses are residential, general office, commercial retail and restaurant. Possible SIC Codes are as follows: 5812 Eating Places, 5813 Drinking Places (alcoholic Beverages), 5900 Miscellaneous Retail, 7380: Miscellaneous Business Services Formation of Home Owners'Association (HOA) or Property Owners Association (POA): Y ❑ N RESPONSIBLE PARTY: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 Sth Street Temecula Ca 92590 • (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project AGENCY Permit required State Department of Fish and Game, 1601 Streambed Y ❑ N® Alteration Agreement State Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Act Y ❑ N® (CWA) section 401 Water Quality Certification US Army Corps of Engineers, CWA section 404 permit Y ❑ N® US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act section 7 Y ❑ N® biological opinion Other (please list in the space below as required) SWRCB General Construction Permit Y ❑ N® City of Temecula Y ® N❑ • Riverside County Flood Control Y El NM A-2 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project development proposes 30,519 square foot mixed use building on 0.51 acres net/gross. The project will • replace existing residential buildings with a three story mixed use building that includes ground floor restaurant with interior parking spaces. The second and third floors will include 32 apartment units.The new building foot print will be approximately 20,467 square feet with 495 square feet of hardscape and 1254 square feet of landscape. LOCATION OF NEW FACILITIES The building will cover the entire project site with landscape strip along the south and easterly side of the building. PROPOSED ACTIVITIES AT THESE FACILITIES: The project will have activities associated with commercial retail,residential,restaurant and general office uses. SPECIFIC LOCATION OF ACTIVITIES All activities will be located within the building structure. LOCATION OF MATERL4,LS STORAGE Material storage to be inside building. LOCATION OF LOADING AND UNLOADING AREAS • Commercial deliveries are proposed and will be conducted from City Street. Unloading/Loading docks are not proposed. ACIWTY SPECIFIC WASTES GENERATED: Normal household, commercial retail, general office and restaurant waste will be generated on-site.The project will have one trash enclosure located within the building to service the site. Possible pollutants are sediment, nutrients,organic compounds,Trash, oxygen demanding substances,pathogens, oil, grease,pesticides and metals. Appendix A of this project-specific WQMP includes a complete copy of the final Conditions of Approval. Appendix B of this project-specific WQMP shall include: 1. A Vicinity Map identifying the project site and surrounding planning areas in sufficient detail to allow the project site to be plotted on Co-Permittee base mapping; and 2. A Site Plan for the project. The Site Plan included as part of Appendix B depicts the following project features: Location and identification of all structural BMPs, including Treatment Control BMPs. Landscaped areas. Paved areas and intended uses(i.e., parking, outdoor work area, outdoor material storage area, sidewalks, patios, tennis courts, etc.). Number and type of structures and intended uses(i.e., buildings,tenant spaces,dwelling units, community facilities such as pools, recreation facilities,tot lots, etc.). • Infrastructure(i.e., streets, storm drains, etc.)that will revert to public agency ownership and operation. A-3 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSME, LLC Location of existing and proposed public and private storm drainage facilities(i.e., storm drains, channels, basins, etc.), including catch basins and other inlets/outlet structures. Existing and proposed drainage facilities should be clearly differentiated. • Location(s)of Receiving Waters to which the project directly or indirectly discharges. Location of points where onsite(or tributary offsite)flows exits the property/project site. Proposed drainage areas boundaries, including tributary offsite areas, for each location where flows exits the property/project site. Each tributary area should be clearly denoted. Pre- and post-project topography. Appendix G of this project-specific WQMP shall include copies of CC&Rs, Covenant and Agreements, and/or other mechanisms used to ensure the ongoing operation, maintenance, funding, transfer and implementation of the project-specific WQMP requirements. • • A-4 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC II. Site Characterization • Land Use Designation or Zoning: Community commercial Current Property Use: Private resident Proposed Property Use: Residential, Restaurant, General Office and Commercial Availability of Soils Report: Y ® N ❑ Note:A soils report is required if infiltration BMPs are utilized. Attach report in Appendix E. Phase 1 Site Assessment: Y ❑ N® Note: If prepared, attached remediation summary and use restrictions in Appendix H. Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site Instructions: On the following page, list in order of upstream to downstream, the receiving waters that the project is tributary to. Continue to fill each row with the receiving water's 303(d) listed impairments, designated beneficial uses, and proximity, if any,to a RARE beneficial use. A-5 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC Receiving Waters for Urban Runoff from Site • Receiving Waters 303(d) List Designated Beneficial Uses Proximity to RARE Impairments Beneficial Use Murrieta creek PHOSPHORUSNITROGEN, IRON, MUN, AGR, IND, PROC, GWR Not a rare water boady HU 2.32 MANGANESE REC1, REC2, WARM, WILD SANTA MARGARITA RIVER PHOSPHORUS MUN, AGR, IND, , RARE REC2, WARM, COLD, WILD, Approximately 1h Mile HU2.52 SANTA MARGARITA RIVER PHOSPHORUS MUN, AGR, IND, , RARE REC2, WARM, COLD, WILD, Approximately 1.5 Miles HU2.22 SANTA MARGARITA RIVER PHOSPHORUS MUN, AGR, IND, , RARE REC2, Approximately 8 Miles HU 2.21 WARM, COLD, WILD, SANTA MARGARITA RIVER None MUN, AGR, IND, PROC, REC1, Approximately 15 Miles HU 2.13 REC2, WARM, COLD, WILD, RARE SANTA MARGARITA RIVER None MUN, AGR, IND, , RARE REC2, WARM, COLD, WILD, Approximately 18 Miles HU 2.12 SANTA MARGARITA RIVER None MUN, AGR, IND, PROW,REC2, WARM, COLD, WILD, R, RARE Approximately 23 Miles HU 2.11 SANTA MARGARITA RIVER LAGOON EUTROPHIC REC1, REC2, EST, WILD, RARE, Approximately 26 Miles • HU 2.2.11 MAR, MIGR, SPWN IND, NAV, REC1, REC2, COMM, BIOL, PACIFIC OCEAN None WILD RARE MAR, AQUA, MIGR, SPWN, Approximately 28 Miles SHELL • A-6 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC • III. Pollutants of Concern Potential pollutants associated with Urban Runoff from the proposed project must be identified. Exhibit B of the WQMP provides brief descriptions of typical pollutants associated with Urban Runoff and a table that associates typical potential pollutants with types of development (land use). It should be noted that at the Co- Permittees discretion, the Co-Permittees may also accept updated studies from the California Association of Stormwater Quality Agencies (CASQA), USEPA, SWRCB and/or other commonly accepted agencies/associations acceptable to the Co-Permittee for determination of Pollutants of Concern associated with given land use. Additionally, in identifying Pollutants of Concern, the presence of legacy pesticides, nutrients, or hazardous substances in the site's soils as a result of past uses and their potential for exposure to Urban Runoff must be addressed in project-specific WQMPs. The Co-Permittee may also require specific pollutants commonly associated with urban runoff to be addressed based on known problems in the watershed. The list of potential Urban Runoff pollutants identified for the project must be compared with the pollutants identified as causing an impairment of Receiving Waters, if any. To identify pollutants impairing proximate Receiving Waters, each project proponent preparing a project-specific WQMP shall, at a minimum, do the following: 1. For each of the proposed project discharge points, identify the proximate Receiving Water for each discharge point, using hydrologic unit basin numbers as identified in the most recent version of the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin or the San Diego Region. 2. Identify each proximate identified above that is listed on the most recent list of Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list of impaired water bodies, which can be found at website www.swrcb.ca.gov/tmdl/303d_lists.html. List all pollutants for which the proximate Receiving Waters are impaired. 3. Compare the list of pollutants for which the proximate Receiving Waters are impaired with the potential • pollutants to be generated by the project. Urban Runoff Pollutants: Restaurant and parking lot will be used as the pollutant category for this WQMP, as such the pollutants associated are listed in the following table. • A-7 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Item 41 Addressed in Section II, Receiving Water table. • Item#2 Addressed in Section 11, Receiving Water table. Item #3 Parking Lots will be used as the pollutant category of this WQMP. As such, the pollutant associated with parking lots are listed below. POLLUTANTS POTENTIAL 303(d) EXPECTED POTENTIAL SOURCE LISTING SEDIMENTITURBIDITY ROOF/ LANDSCAPE NUTRIENTS LANDSCAPE X ORGANIC COMPOUNDS LANDSCAPE/ROOF TRASH&DEBRIS CUSTOMER/RESIDENT/EMPLOYEE OXYGEN DEMANDING LANDSCAPE SUBSTANCES PATHOGENS( GARBAG/ROOF BACTERIA&VIRUSES) OILS&GREASE RESTAURANT • PESTICIDES LANDSCAPE METALS ROOF DRAIN X Pollutants of concern: Muff ieta Creek is listed on 2006 Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments as being impaired by Phosphorus,Nitrogen, Iron, and Manganese. As such, these pollutants are the Pollutants of Concern for this Project. Legacy Pollutants: The project site presently consists of one existing residential buildings and no known hazardous substances have been used on the property. • A-8 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC IV. Hydrologic Conditions of Concern • Impacts to the hydrologic regime resulting from the Project may include increased runoff volume and velocity; reduced infiltration; increased flow frequency, duration, and peaks; faster time to reach peak flow; and water quality degradation. Under certain circumstances, changes could also result in the reduction in the amount of available sediment for transport; storm flows could fill this sediment-carrying capacity by eroding the downstream channel. These changes have the potential to permanently impact downstream channels and habitat integrity. A change to the hydrologic regime of a Project's site would be considered a hydrologic condition of concern if the change would have a significant impact on downstream erosion compared to the pre-development condition or have significant impacts on stream habitat, alone or as part of a cumulative impact from development in the watershed. This project-specific WQMP must address the issue of Hydrologic Conditions of Concern unless one of the following conditions are met: Condition A: Runoff from the Project is discharged directly to a publicly-owned,operated and maintained MS4; the discharge is in full compliance with Co-Permittee requirements for connections and discharges to the MS4 (including both quality and quantity requirements);the discharge would not significantly impact stream habitat in proximate Receiving Waters; and the discharge is authorized by the Co-Permittee. Condition B: The project disturbs less than 1 acre. The disturbed area calculation should include all disturbances associated with larger plans of development. Condition C: The project's runoff flow rate, volume,velocity and duration for the post-development condition do not exceed the pre-development condition for the 2-year, 24-hour and 10-year 24-hour rainfall events. This condition can be achieved by minimizing impervious area on a site and incorporating other site-design concepts that mimic pre-development conditions. This condition must be substantiated by hydrologic modeling methods acceptable to the Co-Permittee. • This Project meets the following condition: This project meet conditon B Supporting engineering studies,calculations, and reports are included in Appendix C. 2 year-24 hour 10 year-24 hour 100 year-24 hour Precondition Post- Precondition Post- Precondition Post- condition condition condition Discharge(cfs) .05 0.08 0.14 0.16 0.25 0.27 Velocity(fps) 0.60 1.08 1.89 2.16 3.37 3.64 Volume(cubic feet) 958 1758 2178 3500 4424 5740 otume(Acre) 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.08 010 0.13 Duration (minutes) 720 810 810 810 810 810 A-9 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC V. Best Management Practices • V.) SITE DESIGN BMPS Project proponents shall implement Site Design concepts that achieve each of the following: 1) Minimize Urban Runoff 2) Minimize Impervious Footprint 3) Conserve Natural Areas 4) Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas(DCIAs) The project proponent should identify the specific BMPs implemented to achieve each Site Design concept and provide a brief explanation for those Site Design concepts considered not applicable. Instructions: Infield below,provide narrative describing which site design concepts were incorporated into project plans. If the project proponent implements a Co-Permittee approved alternative or equally-effective Site Design BMP not specifically described below, the Site Design BMP checkbox in Table I should be marked and an additional description indicating the nature of the BMP and how it addresses the Site Design concept should be provided Continue with completion of Table]. Note: The Co-Permittees general plan or other land use regulations/documents may require several measures that are effectively site design BMPs (such as minimization of directly connected impervious areas and/or setbacks from natural stream courses). The Project Proponent should work with Co-Permittee staff to determine if those requirements may be interpreted as site design BMPs for use in this table/narrative. See Section 4.5.1 of the WQMP for additional guidance on Site Design BMPs. • Following Table 1: if a particular Site Design BMP concept is found to be not applicable, please provide a brief explanation as to why the concept cannot be implemented Also include descriptions explaining how each included BMP will be implemented In those areas where Site Design BMPs require ongoing maintenance, the inspection and maintenance frequency, the inspection criteria, and the entity or party responsible for implementation, maintenance, and/or inspection shall be described The location of each Site Design BMP must also be shown on the WQMP Site Plan included in Appendix B. PROPOSED PROJECT BMPS This Project is 0.51 acres, therefore meets Condition B and is exempt from addressing hydrologic Conditions of Concern. I. Walkways will be a minimum width allowed by the City. 2. Project includes "Precast 48-inch Manhole by Contech Stormfilter" to filter all roof drain. • A-10 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Table 1. Site Design BMPs • Design Included Concept Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A Maximize the permeable area (See Section 4.5.1 of the WQMP). Comment: ❑ ❑ Proposed building covers the entire property, Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. Comment: ❑ ❑ Old Town is urban area which is not suitable for landscape buffer and building will covers the entire site. Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by preserving existing native trees and shrubs, and planting additional native or drought tolerant trees and large shrubs. ❑ ❑ Comment: None existing. Minimize Use natural drainage systems. 0 • V Comment: ❑ ❑ Urban None existing. .y N Runoff Where soils conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. Comment: ❑ ❑ Infiltration is not suitable for this project. Construct onsite ponding areas or retention facilities to increase opportunities for infiltration consistent with vector control objectives. Comment: ❑ ❑ Infiltration is not suitable for this project. Other comparable and equally effective site design concepts as approved by the Co-Permittee (Note: Additional narrative required to describe BMP and how it addresses Site Design concept). ❑ ❑ Comment: None proposed. • A-1 1 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Table 1. Site Design BNlPs(Cont.) • Included Design Technique Specific BMP Yes No NIA Concept Maximize the permeable area (See Section 4.5.1 of the WQMP). Comment: ❑ ❑ M Existing building and parking to be replaced with one building covering the entire site. Construct walkways, trails, patios, overflow parking lots, alleys, driveways, low-traffic streets and other low-traffic areas with open-jointed paving materials or permeable surfaces, such as N pervious concrete, porous asphalt, unit pavers, and granular ❑ ❑ M materials. d u Minimize Comment: o Infiltration is not suitable for this project. V Impervious Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to the t: � minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walk able environment for pedestrians are not compromised. El ❑ M O Footprint a Comment: y Public improvements are set by City Public Works Department. Reduce widths of street where off-street parking is available. Comment: ❑ ❑ M Public improvements are set by City Public Works Department. • Minimize the use of impervious surfaces, such as decorative concrete, in the landscape design. El El N Comment: Infiltration is not suitable for this project Other comparable and equally effective site design concepts as approved by the Co-Permittee (Note: Additional narrative required describing BMP and how it addresses Site Design concept). ❑ ❑ M Comment: None Proposed. M Conserve natural areas (See WQMP Section 4.5.1). o. eComment: El El M V Conserve None existing on-site. Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by ✓a Natural preserving existing native trees and shrubs, and planting additional native or drought tolerant trees and large shrubs. El El Areas c Comment: y Proposed building covers the entire property. Use natural drainage systems. Comment: ❑ ❑ M Proposed building covers the entire property. Other comparable and equally effective site design concepts as • approved by the Co-Permittee (Note: Additional narrative El M El describing BMP and how it addresses Site Design concept). A-12 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Table 1. Site Design BMPs(Cont.) Included Descent Technique Specific BMP Yes No N/A • Residential and commercial sites must be designed to contain and infiltrate roof runoff, or direct roof runoff to vegetative swales or buffer areas, where feasible. El ❑ Comment: Proposed building covers the entire property, roof runoff will be treated by Storm(Iter. Where landscaping is proposed, drain impervious sidewalks, walkways, trails, and patios into adjacent landscaping. Comment: ❑ ❑ Roof Drains to discharge into "Precast 48-inch Manhole by Contech Storm Ater". Increase the use of vegetated drainage swales in lieu of underground piping or imperviously lined swales. Comment: ❑ ❑ Proposed building covers the entire property and roof drains will discharge into "Precast 48-inch Manhole by Contech Storm alter". Rural swale system: street sheet flows to vegetated swale or gravel shoulder, curbs at street corners, culverts under driveways and street crossings. ❑ ❑ Comment: Infiltration is not suitable for this project V Minimize Urban curb/swale system: street slopes to curb; periodic swale inlets Di ect/ drain to vegetated swale/boiler. y comment: El El c Infiltration is not suitable for this project. • V connected Dual drainage system: First flush captured in street catch basins and A discharged to adjacent vegetated swale or gravel shoulder, high flows y Impervious connect directly to MS4s. ❑ ❑ Comment: N Areas Infiltration is not suitable for this project co Design driveways with shared access, flared (single lane at street) or (Dc/As) wheel strips (paving only under tires); or, drain into landscaping prior to discharging to the MS4. ❑ ❑ Comment: Not used due to existing access of existing adjacent development Uncovered temporary or guest parking on private residential lots may be paved with a permeable surface, or designed to drain into El Ellandscaping prior to discharging to the MS4. Comment: Proposed parking is covered. Where landscaping is proposed in parking areas, incorporate landscape areas into the drainage design. ❑ ElComment: No landscaping proposed in covered parking area. Overflow parking (parking stalls provided in excess of the Co- Permittee's minimum parking requirements) may be constructed with El ❑ permeable paving. Comment: Overflow parking is not apart of project Other comparable and equally effective design concepts as approved by the Co-Permittee (Note: Additional narrative required describing BMP and how it addresses Site Design concept). ® ❑ ❑ Comment: Roof Drains to discharge into "Precast 48-inch Manhole by • Contech Storm after". A-13 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC V.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS • Instructions:Complete Table 2. Table 2.Source Control BMPs Check One BMP Name Not If not applicable,state Included brief reason Applicable �.. �.. ., 1 w , . ._.., f ... ..w'4 on"Structural7Source dontrohBMP's: Education for Property Owners, Operators,Tenants, Occupants, ® ❑ or Employees Activity Restrictions ® ❑ Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance ❑ Common Area Litter Control ® ❑ Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots ❑ ® Not a part of project Draina a Facility Inspection and Maintenance ® ❑ s stNCtllrahSOUfCe!COntrOIiBMPS,e `il u3,rc§tl .,�eai . (`kr _`� . .�#�rv.�:' "MS4 Stenciling and Si na a z ❑ Landscape and Irrigation System Design ® ElProtect Slopes and Channels El ® Not a part of project Provide Community Car Wash Racks ElNot a part of project Properly Design: El ® Not a part of project Fueling Areas ❑ ❑ Not a part of project Air/Water Supply Area Drainage El ® Not a part of project Trash Storage Areas ® ❑ a Loading Docks ❑ ® Not a part of project • Maintenance Bays ❑ ® Not a part of project Vehicle and Equipment Wash Areas ❑ ® Not a part of project Outdoor Material Storage Areas ❑ ® Not a art of ro'ecl Outdoor Work Areas or ProcessingAreas ❑ ® Not a art of ro'ect Provide Wash Water Controls for Food Preparation Areas ❑ I ® I Not a part of project Instructions: Provide narrative below describing how each included BMP will be implemented, the implementation frequency, inspection and maintenance frequency, inspection criteria, and the entity or party responsible for implementation, maintenance, andlor inspection. The location of each structural BMP must also be shown on the WQMP Site Plan included in Appendix B. • A-14 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC ACTIVITY FREQUENCY RESPONSIBLE PARTY • NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROLS Education Provide at occupancy,within 3 months Property Owner for new hires,and annually for existing employees Activity Restrictions Daily Property Owner Landscape Maintenance Bi-weekly Property Owner Litter Control Daily Property Owner Drainage Facility Inspection Monthly Property Owner and Maintenance STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROLS Stenciling and Signage Bi-annually Property Owner • Irrigation System Same as landscape maintenance Property Owner Maintenance Trash Storage Areas Daily Property Owner PROPOSED NON-STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS Education for Employees& Contractors: The Developer will distribute to employees & Landscape Contractors, a public education program on the use of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, proper disposal of wastes, and other storm water pollution prevention measures. Employees & Landscape Contractors will sign a form acknowledging receipt of the storm water pollution prevention materials, (See Appendix D). An Education log will be kept showing that they have received the information. The log will be kept herein in Appendix D. Training will be provided within 30 days of signing rental agreement with on going training at no less than 90- day intervals. The tenant will be provided with pamphlets provided by the Property Owner. • Activity Restrictions: At a minimum, Rental Agreement will restrict the following activities that may contribute pollutants: A-15 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSME,LLC 1. Prohibiting the blowing, sweeping, or hosing of debris(leaf litter, grass clippings, litter, etc.) into streets, storm drain inlets,or other conveyances. • 2. Require dumpster lids to be closed at all times. 3. Prohibit vehicle washing, maintenance,or repair on the premises. Irrigation System and Landscape Maintenance 1 Pesticides, fertilizers and other chemical products shall be used in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 2 Pesticides, fertilizers and other chemical products shall be stored in closed, labeled containers, under cover and off the ground. 3 Landscaping waste shall be properly disposed by at an approved composting location or permitted landfill. 4 Stockpiles shall be placed away from watercourses, and covered to prevent the release if materials to the Stormwater Conveyance System or Receiving Waters. 5 Where practicable, native vegetation shall be retained or planted to reduce water, fertilizer and pesticide needs. 6 Areas where work is being actively conducted shall be routinely cleaned up using dry methods (e.g., sweeping, raking, etc.). Wet methods (e.g., hosing, etc.) may only be used if adequate precautions have been taken to prevent the discharge of wash water or other materials to the Stormwater Conveyance System or Receiving Waters. • 7 The use of blowers is permitted so long as materials are collected and properly disposed. 8 Measures will be taken to reduce or eliminate landscaping and irrigation runoff. Examples of practices include proper irrigation programming, programming shorter irrigation cycle times, and decreasing frequency after the application of fertilizers and pesticides. 9 Fertilizers and pesticides will not be applied prior to storm events. These products will not be applied during storm events. 10 Maintenance of irrigation systems and landscaping will be consistent with the City of Temecula landscape ordinance, which can be obtained at the City of Temecula planning counter. 11 Irrigation system maintenance will be conducted weekly to detect overspray, broken sprinkler heads,and other system failures. 12 The frequency of irrigation is anticipated to be daily during summer months and bi-daily during the rest of the year. Inspection& Maintenance Frequency will be conducted weekly Property Owner Association will be responsible for implementation, maintenance, inspection and funding. Common Area Litter Control Property Manager will hire grounds keeper to inspect and collect all litter on a daily schedule. • Drainage Facility Inspection and Maintenance A-16 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC All drainage facilities will be inspected monthly and after each major rain storm and will be maintained by the Property Manager. • PROPOSED STRUCTURAL SOURCE CONTROL BMPS Stenciling and Signage Each catch basins will be stenciled with the following prohibitive language; "NO DUMPING,DRAINS TO CREEK". Trash Storage Areas Trash enclosure is located within the building and will be inspected weekly. Washing of food preparation utensils will be prohibited. PROPOSED SOURCE CONTROL BMPS MAINTENANCE The Source Control BMP's will be installed by the project developer prior to occupancy. Long-term Maintenance and Inspection will be the responsibility of the Property Manager. Appendix D includes copies of the educational materials that will be used in implementing this project-specific WQMP. • • A-17 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC V.3 TREATMENT CONTROL BMPs • Instructions: 1. Provide narrative below describing each Treatment Control BMP. Include location, identify the sizing criteria [i.e., Urban Runoff quality designfow(QBMP) or the Urban Runoff quality design volume(VBMP),preliminary design calculations, for sizing BMPs, maintenance procedures, and the frequency of maintenance procedures necessary to sustain BMP effectiveness. The location of each Treatment Control BMP must also be shown on the Site Plan included in Appendix B. 2. Complete Table 3: Treatment Control BMP Selection Matrix Directions for completing Table 3: ♦ For each pollutant of concern enter 'yes"if identified using Exhibit B (Riverside County WQMP- General Categories of Pollutants of Concern per the instructions specified in Section III of this Template), or "no"if not identified for the project. ♦ Check the boxes of selected BMPs that will be implemented for the project to address each pollutant of concern from the project as identified using Exhibit B. Treatment Control BMPs must be selected and installed with respect to identified pollutant characteristics and concentrations that will be discharged fom the site. ♦ For any identified pollutants of concern not listed in the Treatment Control BMP Selection Matrix,provide an explanation(in space below) ofhow they will be addressed by Treatment Control BMPs. 3. In addition to completing Table 3,provide detailed descriptions on the location, implementation, installation, and long-term O&M of planned Treatment Control BMPs. For identified pollutants of concern that are causing an impairment in receiving waters, the project WQMP shall incorporate one or more Treatment Control BMPs of medium or high effectiveness in reducing those pollutants. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to demonstrate, and document in the project WQMP, that all pollutants of concern • will be fully addressed. The Agency may require information beyond the minimum requirements of this WQMP to demonstrate that adequate pollutant treatment is being accomplished Supporting engineering calculations for Qey,, and/or VyMr, and Treatment Control BMP design details are included in Appendix F. Note: Projects that will utilize infiltration-based Treatment Control BMPs (e.g., Infiltration Basins, Infiltration Trenches, Porous Pavement) must include a copy of the property/project soils report as Appendix E to the project-specific WQMP. The selection of a Treatment Control BMP (or BMPs)for the project must specifically consider the effectiveness of the Treatment Control BMP for pollutants identified as causing an impairment of Receiving Waters to which the project will discharge Urban Runoff. BMP This project will include a "Precast 48-inch Manhole by Contech" to removal sediment and associated pollutants location is shown on Exhibit A. • A-18 • i • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Table 3: Treatment Control BMP Selection Matrix Treatment Control BMP Categories(s) Manufactured/ Proprietary Devices Vag.Swale Infiltration Basins Detention & Wet Sand Water Hydrodynamic "Precast 48- Neg. Filter Basins(2) Trenches/Porous Ponds or Filter or Quality Separator inch Pollutant of Concern Strips (3)(10) Wetlands Filtration Inlets Systems Pavement Manhole by Contech Stormfilter" HIM Sediment/Turbidity HIM M HIM HIM HIM L (L for turbidity) M Y® N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ID Nutrients L M HIM HIM UM L L HIM Y❑ NZ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Organic Compounds U U U U HIM L L HIM Y® N❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Trash&Debris L M U U HIM M HIM M Y® N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Oxygen Demanding Substances L M HIM HIM HIM L L U Y ❑ N® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bacteria&Viruses U U HIM U HIM L L M Y® N❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Oils&Grease HIM M U U HIM M LIM HIM Y® N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Pesticides(non-soil bound) U U U U U L L U Y ❑ N ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Metals HIM M H H H L L L Y❑ N® 1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ A-19 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Abbreviations: L: Low removal efficiency H/M:High or medium removal efficiency U: Unknown removal efficiency • Notes: (1) Periodic performance assessment and updating of the guidance provided by this table maybe necessary. (2) Includes grass swales,grass strips,wetland vegetation swales, and bioretention. (3) Includes extended/dry detention basins with grass lining and extended/dry detention basins with impervious lining. Effectiveness based upon minimum 36-48-hour drawdown time. (4) Includes infiltration basins,infiltration trenches,and porous pavements. (5) Includes permanent pool wet ponds and constructed wetlands. (6) Includes sand filters and media filters. (7) Also known as hydrodynamic devices,baffle boxes,swirl concentrators,or cyclone separators. (8) Includes proprietary stormwater treatment devices as listed in the CASQA Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbooks,other stormwater treatment BMPs not specifically listed in this WQMP,or newly developed/emerging stormwater treatment technologies. (9) Project proponents should base BMP designs on the Riverside County Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice Design Handbook. However, project proponents may also wish to reference the California Stormwater BMP Handbook — New Development and Redevelopment (www.cabmnhandbooks.com). The Handbook contains additional information on BMP operation and maintenance. (10) Note: Projects that will utilize infiltration-based Treatment Control BMPs (e.g., Infiltration Basins, Infiltration Trenches, Porous Pavement)must include a copy of the property/project soils report as Appendix E to the project-specific WQMP.The selection of a Treatment Control BMP (or BMPs) for the project must specifically consider the effectiveness of the Treatment Control BMP for pollutants identified as causing an impairment of Receiving Waters to which the project will discharge Urban Runoff. • • A-20 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC VA EQUIVALENT TREATMENT CONTROL ALTERNATIVES • Not Applicable V.5 REGIONALLY-BASED TREATMENT CONTROL BMPS Not Applicable • • A-21 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC VI. Operation and Maintenance Responsibility for Treatment Control BMPs Operation and maintenance(O&M)requirements for all structural Source Control and Treatment Control BMPs shall be identified in the project-specific WQMP.The project-specific WQMP shall address the following: Identification of each BMP that requires O&M. Thorough description of O&M activities,the O&M process, and the handling and placement of any wastes. BMP start-up dates. Schedule of the frequency of O&M for each BMP. Identification of the parties(name, address,and telephone number)responsible for O&M, including a written agreement with the entities responsible for O&M. This agreement can take the form of a Covenant and Agreement recorded by the Project Proponent with the County Recorder, HOA or POA CC&Rs, formation of a maintenance district or assessment district or other instrument sufficient to guarantee perpetual O&M. The preparer of this project-specific WQMP should carefully review Section 4.6 of the WQMP prior to completing this section of the project-specific WQMP. Self-inspections and record-keeping requirements for BMPs(review local specific requirements regarding self- inspections and/or annual reporting), including identification of responsible parties for inspection and record- keeping. Thorough descriptions of water quality monitoring, if required by the Co-Permittee. • Instructions: Identify below all operations and maintenance requirements, as described above, for each structural BMP. Where a public agency is identified as the funding source and responsible party for a Treatment Control BMP, a copy of the written agreement .stating the public agency's acceptance of these responsibilities must be provided in Appendix G. Operation and maintenance (O&M) for all Structural Source Control and Treatment Control BMPs will be will the responsibility of the Property Owner. Treatment Control BMPs: The Property Owner will be responsible for the inspection and record keeping of O&M of this BMP. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE Structural Quantity Capital Annual Start-up O&m Responsible Responsible BMP Cost O&M Dates Frequenc funding funding party Cost y party For long-term For O&M installation "Precast 48-inch Manhole by Prior to Current Current and lEA $6000 $2000 Monthly Property Future Property Contech occupancy S Owner Owner tormfilter" • A-22 Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Parties responsible for O&M The Property Owner will be responsible for the O&M of this BMP. • WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 5th Street Temecula Ca 92590 (9S1) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner Proof of Entities Responsible For O&M Agreement will be in place that will have sufficient language to guarantee perpetual O&M. Inspection and Record Keeping Requirements and Responsible Party The Property Owner will be responsible for the inspection and record keeping of O&M of this BMP. • • A-23 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE,LLC VI I. Funding • A funding source or sources for the O&M of each Treatment Control BMP identified in the project-specific WQMP must be identified. By certifying the project-specific WQMP,the Project applicant is certifying that the funding responsibilities have been addressed and will be transferred to future owners. One example of how to adhere to the requirement to transfer O&M responsibilities is to record the project-specific WQMP against the title to the property. Maintenance funding will be provided by the Property Owner and be will be enforced by implementation of the Rental Agreement. CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 5th Street Temecula Ca 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner • • A-24 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC FUNDING CERTIFICATION • A source of funding is required for all site design, source control, and treatment BMPs. For this project, the owner will fund the installation, and operation and maintenance of all BMPs set forth in the WQMP until the project is transferred to a new owner. Each owner shall record this WQMP with the County of Riverside as an attachment to the title of the property in order to transfer the O &M responsibilities to each new owner. Where the owner requires a lessee or other party to install, and operate and maintain the BMPs, the owner will maintain ultimate funding responsibilities, and will, upon default of the lessee or other party to fulfill these responsibilities shall cause the same to be performed at owner's expense. Nothing in this WQMP shall prevent the owner from pursuing cost recovery from any lessee or other party responsible for the BMPs, or fi•om pursing remedies for the default of responsibilities as provided by the lease contract and law. The owner for The Warehouse at Creekside, Lots 17-22, Block 29 of MB 15/726, located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County will be responsible for the installation, and operation and maintenance of all BMPs until such time that the site is transferred to a new owner. Ovine Signature Date William R.Dalton Partner, Warehouse at Creekside, LLC Owner's Printed Name Owner's or company Official's Title/Position • WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC 41911 5th Street Temecula Ca 92590 (951) 491-7777 (866) 697-3013 fax Contact: Bill Dalton, Managing Partner • A-25 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT • State of California County of On before me, U W&I& �U f rW I E f I fL, n DTA RN �U t3UG • Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer personally appeared W I L(,I Awl !2• -R&L-FO N �— Name(s)of Signeds) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/axe subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/s"Al4ey executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/har/their signaturel* on the LAURIE LUFMELER instrument the person(&), or the entity upon behalf of Comm ftbO ;o 011ftlni which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Nofary PUDIIC -CaH/ornto RlversWe County CM.VM Iee0eolP 1 I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. • Signature)Plaoe Notary Seal Above Slgnalure of NotarO OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document I Title or Type of Document:_0W l!JP . > ('EF--ET F I CAT I t71J Document Date: NAA Y I q , .1003 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: KIoIJE Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: W I L AAM R. PA LT DA Signer's Name: Individual ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner—❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee Top of thumb here ❑Trustee To.of thumb here ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: n Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: • t%c' •atioc�Nolaiy L�vtmn- De SoF"r�'C'( 2402- 0 ,rrg hem #5907 8008766827 ©20W National Notary Assoc anon•93500e Solo Ave RO.Box 2002•Chatsworth CA 01313-2402•omw NalionalNolaryorg Item a500] Reoidec Call Toll Free l-900-0>6-682] Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC Appendix A Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Resolution 08-39 for PA 08-0115 Dated 8/20/08 • • ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I, Bill Dalton, understand that Planning Application No. PA08-0115 has been approved with Conditions of Approval which are set forth in Exhibit A. I have read the Conditions of • Approval contained in PC Resolution No. 08-39 and understand them. Through signing this ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, I agree and commit to the City of Temecula that I will implement and abide by the Conditions of Approval, including any indemnification requirements imposed by those conditions. -7 z'XK SIGNATURE DATE • EXHIBIT A • CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA08-0115 Project Description: A Development Plan for the Warehouse at Creekside, a 30,519 square foot mixed use project (ground floor restaurant/parking plus three stories residential) including 32 (19 low income and 13 moderate income) residential apartment units and a 3,400 square foot restaurant and a Conditional Use Permit required for the residential use Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-046-12 MSHCP Category: Residential 14.0 DU or Greater DIF Category: Residential/Retail TUMF Category: Low-Income Residential/Retail Commercial Approval Date: August 20, 2008 Expiration Date: August 20, 2010 • PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL-1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Sixty-Four Dollars ($64.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption as provided under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15062. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). PL-2. The applicant shall review and sign the Acceptance of Conditions of Approval document that will be provided by the Planning Department staff and return the document with an original signature to the Planning Department. General Requirements PL-3. The applicant and owner ofthe real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval ofthe • City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or • legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof,or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action,or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. PL-4. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL-5. This approval shall be used within two years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. PL-6. The Director of Planning may, upon an application being filed within 30 days prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL-7. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 5, Old Town Specific Plan. PL-8. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. • PL-9. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. PL-10. Landscaping installed forthe project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained,the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. PL-11. The applicant shall provide an example mock-up of the brick veneer and paint a three- foot by three-foot section of the building for Planning Department inspection, prior to commencing application of any veneers or painting of the building. PL-12. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two 8"X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved color and materials board and the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the color and materials board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. PL-13. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment,finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to • substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the • regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. MATERIAL COLOR Building - Brick Higgins Brick Custom Blend Cornice—Concrete Fine Grain DE 6213 paint Belt Cornice—Concrete Pigeon Gray DE 6214 paing Base—Stone veneer pedestal Prairie Stone Buff Ground Face Arcade— Exterior Plaster Tuscany finish Texston Steel Column Light Aspiration Steel Column Base Denali Green Steel Column Capital Biscotti Aluminum Clad Wood Windows/Metal Weathered Green exterior finish Clad Wood Storefront Entry Doors Wrought Iron details Weathered Green Paint and finish PL-14. The applicant shall use old bricks or sandblasted brickto give the appearance of older brick subject to approval by the Director of Planning. PL-15. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on site plan. PL-16. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved the Director of Planning. PL-17. The applicant shall comply with their Statement of Operations dated May 21, 2008, on file with the Planning Department, unless superseded by these Conditions of Approval. • PL-18. This Conditional Use Permit may be revoked pursuant to Section 17.03.080 of the City's Development Code. PL-19. The City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council retain and reserve the right and jurisdiction to review and modify this Conditional Use Permit (including the Conditions of Approval) based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to,the modification of business, a change in scope, emphasis, size of nature of the business, and the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration or change of use. The reservation of right to review any Conditional Use Permit granted or approved or conditionally approved hereunder by the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission and City Council is in addition to, and not in- lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Director, Planning Commission, and City Council to review, revoke or modify any Conditional Use Permit approved or conditionally approved hereunder for any violations of the conditions imposed on such Conditional Use Permit or for the maintenance of any nuisance condition or other code violation thereon. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL-20. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. • PL-21. Double detector check valves shall be either installed underground or internal to the • project site at locations not visible from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning. PL-22. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at anytime during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Director of Planning at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessaryto allow the Cityto consult and/or authorize an independent,fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Director of Planning shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource,the Director of Planning shall notifythe property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Director of Planning." PL-23. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL-24. A Parcel Merger shall be recorded. • PL-25. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot to the Planning Department,which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. PL-26. All downspouts shall be internalized. PL-27. Three copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan,or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL-28. Conceptual landscape plan plant palette should be modified to replace Melaleuca quinquenervia and Thevetia peruviana with species not subject to freeze, as approved by the Director of Planning. PL-29. Plantings along the western property line adjacent to Murrieta Creek should not include invasive, non-native plant species listed in Table 6-2 of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. • PL-30. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall provide a minimum five-foot wide planterto • be installed at the perimeter of all parking areas. Curbs, walkways, etc. are not to infringe on this area. PL-31. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating that"The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL-32. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan), and the locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the Tentative Map. PL-33. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. PL-34. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate that a minimum of two landscape site inspections will be required. One inspection to verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems have head-to-head coverage, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The applicant/ owner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. • PL-35. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include specifications indicating that a minimum of two landscape site inspections will be required. One inspection to verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems have head-to-head coverage, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. PL-36. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement, the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Director of Planning. PL-37. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three-foot clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after-thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL-38. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape (choose or add to as appropriate) to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the Planning Director. • PL-39. Building plans shall indicate that all roof hatches shall be painted"International Orange." • PL-40. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a nine-inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced nine inches apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard nine-inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL-41. An applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance,subject to field verification by the Planning Director or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. If a certificate of use and occupancy is not required for the project, such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted priorto scheduling for the final inspection. PL-42. The applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of the adjacent residences and public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. • PL-43. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. PL-44. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection priorto issuance of occupancy permits. PL-45. Each parking space reserved forthe handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning (951) 696-3000." • PL-46. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a • surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least three square feet in size. PL-47. All site improvements including but not limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL-48. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL-49. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated June 11,2008, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. PL-50. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated June 6, 2008, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT General Conditions/Information B-1. All design components shall complywith applicable provisions of the 2007 edition of the • California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2007 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and the Temecula Municipal Code. B-2. Provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans. B-3. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. B-4. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. B-5. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. B-6. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. B-7. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. • B-8. Commercial and industrial project trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and • any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. B-9. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Ordinance Number 94-21, specifically Section G(1) of Riverside County Ordinance Number 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Mondaythrough Fridayfrom 6:30 a.m.to 6:30 p.m., and Saturdayfrom 7:00 a.m,to 6:30 P.M. No work is permitted on Sundays or Government Holidays. B-10. The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Ordinance 03-01 and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. B-11. Developments with multi-tenant buildings or shell buildings shall provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed. Prior to Submitting for Plan Review B-12. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings. At Plan Review Submittal • B-13. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work for plan review. B-14. Provide a Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2007 edition of the California Building Code. B-15. Provide number and type of restroom fixtures,to be in accordance with the provisions of the 2007 edition of the California Plumbing Code. B-16. Provide precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. B-17. Provide truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) B-18. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction B-19. A pre-construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start ofthe building construction. I COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • General Conditions/Information CS-1. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. CS-2. The applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. CS-3. All landscaping including within the right-of-way, walls and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner. CS-4. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the Temecula Community Services District. CS-5. Recycling opportunities/bins shall be available for both the residential and commercial tenants. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) CS-6. The developer shall provide TCSD verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. CS-7. Prior to the first building permit or installation of additional streetlights, which ever occurs first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application, submit an approved Edison Streetlight Plan and pay the advanced energy fees. • CS-8. The developer shall satisfythe City's parkland dedication (Quimby)requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to .39 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use,the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. F-2. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020, Section R). F-3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. A combination of on-site and off site 6"x 4'x 2-2 '/z" outlets on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more I i i i than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s)frontage to • a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrants in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020, Section R). F-4. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction (CFC Chapter 5, Section 503.4). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-5. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 1410.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. When temporary fire apparatus access roads are approved by the Chief and provided for use until permanent fire access roads are installed,the fire apparatus roads shall be an all weather surface for an 80,000 lb. GVW(CFC Chapter 5,Section 503.2, 503.4 and City Ordinance 15.16.020 Section E). F-6. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5, Section 503.2, 503.4 and City Ordinance 15.16.020 Section E). F-7. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5, Section 503.2.5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020 Section E). • Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-8. The developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met forthe on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 14, Section 1412 and Chapter 5, Section 501.3). F-9. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-10. Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. i Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy isF-11. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) per City Ordinance 15.16.020 Section E. F-12. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers,building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Commercial buildings shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. All suites shall have a minimum of 6- inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. (CFC Chapter 5, Section 505.1 and City Ordinance 15.16.020 Section E). F-13. A"Knox-Box'shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room(CFC Chapter 5, Section 506). F-14. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval,a site plan designating fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs (CFC Chapter 5, Section 503.3). F-15. A simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format, must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Contact Fire Prevention for approval of alternative file formats which may be acceptable. POLICE DEPARTMENT • General Requirements PD-1. Applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding the building are kept at a height of no more than three feet or below the ground floor windowsills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to deterwould-be intruders from breaking into the building utilizing lower level windows. PD-2. Applicant shall ensure all trees surrounding the building rooftop be kept at a distance to deter roof accessibility by"would-be burglars." Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the building. PD-3. Berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD-4. All parking lot lighting surrounding the complex shall be energy saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with the State of California Lighting Ordinance, California Government Code 8565. PD-5. All exterior lighting to be in compliance with Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655 requiring low pressure sodium lighting. PD-6. All exterior doors to have their own vandal resistant fixtures installed above each door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one-foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. • PD-7. All exterior night lighting shall be wall mount light fixtures to provide sufficient lighting • during hours of darkness. PD-8. Applicant shall comply with the Governor's orderto address the power crisis. This order became effective March 18, 2001 calling for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non-business hours. The order, in part, states, "All California retail establishments, including, but not limited to, shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships,shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non- business hours except as necessary forthe health and safety of the public, employees or property." Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1000 in accordance with Section 8565 of the California Government Code. PD-9. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD-10. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the building must be removed or painted overwithin 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP, option#5. PD-11. Upon completion of construction, the building shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24 hours a day by designated private alarm companyto notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi-tenant offices/suites/ businesses located within the building shall have their own alarm system. This condition is not applicable if the business is opened 2417 or if residential units exist within portions of the building. Residential units have the option to install alarm systems at their discretion. • PD-12. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange". PD-13. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the building shall be placed in a well-lit, highly visible area, and installed with a "call-out only' feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the building. PD-14. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. PD-15. All retailing businesses shall contact the California Retailers Association for their booklet on the California Retail Theft Law at California Retailers Association, 1127 Eleventh Street, Suite 1030, Sacramento, CA 95814, (916) 443-1975. Penal Code 490.5 affords merchants the opportunity to recover their losses through a civil demand program. PD-16. Employee training regarding retail/credit card theft,citizens'arrest procedures, personal safety, business security, shoplifting or any other related crime prevention training procedures is also available through the Crime Prevention Unit. PD-17. Any business that serves or sells any type of alcoholic beverages will comply with all guidelines within the Business and Profession Codes and all other guidelines associated with the State Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. • PD-18. Contact the Temecula Police Department for inspections and training for employees, • management and owners. This includes special events held at business location where alcohol will be served for a fee and the event is open to the general public. PD-19. Applicant will comply with the Temecula City Ordinance 97-07, (9.14.010 Temecula Municipal Code series) regarding the use of alcohol. PD-20. Identification will be verified utilizing one of the following: (a) valid California driver's license; (b) valid California identification card; (c) valid military identification card (active/reserve/retired/dependent), (d)valid driver's license from any of the 50 States or Territories of the United States; (e) valid U.S. Passport; (f) valid government issued identification card issued by a Federal, State, and County or City agency. PD-21. As noted above,only a valid government issued identification card issued by a Federal, State, County or City agency is acceptable, providing it complies with 25660 of the Business and Profession Code (B&P),which includes the following requirements: (a) name of person; (b) date of birth; (c) physical description; (d) photograph; (e) currently valid (not expired). PD-22. Businesses desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department. PD-23. The Temecula Police Department affords all retailers the opportunity to participate in the "Inkless Ink Program." At a minimal cost of less that $40 for inkless inkpads, retailers can take a thumbprint of every customer using a personal check to pay for services. A decal is also posted on the front entry of the business advising customers of the "Inkless Ink Program" in use. If the business becomes a victim of check fraud, • the Police Department will be able to track the suspect with the thumbprint. PD-24. Crime prevention through environmental design as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that"the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included as conditions below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently renderthe location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. • e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of • natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be award of the risk of detection and possible intervention. I. Windows and clear lines-of-sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. j. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. PD-25. Any questions regarding this condition can be referred to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit, (951) 695-2773. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • PW-1. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed bythe developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW-2. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right-of-way. PW-3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. PW-4. All improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24"x 36" City of Temecula mylars. PW-5. The project shall include construction-phase pollution prevention controls and permanent post-construction water quality protection measures into the design of the project to prevent non-permitted runoff from discharging off site or entering any storm drain system or receiving water. PW-6. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must be accepted by the City prior to the initial grading plan check. The WQMP will be prepared by a registered civil engineer • and include site design Best Management Practices, (BMPs) source controls, and treatment mechanisms. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW-7. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way. PW-8. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to the commencement of grading. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect the site(public and private) and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. PW-9. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works in accordance with Grading Ordinance Section 18.24.120. PW-10. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soil conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. PW-11. The developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or • private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the developer. PW-12. Construction-phase pollution prevention controls shall be consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance and associated technical manual, and the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control. PW-13. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Planning Department, or other affected agencies. PW-14. The developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet(ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. PW-15. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. PW-16. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. • PW-17. The developer shall obtain letters of approval for any off site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters shall be in format as directed by the Department of • Public Works. PW-18. The developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. PW-19. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. This project shall comply with Chapter 15.12 of the Temecula Municipal Code which may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW-20. Parcel Merger Map shall be approved and recorded. PW-21. Improvement plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5%minimum over P.C.C.and 1.00% minimum overA.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard Number 207. • c. Streetlights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Old Town Specific Plan Standard. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Number 400. e. All street and driveway center line intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Public street improvement plans shall include plans and profiles showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. g. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. PW-22. The developer shall construct all public improvements outlined in these conditions to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. PW-23. Improve Third Street (General Local Street Standard No. 104-60' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of half-width street improvements plus twelve feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, drainage facilities, signing, striping and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). • • PW-24. All street improvement designs shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. PW-25. The developer shall construct all public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works including street improvements,which may include, but not limited to, pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches;streetlights,signing,striping,othertraffic control devices as appropriate; sewer and domestic water systems; under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines; and storm drain facilities. PW-26. The developer shall vacate and dedicate the abutters rights of access along Third Street pursuant to the new location of the driveway. PW-27. A Signing and Striping Plan shall be designed by a registered civil engineer approved by the Department of Public Works for Third Street. PW-28. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered civil engineer, and the soil engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. PW-29. The developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. PW-30. The developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing • Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW-31. The project shall demonstrate the pollution prevention BMPs outlined in the WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and are ready for immediate implementation. PW-32. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works the developer shall receive written clearance from Rancho California Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District, or other affected agencies. PW-33. Corner property line cut off shall be required per City of Temecula Standard No.603A. PW-34. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW-35. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW-36. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) • Appendix B Vicinity Map, WQMP Site Plan AND RECIVING WATERS MAP • y < )Y � f- rw. 9 it ,,,,//fi�rr <��.• "{+Y r�� #' � •ts ��, E1"'A � w+• � (r�oflFlr,VallBy,� n�' n e'•�f�� V� ♦ M 4iW�� ', Y� 3r1�41i �4Mr �.Gay\�i.�, , ' �� .Li'• l It-� � b"�'�`vrG9"���3 � •� `" _ ?4���F�;�+�°sq':.m: 4 �qg �� ♦ ° y ¢ Ste. �xp o ^Y# ,/��� Ja ••,°�+.�•« �} it \l�, � ,.� +W J^�ya1+� ��r''�Q� ►'��k � °• i. � � '*6" � .�� "'�'� °'Y fir' .r.,y}++S YaVar;a,�G; '_"^ h q,j�j; Se o I} ' •4 o`p .�W V !A� �Jh •, � m �` ti� �� �� �� _�:ti Kam- � i°; �� „�. Oi 1 a , I a;p ' All � Y .. f' CA -Y •` d, :f atG . �� ° � 11 ,. o s71 h`�,,,�,,��,, •� ";'°U-1`+ $' w. w l�qr, � Maj �•h a v '<. ►+asY! ..��•. � io, ",l`, �aeg. �r, p9.. , pie � •.A 7r r f""'''t w ��e .. a'` • o$ 1 y1 � ,_„Z • pr `�'�\�i;� . �!"'3 f F O• �7 %�•"''��_r p " 4ti Image 6�2008 DlgllelG lobe ,4+C" k' .' '" ';�92008 PATH OF DISCHARGE Q �'• 1_N U �C Ow:nem:0' e 1. A �J� l^� ElSND PEAR Gtil t RACMEf't3R MOUE te 'tiJ`N_i �< �1� _ /�-. P w SIRONriE'AN er \ _\ i/ `v/\\ r fy(m.in ,X/� c L.�_JI' sJ(/ 3 nn .r' t� F 0Y5R Es S T`` "1 /'• ! i jo �,R�% //`��{_ v raloi'f w G �HDt�Spnngsv ncn �.° !w AramR� i �` JAB ✓\ I A L l / — OteP gtij fXJ36•"' Yel 4J'y J'r {}.Ay - /'��Wal .. S I M1 3 � / Il garors T�— s II�yL1eY. jx1 ; /sOUAw t IJI / �, fMOUh'IPIN � 1 Xz RIVERSIDE COUNTY EI DE C % y 5 \�09 /^ i AV DIE'Gp COUNTY MIt EDONDA ♦ a 4A,14 - MESA +�J L. yV -' is �, ,€ .Ray�. + nu.nl ala dam. Rancc '+� ,• ,RaM I — c:y . A � tC�i`� J �' rl• "�'" !l. 5—i i' Ri < ' VJYwie '�• i� i' i ss v i _ f1 w {f \ N."Id, . I q ih � R Z \J� rcnnmM� ' �I PECHANGA f MARClARI}..PEAK _ q t x G4 V1lAM>A(OUla'jAllJ �� ~ E111NDIAN vPan<n RanchSr RVAI'rbN fRance r m ( � . IAA, •on '1 _ / M Of M-PUS +� _ T%gM r , • a �CAMP ��t J / \ to RED�MoyNrAN lnl . � i LFanrp �-�..G estatpr PEMDIETON al iIT I —_ _ 1 u'k ouRM�i y. q EF CUM i�+=t. / J- ✓ r'j"! : ��� fallok •--JLBR60H q IJAYA s \ FY�Fat a _ Qamn� wal GPI F f� I .Tt �/ a ��.�Tom I . I..... e v/Jt Naval harlill�l / I, I PalaM Sa r-„ante 1 r RESERVATIOMJ;M Ran ,, — rJrANCesrCA 'Tn7p c� rri J�}1k Er w Iw /• `: y, } /Ci' Com PeI I,on IMCAF Rance I C �Cn�d/ Paun. a 1 . —bel RPenm RT IMQRrto IN J a. ;a` WEA VCi e fj I Ranch ,_ / MrN i . AR4 t Io-tr/mil FnT. e Cao I F: I / j) ` 4 Ranch IacAmten 3 r 65 ¢ ew o � F:/ el t,,rena .� ha•' }rT"1¢��`' -r..ur'1.. —{ or PFR UNEAI! fp Y� Coo h\ D',sans ae RY" � �L�1'nru 4 \rI �Y2g� 1 0♦ ... .f' v '.. rti �_ p A _p i ' \.wpr. ,,` I' _ OCEANSIDE� �� .R� I RIB }� r w EI f ; r ; l� 1A IN �•.t�..,—) ,may I wumla LEGEND SIDE T14E USE A T GREEK Amu=& is mom A::11 o/w%1z 00 . '110^10 , ..ICI. -' LANDSCAPE ARESL0 PL w4 BUILDING STURCTURE � 62.50' 1.66 w,` `w•11 Rw 10.34'_ -P 0.6 ! +! 13,25' PLC S• p . -te r. tlt# i t7V _ EX. LANDSCAPE HARD ISI D>t WALK FINISH FLOOR --� TO �� CONC. HARDSCAPE s APE IWALk ExIsrlNc f �- ,� THIRD STREET c FINISH FLOOR �" Co �I __PROP. 6+ HIGH ;BALL � - --- - ,� ��• �� FINISH FLOOR � FINISH FLOOR CITY PROPERTY -�' �� N no an am w wUA T M A III uEmmaE T PLAN A d_�_ W R-1=Mw H 0 A4B PA DRAINAGE BOUNDARY � PROP.ROLL CURB PROP. LANDSCAPE Ex. PARKING LOT--- ., - - - DEEPEN F0017NC4�- - PROP. LANDSCAPE O DRAINAGE AREA EX. EP Ex. GROUND UA , 66, ► SECTION -PROP. 1+D PVC DRAIN PROP. 10" PVC DRAIN MURRIE TA CREEK N Ts SECTION � DISCHARGE POINT SECTION B NTS � SECTION D N TS - _- .. _r N TS PROJE TRASH TRASH TRASH ENCLOSURE LOCATION LOCATION i I < LOY J . NOT LOT 8 r D«r I LOT S � �..� WQMP 48--INCH MH STORMFILTERI t 1 2Lo RW EX. IR7 r _ ------ ` , --- FLOW DIRECTION 1 _ _ --EP - - , . _ -- „ r , 13ALLA5T ROOF DRAIN LOCATION _� - (HE NOTE(5) -- __ 1()�,,,. �_- ,��c�} c r •c-`r _,..-'r-r,;t}r. t-��� U is -�k ' • EP t. �r - 1 ------------- _ r 1 �i / _ ,.cQ ECT T�Vic. 48 s -- PROPERTY LINE r '�t� ,� , r . ;= _ �- , - - r i - .. 1 � T s EEC. 48 RCS�.SDu �J Q10=1-46cf' 1( Q YEAR STORM RUNOFF ( - '�� r.� ,�_ ��� Q�.1CA�/1 r 'I�QM P- $ T M I-I--',.`�-TORM II-TER --�- - .�--, - -•1 w' - RO DRAIN, i�I~L IN INTO FILTERED ED IH _ 4 - r r__ era yr r rrf ♦ .r .._ - ... .�. L. 1. \ l ,f! ► - .INLET PIPE I`1 ..__ a•. r F'r LI f t .k i r. r i Q100=2.62dS 10 YEAR STORM RUI��o1=F - � r. -` c - _�T b'71 O t1UrE OUTLET to S'YST AS SHE, I�t . Any `� C u�(SEE NOTES 5 l 'J f�l�.✓ _.` /L I --j ! �• f J 67LD ALL } 07.Jtli ! `ir� ) t 5T ( 5 t 6) ' y `_ _ ..J!'L,j)�r ' r f`i w„ _.._..._-_, T.-._.-. ...._.- ar• ..- - ...-_. ` l --•`� •:- 7 ../+ ( l', !7'• l _ .l w 4. :l `- r . .J N � �W.1• rh T� • 1 r ^'�` (} �f3 W2 -r 3• .1• t Lf �...M � V._ nJ'••i1 . • � ivK _ ' a aEX. EP . t 1`{ ' rj. r a k s ti' a A r.yc P^ y - n 'EX RW d • - 1 MANHOLE STORMFILTER � I �� � .. � ,�,�,(,F 1 : tr, - V __•t � S C) - PLAN VIEWri - r ._i c- \---`-_. '•' i ` ♦r i !_ , - - ..:ice x .h w _ y. ..,- w , .- .ry• - ._...-- �L c• I �. �!UP. S!' SCREE FVAL r- �� f z - MANHOLE STORMFILTER - TOP VI � t.` �` �w � S � � 4 'w 1.�--^*c i� 4-t � T'� w( M l^ 1 w� 1 " N M1�` ', ti \ 'tic I r! :\_ ti ',• ly -, i ! I Q.3 '1 5AND COLL , ti jf'j� 1 w.1 j�'^' _ •\- 'ti \ ` r. R i.l �t C Nt� „� ! 'FF ' � r i - y 1.'I { 1 1 1 e ({w �� �� AND COVER(aTD) i CW. �T S ! - G �iCKETE (SEE NOTE ) CONCKETE COLLAR, )eijI I � 11 �•' V 'A`- � -,�� -��- �'- i [ I I`7-, �� - �_; � GI�.QE ?SING .. . r-• � fit,- �s .} 1" y, ,Ln A'�• -P STEP I GJfl_ r�' �'.ll }f j 11 •. ` N, u r Jr1 i •. Gy I ~1C rt i _ !J t 1 C f Z ! I , `� (`.q' /''� .a,.. iJ.� \f 1. ✓ 4j Y .. 11 P INLET PIPE D E OUTLET I5E 1. ()Tr �1 i (SEE tvaTES 5 ) -- S�` WITH ryF� j s3AFFtF _ ` ••,. •`^r l � -!. -ti. l ' 4. '..+ •ei .',V. ',+ V•ti, i_r.. I r�.w• w \ � � r� ~ i i r r rl yy-.��1� �a/-•r.t . ram{- r, } i, r-•.{ wti ±"• - ! ` - tip.. r r vx I" rt, *i4ti'+ _ fit,., •' I 1 / l I r L' 1��.r F t i E ,� (E3Y CQNTfIC7t) r` k i COUPLING 1t r"•s f i • - r r- , I 1 1 ll i Fn`Ai1 i r: f;f i i; r'•h•.+ J_. �. 7 -r' 71 h.iR-L'N r.!r1�� !� � � �3 I f`��4 �lam./�r .cam 1 1 F T Fi - ' r'' i _ , j ,I rC„ >I,! hC f4 r. r� `4! .J•.d•(" -lr .7'rl Ir)) r ... \ .. - `J ROOF i./ AI N Y� I t_ i�. w.� r'r r 1 ^ ' r i 1 Ei , J ..•-- - . ._..._- i , u :, � r . {TYi'j(.SEE NO-TE 2) SEE ��+UTE b} , J J .. ,tJ r - :• CONNECT � r .:'�: DIRECTL TDALI�,5r .. BALLAST Al ',_� ,a .�1� F ? (:SEE NOTE a) �-r �° �� r. T fl E-F NoTF 8) SD - - i^SRO!I'. 1 \.`--`X y r . '4- r ,i%, : . r i.'k T F4 i ! ? w rr. 'R \ "_'C`"• f l , it t, `tid'....� r. ... r ....__ {`r � r"";'. • r tom!',� \ ;,( . i",! -4i ti. t ./, ' : ,r- 1 1 1 S / 1 S, _f . r 1 - . _ `` C�C /r• i r.r' T r w�.+/ _____......- p •• '�. ! - 1 lJ I MANHOLE STORMFILTER - OUTLET DETAIL 2 N.,. �. ` Irl J! r i `----7�!`%fit. 'i 11 - 'i �7 r Al w ( r r. r; ! \1 t J t'. 4 I{"',! I 1, J,r,!t. I.' li" 1.. • '\ , .•1% r - \1 • ,- _ ' I � � ,�F, `�. U N DE i�D i�'�i N EE C3 E i-AI l_21 r t 0Tr �f MANIFOLD ( r ,G i ; !', ...... 1, ` ,, i •. ekr� � .s.J!� r!l' +_ �+... ` f' �F '` � �, i'i`l "��,f 1 _ l rr f -y �• 1 r D }(yj raj{{ (!� 5 I y...- ''•4 tl!' 't i(tx''l Y l,' 4. _� % k rR , r ti. I 1/PR ! SCREEN L�+ ;� , �� ,) ;,(� Y r ., PRECAST 48" MANHOLE STORMFILTER �� -- -� �_-1L �Q� i `� -Y •�a MANHOLE STORMFIILTER - SECTION VIEUV A 1 - _ - TOP AND SECTION VIEWS, NOT AND DATA J ri -_ '� �� PRECAST' 48" MANHOLE. STORMFILTER R F R I �� N OC�F DRAIN CONNECTSTANDARD DETAIL � t IIRECTLY TO SD 4 +E .4 K-S 0 PLAN AND SECTION VIEWS � STANDARD DETAIL , •�. *li'.i til` i �T - '!M , i ,, '.1� ',ti '-.--n^-"R_'-' i' ,`1 1, w.' l»_..-_.._. -.." «y ' it, i , ,,, �`�. � .,� 1� Lam: t t�,� V t � -•- . _ • \ f ` _._ ... t' ES i'. `% t 1� , 't ,. r tc..e ,`` . `,•. '- 1V ; r�, F S'. ,.F''y_ (' 'f• ^.• FERIA MAPPED FLOODPLAIN :, F ` 5, s ``.`r.l•., .'. , 't w! ,�f, �:,;tt � - t t � ryti,1 '�i. i •�. ".r y- FREGA5T MANHOLE I it I i r, "1 1 !16i.� _ u t lr'. �` ` - Z�NE AE (COMMUNITY PANEL 060742 0010B) �� \, ,-- �- - �- �- STORM f I LTEK DATA MAP REVISED NOV. 20, 1996 .�-- f '' � �-. .� � -� "� F 2 59 E -. 11 .IA l� t�1 FLOOD ELEVATION 1005,5 ..� �� � A LL9 ' _- ' °, ; --�+ ": - r ► 1 1 tT :U CT U��� 1 J i�r�H C 1 '�� - 150. 0'.. ( � N44' `-� F = � I�f. ( i � WATER' QUALITY FLOW RATE (cf5,� 0.09 LAND USE sF AC ENTIRE SITE IS OUTSIDE MAPPED 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN �J :� ��� (���c� �n} ���. 1i�,i t �',.90N\1�f r t Y PEAK FLOW DATE (< 1 C.f5) I ` PEAK LANDSCAPE 1254 SF 0.03 AC •4 CAL FUKN ftKfCA) OF PEAK FLOW ( r5) 1 U �i � I , _.. rT? .--- __-----,_____-_ __ --.-- --_----•---t ._. :._:-__._._ , .-____ . - -. � # C�F CAKTRI DGES f�EC�U I QED 3 f =, �. _ a r n n HARDSCAPE 495 SF 0.01 AC I.�. CAI?.T'�I17 F f O � TE c 5 �' f .5 .�prnl MEDIA TYPE (C5f PERLITE, ZFG) ZGP BUILDING ROOF AREA 20,467 SF 0.47 AC r� f I�cM ELEVATION 1001 .60 . - `3 r- t. ° =` w � � t - t �r' � t`r 1 tPE'R 4lI DIJ.�� r41?FA ZQ,962 S 0.45 AG it s ' r. L Ul.1 �• E �� ; ; J . w f_- � 3 L �'IF' DATA: 1.L. ORIENT ATION NIA 1 L :SAL UtA�11 1 cif F //� ... - INLET PIPE #1 ...995.7 5 27V 12 SITE AREA-'--22 215 SF=0.51 AC ilmo. r"rr y� pA�lxmo L o r I NLFT FI Ft #2 NA NA NA OUTLET STUB 995.75 90- 1211 24 HOUR STORMS IMP SUMMARY CONCENTRATION POINT I r�����"1" -����-r ����L L ECCENTRIC REDUCER YE5\NO 512E (r` 'r CoN rP4\f TOP.} Y' 5 ► 2`iiC 161 POINT 2 YEAR -24 HR. STORM 10 YEAR �-24 HR. STORM 100 YEAR -�24 HR. STORM ANTI-FLOTATION 13ALLA5T WIDTH HEIGHT DISCHARGE I P'ii C ii* (�IC�TE5fbPECIAL KtC.�UI�_EI•,�ifNY5: F'lf'E UKIfNTAI�IUN KEY: PRE POST PRE POST PRE POST 9O° 1 RUNOFF--CFS 0.05 0.08 0.14 0.16 0.25 0.27 GRAPHIC SCALE 2D 0 10 2a 4D VELOCITY -- FPS 0.80 1.08 1.89 218 3.37 3.64 1 VOLUME-CUBIC FT 95$ 758 2178 3500 4424 5740 270° C'w� L Nn 0.04 0 08 0.10 0.13ASSESSOR'S PARCEL S/TE A DDRESS 3fJ U TOWN FRONT STET (951) w4mg (v) w4919 FAx SCALE: 1" = 20' VOLUME-AC FT 0.020 0.05 922--046--0 f2 42081 THIRD STREET TWICULA, CA 92590 UPDA TED 10--21108 DURATION--- MIN 720 810 810 810 810 810 TEMECULA, CA 92590 S/rE AREA LEGAL DESCRIPTION 0.51 AC. NET DRAWING NO. 0.5�� AC. GROSS CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS LOT(S) 17 THROUGH 22, IN BLOCK 19 OF 7I-lE TOWN OF TEJ4lEGULA, AS 7 1�,^ SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 15 PAGE(S) 725, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS.. RECORDS OF SAI'! DIE GO COUNTY RECORDS.CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER ER WITH t I THAT ° ? WQMP EXHIBI T A t2s gm BILL DAL TON PORTION OF ALLEY VACA TED- BY RESOLUTION NO. 79�-68, RECORDED- THE WAREHOUSE A T CREEKSIDE wkjm THE WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE, LLC APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80863, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 41911 5#h Street Temecula � � ~'��'�x � LOTS BLOCK 29 MB 15 PAGE 726 951 491--7777 - 86 ) 697--3013 fax :lea 1 1 . " PA08-0115 SHEET OF Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) • Appendix C Supporting Detail Related to Hydraulic Conditions of Concern • • WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE LOTS 17-22 BLK 29 MB15/726 DRAINAGE STUDY September 3,2009 Prepared For: WAREHOUSE AT CREEKSIDE Prepared By: HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING • 28465 old TOWN FRONT STREET Suite 315 Temecula, CA 92590 (951)506-4869 RCE STAMP EXP.6/30/08 O QpOFESSlONg6 Q� �y HECTOR y' W LUC10 CORREA z No. 363C6 p CIVIL B1,: �1 � O� ( ENGINEERING At, Hector!L. Correa,RCE 36306 ��Of CAI�F� • • DRAINAGE STUDY STUDY AREA The subject property consists of approximately 0.51 acres, located on the southwesterly side of Third Street westerly of the 3`d Street and Front Street intersection. The site is protected from off-site storm runoff by existing street and storm drain improvement constructed by the City of Temecula. EXISTING DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Under existing conditions the project site presently sheet flow storm runoff into adjacent Murrieta Creek. Mite street flow also drains to Murrieta Creek via existing 3`d Street with major flow conveyed by City 48-inch RCP Line 3 Storm Drain. PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS The on-site developed storm runoff will construct two 18-inch storm laterals that will connect into the existing 48"storm drain located in Third Street. See Calculations on next page • • j EXISTING 100 YEAR STORM RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON • --------RIVERSIDE-COUNTY-FLOOD-CONTROL-&-WATER-CONSERVATION-DISTRICT -----_-- (RCFC6WCD1 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL «««««««<C«««««««««««»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» (C) Copyright 1982,1966 Advanced Engineering Software [AES] +**+++++++DESCRIPTION OF * EXIST. 100 YEAR STORM + + ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 1.2.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ .90 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) 2.360 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) _ .880 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.480 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.300 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ ..1505732 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5495536 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.3000 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE = .5496 RCFCSWCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED • Advanced Engineering Software [AES] SERIAL No. I00971 VER. 3.3C RELEASE DATE: 2/20/86 FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE _ 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< -- ----- ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS SINGLE FAMILY(1/2 ACRE) TC = Q[ (LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 1.60.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.50 TO = .422+'[ ( 160.001*3)/( 1.50)1" 2 = 8.178 100.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.887 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" SINGLE-FAMILY(1/2 ACRE LOT) RUNOFF COEF71CIENT = .053 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.86 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .61 TOTAL RUNOE'F(CFS) = 1.86 FLOW+PROCESS+FROM�NODE * ++3.00 TO+NODE***++4-00+IS+CODE _ * 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD .INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< • = ___--- __________--- ___--- ____�____ =ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TO = IC`[(LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]-.2 i NITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 255.00 I ❑ UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.70 TO = _303*(( 255.00"*3)/( 1.70)7*t.2 = 7.576 100.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.054 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8815 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS • • 7 EXISTING 10 YEAR STORM =---------------------------------------------------- RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON • RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ----(RCFC&WCD) 1978 HYDROLOGY MANUAL (C) Copyright 1962,1986 Advanced Engineering Software (AES] **********DESCRIPTION OF * EXISTING 10 YEAR STORM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.0u SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ .90 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.360 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) _ .880 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.980 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.300 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5505732 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5995536 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 10.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = .8888 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE _ .5506 RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED «««««««««<<«««<<«««««»»»»»»»»»»»»»>.»»»»»> Advanced Engineerinc Software [.AES] SERIAL No. I00971 VER. 3.3C RELEASE DATE: 2/20/86 <<<«««««««««««««««««<»»»»»»»»»»»>)»»»»»»» *+FLOW+PROCESS+FROM+NODE++ * 1.00+TO+NODE*+++*2.00*IS+CODE*=+*s2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD TNTTIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< _ _ ______-____________-______________-_____ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS SINGLE FAMILY(1/2 ACRE) TC = K+((LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]-'-- INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 160.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.50 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.50 'PC = .922*[( 160.00'*'*3)/ ( 1.50)]'*.2 = 8.17e 10.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.663 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" SINGLE-FAMILY(1/2 ACRE LOT) RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .7475 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.21 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .61 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.21 *+FLOW+PROCESS+FROM NODE * +3.00*TO*NODE++*+*9*00+IS+CODE*= 2 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------• --»RATIONAL-METHOD-INITIAL SUBAREA .ANALYSIS««------>---------- ---------------- ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TC = K"[(LENGTH**3)/ (ELEVATION CHANGE)]"-.- INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW—LENGTH = 255.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.Oc • DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.3( ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.70 TO = .303"( ( 255.00**3)/ ( 1.70)]**.2 — 7.576 10.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) — 2.777 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" C0MMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT — .8753 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ .75 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) — .31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) _ .75 ________________________________________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS • • 10 YEAR DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY ----------------------------------------------------------- RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT • (RCFCSWCD) 1918 HYDROLOGY MANUAL --------------------------------------- ««««««««««««««««««<O»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»> (C) Copyright 1982,1986 Advanced Engineering Software [AEW Especially prepared for: ----DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS*"+++++++++++++++++++++a+++.+++++++++++++++« * 10 YEAR DEVELOPED STORM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- USER SPECIFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 10.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZE(INCH) = 12.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ .90 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) 2.360 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) _ .880 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.480 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.300 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5505732 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5495536 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 10.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) _ .8888 SLOPE OF INTENSITY DURATION CURVE. _ .55% RCFCSWCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALUES USED ««««««««««««««««««<O»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»> Advanced Engineering Software [AES] SERIAL N, I00971 VER. 3.3C RELEASE DATE: 2/20/86 «««««««««««««<«««««<»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» *+'LOW*PROCESS*FROM*NODE*++++1.00*TO�NODE**�++2.00+IS�CODE*= ____________________________________________________________________________ »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYS"IS««< ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TO = Qr (LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]*`.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 300.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1001.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.40 TO = .303*[( 300.00**3)/( 1.90) 1**.2 = 8.682 10.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) — 2.576 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8740 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.37 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .61 TOTAL RUNOFF(CPS) _ 1.37 • 10 YEAR DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE • -------RATIONAL-METHOD- = ------INITIAL SUBAREA «- IS < ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TC = K*'((LENGTH'-3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]*".2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 255.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.70 TC = .303t[( 255.00**3)/( 1.70)1--.2 = 7.576 10.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.777 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8753 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) _ .75 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ .31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CF'S) _ .75 ____________ _________________ _ _ ________ _ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS • • - 4 - 100 YEAR DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY ---------- RATIONAL M£T90D HYDROLOGY COMPUTER PROGRAM BASED ON RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT • --- ----- - _ -(RCFC6WC - 1978-HYDROLOGY L MANUA--- -=- - - - - - ----- ----__ ------ ««««««««««««««««««<O»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»> (C) Copyright 1962,1986 Advanced Engineering Software [AES] ++*++.+++*DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS++++++++++++++++++«+++++*++++++*.++****++*+. * DEVELOPED 100 YEAR STORM + _____ _ __ ____ _______________________________________________ USER SPECIFIED HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC MODEL INFORMATION: ___________________ _______-_______ USER SPECLFIED STORM EVENT(YEAR) = 100.00 SPECIFIED MINIMUM PIPE SIZEIINCH) = 12.00 SPECIFIED PERCENT OF GRADIENTS(DECIMAL) TO USE FOR FRICTION SLOPE _ .90 10-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 2.360 10-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) _ .880 100-YEAR STORM 10-MINUTE INT EN SITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.480 100-YEAR STORM 60-MINUTE INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.300 SLOPE OF 10-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5505732 SLOPE OF 100-YEAR INTENSITY-DURATION CURVE _ .5495536 COMPUTED RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA: STORM EVENT = 100.00 1-HOUR INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 1.3000 SLOPE OF INTENSITY" DURATION CURVE _ .5496 RCFC&WCD HYDROLOGY MANUAL "C"-VALOES USED «««<««<<««««««««««««<»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» .Advanced Enoineerino Software (AES7 SERIAL No. I00971 VER. 3.3C RELEASE DATE: 2/20/86 *FLOW+PROCESS+FROM+NODE****+1.00+TO+NODE +++**2.00+IS CODE -++ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- »»>RATIONAL METHOD INITIAL SUBAREA ANALYSIS««< ___— _____---____—_________ ______ _ ______ ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TC - K*[(LENGTH++3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]­ INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 300.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1001.70 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.40 TO - .303+[( 300.00+*3)/( 1.40)]++.2 = 8.682 100.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 3.761 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8804 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.02 TOTAL AREA(ACRES) _ _61 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) = 2.02 • 5 - 100 YEAR DEVELOPED HYDROLOGY FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 3.00 TO NODE 4.00 IS CODE = 2 • - » - RATIONAL- = - _ ------ METHOD - ----- -- - --- - - ASSUMED INITIAL SUBAREA UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL TO = K*[ (LENGTH**3)/(ELEVATION CHANGE)]**.2 INITIAL SUBAREA FLOW-LENGTH = 255.00 UPSTREAM ELEVATION = 1002.00 DOWNSTREAM ELEVATION = 1000.30 ELEVATION DIFFERENCE = 1.70 TC = .303*[( 255.00**3)/( 1.70)1**.2 = 1.576 100.00 YEAR RAINFALL INTENSITY(INCH/HOUR) = 4.054 SOIL CLASSIFICATION IS "B" COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .8815 SUBAREA RUNOFF(CFS) = 1.11 TOTAL AREA.(ACR£S) _ .31 TOTAL RUNOFF(CFS) 1.11 __________-__ _________ _ _ ___ _ _ ___________ _ END OF RATIONAL METHOD ANALYSIS • • - 6 - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS LATERAL "A" • 18 INCH CONNECTION FOR Q=2.02 cfs PRESSURE PIPE-FLOW HYDRAULICS COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE (Reference: LACFD,LACRD,S OCEMA HYDRAULICS CRITERION) (C) Copyright 1982,1986 Advanced Engineering Software [AESj ++++++++*+DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS****+*******+*++**`********+***+*+**++++++++ * LATERAL A + NOTE: STEADY FLOW HYDRAULIC HEAD-LOSS COMPUTATIONS BASED ON THE MOST CONSERVATIVE FORMULAE FROM THE CURRENT LACRD,LACFCD, AND OCEMA DESIGN MANUALS. DOWNSTREAM PRESSURE PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA: NODE NUMBER = 1.00 FLOWLINE ELEVATION 987.94 PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 PIPE FLOW(CFS) = 2.02 ASSUMED DOWNSTREAM CONTROL HOD 990.000 NODE 1.00 HGL= < 990 000>;EGL= < 990.020>;FLOWLINE= < 987 940> • PRESSURE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2 00 IS CODE = 1 UPSTREAM NODE 2.00 ELEVATION = 993.15 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALCULATE PRESSURE FLOW FRICTION LOSSES(LACFCDi : PIPE FLOW = 2.02 CPS PIPE DIAMETER = 18.00 INCHES PIPE LENGTH = 27.00 FEET MANNINGS N = .01300 SF=(Q/0**2 = 1 ( 2.02)/( 105.04311*+2 = .0003698 HF=L-*SF = ( 21.0M I .0003693) = .010 NODE 2.00 HGL= < 990.010>;EGL= < 990.030>;FLOWLINE= < 993.150> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESSURE FLOW ASSUMPTION USED TO ADJUST HGL AND EGL LOST PRESSURE HEAD USING SOFFIT CONTROL = 5.24 NODE 2.00 : HGL= < 995.250>;EGL= < 995.270>;FLOWLINE= < 993.750> ____=___________________ _ __________ _ _ _ END OF PRESSURE FLOW HYDRAULICS PIPE SYSTEM TOP OF RIM ELEV. = 1001.60 . HLG= 995.25 THEREFORE 18-INCH MORE THE ADEQAUTE TO CONVAYE 100 YEAR STORM • 7 - HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS LATERAL "B" • 18 INCH CONNECTION FOR Q=1.10 cfs PRESSURE PIPE-FLOW HYDRAULICS COMPUTER PROGRAM PACKAGE 'Reference: LACFD,LACRD,& OCEMA HYDRAULICS CRITERION) ««««««««««««<<««««««»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»» (C) Copyright 1982,1986 Advanced Engineering Software [AES} *********+DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS****++++*****++++++++s+**++++++++++++++.+,.++ LATERAL B NOTE: STEADY FLOW HYDRAULIC HEAD-LOSS COMPUTATIONS BASED ON THE MOST CONSERVATIVE FORMULAE FROM THE CURRENT LACRD,LACFCD, AND OCEMA DESIGN MANUALS. DOWNSTREAM PRESSURE PIPE FLOW CONTROL DATA: NODE NUMBER = 1.00 FLOWLINE ELEVATION = 988.00 PIPE DIAMETER(INCH) = 18.00 PIPE FLOW(CE'S1 = 1.10 AS SUPIED DOWNSTRENI CONTROL HGL = 990.600 ____-_==_______ _ _______ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ NODE i.00 : HGL= < 990.600>;EGL= < 990.606>;FLOWLINE= < 988.000> • _____________--___ __ - _- - - - - PRESSURE FLOW PROCESS FROM NODE 1.00 TO NODE 2.00 IS CODE = 1 UPSTREAM NODE 2.00 ELEVATION = 988.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALCULATE PRESSURE FLOW FRICTION LOSSES(LACFCDj : PIPE FLOW = 1.10 CFS PIPE DIAMETER = 18.00 INCHES PIPE LENGTH = 17.00 FEET MANNINGS N = .01300 SF=(Q/K)+*2 = ( f 1.10 M 105.043) )**2 = .0001097 HF=L*SF = l 1—l.no p .000109"7 = .Un2 NODE 2.00 HGL= < 990.602>;EGL= < 990.608>;FLOWLINE= < 986.000> END OF PRESSURE FLOW HYDRAULICS PIPE SYSTEM CB INLET ELEV_ = 1000.3i. HLG= 990.60 THEREFORE 19-INCH MORE THE ADEQAUTE TO CONVAYE 100 YEAR STORM • - s - PRE-DEVELOPED 24 HOUR STORMS - 4 - PRE-DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX242.out Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 _____________________________________________________________________ English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format _____________________________________________________________________ 2 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 3RD ST. PROJECT __________ __________________________________________________________ Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time = 0.011 Hr. Lag time = 0.65 Min. . % of lag time = 0. 6 Min. 40 90% of lag time = 0.26 Min. unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 HoUr(5) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) (2) Weighting[1.2] 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) (2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 2.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 1.800(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 1.800(In) Sub-Area Data: AYea(AC.) Runoff Index Impervious % 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.199 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-2YR-24HR-Page I of 3 PRE-DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.144 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/Hr)) = 0.072 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.740 ----------------------------------------------------------____ • U n i t H y d r o 9 r a p h VALLEY S-Curve _____________________________________________________________ Unit Hydrograph Data ______________ _______________________________________________________ Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit HCFS)9 aph Graph % (bra)______________ _ ____ 4605.302 _____________________ ---_----100 000 1 0.500 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.519 _____________________________________________________________ Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.018 0.253 0.013 0.00 00 0.70 0.025 0.247 0.019 0.01 2 1.1 0.241 0.016 0.01 3 .0 4 .50 0.0 0.60 0.020 0.022 75 0.235 0.019 0.01 5 2.50 0.80 0.029 0.230 0.0217 .02 0.01 6 3.00 1.00 0.036 0.224 0.0277 0.01 7 3.50 1.00 0.036 0.219 0.027 0.01 8 4.00 1.10 0.040 0.213 0.029 0.01 9 4.50 1.30 0.047 0.208 0.035 0.01 10 5.00 1.50 0.054 0.203 0.040 0.01 11 5.50 1.30 0.047 0.197 0.035 0.01 12 6.00 1.60 0.058 0.192 0.043 0.01 13 6.50 1.80 0.065 0.187 0.048 0.02 14 7.00 2.00 0.072 0.182 0.053 0.02 15 7.50 2.10 0.076 0.177 0.056 0.02 16 8.00 2.50 0.090 0.172 0.067 0.02 17 8.50 3.00 0.108 0.168 0.080 0.03 • 18 9.50 3.90 0.140 0.158 0.088 104 0.04 19 9.50 3.90 0.190 0.158 0.109 0.00 20 10.00 4.30 0.155 0.154 21 10.50 3.00 0.108 0.149 0.080 0.03 22 11.00 4.00 0.144 0.145 0.107 0.04 23 11.50 3.80 0.137 0.141 0.101 0.04 24 12.00 3.50 0.126 0.137 0.093 3 25 12.50 5.10 0.184 0.133 --- 0.05 26 13.00 5.7o 0.205 0.129 --- 0. 8 27 13.50 6.80 0.245 0.125 --- 0.0 0.12 28 14.00 4.60 0.166 0.121 --- 04 29 14.50 5.30 0.191 0.117 --- 0.07 30 15.00 5.10 0.184 0.114 --- 0.07 31 15.50 4.70 0.169 0.110 --- 0.06 32 16.00 3.80 0.137 0.107 --- 0.03 33 16.50 0.80 0.029 0.104 0.021 0.01 34 17.00 0.60 0.022 0.101 0.016 0.01 35 17.50 1.00 0.036 0.098 0.027 0.01 36 18.00 0.90 0.032 0.095 0.024 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.029 0.092 0.021 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.018 0.089 0.013 0.00 39 19.50 0.70 0.025 0.087 0.019 0.01 40 20.00 0.50 0.018 0.085 0.013 0.00 41 20.50 0.60 0.022 0.082 0.016 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.018 0.080 0.013 0.00 43 21.50 0.50 0.018 0.078 0.013 0.00 44 22.00 0.50 0.018 0.077 0.013 0.00 45 22.50 0.50 0.018 0.075 0.013 0.00 46 23.00 0.40 0.014 0.074 0.011 0.00 47 23.50 0.40 0.014 0.073 0.011 0.00 48 24.00 0.40 0.014 0.072 0.011 0.00 = 0.01.0 Sum = 100.0 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 0.52(In) 0.0(Ac.Ft) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[ (In)/(Ft.)] _ • Total soil loss = 1.28(In) Total soil loss = 0.055(Ac.Ft) EX-2YR-24HR-Page 2 of 3 PRE DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall Flood volume = 958.1 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 2374.3 Cubic Feet _______________________________________________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.062(CFS) 29 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h ____________ _______________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ( (CFS) ) ____________________________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 -------------_- --- __________ 0+30 0.0001 ______ -- _--_--- ------0.00 Q I 1 1+ 0 0.0002 0.00 Q I 1+30 0.0004 0.00 Q 1 2+ 0 0.0005 0.00 Q 2+30 0.0007 0.00 QV 1 3+ 0 0.0009 0.00 QV 1 3+30 0.0011 0.00 QV 4+ 0 0.0013 0.01 Q V I 1 4+30 0.0015 0.01 Q V 5+ 0 0.0018 0.01 Q V 5+30 0.0021 0.01 Q V 6+ 0 0.0024 0.01 Q V 6+30 0.0028 0.01 Q V 1 7+ 0 0.0032 0.01 Q V I 7+30 0.0036 0.01 Q V 1 0+ 0 0.0041 0.01 Q V I 1 8+30 0.0047 0.01 Q V 9+ 0 0.0053 0.02 Q VI 1 9+30 0.0061 0.02 Q V 10+ 0 0.0061 0.00 Q IV 10+30 0.0067 0.01 Q I V 11+ 0 0.0075 0.02 Q I V 11+30 0.0083 0.02 Q I V 12+ 0 0.0090 0.02 Q V • 12+30 0.0101 0.03 Q V 13+ 0 0.0117 0.09 4 I V I 13+30 0.0142 0.06 Q I V 1 14+ 0 0.0152 0.02 Q I V 14+30 0.0167 0.04 Q I V 15+ 0 0.0182 0.04 Q I V 15+30 0.0195 0.03 Q I V 16+ 0 0.0201 0.02 Q I I V 16+30 0.0202 0.00 Q V 17+ 0 0.0204 0.00 Q V 1 17+30 0.0206 0.00 Q I V 18+ 0 0.0207 0.00 Q I V 18+30 0.0209 0.00 Q I V 19+ 0 0.0210 0.00 Q I V 19+30 0.0211 0.00 Q I V 20+ 0 0.0212 0.00 Q I V 1 20+30 0.0214 0.00 Q I V 1 21+ 0 0.0215 0.00 Q I VI 21+30 0.0216 0.00 Q I VI 22+ 0 0.0217 0.00 Q I VI 22+30 0.0218 0.00 Q I VI 23+ 0 0.0218 0.00 Q I VI 23+30 0.0219 0.00 Q I VI 24+ 0 0.0220 0.00 Q I V -------------------------------------------____________________________ EX-2YR-24HR-Page 3 of 3 PRE-DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX2410.Out ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - S/N 867 --_9--------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING - 3RD ST. PROJECT ----------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time = 0.011 Hr. Lag time 0.65 Min. • of lag time = 0. 6 Min. 40% 908 of lag time = 0.26 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1'2) 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1.2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 10.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 2.911(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 2.911(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious 8 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) '(In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.144 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-l0YR-24HR-Page 1 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.144 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr) ) = 0.072 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.740 --------------------------------------------------------------------- • 0 n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 4605 302 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.029 0.253 0.022 0.01 2 1.00 0.70 0.041 0.247 0.030 0.01 3 1.50 0.60 0.035 0.241 0.026 0.01 4 2.00 0.70 0.041 0.235 0.030 0.01 5 2.50 0.80 0.047 0.230 0.034 0.01 6 3.00 1.00 0.058 0.224 0.043 0.02 7 3.50 1.00 0.058 0.219 0.043 0.02 8 4.00 1.10 0.064 0.213 0.047 0.02 9 4.50 1.30 0.076 0.208 0.056 0.02 10 5.00 1.50 0.087 0.203 0.065 0.02 11 5.50 1.30 0.076 0.197 0.056 0.02 12 6.00 1.60 0.093 0.192 0.069 0.02 13 6.50 1.80 0.105 0.187 0.078 0.03 14 7.00 2.00 0.116 0.182 0.086 0.03 15 7.50 2.10 0.122 0.177 0.090 0.03 16 8.00 2.50 0.146 0.172 0.108 0.04 17 8.50 3.00 0.175 0.168 --- 0.01 • 18 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.158 --- 0.07 19 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.158 0.07 20 10.00 4.30 0.250 0.159 0.10 21 10.50 3.00 0.175 0.149 --- 0.03 22 11.00 4.00 0.233 0.145 --- 0.09 23 11.50 3.80 0.221 0.141 --- 0.08 24 12.00 3.50 0.204 0.137 --- 0.07 25 12.50 5.10 0.297 0.133 --- 0.16 26 13.00 5.70 0.332 0.129 --- 0.20 27 13.50 6.80 0.396 0.125 --- 0.27 28 14.00 4.60 0.268 0.121 --- 0.15 29 14.50 5.30 0.309 0.117 --- 0.19 30 15.00 5.10 0.297 0.114 --- 0.18 31 15.50 4.70 0.274 0.110 --- 0.16 32 16.00 3.80 0.221 0.107 --- 0.11 33 16.50 0.80 0.047 0.104 0.034 0.01 34 17.00 0.60 0.035 0.101 0.026 0.01 35 17.50 1.00 0.058 0.098 0.043 0.02 36 18.00 0.90 0.052 0.095 0.039 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.047 0.092 0.034 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.029 0.089 0.022 0.01 39 19.50 0.70 0.041 0.087 0.030 0.01 40 20.00 0.50 0.029 0.085 0.022 0.01 41 20.50 0.60 0.035 0.082 0.026 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.029 0.080 0.022 0.01 43 21.50 0.50 0.029 0.078 0.022 0.01 44 22.00 0.50 0.029 0.077 0.022 0.01 45 22.50 0.50 0.029 0.075 0.022 0.01 46 23.00 0.40 0.023 0.074 0.017 0.01 47 23.50 0.40 0.023 0.073 0.017 0.01 48 24.00 0.40 0.023 0.072 0.017 0.01 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 2.4 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 1.18(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[ (In)/(Ft.)] = 0.1(AC.Ft) • Total soil loss = 1.73(In) Total soil loss = 0.079(Ac.Ft) EX-10YR-24HR-Page 2 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall Flood volume = 2178.1 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 3210.7 Cubic Feet ________ ___________________________________________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.139(CFS) ----------------------------------- 24 - H O U R S T 0 R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h ______________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ( (CFS)) ____________________________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 10.0 ---------------- -- --_---- ___ __------__ ___________________________0+300.00020.00 Q I I I 1+ 0 0.0004 0.01 Q 1+30 0.0006 0.00 Q 2+ 0 0.0008 0.01 Q 2+30 0.0011 0.01 Q 3+ 0 0.0014 0.01 QV 3+30 0.0017 0.01 QV 4+ 0 0.0021 0.01 QV 4+30 0.0025 0.01 QV 5+ 0 0.0030 0.01 Q V I 5+30 0.0034 0.01 Q V I 6+ 0 0.0039 0.01 Q V 6+30 0.0045 0.01 Q V 7+ 0 0.0051 0.02 Q V - 7+30 0.0058 0.02 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0066 0.02 Q V 8+30 0.0067 0.00 Q V 9+ 0 0.0074 0.01 Q V I 9+30 0.0088 0.04 Q V 10+ 0 0.0109 0.05 Q V 10+30 0.0114 0.01 Q VI ll+ 0 0.0133 0.05 Q V 11+30 0.0150 0.04 Q V 12+ 0 0.0164 0.03 Q I v • 12+30 0.0 0. 0 Q I V I 13+ 0 0.0242 242 0.10 Q I VI I I 13+30 0.0300 0.14 Q I V 14+ 0 0.0331 0.08 Q I V 14+30 0.0371 0.10 Q I VI 15+ 0 0.0410 0.09 Q I V 15+30 0.0445 0.08 Q V 16+ 0 0.0469 0.06 Q V 16+30 0.0472 0.01 Q V 17+ 0 0.0474 0.00 Q V 17+30 0.0477 0.01 Q V 18+ 0 0.0480 0.01 Q V 18+30 0.0482 0.01 Q v l 19+ 0 0.0484 0.00 Q V 19+30 0.0486 0.01 Q v l 20+ 0 0.0488 0.00 Q VI 20+30 0.0490 0.00 Q VI 21+ 0 0.0491 0.00 Q VI 21+30 0.0493 0.00 Q VI 22+ 0 0.0495 0.00 Q VI 22+30 0.0496 0.00 Q VI 23+ 0 0.0497 0.00 Q VI 23+30 0.0499 0.00 Q VI 24+ 0 0.0500 0.00 Q VI _______________________________________________________________________ • EX-10YR-24HR-Page 3 of') PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM ❑ n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX24100.out ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 --------------- -------_---------' English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- 100 YEAR EXISTING HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 3RD ST. PROJECT -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) _ 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time - 0.011 Hr. Lag time = 0.65 Min. • 25% of lag time = 0.16 Min. 40% of lag time = 0.26 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(AC.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.500(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 4.500(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious % 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.144 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-100YR-24HR-Page 1 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.144 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr)) = 0.072 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.740 --------------------------------------------------------------------- • U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve ----------------- -- -_-- Unit Hydrog raP h Data ----------------------------------------__ Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 4605.302 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum- 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.045 0.253 0.033 0.01 2 1.00 0.70 0.063 0.247 0.047 0.02 3 1.50 0.60 0.054 0.241 0.040 0.01 4 2.00 0.70 0.063 0.235 0.047 0.02 5 2.50 0.80 0.072 0.230 0.053 0.02 6 3.00 1.00 0.090 0.224 0.067 0.02 7 3.50 1.00 0.090 0.219 0.067 0.02 8 4.00 1.10 0.099 0.213 0.073 0.03 9 4.50 1.30 0.117 0.208 0.087 0.03 10 5.00 1.50 0.135 0.203 0.100 0.04 11 5.50 1.30 0.117 0.197 0.087 0.03 12 6.00 1.60 0.144 0.192 0.107 0.04 13 6.50 1.80 0.162 0.187 0.120 0.04 14 7.00 2.00 0.180 0.182 0.133 0.05 15 7.50 2.10 0.189 0.177 --- 0.01 16 8.00 2.50 0.225 0.172 --- 0.05 17 8.50 3.00 0.270 0.168 --- 0.10 18 9.00 3.30 0.297 0.163 --- 0.13 • 19 0.00 3.30 0.387 0.154 --- 0.19 23 20 10.00 9.30 0.387 0.159 0.23 21 10.50 3.00 0.270 0.149 0.12 22 11.00 4.00 0.360 0.145 --- 0.21 23 11.50 3.80 0.342 0.141 --- 0.20 24 12.00 3.50 0.315 0.137 --- 0.18 25 12.50 5.10 0.459 0.133 --- 0.33 26 13.00 5.70 0.513 0.129 --- 0.38 27 13.50 6.80 0.612 0.125 --- 0.49 28 14.00 4.60 0.414 0.121 --- 0.29 29 14.50 5.30 0.477 0.117 --- 0.36 30 15.00 5.10 0.459 0.114 --- 0.35 31 15.50 4.70 0.423 0.110 --- 0.31 32 16.00 3.80 0.342 0.107 --- 0.23 33 16.50 0.80 0.072 0.104 0.053 0.02 34 17.00 0.60 0.054 0.101 0.040 0.01 35 17.50 1.00 0.090 0.098 0.067 0.02 36 18.00 0.90 0.081 0.095 0.060 0.02 37 18.50 0.80 0.072 0.092 0.053 0.02 38 19.00 0.50 0.045 0.089 0.033 0.01 39 19.50 0.70 0.063 0.087 0.047 0.02 40 20.00 0.50 0.045 0.085 0.033 0.01 41 20.50 0.60 0.054 0.082 0.040 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.045 0.080 0.033 0.01 43 21.50 0.50 0.045 0.078 0.033 0.01 44 22.00 0.50 0.045 0.077 0.033 0.01 45 22.50 0.50 0.045 0.075 0.033 0.01 46 23.00 0.40 0.036 0.074 0.027 0.01 47 23.50 0.40 0.036 0.073 0.027 0.01 48 24.00 0.40 0.036 0.072 0.027 0.01 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 4.8 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 2.39(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[ (In)/(Ft.)] = O.I(AC.Ft) • Total soil loss = 2.11(In) Total soil loss = 0.090(AC.Ft) EX-100YR-24HR-Page 2 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall = 4.50(In) Flood volume = 4424.8 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 3906.0 Cubic Feet -------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.250(CFS) 29 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ( (CFS)) _________________________ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 __ _______ ______ __ _____________ 0+30 0.0002 0.01 Q I 1+ 0 0.0006 0.01 Q 1+30 0.0009 0.01 Q 2+ 0 0.0012 0.01 Q 2+30 0.0016 0.01 Q 3+ 0 0.0021 0.01 Q 3+30 0.0026 0.01 QV 4+ 0 0.0032 0.01 QV 4+30 0.0038 0.02 QV 5+ 0 0.0046 0.02 QV 5+30 0.0052 0.02 Q V I 6+ 0 0.0060 0.02 Q V I 6+30 0.0069 0.02 Q V I 7+ 0 0.0079 0.02 Q V I 7+30 0.0082 0.01 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0093 0.03 Q V I 8+30 0.0114 0.05 Q V I 9+ 0 0.0143 0.07 Q V I 9+30 0.0184 0.10 Q V I 10+ 0 0.0233 0.12 Q VI 10+30 0.0259 0.06 Q V ll+ 0 0.0305 0.11 Q V 11+30 0.0347 0.10 Q I V I 12+ 0 0.0385 0.09 Q V I • 12+30 0.0 0. Q V I 13+ 0 0.0536 536 0.2020 Q I V I I 13+30 0.0640 0.25 IQ I I V I 14+ 0 0.0702 0.15 Q I I V 1 1 14+30 0.0778 0.18 Q I I V 15+ 0 0.0852 0.18 Q I I I V 15+30 0.0918 0.16 Q I I I V I 16+ 0 0.0968 0.12 Q I I I V 1 16+30 0.0972 0.01 Q I I I V 1 17+ 0 0.0975 0.01 Q 1 1 1 V 1 17+30 0.0980 0.01 Q I I I V 1 18+ 0 0.0984 0.01 Q I I I V I 18+30 0.0988 0.01 Q 1 1 1 V I 19+ 0 0.0991 0.01 Q I I I VI 19+30 0.0994 0.01 Q I I I VI 20+ 0 0.0997 0.01 Q I I VI 20+30 0.1000 0.01 Q I I I VI 21+ 0 0.1002 0.01 Q VI 21+30 0.1005 0.01 Q VI 22+ 0 0.1007 0.01 Q I I I VI 22+30 0.1010 0.01 Q I I I VI 23+ 0 0.1012 0.00 Q I I I VI 23+30 0.1014 0.00 Q I I I VI 24+ 0 0.1016 0.00 Q I I I V ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EX-100YR-24HR-Page 3 of 3 DEVELOPED 24 HOUR STORMS - s - DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H v d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTDV242.out • ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format __-____ ________________ 2 YEAR DEVELOPED CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 4/19/06 ____________________________________I-__________ Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) 0.001 S Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 300.00(Ft. ) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 100.00(Ft. ) Length along longest watercourse = 0.057 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.019 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.40(Ft. ) Slope along watercourse = 24.6400 Ft./Mi. Average Nanning's 'N' = 0.015 Lag time = 0.015 Hr. Lag time = 0.88 Min. • 40% of lag time = 0. in. 409 of lag time = 0.35 35 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: .Area(Ac. ) [1] Rainfal 1(In) [21 Weighting[1'2] 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.51 1_80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(AC. ) [II Rain£all(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 2.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 1.800(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 1.800(In) Sub-Area Data: • Area(Ac. ) Runoff Index Impervious & 0.510 56.00 0.890 DEV. 2YR-24HR-Page 1 of DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj . Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec. ) (In/Hr) • 56.0 56.0 0.511 0.890 0.102 1-000 0.102 Sum (F) = 0.102 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.102 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/Hr) ) = 0.051 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.240 --------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve ---_------_ _-----__ Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % ICFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 3427 480 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max Low (in/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.018 0.178 0.004 0.01 2 1.00 0-70 0.025 0.174 0.006 0.02 3 1.50 0.60 0.022 0.170 0.005 0.02 4 2.00 0-70 0.025 0.166 0-006 0.02 5 2.50 0.80 0.029 0.162 0.007 0.02 6 3.00 1.00 0.036 0.158 0.009 0.03 7 3.50 1.00 0-036 0.154 0.009 0.03 8 4.00 1.10 0.040 0.151 0.010 0.03 9 4.50 1.30 0.047 0.147 0.011 0.04 10 5.00 1.50 0.054 0.143 0.013 0-04 11 5.50 1.30 0.047 0.139 0.011 0.04 • 12 6.00 1.60 0-058 0.136 0.014 0-04 13 6.50 1-80 0.065 0.132 0.016 0.05 14 7.00 2.00 0.072 0.129 0.017 0.05 15 7.50 2.10 0.076 0.125 0.018 0.06 16 8.00 2.50 0.090 0.122 0.022 0.01 17 8.50 3.00 0.108 0.118 0.026 0.08 18 9.00 3.30 0.119 0.115 --- 0.00 19 9.50 3.90 0.140 0.119 --- 0.03 20 10.00 4.30 0.155 0.109 --- 0-05 21 10.50 3-00 0.108 0.106 --- 0.00 22 11.00 4.00 0.144 0.102 --- 0-04 23 11.50 3.80 0-137 0.099 --- 0.04 24 12.00 3.50 0.126 0.097 --- 0.03 25 12.50 5.10 0-164 0.094 --- 0.09 26 13.00 5.70 0.205 0.091 --- 0.11 27 13.50 6.80 0.245 0.088 --- 0.16 28 14.00 4.60 0.166 0.086 --- 0.08 29 14.50 5.30 0.191 0.083 --- 0.11 30 15.00 5.10 0.184 0.080 --- 0.10 31 15.50 4.70 0.169 0.078 --- 0.09 32 16.00 3.80 0.137 0.076 --- 0.06 33 16.50 0.00 0.029 0.073 0.007 0.02 34 17.00 0.60 0.022 0.071 0.005 0.02 35 17.50 i.00 0.036 0.069 0.009 0.03 36 118.00 0.90 0.032 0.067 0.008 0.02 37 18.50 0.80 0.029 0.065 0.007 0.02 38 19.00 0.50 0.01.8 0.063 0.004 0.01 39 19.50 0.70 0.025 0.061 0.006 0.02 40 20.00 0.50 0.018 0.060 0.004 1.0i 41 20.50 0.60 0.022 0.058 0.005 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.018 0.057 0.004 0.01 43 21.50 0.50 0.018 0.055 0.004 0.01 44 22.00 0.50 0.01.8 0.054 0.004 0.01 45 22.50 0.50 0.018 0.053 0.004 0-01 • 46 23.00 0.40 0-014 0.052 0.003 0.01. 47 23.50 0.40 0-014 0.051 0.003 0-01 DEV. 2YR-24HR-Page 2 of 3 DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 48 24.00 0.40 0.014 0.051 0.003 0.01 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 1.9 Flood volume - Effective rainfall. 0.95(In) times area 0.5(Ac_)/[(In)/(Ft. )] = 0.0(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss = 0.85(In) • Total soil loss = 0.036(Ac.Ft) Total rainfall = 1.80(In) Flood volume = 1758.0 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 1574.4 Cubic Feet -------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.081(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T 0 R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ( (CFS) ) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Tfine(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+30 0.0003 0.01 Q 1+ 0 0.0007 0.01 Q 1+30 0.0010 0.01 QV 2+ 0 0.0015 0.01 QV 2+30 0.0019 0.01 QV 3+ 0 0.0025 0.01 Q V I 3+30 0.0031 0.01 Q V I 4+ 0 0.0037 0.02 Q V I 4+30 0.0045 0.02 Q V I 5+ 0 0.0053 0.02 Q V I 5+30 0.0061 0.02 Q V I 6+ 0 0.0070 0.02 Q V I 6+30 0.0081 0.03 Q V I 7+ 0 0.0092 0.03 Q VI 7+30 0.0105 0.03 Q V 8+ 0 0.0119 0.04 Q V 8+30 0.0137 0.04 Q I V 9+ 0 0.0137 0.00 Q I V • 9+30 0.013 0.0 Q V 10+ 0 0.0153 0.022 Q V 10+30 0-0154 0.00 Q V 11+ 0 0.0163 0.02 Q I V I 11+30 0.0171 0.02 Q V I 12+ 0 0.0177 0.02 0 1 V I 12+30 0.0196 0.05 Q VI 13+ 0 0.0220 0.06 Q V 13+30 0.0254 0.09 Q I V 14+ 0 0.0271 0.04 Q I V I 14+30 0.0293 0.06 Q I I VI 15+ 0 0.0315 0.05 Q I I v 15+30 0.0335 0.05 Q I I I V 16+ 0 0.0348 0.03 Q I- I I V 16+30 0.0352 0.01 Q I I I V 17+ 0 0.0356 0.01 Q I I I V 17+30 0.0362 0.01 Q I I I V 18+ 0 0.0367 0.01 Q I I I v 18+30 0.0372 0.01 Q I I v 19+ 0 0.0375 0.01 Q I I I V 1 19+30 0.0379 0.01 Q I I I V 1 20+ 0 0.0381 0.01 Q I I I V I 20+30 0.0385 0.01 Q I I I V 1 21+ 0 0.0388 0.01 Q I I v 1 21+30 0.0391 0.01 Q I I I V 1 22+ 0 0.0394 0.01 Q I I I VI 22+30 0.0397 0.01 Q I I I VI 23+ 0 0.0399 0.01. Q I VI 23+30 0.0401 0.01 Q I VI 24+ 0 0.0404 0.01 Q I VI ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEV. 2YR-24HR-Page 3 of') DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTDV2410.out ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC S WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 YEAR DEVELOPED CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 4/19/06 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 300.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 100.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.057 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.019 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.40(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 24.6400 Ft./Mi- Average Manning's 'N' = 0.015 Lag time = 0.015 Hr. Lag time = 0.88 Min. • 25% of lag time = 0.22 Min. 40% of lag time = 0.35 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Ared(Ae.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 10.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) point rain (area averaged) = 2.911(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 8 Adjusted average point rain = 2.911(In) • Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious 9 DEV. lOYR-24HR-Page 1 of DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 0.510 56.00 0.890 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F • AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) 56.0 56.0 0.511 0.890 0.102 Sum 00 _ 00 102 102 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.102 Minimum soil loss rate 1 (In/Hr)) = 0.051 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.240 ______________________________________ U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve ____________________________________________________________________ Unit Hydrograph Data _____________________________________________________________________ ❑nit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit (CFS)graph (hrs) _ _ _ _________________________________________________________ __-____ 1 0.500 3427.480 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 _______________________________________________________________________ Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.029 0.178 0.007 0.02 2 1.00 0.70 0.041 0.174 0.010 0.03 3 1.50 0.60 0.035 0.170 0.008 0.03 4 2.00 0.70 0.041 0.166 0.010 0.03 5 2.50 0.80 0.047 0.162 0.011 0.04 6 3.00 1.00 0.058 0.158 0.014 0.04 7 3.50 1.00 0.058 0.154 0.014 0.04 8 4.00 1.10 0.064 0.151 0.015 0.05 9 4.50 1.30 0.076 0.147 0.018 0.06 10 5.00 1.50 0.087 0.143 0.021 0.07 • 11 6. 0 1.30 0.0 0.13 0.0 0.0 12 .00 1.60 0.093 93 0.136 0.022 22 0.07 13 6.50 1.80 0.105 0.132 0.025 0.08 14 7.00 2.00 0.116 0.129 0.028 0.09 15 7.50 2.10 0.122 0.125 0.029 9 16 8.00 2.50 0.146 0.122 0.02 17 8.50 3.00 0.175 0.118 --- 0.00.06 18 9.00 3.30 0.192 0.115 --- 0.12 19 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.112 ---20 10.00 4.30 0.250 0.109 --- 14 0 0.14 21 10.50 3.00 0.175 0.106 --- 07 22 11.00 4.00 0.233 0.102 --- 0.13 23 11.50 3.80 0.221 0.099 --- 0.12 24 12.00 3.50 0.204 0.097 --- 0.11 25 12.50 5.10 0.297 0.094 --- 0.20 26 13.00 5.70 0.332 0.091 --- 0.24 27 13.50 6.80 0.396 0.088 --- 0.31 28 14.00 4.60 0.268 0.086 --- 0.18 29 14.50 5.30 0.309 0.083 --- 0.23 30 15.00 5.10 0.297 0.080 --- 0.22 31 15.50 4.70 0.274 0.078 --- 0.20 32 16.00 3.80 0.221 0.076 --- 0.15 33 16.50 0.80 0.047 0.073 0.011 0.04 34 17.00 0.60 0.035 0.071 0.008 0.03 35 17.50 1.00 0.058 0.069 0.014 0.04 36 18.00 0.90 0.052 0.067 0.013 0.04 37 18.50 0.80 0.047 0.065 0.011 0.04 38 19.00 0.50 0.029 0.063 0.007 0.02 39 19.50 0.70 0.041 0.061 0.010 0.03 40 20.00 0.50 0.029 0.060 0.007 0.02 41 20.50 0.60 0.035 0.058 0.008 0.03 42 21.00 0.50 0.029 0.057 0.007 0.02 43 21.50 0.50 0.029 0.055 0.007 0.02 44 22.00 0.50 0.029 0.054 0.007 0.02 • 45 22.50 0.50 0.029 0.053 0.007 0.02 96 23.00 0.40 0.023 0.052 0.006 0.02 DEV. IOYR-24HR-Page 2 of 4 DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 47 23.50 0.40 0.023 0.051 0.006 0.02 48 24.00 0.40 0.023 0.051 0.006 0.02 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 3.8 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 1.89(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.)] = 0.1(Ac.Ft) • Total soil loss = 1.02(In) Total soil loss = 0.043(Ac.Ft) Total rainfall = 2.91(In) Flood volume = 3500.0 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 1888.8 Cubic Feet --------------------------------------______________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.158(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T 0 R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h ____________________________________________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ( (CFS)) ____________________________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 __ _______ ______ _ ____ _------------------_________ 0+30 0.0005 0.01 Q 1+ 0 0.0011 0.02 Q 1 1+30 0.0017 0.01 Q 2+ 0 0.0024 0.02 QV 2+30 0.0031 0.02 QV 3+ 0 0.0040 0.02 Q V 3+30 0.0050 0.02 Q V 4+ 0 0.0060 0.03 Q V 4+30 0.0072 0.03 Q V 5+ 0 0.0086 0.03 Q V 5+30 0.0099 0.03 Q V 6+ 0 0.0114 0.04 Q V 6+30 0.0131 0.04 Q V I I 7+ 0 0.0149 0.05 Q V I 7+30 0.0169 0.05 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0174 0.01 Q V I 1 8+30 0.0186 0.03 Q VI • 9+ 0 0.02 0.0 Q V 9+30 0.0227 27 0.06 Q V I I I 10+ 0 0.0257 0.07 Q I V 10+30 0.0272 0.04 Q I V 1 ll+ 0 0.0300 0.07 Q I V 11+30 0.0325 0.06 Q I V 12+ 0 0.0348 0.06 Q I V 12+30 0.0391 0.10 Q I VI 13+ 0 0.0443 0.12 Q I V 13+30 0.0508 0.16 Q I V 14+ 0 0.0547 0.09 Q I V 14+30 0.0595 0.12 Q 1 VI 15+ 0 0.0641 0.11 Q V 15+30 0.06B2 0.10 Q I V 16+ 0 0.0713 0.07 Q I V 16+30 0.0721 0.02 Q I V 17+ 0 0.0726 0.01 Q I V 17+30 0.0736 0.02 Q I V 18+ 0 0.0744 0.02 Q I V 18+30 0.0752 0.02 Q I V 19+ 0 0.0756 0.01 Q I V 19+30 0.0763 0.02 Q I V 20+ 0 0.0768 0.01 Q I V 20+30 0.0773 0.01 Q I V 21+ 0 0.0778 0.01 Q I V 21+30 0.0783 0.01 Q I V 22+ 0 0.0787 0.01 Q I VI 22+30 0.0792 0.01 Q I VI 23+ 0 0.0796 0.01 Q I VI 23+30 0.0800 0.01 Q I I I VI 24+ 0 0.0803 0.01 Q I I I VI ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEV. IOYR-24HR-Page 3 of DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTDV24100.out ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC S WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - S/N 867 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format ------------------------ 100 YEAR DEVELOPED HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 4/19/06 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 300.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid 100.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.057 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.019 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.40(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 29.6400 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.015 Lag time = 0.015 Hr. Lag time = 0.88 Min. • 25% of lag time = 0. Min. 40%0& of lag time = 0.3535 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(S) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Ared(Ae.) [11 Rainfall(In) [21 Weighting[1'23 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [11 Rainfall(In) [21 Weighting[1'23 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.500(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 8 Adjusted average point rain = 4.500(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious 8 • 0.510 56.00 0.890 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) DEV. 100YR-24HR-Page I of') DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) 56.0 56.0 0.511 0.890 0.102 1.000 0.102 • Sum (F) = 0.102 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.102 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/Hr)) = 0.051 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.240 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data ----_ ---------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CPS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 3427.480 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.045 0.178 0.011 0.03 2 1.00 0.70 0.063 0.114 0.015 0.05 3 1.50 0.60 0.054 0.170 0.013 0.04 4 2.00 0.70 0.063 0.166 0.015 0.05 5 2.50 0.80 0.072 0.162 0.017 0.05 6 3.00 1.00 0.090 0.158 0.022 0.07 7 3.50 1.00 0.090 0.154 0.022 0.07 8 4.00 1.10 0.099 0.151 0.024 0.08 9 4.50 1.30 0.117 0.147 0.028 0.09 10 5.00 1.50 0.135 0.143 0.032 0.10 11 5.50 1.30 0.117 0.139 0.028 0.09 12 6.00 1.60 0.144 0.136 --- 0.01 • 13 7.00 2.00 0.180 0.129 --- 0.05 19 7.00 2.00 0.180 0.129 0.05 15 7.50 2.10 0.189 0.125 0.06 16 8.00 2.50 0.225 0.122 --- 0.10 17 8.50 3.00 0.270 0.118 --- 0.15 18 9.00 3.30 0.297 0.115 --- 0.18 19 9.50 3.90 0.351 0.112 --- 0.24 20 10.00 4.30 0.387 0.109 --- 0.28 21 10.50 3.00 0.270 0.106 --- 0.16 22 11.00 4.00 0.360 0.102 --- 0.26 23 11.50 3.80 0.342 0.099 --- 0.24 24 12.00 3.50 0.315 0.097 --- 0.22 25 12.50 5.10 0.459 0.094 --- 0.37 26 13.00 5.70 0.513 0.091 --- 0.42 27 13.50 6.80 0.612 0.088 --- 0.52 28 14.00 4.60 0.414 0.086 --- 0.33 29 14.50 5.30 0.477 0.083 --- 0.39 30 15.00 5.10 0.459 0.080 --- 0.38 31 15.50 4.70 0.423 0.078 --- 0.35 32 16.00 3.80 0.342 0.076 --- 0.27 33 16.50 0.80 0.072 0.073 0.017 0.05 34 17.00 0.60 0.054 0.071 0.013 0.04 35 17.50 1.00 0.090 0.069 --- 0.02 36 18.00 0.90 0.081 0.067 --- 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.072 0.065 --- 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.045 0.063 0.011 0.03 39 19.50 0.70 0.063 0.061 --- 0.00 40 20.00 0.50 0.045 0.060 0.011 0.03 41 20.50 0.60 0.054 0.058 0.013 0.04 42 21.00 0.50 0.045 0.057 0.011 0.03 43 21.50 0.50 0.045 0.055 0.011 0.03 44 22.00 0.50 0.045 0.054 0.011 0.03 45 22.50 0.50 0.045 0.053 0.011 0.03 46 23.00 0.40 0.036 0.052 0.009 0.03 • 47 23.50 0.40 0.036 0.051 0.009 0.03 48 24.00 0.40 0.036 0.051 0.009 0.03 DEV. 100YR-24HHR-Page 2 of') DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Sum = 100.0 Sum = 6.2 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 3.10(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.) ] = 0.1(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss = 1.40(In) Total soil loss = 0.059(Ac.Ft) • Total rainfall = n) 5739.6 Flood volume = 5739 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 2591.2 Cubic Feet ____________________________________________________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.269(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h ___________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS) ) ____ ___ __ ________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume AC.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 _______________________________________________________________________ 0+30 0.0007 0.02 Q 1+ 0 0.0017 0.02 Q 1+30 0.0026 0.02 Q 2+ 0 0.0036 0.02 QV 2+30 0.0048 0.03 QV 3+ 0 0.0063 0.04 QV 3+30 0.0077 0.04 Q V 4+ 0 0.0093 0.04 Q V 4+30 0.0112 0.05 Q V 5+ 0 0.0134 0.05 4 V 5+30 0.0153 0.05 Q V 6+ 0 0.0154 0.00 Q V 6+30 0.0161 0.02 Q V 7+ 0 0.0172 0.03 Q V 7+30 0.0185 0.03 Q V 8+ 0 0.0207 0.05 Q V 8+30 0.0239 0.08 Q V I 9+ 0 0.0278 0.09 Q V I 9+30 0.0329 0.12 Q VI • 10+ 0 0.0388 0.14 Q V 10+30 0.0423923 0.08 4 I V I I I ll+ 0 0.0478 0.13 Q I V 11+30 0.0529 0.12 Q V 12+ 0 0.0576 0.11 4 V 12+30 0.0653 0.19 Q VI 13+ 0 0.0743 0.22 Q V 13+30 0.0854 0.27 IQ I V 14+ 0 0.0924 0.17 Q I V 14+30 0.1008 0.20 4 I I V 15+ 0 0.1088 0.19 Q I I V 15+30 0.1162 0.18 Q I I V 16+ 0 0.1218 0.14 Q I I V 16+30 0.1230 0.03 Q I I V 17+ 0 0.1239 0.02 Q I V 1 17+30 0.1243 0.01 Q I V 1 18+ 0 0.1246 0.01 Q I V 1 18+30 0.1248 0.00 Q I V 1 19+ 0 0.1255 0.02 Q I V 1 19+30 0.1255 0.00 Q I V 1 20+ 0 0.1262 0.02 Q I V 1 20+30 0.1271 0.02 Q I V 1 21+ 0 0.1278 0.02 Q 1 V 1 21+30 0.1286 0.02 Q I VI 22+ 0 0.1293 0.02 4 I VI 22+30 0.1300 0.02 Q I VI 23+ 0 0.1306 0.01 4 I VI 23+30 0.1312 0.01 Q I VI 24+ 0 0.1318 0.01 Q I V ----------------------------------------------------------------------- • DEV. IOOYR-24HR-Page 3 of 3 HYDROLOGY MAP - 6 - • PRE-DEVELOPED 24 HOUR STORMS - a - PRE DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX242.out • 4++h+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++4+++++i++++ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 5 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 __________________________________________________________ English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format ________________________________________________________________ 2 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 3RD ST. PROJECT -------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time = 0.011 Hr. Lag time = 0.65 Min. • % of lag time z 0. 6 Min. 40 90% of lag time = 0.26 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [21 Weighting[1*2] 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(AC.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2) Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 2.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) - 1,800(ln) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 1.800(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious % 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj, infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec. ) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.199 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-2YR-24HR-Page I of 3 PRE-DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.144 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/Hr) ) = 0.072 (for 24 hour storm duration) soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.740 ___ ---------------------------------------------------------- • U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data ______________ _______________________________________________________ unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph 8 (CFS) _________ ---------------_-----------------------------------------___ 1 0.500 4605.302 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ______________________________________________________________________ Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr. ) Percent (In/Hr) Max Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.018 0.253 0.013 0.00 2 1.00 0.70 0.025 0.247 0.019 0.01 3 1.50 0.60 0.022 0.241 0.016 0.01 9 2.00 0.70 0.025 0.235 0.019 0.01 5 2.50 0.80 0.029 0.224 00.02 02 7 0.01 6 3.00 1.00 0.036 0.219 . 0.01 7 3.50 1.00 0.036 0.23 0.029 0.01 0.01 B 4.00 1.10 0.040 0.21 0.029 0.01 9 4.50 1.30 0.047 0.208 0.035 10 5.00 1.50 0.059 0.203 0.040 0.01 11 5.50 1.30 0.047 0.197 0.035 0.01 12 6.00 1.60 0.058 0.192 0.093 0.01 13 6.50 1.80 0.065 0.187 0.048 0.02 14 7.00 2.00 0.072 0.182 0.053 0.02 15 7.50 2.10 0.076 0.177 0.056 0.02 16 8.00 2.50 0.090 0.172 0.067 0.02 17 8.50 3.00 0.108 0.168 0.080 0.03 • 18 9.50 3.90 0.140 0.158 0.104 0.04 19 9.50 3.90 0.190 0.150 0.109 O.Qa 20 10.00 4.30 0.155 0.159 21 10.50 3.00 0.108 0.149 0.080 0.03 22 11.00 4.00 0.144 0,145 0.107 0.04 23 11.50 3.80 0.137 0.141 0.101 0.04 24 12.00 3.50 0.126 0.137 0.093 0.03 25 12.50 5.10 0.184 0.133 --- 0.05 26 13.00 5.70 0.205 0.129 --- 0.08 27 13.50 6.60 0.245 0.125 --- 0.12 28 14.00 4.60 0.166 0.121 --- 0.04 29 14.50 5.30 0.191 0.117 --- 0.07 30 15.00 5.10 0.184 0.114 --- 0.07 31 15.50 4.70 0.169 0.110 --- 0.066 32 16.00 3.80 0.137 0.107 --- 0.03 33 16.50 0.80 0.029 0.104 0.021 0.01 34 17.00 0.60 0.022 0.101 0.016 0.01 35 17.50 1.00 0.036 0.098 0.027 0.01 36 18.00 0.90 0.032 0.095 0.024 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.029 0.092 0.021 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.018 0.089 0.013 0.00 39 19.50 0.70 0.025 0.087 0.019 0.01 40 20.00 0.50 0.018 0.085 0.013 0.00 41 20.50 0.60 0.022 0.082 0.016 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.018 0.080 0.013 0.00 43 21.50 0.50 0.018 0.078 0.013 0.00 44 22.00 0.50 0.018 0.077 0.013 0.00 45 22.50 0.50 0.018 0.075 0.013 0.00 46 23.00 0.40 0.014 0.074 0.011 0.00 47 23.50 0.40 0.014 0.073 0.011 0.00 48 24.00 0.40 0.014 0.072 0.011 0.00 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 1.0 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 0.52(In) times area 0.5(Ac.1/[ (In)/(Ft.) 1 = 0.0(Ac.Ft) • Total soil loss = 1.28(In) 'total soil loss = 0.055(Ac.Ft) EX-2YR-24HR-Page 2 of 1 PRE-DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall = 1.80(In) Flood volume = 958.1 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 2374.3 Cubic Feet ____________________________________________________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.062(CFS) 29 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h _____________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS) ) ____________________________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume AC.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2_5 5.0 7.5 10.0 __________________________________ 0+30 0.0001 0.00 Q I 1+ 0 0.0002 0.00 Q 1+30 0.0004 0.00 Q 2+ 0 0.0005 0.00 Q 2+30 0.0007 0.00 QV 3+ 0 0.0009 0.00 QV 3+30 0.0011 0.00 QV 4+ 0 0.0013 0.01 Q V I 1 4+30 0.0015 0.01 Q V 5+ 0 0.0018 0.01 Q V 5+30 0.0021 0.01 Q V 6+ 0 0.0024 0.01 Q V I 6+30 0.0028 0.01 Q V 1 7+ 0 0.0032 0.01 Q V 1 7+30 0.0036 0.01 Q V I I 8+ 0 0.0041 0.01 Q V I 8+30 0.0047 0.01 Q V I I I 9+ 0 0.0053 0.02 Q VI 9+30 0.0061 0.02 Q V 10+ 0 0.0061 0.00 Q IV 1 10+30 0.0061 0.01 Q I V I ll+ 0 0.0075 0.02 Q I V 11+30 0.0083 0.02 Q I V I 12+ 0 0.0090 0.02 Q I V I1 • 12+30 0.017 0.03 Q I V 13+ 0 0.0117 0.09 Q I V I I 13+30 0.0142 0.06 Q I I V 14+ 0 0.0152 0.02 Q I I V 14+30 0.0167 0.04 Q I I V 15+ 0 0.0182 0.04 Q I V 15+30 0.0195 0.03 Q I V 16+ 0 0.0201 0.02 Q I V 16+30 0.0202 0.00 Q I V 17+ 0 0.0204 0.00 Q I V 1 17+30 0.0206 0.00 Q V I 18+ 0 0.0207 0.00 Q V 1 18+30 0.0209 0.00 Q V 1 19+ 0 0.0210 0.00 Q I V 1 19+30 0.0211 0.00 Q V 1 20+ 0 0.0212 0.00 Q I V 1 20+30 0.0214 0.00 Q I V 1 21+ 0 0.0215 0.00 Q I VI 21+30 0.0216 0.00 Q I V1 22+ 0 0.0217 0.00 Q I VI 22+30 0.0218 0.00 Q I VI 23+ 0 0.0218 0.00 Q VI 23+30 0.0219 0.00 Q VI 24+ 0 0.0220 0.00 Q V ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EX-2YR-24HR-Page 3 of 3 PRE-DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (C) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX2410.out ________________________________________________________________________ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - S/N 867 _____________________________________________________________________ English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format __________________________________________ 10 YEAR EXISTING CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 3RD ST. PROJECT _________________ -_______ _ Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time = 0.011 Hr. Lag time = 0.65 Min. • of lag time = 0. 6 Min. 40% 908 of lag time = 0.26 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 10.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 2.911(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 8 Adjusted average point rain = 2.911(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious 8 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.144 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-l0YR-24HR-Page 1 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.144 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr)) = 0.072 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.140 --------------------------------------------------------------------- • U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve ------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph 8 (CFS) '-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 4605.302 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.029 0.253 0.022 0.01 2 1.00 0.70 0.041 0.247 0.030 0.01 3 1.50 0.60 0.035 0.241 0.026 0.01 4 2.00 0.70 0.041 0.235 0.030 0.01 5 2.50 0.80 0.047 0.230 0.034 0.01 6 3.00 1.00 0.058 0.224 0.043 0.02 7 3.50 1.00 0.058 0.219 0.043 0.02 8 4.00 1.10 0.064 0.213 0.047 0.02 9 4.50 1.30 0.076 0.208 0.056 0.02 10 5.00 1.50 0.087 0.203 0.065 0.02 11 5.50 1.30 0.076 0.197 0.056 0.02 12 6.00 1.60 0.093 0.192 0.069 0.02 13 6.50 1.80 0.105 0.1B7 0.078 0.03 14 7.00 2.00 0.116 0.182 0.086 0.03 15 7.50 2.10 0.122 0.177 0.090 0.03 16 8.00 2.50 0.146 0.172 0.108 0.04 17 8.50 3.00 0.175 0.168 --- 0.01 • 18 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.158 --- 0.07 19 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.158 0.07 20 10.00 4.30 0.250 0.159 0.10 21 10.50 3.00 0.175 0.149 --- 0.03 22 11.00 4.00 0.233 0.145 --- 0.09 23 11.50 3.80 0.221 0.141 --- 0.08 24 12.00 3.50 0.204 0.137 --- 0.07 25 12.50 5.10 0.297 0.133 --- 0.16 26 13.00 5.70 0.332 0.129 --- 0.20 27 13.50 6.80 0.396 0.125 --- 0.27 28 14.00 4.60 0.268 0.121 --- 0.15 29 14.50 5.30 0.309 0.117 --- 0.19 30 15.00 5.10 0.297 0.114 --- 0.18 31 15.50 4.70 0.274 0.110 --- 0.1`a 32 16.00 3.80 0.221 0.107 --- 0.11 33 16.50 0.80 0.047 0.104 0.034 0.01 34 17.00 0.60 0.035 0.101 0.026 0.01 35 17.50 1.00 0.058 0.098 0.043 0.02 36 18.00 0.90 0.052 0.095 0.039 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.047 0.092 0.034 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.029 0.089 0.022 0.01 39 19.50 0.70 0.041 0.087 0.030 0.01 40 20.00 0.50 0.029 0.085 0.022 0.01 41 20.50 0.60 0.035 0.082 0.026 0.01 42 21.00 0.50 0.029 0.080 0.022 0.01 43 21.50 0.50 0.029 0.07E 0.022 0.01 44 22.00 0.50 0.029 0.077 0.022 0.01 45 22.50 0.50 0.029 0.075 0.022 0.01 46 23.00 0.40 0.023 0.074 0.017 0.01 47 23.50 0.40 0.023 0.073 0.017 0.01 48 24.00 0.40 0.023 0.072 0.017 0.01 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 2.4 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 1.18(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.) ] = 0.1(Ac.Ft) • Total soil loss = 1.73(In) Total soil loss = 0.079(Ac.Ft) EX-l0YR-24HR-Page 2 of 3 PRE DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall -= 2.91(In) Flood volume = 2178.1 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 3210.7 Cubic Feet --------------------_____________________________________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.139(CFS) ---------------------------- 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h __________________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS)) ____________________________________________________________________ Time(h+m) Volume AC.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 --- 10.0 ________-_-_- _ _______________ -_0+30----_--0 0002----_-0.00 Q I I I 1+ 0 0.0004 0.01 Q I 1+30 0.0006 0.00 Q 2+ 0 0.0008 0.01 Q I 2+30 0.0011 0.01 Q 3+ 0 0.0014 0.01 QV 3+30 0.0017 0.01 QV 4+ 0 0.0021 0.01 QV 4+30 0.0025 0.01 QV I 5+ 0 0.0030 0.01 Q V 5+30 0.0034 0.01 Q V 6+ 0 0.0039 0.01 Q V 6+30 0.0045 0.01 Q V I 7+ 0 0.0051 0.02 Q V 7+30 0.0058 0.02 Q V 8+ 0 0.0066 0.02 Q V I 8+30 0.0067 0.00 Q V 1 9+ 0 0.0074 0.01 Q V 1 9+30 0.0088 0.04 Q V 10+ 0 0.0109 0.05 Q V 10+30 0.0114 0.01 Q VI ll+ 0 0.0133 0.05 Q V 11+30 0.0150 0.04 Q V 12+ 0 0.0164 0.03 Q I V • 12+30 0.0199 0.08 Q V I 13+ 0 0.0242 0.10 Q VI 13+30 0.0300 0.14 Q V 14+ 0 0.0331 0.08 Q I V 14+30 0.0371 0.10 Q I VI 15+ 0 0.0410 0.09 Q I V 15+30 0.0445 0.08 Q I V 16+ 0 0.0469 0.06 Q I V 16+30 0.0472 0.01 Q I V 17+ 0 0.0474 0.00 Q I V 1 17+30 0.0477 0.01 Q V I 16+ 0 0.0480 0.01 Q V 1 10+30 0.0482 0.01 Q V 19+ 0 0.0484 0.00 Q V 1 19+30 0.0486 0.01 Q V 1 20+ 0 0.0488 0.00 Q VI 20+30 0.0490 0.00 Q VI 21+ 0 0.0491 0.00 Q VI 21+30 0.0493 0.00 Q VI 22+ 0 0.0495 0.00 Q VI 22+30 0.0496 0.00 Q VI 23+ 0 0.0497 0.00 Q VI 23+30 0.0499 0.00 Q VI 24+ 0 0.0500 0.00 Q V I _______________________________________________________________________ • EX-l0YR-24HR-Page 3 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (C) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, version 6.0 Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTEX24100.out ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - SIN 867 ------------------------------------------ English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format --------------------------------------------------------------------- 100 YEAR EXISTING PLO CIVIL ENGINEERING 3RD ST. PROJECT --------------- --------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 140.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 70.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.027 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.013 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.50(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 56.5714 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.020 Lag time = 0.011 Hr. Lag time = 0.65 Min. • of lag time = 0. 6 Min. 40% 40$ of lag time = 0.26 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) (2] Weighting[1*2) 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac. ) [li Rainfall(In) (2] Weighting[1*2] 0.31 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.500(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 8 Adjusted average point rain = 4.500(ln) Sub-Area Data: AYea(AC.) Runoff Index Impervious 8 0.510 86.00 0.200 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Ada. Infil. Rate Area& F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 86.0 86.0 0.176 0.200 0.144 1.000 0.144 Sum (F) = 0.144 EX-t00YR-24HR-Page 1 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Area averaged mean soil loss (F) '-"" ) = 0.199 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/flr)) = 0..' (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.740 U n i• t H y d r o g r a p h______________-------------------------- VALLEY S-Curve _________________________________________________ Unit Hydrograph Data ________---___------------___---- Unit time period Time 8 of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph____ (bra) Graph & (CFS) 1 0.500 4605.302 100.000 0.519_______ -------------------------____________ Sum 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ____________________________ Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss ra to(I Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.045 Max Low Low (In/H r) 2 1.000,70 0.253 0.033 0.01 3 1.50 0.60 0.063 0.297 0.047 0.02 4 2.00 0.054 0.241 0.040 0.01 0.70 0.063 0.235 5 2.50 0.80 0.047 0.02 0.072 0.230 0.053 0.02 6 3.00 1.00 7 0.090 0.224 0.067 3.50 1.00 0.090 0.02 8 4.00 1.10 0.219 0.067 0.02 9 9.50 0.099 0.213 0.073 0.03 1.30 0.117 0.20E 10 5.00 1.50 0.135 0.087 0.03 0.117 11 5.50 1.30 0.203 0.100 0.04 12 6.00 1.60 0.144 0 192 0.197 0.087 0.03 13 6.50 1.80 0.162 0.107 0.09 19 7.00 2.00 0.187 0.120 0.04 2. 15 7.50 0.180 0.182 0.133 0.05 10 0.189 0.177 lo` 8.00 2.50 0.225 --- 0.01 17 8.50 3.00 0,172 --- O.OS 0.270 0,168 18 9.50 3.30 0.297 --- 0.10 • 19 0.00 0.1 -- 0.13 3.90 0.351 0.158 20 10.50 4.30 0.387 0.159 0.19 21 11.50 3.00 0.270 0.23 22 11.50 4.00 0.145 --- 0.12 23 11.50 0.342 0.195 --- 3.80 0.392 0.141 0.20 29 12.50 5.10 0.315 --- 0.20 25 13.00 0.133 --- 0.18 5.70 0.513 0.133 26 13.50 6.80 0.513 0.33 27 14.00 4.60 0.125 --- 0.38 0.612 0.125 ' 28 14.50 9.60 0.414 0.121 --- 0.49 29 19.50 5.30 0.477 --- 0.29 30 15.00 5.10 0.117 --- 0.36 31 15.50 0.959 0.114 ___ 9.70 0.423 0.110 0.35 32 16.00 3.80 0.342 --- 0.31 33 16.50 0.80 0.107 --- 0.23 34 17.00 0.072 0.104 0.053 0.60 0.054 0.101 0.02 35 17.50 7.00 0.090 0.040 0.01 36 18.00 0.90 0.098 0.067 0.02 37 18.50 0.80 0.081 0.095 0.060 0.02 38 19.00 0.O72 0.092 0.053 0.50 0.045 0.089 0.02 j 39 19.50 0.70 0.063 0.033 0.01 40 20.00 0.50 0.087 0.047 0.02 41 20.50 0.054 0.085 0.033 0.50 0.045 0.082 0.01 42 21.50 0.50 0.095 0.033 0.01 j 93 21.50 0.50 0,080 0.033 0.01 - 44 22.00 0.095 0.078 0.033 0.50 0.0450.0770.01 45 22.50 0.033 0.01 0.40 0.045 0.075 0.033 0.01 96 23.50 0.90 0.036 47 24.00 0.40 0.036 0.073 0.027 0.01 98 um 0.40 0.072 0.027 0.01 0.030' Sum = 100.0 0.072 0.027 0.01 Flood volume = Effective rainfall Sum = 4.8 times area 2. . 39 j (In) 05(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.)] _• Total soil loss _ 0.1(Ac.Ft) ,. Total soil loss = 2.11(In) 0.090(Ac.Ft) EX-I OOYR-24HR-Page 2 of PRE-DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total rainfall Flood volume = 9924.8 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 3906.0 Cubic Feet -------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0 250(CFS) 29 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h _____________________________________________________________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS) ) ____________________________________ 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ____________________________ Time(h+m) Volume Ac.Ft Q(CF$) 0 _____________________________ 0+30 0.0002 0.01 Q 1 1+ 0 0.0006 0.01 q I 1+30 0.0009 0.01 Q I I 2+ o 0.0012 0.01 Q I 2+30 0.0016 0.01 Q 3+ 0 0.0021 0.01 Q 3+30 0.0026 0.01 Qv 9+ 0 0.0032 0.01 QV I 9+30 0.0038 0.02 QV 5+ 0 0.0046 0.02 QV 5+30 0.0052 0.02 q V I I 6+ 0 0.0060 0.02 Q V 1 I 1 6+30 0.0069 0.02 Q v 7+ 0 0.0079 0.02 Q V 7+30 0.0082 0.01 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0093 0.03 Q V I I 8+30 0.0114 0.05 4 v 9+ 0 0.0143 0.07 Q V 9+30 0.0184 0.10 Q V 10+ 0 0.0233 0.12 10+30 Q VI I 0.0259 0.06 Q V I 11+ 0 0.0305 0.11 Q V 1 11+30 0.0347 0.10 Q 12+ 0 1 V 0.0385 0.09 Q I V • 12+30 0.0 0. Q V I 13+ 0 0.0536 536 0.2020 q 1 I 13+30 0.0640 0.25 V Q V 19+ 0 0.0702 0.15 Q 1 I V 19+30 0.0776 0.18 15+ 0 Q V I 0.0 0.16 Q 15+30 0.0918 18 0.10` Q V IV 16+ 0 0.0968 0.12 Q 16+30 0.0972 0.01 Q V 1 17+ 0 0.0975 0.01 1 V I Q 0.01 Q 17+30 0.0980 V 1 18+ 0 0.0989 0.01 Q V I 18+30 0.0988 0.01 I 1 V 4 V I 19+ 0 0.0591 0.01 Q I 1 VI ' 19+30 0.0994 0.01 Q 20+ 0 0.0997 0.01 Q 1 VI 20+30 0.1000 0.01 q I 1 V1 21+ 0 0.1002 0.01 1 I vl 21+30 0.1005 0.01 Q I I VI 22+ 0 0.1007 0.01 VI 22+30 0.1010 0.01 Q I I VI 23+ 0 0.1012 0.00 q I VI 23+30 0.1014 0.00 q 1 I vl 29+ 0 0.1016 0.00 Q VI ______________________________________ V _______________________I_ __ i EX-100YR-24HR-Page 3 of3 DEVELOPED 24 HOUR STORMS - s - DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM p ,. _ - i a _a 11 A n a t I .s i s -.y_iyht Ic) CIVILCADD/i —LDESLGN, 1989 - 1999, Version e. 1 , - uc oats D /I C,06 �llc 3 'DSTD`- - Tut ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _.-r51G_ Coun�_r S` ,i'hetic Unit Hv,-rcl-y_i tie LhCd u pa^nI.Flnuii c re AF211 1978 _____________________________________________________________________ Eiiy-ish (i.n-_b) L'yaut Units Used Englist, Raintal' Date (Inches} Input Values tis_.. 'dng—sh Units used in -utput mx:nat --------------------------------------------------------------------- EP.R DEVELOPED COMDITiCPI HT;-' CIVT_L Elil=.I p!'ttkl,`!C- J/19/0( _______________________ Drai nave Area = alt`nq L-ngest erox:cse = 3b0.OOr Ft. ) r th al Dnj at_.rconrse measuiaa to ._e. aid = o'.OI Fe-1 Length along iorgest �rateroourse = 0.057 'rii. Lennih alcng longest mea,ured L, cenf-rcid J.019 Pii. ❑i;`erence in elevation = 1.40(Ft- ) Slope n 15 • ... i J F!in. 71"e 30.06 Nin. storm = _ Ho_;:ri s �ser =-t-e 4a s l - ...1-11, i ob 1. 0 0.t10 0. D.cv 'EHR .'.__" _.5,_.r 1.I data: Frea A1Vera Ocd L)C'� ear Rainfall = 4.EOUjIn) ate.: 500;In` v k Ind a ,ems i �is 51 36 00 n.J DEV. 2YR-24HR-Page I of 3 f I I DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Total tiL e2 E!)ry !_ed - 0..Fi i.2n. ) -T RI In`ii. :ate IlnnetV Sous .dj . Infil. Ra*e RreaB F J C 5o.0 0.S O.t.J0 10r rn J� 10[ Area averaged rllean soil loss (F) In/Hr) = 0.102 11inimum soil loss 1.-e.te ( (In/H--) ) = 0.llgi. (nx 24 hour storm duration; Soil 1cw less rate (decl_¢Sal; _ ..240 _____________________________________________________________________ `V.'.,LLF't S-Curve _______________ I ^_____________ -________ _________—______ t..i_t Hy,,ncr:,pn ,,,._.. ____________ U-:it lime Time r,< -ag ni sc ri bu-Son .,nit Hvdrogranh k,rrs) Graph k (CFS) ____-- �.5P.0 1p0_u'00 J.51_ 31 = 1c0.00C Sum= 7LeI----------------------------------------------------------------------- Tine Patt_rn Stor... Rai-7 Los te(I1 HL :_ffecti• ,Hr. In/Hc) rqa_. I T !Ini14, 1 0. i.,.50 0.OIS 0.173 0.0,_':4 _.0P 0.7V 0.025 0.17= ull, 0.C- 1.50 0.022 0.170 0.005 .. <1 L 00 U.7O 0.025 0.166 J.U06 O.U.° 5 I.sc 0.30 0.029 0.162 0_u97 Cl.U2 c 3.00 1 .00 0.03 0.15u 509 0.'v3 i, 7o. • I U 1 oU IJ G , t - O . O J J SZ 12 0, _ 'C 672 20 1U.00 9.30 O.i55 p.109 --- O.li5 10.50 3.00 0.11,Ob O.L36 ___ G.n0 =.0C1 �.I. _ --- O.U-1 11.50 0.00..1 ___ 6,C4 I „ .205 C ___ '. %{S 14.017 4.JIJ ll._I.Sc; n.tHi3 _., I 1i.Ji, 5._,.. 0.iil 0. JHH 31 � -J_ U.u78 O.C9 .i_ OG 0.0C1 :.03 'Cl.:. 0..?Oq 0.0? 37 18.50 1 '0 _.EC I' Oi.c . .5's .J04 O.Cil 01a oils .o o - Jo a srJ I^ r. osa 04 02 0..?Sd U.004 0i cl 014 DEV, 2YR-24HR-Page 2 of 3 I I DEVELOPMENT 2 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 24.00 C.4O 0.014 4.051 n.713 Sum = 1G0.!] Sam = 1 S+ o-a plume = Effective rainfall 0.95(In) ti)Cie5 ar"ca. li. (HC. }/ I, (Iin (FL, 11 = 0.0(AC.F-T O.In(Ti, r 1 yi1 C - f Cso;A . FtI T 1 rainfall 1 90(Ir) t lood volume = 11D6.0 C-ter-r geet "otai $oil Liss = 1i_;4.4 ?;hip. ceet clew rat____ _-'___J_______________`- -PSI _ ______________ - a_ this t,varoc arh = O.O u�____________________________________________________________________ ---. T___T- ',_ --- _---' -. - .. :: U R S T O r.: 14 f f H V d r n g r a p h ________________________.__ _________ Hydrovreoe in 30 Nlnute intervals ( ir'FSI ) ______________________________________________ ____________ Vo1'dme Ac.Ft Q(C, CI 0 1.5 5.0 7 5 10.6 _______________________________________________________________________ iy.30 0.0003 i1,01 Q _- 0 0_iJ00i O.O1 Q 1,30 0.0010 0.01 QV I ,.0015 0.01 Qv I I I 2430 01 QV I I r 3+30 0.u031 0.01 Q .- 0.0037 0.0= 0 V ! - 5+ p 0.0053 5<30 0_0061 U.02 Q V 1 0.0070 0:02 Q V 30 0.0081 0.03 C, _. 0.0105 0.J3 Q V 015 04 --_._ O.OL47 4 - 0.0137 00 Q '- 1 4 4. Ilud it - 1'�T•`. u.OP30 u.06 V v 0,0335 t,.i Q 0.0d 4:: 0.03 Q 3-j .1 35^ 17+ p 0.0553 O.Ol. Q - 173 j O.0362 O.r-il S? 1 F1+ 6 .03-7 ,.. F1 - 10+3G i . .37P 2iT 03 a�g li Q V u 1,17 ju 0. __ ;; _ Q ! • DEV. 2YR-2414R-Page 3 of 3 DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, Version 6.0 �• Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTDV2410.out ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - S/N 867 --------------------------------------------------------------------- English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format -------------------------------------- 10 YEAR DEVELOPED CONDITION HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 4/19/06 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 300.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 100.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.057 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.019 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.40(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 24.6400 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.015 Lag time = 0.015 Hr. • Lag time = 0.88 Min. 25$ of lag time = 0.22 Min. 40% of lag time = 0.35 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(AC.) (1] Rainfall(In) [2) Weighting[1*2] 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 10.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 2.911(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 8 Adjusted average point rain = 2.911(In) • Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious S DEV. 10YR-24HR-Page I of DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 0.510 56.00 0.890 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F • AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) 56.0 56.0 0.511 0.890 0.102 1.000 0.102 Sum (F) = 0.102 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.102 Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr) ) = 0.051 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.240 --------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph % (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 3427.480 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.029 0.178 0.007 0.02 2 1.00 0.70 0.041 0.174 0.010 0.03 3 1.50 0.60 0.035 0.170 0.008 0.03 4 2.00 0.70 0.041 0.166 0.010 0.03 5 2.50 0.80 0.047 0.162 0.011 0.04 6 3.00 1.00 0.058 0.15B 0.014 0.04 7 3.50 1.00 0.058 0.154 0.014 0.04 B 4.00 1.10 0.064 0.151 0.015 0.05 9 4.50 1.30 0.076 0.147 0.018 0.06 10 5.00 1.50 0.087 0.143 0.021 0.07 • 11 5.50 1.30 0.076 0.139 0.018 0.06 12 6.00 1.60 0.093 0.136 0.022 0.07 13 6.50 1.80 0.105 0.7.32 0.025 0.08 14 7.00 2.00 0.116 0.129 0.028 0.09 15 '7.50 2.10 0.122 0.125 0.029 0.09 16 8.00 2.50 0.146 0.122 --- 0.02 17 B.50 3.00 0.175 0.118 --- 0.06 18 9.00 3.30 0.192 0.115 --- 0.08 19 9.50 3.90 0.227 0.112 --- 0.12 20 10.00 4.30 0.250 0.109 --- 0.14 21 10.50 3.00 0.175 0.106 --- 0.07 22 11.00 4.00 0.233 0.102 --- 0.13 23 11.50 3.80 0.291 0.099 --- 0.12 24 12.00 3.50 0.204 0.097 --- 0.11 25 12.50 5.10 0.297 0.094 --- - 0.20 26 13.00 5.70 0.332 0.091 --- 0.24 27 13.50 6.80 0.396 0.088 --- 0.31 26 14.00 4.60 0.268 0.086 --- 0.18 29 14.50 5.30 0.309 0.083 --- 0.23 30 15.00 5.10 0.297 0.080 --- 0.22 31 15.50 4.70 0.274 0.078 --- 0.20 32 16.00 3.80 0.221 0.076 --- 0.15 33 16.50 0.80 0.047 0.073 0.011 0.04 34 17.00 0.60 0.035 0.071 0.008 0.03 35 17.50 1.00 0.058 0.069 0.014 0.04 36 18.00 0.90 0.052 0.067 0.013 0.04 37 18.50 D.BO 0.047 0.065 0.011 0.04 3B 19.00 0.50 0.029 0.063 0.007 0.02 39 19.50 0.70 0.041 0.061 0.010 0.03 40 20.00 0.50 0.029 0.060 0.007 0.02 41 20.50 0.60 0.035 0.058 0.008 0.03 42 21.00 0.50 0.029 0.057 0.007 0.02 43 21.50 0.50 0.029 0.055 0.007 0.02 44 22.00 0.50 0.029 0.054 0.007 0.02 • 45 22.50 0.50 0.029 0.053 0.007 0.02 46 23.00 0.40 0.023 0.052 0,006 0.02 DEV. IOYR-24HR-Page 2 of 4 DEVELOPMENT 10 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM 47 23.50 0.40 0.023 0.051 0.006 0.02 48 24.00 0.40 0.023 0.051 0.006 0.02 Sum = 100.0 Sum = 3.8 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 1.89(In) times area 0.5(Ac.)/[(In)/(Ft.) ] = 0.1(Ac.Ft) • Total soil loss = 1.02(In) Total soil loss = 0.043(Ac.Ft) Total rainfall = 2.91(In) Flood volume = 3500.0 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 1888.8 Cubic Feet ------------------------------------ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.158(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h -------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS)) ----------------------- __-----__-------_----------------- Time(h+m) Volume AC.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+30 0.0005 0.01 Q 1+ 0 0.0011 0.02 Q I 1+30 0.0017 0.01 Q 2+ 0 0.0024 0.02 QV I 2+30 0.0031 0.02 QV 3+ 0 0.0040 0.02 Q V 3+30 0.0050 0.02 Q V I 4+ 0 0.0060 0.03 Q V I 4+30 0.0072 0.03 Q V I 5+ 0 0.0086 0.03 Q V I I 5+30 0.0099 0.03 Q v I 6+ 0 0.0114 0.04 Q V I 6+30 0.0131 0.04 Q V I 7+ 0 0.0149 0.05 Q V I 7+30 0.0169 0.05 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0174 0.01 Q V I 8+30 0.0186 0.03 Q VI • 9+ 0 0.0203 0.0 Q V 9+30 0.0227 0.066 Q V I I 10+ 0 0.0257 0.07 Q I V 10+30 0.0272 0.04 Q I V if+ 0 0.0300 0.07 Q I V 11+30 0.0325 0.06 Q I V I 12+ 0 0.0348 0.06 Q I V I 12+30 0.0391 0.10 Q I VI 13+ 0 0.0443 0.12 Q I V 13+30 0.0508 0.16 Q I I V 14+ 0 0.0547 0.09 Q I I V 14+30 0.0595 0.12 Q I I VI 15+ 0 0.0641 0.11 Q I I V 15+30 0.0682 0.10 Q I I I V 16+ 0 0.0713 0.07 Q I I I v 16+30 0.0721 0.02 Q I I v 17+ 0 0.0726 0.01 Q I I I V 17+30 0.0736 0.02 Q I I I V 18+ 0 0.0744 0.02 Q I I I V 18+30 0.0752 0.02 Q I I I V 19+ 0 0.0756 0.01 Q I I I V 19+30 0.0763 0.02 Q I I I V 20+ 0 0.0768 0.01 Q I I I V 1 20+30 0.0773 0.01 Q I I I V 1 21+ 0 0.0778 0.01 Q I I I v 1 21+30 0.0783 0.01 Q I I I V 1 22+ 0 0.0787 0.01 Q I I I vI 22+30 0.0792 0.01 Q I I I VI 23+ 0 0.0796 0.01 Q I I I VI 23+30 0.0800 0.01 Q I I I VI 24+ 0 0.0803 0.01 Q I I I VI ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEV. 1 OYR-24HR-Page 3 of DEVELOPMENT ]00 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 1999, version 6.0 ,• Study date 04/19/06 File: 3RDSTDV24100.out ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++i-i++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method RCFC 6 WCD Manual date - April 1978 Frank D. Gorman, P.E. - S/N 867 _------------------________________________________________ English (in-lb) Input Units Used English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used English Units used in output format _________________________________________________________________ 100 YEAR DEVELOPED HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING 4/19/06 ____________________________________________________________________ Drainage Area = 0.51(Ac.) = 0.001 Sq. Mi. Length along longest watercourse = 300.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 100.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse = 0.057 Mi. Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid = 0.019 Mi. Difference in elevation = 1.40(Ft.) Slope along watercourse = 24.6400 Ft./Mi. Average Manning's 'N' = 0.015 Lag time = 0.015 Hr. Lag time = 0.88 Min. • 25% of lag time = 0.22 Min. 40% of lag time = 0.35 Min. Unit time = 30.00 Min. Duration of storm = 24 Hour(s) User Entered Base Flow = 0.00(CFS) 2 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ac.) [1] Rainfall(In) (2] Weighting[1*2] 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.51 1.80 0.92 100 YEAR Area rainfall data: Area(Ae.) [1] Rainfall(In) [2] Weighting[1*2] 0.51 4.50 2.29 STORM EVENT (YEAR) = 100.00 Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall = 1.800(In) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall = 4.500(In) Point rain (area averaged) = 4.500(In) Areal adjustment factor = 100.00 % Adjusted average point rain = 4.500(In) Sub-Area Data: Area(Ac.) Runoff Index Impervious % • 0.510 56.00 0.890 Total Area Entered = 0.51(Ac.) DEV. 100YR-24HR-Page I of') DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM RI RI Tnfil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F AMC2 AMC-2 (In/Hr) (Dec.$) (In/Hr) (Dec.) (In/Hr) • 56.0 56.0 0.511 0.890 0.102 1.000 0.102 Sum (F) = 0.102 Area averaged mean soil loss (F) (In/Hr) = 0.102 Minimum soil loss rate ( (In/Hr)) = 0.051 (for 24 hour storm duration) Soil low loss rate (decimal) = 0.240 ' --------------------------------------------------------------------- U n i t H y d r o g r a p h VALLEY S-Curve -------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Hydrograph Data --------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit time period Time % of lag Distribution Unit Hydrograph (hrs) Graph 6 (CFS) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 0.500 3427.480 100.000 0.514 Sum = 100.000 Sum= 0.514 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr) 1 0.50 0.50 0.045 0.178 0.011 0.03 2 1.00 0.70 0.063 0.174 0.015 0.05 3 1.50 0.60 0,054 0.170 0.013 0.04 4 2.00 0.70 0.063 0.166 0.015 0.05 5 2.50 0.80 0.072 0.162 0.017 0.05 6 3.00 1.00 0.090 0.158 0.022 0.07 7 3.50 1.00 0.090 0.154 0.022 0.07 8 4.00 1.10 0.099 0.151 0.024 0.08 9 4.50 1.30 0.117 0.147 0.028 0.09 10 5.00 1.50 0.135 0.143 0.032 0.10 11 5.50 1.30 0.117 0.139 0.028 0.09 12 6.00 1.60 0.144 0.136 --- 0.01 • 13 7.00 2.00 0.180 0.129 --- 0.03 19 7.00 2.00 0.180 0.129 0.05 15 7.50 2.10 0.189 0.125 0.066 16 8.00 2.50 0.225 0.122 --- 0.10 17 8.50 3.00 0.270 0,118 --- 0.15 18 9.00 3.30 0.297 0.115 --- 0.18 19 9.50 3.90 0.351 0.112 --- 0.24 20 10.00 4.30 0.387 0.109 --- 0.28 21 10.50 3.00 0.270 0.106 --- 0.16 22 11.00 4.00 0.360 0.102 --- 0.26 23 11.50 3.80 0.342 0.099 --- 0.24 24 12.00 3.50 0.315 0.097 --- 0.22 25 12.50 5.10 0.459 0.094 --- 0.37 26 13.00 5.70 0.513 0.091 --- 0.42 27 13.50 6.80 0.612 0.088 --- 0.52 28 14.00 4.60 0.414 0.086 --- 0.33 29 14.50 5.30 0.477 0.083 --- 0.39 30 15.00 5.10 0.459 0.080 --- 0.3B 31 15.50 4.70 0.423 0.078 --- 0.35 32 16.00 3.80 0.342 0.076 --- 0.27 33 16.50 0.80 0.072 0.073 0.017 0.05 34 17.00 0.60 0.054 0.071 0.013 0.04 35 17.50 1.00 0.090 0.069 --- 0.02 36 18.00 0.90 0.081 0.067 --- 0.01 37 18.50 0.80 0.072 0.065 --- 0.01 38 19.00 0.50 0.045 0.063 0.011 0.03 39 19.50 0.70 0.063 0.061 --- 0.00 40 20.00 0.50 0.045 0.060 0.011 0.03 41 20.50 0.60 0.054 0.058 0.013 0.04 42 21.00 0.50 0.045 0.057 0.011 0.03 43 21.50 0.50 0.045 0.055 0.011 0.03 44 22.00 0.50 0.045 0.054 0.011 0.03 45 22.50 0.50 0.045 0.053 0.011 0.03 46 23.00 0.40 0.036 0.052 0.009 0.03 • 47 23.50 0.40 0.036 0.051 0.009 0.03 48 24.00 0.40 0.036 0.051 0.009 0.03 DEV. ]OOYR-24HR-Page 2 of 3 DEVELOPMENT 100 YEAR- 24 HOUR STORM Sum - 100.0 Sum = 6.2 Flood volume = Effective rainfall 3.10(In) times area 0.5(AC.)/[ (In)/(Ft.)] = O.1(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss = 1.40(In) Total soil loss = 0.059(AC.Ft) • Total rainfall = 4.50(In) Flood volume = 5739.6 Cubic Feet Total soil loss = 2591.2 Cubic Feet _______________________ Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 0.269(CFS) -------------------------------------------------------------------- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 24 - H O U R S T O R M R u n o f f H y d r o g r a p h ____________ ______________________ ____________ Hydrograph in 30 Minute intervals ((CFS)) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Time(h+m) Volume AC.Ft Q(CFS) 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 __ ______________________________________ 0+30 0.0007 0.02 Q 1+ 0 0.0017 0.02 Q I I I 1+30 0.0026 0.02 Q 2+ 0 0.0036 0.02 QV I 2+30 0.0048 0.03 QV I 3+ 0 0.0063 0.04 QV 3+30 0.0077 0.04 Q V 4+ 0 0.0093 0.04 Q V 4+30 0.0112 0.05 Q V 5+ 0 0.0134 0.05 Q V I 5+30 0.0153 0.05 Q V I 6+ 0 0.0154 0.00 Q V I I 6+30 0.0161 0.02 Q V I 7+ 0 0.0172 0A3 Q V I 7+30 0.0185 0.03 Q V I 8+ 0 0.0207 0.05 Q V 8+30 0.0239 0.08 Q V I 9+ 0 0.0278 0.09 Q V I 9+30 0.0329 0.12 Q VI • 10+ 0 0.038E 0.14 Q V 10+30 0.0923 0.0808 Q I V I I 11+ 0 0.0478 0.13 Q I V 11+30 0.0529 0.12 Q V I 12+ 0 0.0576 0.11 Q V I 12+30 0.0653 0.19 Q VI 13+ 0 0.0743 0.22 Q I V 13+30 O.OB54 0.27 IQ I I V 14+ 0 0.0924 0.17 Q I I V 14+30 0.1008 0.20 Q I I V 15+ 0 0.1088 0.19 Q I I V 15+30 0.1162 0.18 Q V 16+ 0 0.1216 0.14 Q V 16+30 0.1230 0.03 Q V 17+ 0 0.1239 0.02 Q I I V 1 17+30 0.1243 0.01 Q I V I is+ 0 0.1246 0.01 Q I V I 18+30 O.1248 0.00 Q I V 19+ 0 0.1255 0.02 Q I V 19+30 0.1255 a.00 Q I V 20+ 0 0.1262 0.02 Q I V 20+30 0.1271 0.02 Q I V 21+ 0 0.1278 0.02 Q I V 21+30 0.1286 0.02 Q I VI 22+ 0 0.1293 0.02 Q I VI 22+30 0.1300 0.02 Q I VI 23+ 0 0.1306 0.01 Q I VI 23+30 0.1312 0.01 Q I VI 24+ 0 0.1318 0.01 Q I V . ----------------------------------------------------------------------- • DEV. I OOYR-24HR-Page 3 of 3 HYDROLOGY MAP i • C1P� 040 - /D N PROJE LOCATION LEGEND NODE ELEVATION NODE NUMBER \to 0. STORM DRAIN INVERT ELEVATION E �27 L 01 1 -r 2 LOT 1 01 4 L afr - LOT 8 L V 7 L 0-r c ��-r 0 iM15 (* f DRAINAGE BOUNDARY 4 f r EX. F�fi� _' (( w ��� } EX. DWY \ AC DRAINAGE AREA .fir .�.- �- ,,,� .. �� -- m,x r) ; !_a} ._ _ Q10=1-21cfsI00 YEAR STORM RUNOFF + ,r;r i .i.- _•.t~r• I'll;.. l V�i oar � z� 100=1. cf 10 YEAR STORM RUNOFF j fit 14' , 1 \ems � ` - ' '�, � r ' 8" lNt�' 8����� �� Q summoomm _ 4 RC r aloo • l`�`-� 4 `_ _! • y \F T _" —. ,-�•,- )_10_0=-10_4;72- 3of�� WITH D€� F�a11V �. '��,��� _� ��, �-� o, .� �a� � �� '- h. �`� _..��T , ,x ., \ �;.�f� T -w _ r,�0;1PT:R LINE 3 SD PLAN �D 2 � 5� r `��•�•� `-"ti-'-� v I ��J � _'� ^_ ._-'-_. 1Au L-Lj . Cam. :--�— C 1 _— .— - FEMA MAPPED FLOODPLAIN i 1 , r a`�,'r� r. i i _ •w '>< �' -vt' vF "-�""•- a!'..- nl ;.r y � I 4.. -- - -- _- PL 060742 001.0B) ZONE AE (COMMUNITY PANEL `. �c� rE� 3 \ 1:� w_ MAP REVISED NOV. 20., 1996 ,f r. _. f 1 If t ✓ hr e ...._"..... ...._._-_--._ r e ,.Y'[:�' 7 r.,:Z""-a'! .1•tl'YY.i4 a/ - �i'>y s f�y �I� �. v � VIP I I IQ_l �--, __ ENTIRE SITE IS OUTSIDE MAPPED 100 YEAR FLOODPLA1N - - . ; ,c"s �! 'icy '•i 1 r..ai{ 2( i `i �, f :Fpr i r}• `,. •5 ----- .�—'-•- _._.._ __.*.__._____? ._._ .__.._ _._•_.-,s 5.�.. s..rzar„-r-`ti- ..--.-`,, I,;-.`� �_ 6 PORCH f i i ') ! i i i ,l t tV,,. y �± •�1 p. i i (i i t-r. x� X t x 0), t/ Aw 1 1 r _ _ . ................ 9 L�j \d2 ��HULL��L (—T 1 I 4324L[- 22,09LJ 96.35INV 0 TIC -------------- �;O��,50 TG 7(� � y , it �1 f• {{ 1�^�..,._.... _..-... - 1 .1`_h.� Y! I ' fr•' -.f . '^ .-� �T ..{( 1. • 2 HOUR STORMSBMP SUMMARY CONCENTRATION POINT I I TING 1 ` r 17 r;� 4 rr i. �, ! �;+1,•,: r 2 YEAR -24 HR. STORM 10 YEAR --24 HR. STORE! IDD YEAR ---24 HR. STORM .,.... _.-....�-- `'-'.__.. r i x, t Ei i `r - �: ":!, .-•-resin. ! :,s <,+ i. It �++I 1� i:':r ;i s.r rr t I r j f ISO ��. POINT of F. a (S; r-- r PR POST r / - i__ E CS PRE POST PRE POST 4 y j n T' f ff I ( V i fir- �� "\ r cx ! I"I 1 �.I r• r / 1,j!�r1 r"1 l r ✓�' ff�S� ' ! `{ , i. r ?� ---1 i :�: �..n .,i r 1 i i. ��.• 1 'f �'ra `------ -----�--.-+-- .-,._,..-- �vK.,.-._._.. r i � i. y i I I I � i •i it j 2 XLL RUNCFF-CFS D.lJ5 0.D8 D.14 D.18 0.25 0.27 i EL SI L•i I FPS /nr 0 1 //'{�'}4'�� -" 1•; ' .I i' li ��„ !� l ,ram Sr:_.7_.. r is r• r-•��rr ! , , ! ,C,! ( � + �.*.�'wr 1.08 ■.Sf+,F 2.16 3.37 3.64 lJ 1,`�,5 a ?C LOT � I. 14 /-;F;' VOLUME-CUBIC FT g 1758 2178 3500 5740 58 4424 ` 1 f xi'• a i '! -�S L "'i �S �`! r`r r! `k1 r :f r\ i ^ I I V.�2� V. V. 5 O8 �. 0.13 � o�f -- -� VOLUME--AC FT 0 _ _ 410 �j o rr ---- E � i 1C, (:� f `�. �S_.11�✓� "�(��1 Iw'\'K ! ���.1 �� ' ' t+_'t T r(,J�,T r DURATI+ N-- MIN 720 810 810 810 810 810 i•r.,r, i=.i r ,, r i� `.�.' s i i i -. .. '•._ j >,-F I mo: 1 L?U P L 1 l t V V Z 16, : I-A!�'r' �1� NSF. _ :.5.� _ •'� � � F . Imo` r �11 !!r, II. 1 1. �• .t i •t + is i! ::ti t' , ct is .ti` . 'i�,• r.�:1 li l\'.1•'�� •5 ei t i ,!'` i! .' i '� .`4� �'t rf t?i. � ei.il Z �a.i -� �=tii:c F` � :` I •�si'S y' ! �;�. �cS.M t - + HED f i v.�: I �7•>,+r,„+�'. - i! •�.,,, ,i`, l.:s ,t ' {k, � 1,•'.. ;�.1k � i4 kn F`.yk. r '*--''))'SS$$51 r s i F,_i j' -{ i ff 'T''!.!: '` ` '.l �--"'" -y , ^.^^^^T+.re^ti^ � :� l .t i .1 •is- i _„ C- �^�" `' I 'ti ,� � t (IF ;r�[ y a+ �.; 4 5, u s�'•� •��}S1� ._:j ',r. � :i....,. 1''. i i - (c "•._.,._T__",�„ .r--- CJ �- -- r P 50.00, Ste' l# i'�� `�.C7 G ) i r fr"�j '-- •�--l�-r�-T-,.......:' ��' - �i..._.- ,•� i �. '� �..T� s :T•��'+��,f ! fi"• •1!� ' rn n Q � i `eo f i All � ���r � ��� µ� ��r � ,��r �,�r � ���r F �Apr = civil Nn inee 'M FRONT STREET (D) W4869(151) M-49n FAX SUITE 315 'HIM, CA 92590 UPDA TED 9102108 20 0 10 20 40 )NIM 0 AIA EXHIBI DEVAR ORED CONDITION WAREHOUSET CREEKSIDE SCALE: 1 20' L TS17-22BL CK MB 15 PA GE 726 PA08-0115 SHEET .1 OF I 7D � D F� PROD E LOCATION LEGEND NODE ELEVATION I NODE NUMBER h� STORM DRAIN INVERT ELEVATION �1!00. ` DRAINAGE BOUNDARY r � ^ EX. DWY _ _ f 0-51ACDRAINAGE AREA X �, .� . � � � -��. �' j'NA TmQ10=1.21cfsIO(} YEAR NORM RUNOFF i~_.. ,.\1 `err u• r~. 1 x r _..' '•t_.^ _ rx' r \ !1- =. �.4. fry' .\ � '� `-�'� ---^_" - �1 a--•—" .��t � .. " C'l lam.] 1 (,3'r ._"..' ---------� � � � C1� r yT O - 1 p - --- �.! � I00 1. 10 YEAR STORM RUNOFF ter. Q _ oCF so / _ 0=1 a4, al 0 0 -I(Y-4 . � fµ �. 2 - PER. LINE 3 SD PLAN -2 0 A C r ^-� 7 ❑ FLOODPLAIN a r'�i v i� ...��..., 1'•-----• X-�-"-�_ / '��.. _�`'v,.• � C.�� I _ '` `---_ ,�-- - _ `-� _ __,� __h ZONE AE (COMMUNITY PANEL 060742 0010B) 1-1 � 4 MAP REVISED NOV. 20, 1996 -- FLOOD ELEVATION1 5.5 f - . ' r r r 00. -_ IJI- ( ` ENTIRE SITE 15 OUTSIDE MAPPED 100 YEAR FLC�ODPLAIN Vx- 4 PORCH � ����� 00 Ix i ll i I I X x � I CD r I-- ._ - Z mm 0 14 CXI, TING � �X r.. ,Il`V F,X I_,T(t'�+(; E I, E �k/,u ,v x J k i ( GF'G(1i D x Pool- \y ° LiXI ., f EkfS Flir�JGSHED Cif x o � t . � �, J h lih rl 1-71 �—j f _ r r C� C. j 4. ! .r7 j !'f _ II ��l T, �°l P d �� l�Kl,\lo Lfl'r rilU�`1"r `r;l T �i ol]L 1 ! LOT 1 LOT 2 �i J-r 1 101 41 L T)I El LOT` - L01 1 LOf A LOT 0 Civil En '� �� 1 28465 � TC'�FRONT STET (95t)�- 69(a5t)�r-�79 F�,� SWE 315 TEMEW, CA 92590 UPDATED 5-�21—OS GRAPHIC SCALE HYDOLOGY A4AP EXHIBIT 20 0 1.0 20 40 DE VEL OPED C ONDI T10111 WAREHOUSE A T CREEKSIDE Ld SCALE: 1" 20' L TS 17-22OFBLOCK9 MB 726 P 08--0II5 SHEET 1 of 1 r Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) • Appendix D Educational Materials Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) • TENANT CERTIFICATION I certify that at the time of Final Walk-through, I have received, reviewed and discussed all WQMP (Water Quality Management Plan) materials provided to me by (Print) , an Authorized Representative of the development, and fully understand the importance of following these requirements and activity restrictions. Date Tenant Name(s) (Print) Date Date Tenant Signature(s) Date • Unit Address, City, State, Zip Developer's Representative (Signature) Date • Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) • TENANT EDUCATION LOG TENANT NAME TENANT DATE WQMP MATERIALS UNIT PROVIDED • • For information on °clospd iocp' suppliers and recycling./disposal ve.t'idors, contact. a„ County Of RIvel- ide � Health Services Agency fie paitment pi Env rpt;menFai Health 1 r. at (909) 35$'�055. FOOD SERVICE SPILL. RESPONSE AGENCY: FIAz-MAT: (909)358-5055 AFTER 5:00-I?t,L 909 358-5245 OR 911 HA2AROOUS WASTE DISPOSAL: (909)358-5055 �, RECYCLING.INFORMATION: 1-800-366-SAVE CO,REPORT ILLEGAL DUMPING OR ACLOGGED STORM DRAIN: 1-800-506-2555 isn on rwl;r pohjtlun €- b ur ' ign rt s ; The Cities and County of Riverside StormVVaterlCaariWater Protection.Program 1 -800-506-2555 StormWater PROTC�TiOhJ I'> Z i�G CAM J � F. :fa y =r t,d11;g dt n�io nt S'oiirc n�s tip iris rvr'�ret+n, i ..,��, e.,a FL. . �` r r y Adr-Clean 4a to PP,.,gran, and ins Sin Be na=-d r? n lt?1T Sti rarval rn, pr is i`is • � . Riverside County has two drainage; systems - sanitary sewers and storm drains. The storm drain system is designed to help prevent flooding by carrying excess rainwater away from streets. Since the storm drain system does not provide for water treatment, it alsn serves the unintended function of transporting pollutants directly to our waterways. Unlike sanitary servers, storm drains z air- '7'; are not connected to a treatment plant- they flow directly to our local streams, rivers and lakes. blasts orwashwater generateri by the food service m industry often contains materials such as foot; wastes,oil,grease,detergents and degreasers. f � These materials can degrade local waterswhen 4a allowed to flow into a storm drain system. Stormwater pollution causes as much as 60% of our i 1 water pollution problem. !'jeopardizes the duality of our waterways and poses a threat to groundwater resources if pollutants per€otate through Soft'. M. Since preventing t,olluticn 'is much easier,end less costly,than cleaning up"after the f, ct "the Cities OPCI 0.e1irty of Rivorside Storrr7V°.'ater/';IeanVV,ater Protection Program :ntornas resideius and Ai:affieSS'�.s fAI poilutlon plev?ntior" .activitl"S Such is the Rest Manaqr.'mo.;,( Prcii C�ces BM Ps) ds=st;r'bed in this pamphl;�t. The .ItidS alid t..iJunty of Rlvc'mlide have -idopled odinanco5 for 5trrrnvvnlor n? 'Ir%aq Pwent Ir7d discharge control. In accordance with State and federal lavi, ilhese toC.-ii stormwater or '.in I net 11ri)_tYibi-t the discharge of wastes Into the ste nn d air SySterl! Or IOQal GLlriac- vvzAer5 'CHlu3 t'r_i. UJ e1S discharge.= ;roar file food service indr-158 Y r or Iainin,,q food VJ z ?S, oil, dl cireel sers. PLEASE NOTE: .A common stormwater po lutian p:thiem assor. l;nn "'Jith 110 Rood sarv.-e rn.i,r,try i.s the discharge ot '.v'eshwater into alleys and gsitte.n t f'' I down of nutdonr .areas. these acr:✓ities flush poilutalwt into tllQ sicrr �MaiYa ystern. Thou disch urges of pollutants is sh-`( tr ,z)r0hibitt d by natal n v1ir'far�rf unit state and kderal regulations. • a.. - r�-'£`• X� '}�'; r k C(eanin' it Right . .. Proper Storage and Disposai . . . Pour prop and wash water into ttie mop sink GaneralrleEaners,floorcleaners,Sulvents, or do-wri floor drains : . . not Into gully rs. and detergents Often ai'ey5, contain toxic ,uE�sPunce� parking lots or ltiedo labels carefully and a storm drain. store and dispose t!f these Wash greasy t` products proper{y. in designated REMEMBER Donn throw wash areas � � � toxic waste into the trash 'Y which are or into a sidn 'I drains To f properly I report toxic Spilt esli 9'1, A% onneced f to 11 rl e sewer SySle.a ' vVith an appropriate hazardous waste pick-up 'I Jlii'n'�ier separatof: Also, av-_id was'l''ll"g call.I!)09}3ji< k.ivj, :t�'h m ils, gam ago E'.conl ! refs; and other terns In areas ';'Jlere v"astt vatel IS �ikeli') to • i e' ,lTe 3� J(r iL'r of Watch{,. �j, Grease �Blti C�Bi 1/C atch N For ills . ilan(tic anL dispose -A9 easepr ni rll. S e r 'Sk'dryT?lelia0:15t fr t.il131 c 7Li}' 1�h nl ❑ ll'sP i th fK iit� 7 s+r}-a; nd 61 for recycling in down outsid spall3. MIS 'V ,11415 ter SEA-1e'}-(utltdil �.C iAE` ! Y j f�Sr gre 3 f into aSlrik, floor dram dlSrrlo=S,,rr LU 5 0 d O r E.l' r �teTthf dr,arl r �.tf`,Cif rer�9t`s bJf r 35 cat hor _m till r r-7 t Jrtiho<� of r i the a;t r, rt ; \ � l QaIlJayF, or hc�1 }elm t - i { Lw nt! 'f.lais waste grease as appropria[e. if il. r! §. .y inter" e `'S f5 S _ ,f F f az Cal S",,t3! ..35,; E r2 for Asrulsvil 3- ,a1nuunt of lti8tt{. rr°(f 1 9i.J t. i �l _ Everyone contributes a little to the problem of stormwater pollution" Now it's time for t t P t 1 £ 4 ,�wy-sa d" .y��` s a�y a.,a3. qr, '• '""�;-� a''9 'f°� '� -_ #.y,,w c� �.:-tii ',,-a w<r '' ",,,,, J> ¢ . Hoer `Bout That OutdoorlSidewalk DumpRster Areas . . . Xeepdumpster and leadingdeck areas clean. Sweep up food partidw , cigafette, butts, and Crntrnol litter try srNceping - don't Muse down °[aat�fYJl-1 rYutdour dining areas before the aria Rapla, A rinsing or steam de aYnna. leaky durnpsters Don't use toxic bleaches and aUUHatar.eek Ft out t sT - — , :u u J drres5ure W-islIoordirlino herfv lidsor dotergents areas, entrances ` or surrounding t sidaw2lk areas.! I ll�, � �s • You u;ay he a tea[ y Mlle °let l n_.ilia r>f +/ s Use Water-Friendly tifUt,�ta HoWPV3!, t Vr,li .IIS(,f1V.^if ,+fr)� P fef 601 Products . . . rriHeh7 afGr 7�Ele!^ Cu 'Sider NJ97ij ftFl% Or IvVh nevoir possible, Purchase rrit_7k?�i�11NCt.t,uf?I'7C r't.,,7�!l1r � cleanlrg a[uduct s Lunh for PrOdUlcts ° . r ! - C' ntC fJ� rFri t`�lt$ f2rl»Pi iF J (} abe? e� Also, lci nGr 14C}IP4r' c C, r-mJ1tme7a� He 1i'1 %'1fj �l rri 1FC7rir�-free," p P rlr'11 3o u) of `•if?!1 rN»1w--!' 7n e �„ ?-- JU lj t1C-YB Lfli rtl )t'Y fY FIg esjLdafl �G.lr61 duietf 1 Jf Y-f rY i R�. Rn te ,� e — �� t t r a t ` I ��Y I f .r.-� 1Fi Cf+Pr Qj�7 tt 4! 7CN.7:� F711� P fr7f Ir((G, t 1 �� JiredaiTMr a air an.r Y r+l fIb, mr (rI �l "'2�'j�Y �; t �- , t 'r T r h �n1JPgi'.ad..iFt r' 'f )t >. JILf'7©EJrt_[f�' (t aCarr 14 n Pl p>`J tah YI Sfi�71 will, be P[�Vta� moor d ` 17 1 r i r�cH�arpt� jY e^aL'r`i}t'� f.-MP : i 2 ) ,rr tries bro&itlwro. :Nisi. Please remember: fl LY RAlPV IN T14E DRAfF all of us to become pad of the solution' • z. ,.. Wd INS- WATER AGENCY LIST in Riverside County City of Banning (9^i'922 3130 City O1U!y1 e (760)922 6151 5 r a City of Coacneoge (750) 9Lt 35502 coacheltavailey water Dlefrlc? (760)398IN51 City 5ert e ter, (951 716 2259 Desert C..nlC r,-C;SFa W51 (7510) 7t F-32D,'y Eastem Mor iuipal Water District i951 i 928 3777 l Isino e Valley CL VJD 1951)e74-3145 Farm MlLltr ,'-tVater Company 951,244-4198 City of Hot (951)765-3712 I yUwlid 1Nater Disin t (951)459-2143 NON-POINT N-P SOURCE C e - Jµrppa 0r milfugity Services D strict (951, a6E`--,8795 59 ak:e I le.met M64D (95� B-it?d i Lee.Lake J6'aler Distrirr (951%277- 414 DISCHARGES. ;. t Marc) Air tui eEa e (951)6567000 fir; Miss on SP gs livater Distritii (tF� ) �29 d4 t3 h of Palm Spriris 06n 32,3253 1a �, i g i 9277 - ''an9hrr t �r.a .4_. r yf'S1+ 9o.Fr OQ Vd e Diatr! $ Cdccf Riverside 113 1 CirG o- '3y Rur`?IdJU iGrinlur,irJ vL:f,i;en l?Isr r1.t kr9 1)68'4'. 580 -,il -i'rt bailey C uh I T 1 4 450I 7 `I Valle, q.inilwy Dishi {7e ),7347 315r dtie_trrr S a v�ln at W tr L`sGi.;i (95t H') 5000 a yucaipa`sllt-y film ro ropart illegal duniPiing iDlu'Aur"r dv aina or r..ladued Sto!m dtlills please call: _ 1-800-506-2555 Cinliru re ov c.e i i xte - r disflCB 3e � - Riv3r ld t orir Flood d Carr"! Ci t d Dutr+uoix lna!erials ) iy<: la&'Z" �`di b`•�s � � r'alltr, i a n a+cr r]!azltiv ry U�Fe.IUn Stair 1 d l h-sup r c a i vn of c 0a d V dtel QUW i ty a paycrt.� a • use as Culdow WON Do NO . , dispose of wvater Do NOT . Dispose of leftover containing soap or any other type of cleaning agents into the gutter. storm drain cleaning agent into a storm drain or water or sanitary sewer. body This is a direct violation of state and/or I local regulations Because wash waterfrom DO . . understand that wash water cleaning parking areas may contain metallic (without soap) used to remove dust from`a i brake pad dust, oil and other automotive clean vehicle may be discharged to a street j fluids, litter, food wastes and other or drain. '✓Vash water from sidewalk, plaza, materials, if should never be discharged to and building surface cleaning may go into a a street,gutter or storm chain. street or storm drain IF ALL of the following conditions are n1et. , dispose of small an Duets of y, The surface being washed i1s free of ,wash water from creaning building residual ,ail, debris and other materals _?tenors, sidewalks r>i lazy onto p � h✓ tis,r,y dry ina,!up methods i e., landscaped or unpaved surfaces, provided • sweeping, >rid �'r�'�;nir>� I3ny' oil VOU have the owners. permission and the } c emical stills rvirtl i SW5 UI" other discharge,vj9ll ,lot cause 11 isancra problt?t115 G :absorbent rnare9".ais before using or flrlr✓into 7 tart�sr stortr,sir_;irt. �'ytt�� uv rterl. Do . . . check with your..`.,",1nitari,,1 fewer 2. 'Washing is done with wal-er rinly, riot agency's policies and rr;gcrirements withso?-apt�rother cleaning materials, CarIcei ning Nash wafer t;Sp sal. 'Wash 3. 'YbU have.n(J" USed. hE^ ''water to rerniove. `Water from outdoor cleaning activities may paintf oil,S4 ifcaces during cleaning. be acceptable for disposal tc7 the sanitaiv Sewer Leith SpeCiflC perniiSSiOn. tied the IIS'r, U '° on the beck of this flverr for phone num { 'OU 6 bers 2555 of the sanitary sewer agencies in votirurOa. TO REPORT It.r FG L POLLUTING OF 'r(. lilM, OR AWl D •. . . Understand that mobile auto detaile s should divert vrash Beater to ands cued of dirt -areas. Be aware that soapy wash water may damage iandscaping. Resickuai wash water may o — remain on paved surfaces to e v ifioraU . Residues should b :s.vr [itup and olsposed or visit f?T. i'l�Y,%lt✓.T6��c'I.�C),4'I#.7'(�i G�` rl:r�i vIi''4-' �P2�3p. • rem77M,r fi^y�i '' w S` -. +� #s= � ^t. P� - USING LEANING AGENTS: OTHER rips To HELP PROTECT OUR WATER. . . if you must use soap, use biodegradable/ phosphate-free cleaners.Although the use of Er. IM-;sr SE nontoxic cleaning products is strongly A thorough dry cleanup before washing encouraged, do understand that these exterior surfaces such as building and decl.5 products can degrade water quality. The without loose paint sidewalks, or plaza discharge of these products into the street; areas should be sufficient to protect gutters, storm drain system or waterways is receiving waters. HOWEVER, if any debris prohibited by local ordinances and the State (solids) could enter store/ drains or remain in Water Code. Avoid use of petroleum-based the gutter or street after cleaning,wash water cleaning products should first pass through a "20 mesh" or finer screen to catch the solid materiols, the mesh a should then be disposed of in the trash. w a = s 4rrLe i PRGT �z1��3'r : dT1r rnEN°r • .x c r `s t' t_LCCf10N JVJVASH ']JtAI_�R Sand baris c; in be used 40 Create a barrier x around storria drain inlets. r�.) Plugs or rubber mats can be used to .s� temporarily seal storm drain openings. e Containmeti: p�tFt r rem;,irarv� barns ,)r x ' vacuum brooms can he used to contain and collect wash water. Special materials such as ab orbents, stone drain plugs and seals, small sump pumps When -&eaning SLJ-f7C:e5 blt1h high pn.,suro and vaacut.im boorns are available from many washer or -steam cleaning methods, ver.-fors. For more information, check addforial precautions should be taken tci catalogs such as New Pig t200-468 4647: prevent the discharge of pollutants into the vvww.newpird.comi: Lab Safety Supply (800- storm drain systeiri- These two methods of 356-0783), C&H (800-558-9964 end W.W. surface cleaning as compared'to the use of a Grainger (KO- a'-+17�1} or coil tine low-pressure hose, can remove additional Cleaning Equipment Tra(teAssoc.iation (800- materials that can contaminate local .4-4'1-0311) or the Power Washers of North watenr�ays. Arnerica M0-3g3-PVJNA). • yQuwheat e iater ClawIly does? 8OFM Offarns are not connecaed Re saffilary WOR �sower s� s MS p�pand .J1 BkY V P YA fy^P WYV ��iinY X The primary purpose, of storm drains is to carry rain water away from developed areas to prevent, flooding. Pollutants discharged to storm drains are conveyed directly into tivers, lakeS and sireal- Soaps, degreasers, ;4utcmo(ive_flulds, litter and a host of other materials wasnizd off buff{iln�gs, sidewalks, plazas, parking areas, vehicles atld equipment must to properly managed to prevent the pollution of rivers,lakes and sireams. Preventing'i q-Aution is the hest way to protect the environment. In addilion it is much easier and less wstly than eleaninq up"after the fact." Nip � olit of Riverside q+ g elate Quaid Control BOOM WAFERS 1"1EL is a. i area of 'and that catcht S rain and. sn()w. ihen drai't or -,-Qpt, into, a iC'i;rsh„ it"rant, aver, Iah , of ProurioNvate,. \M.Itershedo come In all shHpes Pinci silos CrOSS ny co,i:nty. `_+ aiio. and n0ir final f77Yun`,'t.,',. >, 11eefor,�nianyofJ!ri a..(Iwiti..E at `lJt'riG. ^ lk of pl2;jl ieTect it'd q uall[y of OL11 '. VJai.'r511@t15. In acC:o3danc,c `vit 1 si-te and toocral !aw to PJ oted our watersheds, the CI i Ir;i '#.Ni_} t,OUNIT:" (.)r RIVERSIDE E anddis.charge Gontrol it") pro libot ill:-. C"iscri rgR cf wasles into the storm dram system or � irfacf-. watpri,q, Th:i INCL I_.17S dis,:hal e of w,- h Aater from. o ltd-cr cl arling activities ,lNicil nla,. C ,nt,.tfl oollutants .Such as nil. ?t C:r.SS^,il`P:S:i(JQnt, ;IF.�I P,aat3S,t3't3Sh,a(?t lti-aSiG'U,"CII'�{" Tl'StE'�I:lts. , tl i Ff.Et $F ;JC7T t;i ark • ith ;+our Regional ?alfate ii4 ( . rY_ral 13c-af I `oral monlcipl-I iovernmonl.ar!il areo. I interested.. to oth©- FREE pollution urevanjion c?�,' - ❑tfoanabn? Catl 11004064555 W onjer any of Ehe fnilo;alnymaleria3solpreseni�,iotls: � � � � �� �� �� � t✓fatanais � j �; - -- A.Homo Girden Care-Guice Outdoor Activities Flies 13r c€lure Ervh�nutantei.Calendar(.when available ^+ Hnut oh rlct HaZ8lllOW WA SW C,Ife bn:Scheioia Presentat ons: Carden'W kshops at imai nEu'seriet - Cla srmom Pre eninfions Y 2 j%3 '" t:i,vlr f=2nFary?Flflv r r'�lub Picsent_ativtrs � Y�x� a LOCAL SEWERING AGENCIES IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY. � city n!Breunxwll (909)mass, - t ch of Banning. (POP)922-3130 City.ABlytha. ( 3 -2 to Lrtyof coacheIla (760)3 g 1 Sv(Ih', ('n s hel i galley VDater (MG) 9P(1 2'6 ✓ 17 Deswt Cu tt r t S,A 4 it �i(760 3)Z 7 32�13 � � r"• L.- [ cc__-.,�..� Easter Mum(,pal ivn;ed. MCI)928.3777 - c�....�e vo ley Ni.NCl WHOM�if r t „?+C I''. .;.a� A' '+ i PtWual dVat� 309)244 4i r • l i 1 loin YVator VI 'c Ict _ '9.'9)C 43 rti la to U nu ty`t t�..e_ (009)WSW We QUIT N 'WL (9091 r 50 241 to Lcu Lati FtBr bistrict (000)17 . 14!,1 March All RFsalv7'.=Jce RAIS tvn y iu ^'40er (70 ) Uny,31 t pr ngg. 17K1. 323-a2,1- RamshoCah s tare, PLM 7869272 Mat 1 �_- 1 r' .•"` - . 4 Rar,f ;.ho (909)676 vw I'll el C..A052 (7601922-.4909 pzjlji#ioux tvtilYrn{ll'liO' w0s) b ✓-� +✓ ^x,. 114 of RI r Itlu f90�)3t .3 F1 ��ertlalE y Chl), Inc- (9173)87&4 t11 .'�� &L• '+ -`moi l r(. 1�,} r hi San! i71'krrt 7001d4 humcgol Jvalzr 091 720.4 170 I to- rmWBAW > r IN f KIN i >=r�t��`�c'--rrE-�r`i I RC?tafiAn/t 3 tl r Pr- r ai • I u MIN s to e tie carte should ? Riverside County has two drainage systems-sanitany sewers and storm drains. The storm drain system is designed to prevent flooding by carrying excess A y rainwater away from streets. . .it's notdesigned to be a !� waste disposal system. Since the storm drain system does not provide for wale; treatment, it often serves l the unintended function of transporting pollutants di rectly to our waterways. Unlike sanitarV sewers, storm d:u+nt; ory not ! �-,; , rvieried*natr�,-vrenthlainY-+', yflotivdireeihr , to our local streams,rivers aw,lakes. Non-stormwaler discharges such as washwater generated from outdoor cleaning projects often transport harmful § Soaps.degreasers,aAOMOtive fluids, litter,and a host pollutants into storm drains and our local of other materials washed off buildings: sidewalks, waterways- Polluted runoff contaminates plazas,parking areas:vehicles,and equlornent can all local watenvays and poses a threat to 1 pollute our waterways groundwater resources. lilt �(®{�� id ppe gy§p8@gq� .C' - � ~ y � V '�14�ygApYtl�YW Ytl 4a��YY9'�tl YP�Y{/��9�Y• p Vf,��0.Y9�3 JIncc pleve lfing poll itinn ,3 ml4'h ea-&Pr, and leSs '.GSIIq than 'lean y 1-�1, the fact. the Citi—,—.nd Cou-[') of Riverside 8tormN,ur..i IwIaaMN.:U=r Ptclectiwi Pro ,F-3m infon sf resi,d,^r s ar 1 III preventionactivitl^ssuch a- �h�cea -s :shed rr]thi pdrr;phtetha C,'jties ari� County of Ftvemide ha e aciopi-d �c i �ar=c to-vni r,araer m�,,,a,,7arnar !.is Ji char .onir,� I i acceruar+rewith stale andf:.rde.ial 1f- e : eardlhi non-stormWaier dlSC,� cf(j'65 coii[aining Oil grezSp eplege is u_ccrcaser t-aslt. f (Ahm w' A-Ie n'latcrla!s. t ' 0 PLEASE NOTE: The discharge of pollutants into the street, gutters, storm drain systern, or waienways - without a Regional�Vale Quality Control Board per n'.nr„vaivei-is strictly trrolmnted by local ni-din� r�as and star=:glad fede;al taw. . • • 4 1 C 5 Everyday activities!l? our communities can affect the qualify of water,in Our wet waferrunoff the cal»bined effectafan'entire catrimunitywithin the watershed c r i w ntl Repfor Cteanin * Wash cars on a lawn or unpaved surface that 0 Dispose of dirty cleaning solution down a sink will absorb and Help Ater the water, Don't or toilet. Do not dispose of it the street gutter allow, polluted waste water to flow Into the or,stormdrainsystem, street,gutter or storm drain inlet. Repair lealling vehicles promptly. Use (TIPS) Maire sure tlta professionals don't use absorbents tine cardboard, cat litter, cloths, the storm drain to empty thail tanks. etc. to safely catch spills: Sweep up used Protessionals should dispose of the pio3ning absorbent materials and place !it the Gash. solutions down a sthk or toilet,orretwo Io their Never dump oil or any auto fluids onto the company for disposal to the sanitary sower ground or into e.storm drain inlet. A 7akQ sure they don't use the storm dram! If you change your own oil or antifreeze,be su re to recycle ill'Call 1-800-G t_E.ANU P for the nealestdisposallocaton. VIMO are the Solution i7'1A.l use_a ccmmerciai carwasia. Car 'f ash to StormWaterPollution-1 • rac.rt,r�es Qi,r d?aimed to ra'Mare ,all waste Oat r if vlr auto senvice center changes Me oil, Saar r:uro ttrey divert ovate runoff away frrarn �31��1` Yaed Care _�tr+,ia v,.j47ttt?fS url,a.ptfi.Y rrr draf a712 r5. b�z.=zxw.:4xaa�»<.x^•-=,.r .. Lard use ch .rnicar Pesticide; or hurbicities unless you have a mayor problern and never r r apply it lain is folerast :a Read labels, la, onry and carefully,arid apply sparingly. 6 �1 a it Limit lawn treatment apple .Bil , n, of her deal t v.'eFd killers rind ferldli.:erS. 8� 5. �e thaf yrOr Set Lira :and operate srwll mixers on Heavy lawn is appropriately wiater d 1'110"Af"d, ternsordropcloths`oronfa,nmatenalsptps. t1hit&.cdI ono aerated, Try less-roxlc alternatives for the yard and garden Call Hose dcwj,i mixers, toads 4,nd trailers in a Alit 800 506 25E5 tor FREE copJ of a Horne a I whL-'YE' rlgse gvefe( wUll�' f twJ illl0 {tie- Garden tare Guide to Help Protect0'us sUrt:ettguttercirstomldralns stem, Environment. CIran up wi li a broom NO i' 1, i-OSE-l Fine 'Don't ble;i 4 of +lke;' Yl lwa slP.6t c he Slreet of 7?rflcl is may be washecJ into a dirt are —but gutter.Sweep up the leaves and c hppirig s in a riot role thesfC9�faJUfte'i nY titortn drat!+5y5`,G-n'7. trazh can cirstart21 CnmpO8t Dil,2.: j'Ti?S tf the work is contra^ted, Stave , our h you are renovating tinu=lands t:ing, to"fik Contractor establish a cleanup area before erosion control. Prevent dhT and deans ,rO»n Starting the-e'dC71'lf. Ttv t0-tninirftile the flee of v;.a:.11ing tot��Si[irrn tira�n S. water c,l the clean up, Tell t our corrtr< for Met 0 Pick lip per w4asie and nlspc c, of If In 'rush �7Yr5JA"fGj' .fL}LS'3rP�fal�3nffM,'�r ntr.c,Srrf t0 TlScr ,ans..Al` oy4 remet bei to pick up }roar : stormbrainisil3--gailarlditisrjan s .cliii*ei roc; ,vhanyiatakeItt> ntvelk. • ; } ershect. lNl�ile jndivio'ua!homes rnlghf contrif�tttc oniy miner amvut�ts of polluted an seriously affect ourrivers, lakes and streams. IA) f€1g Pallnting > Deplete the chernic-.4 'in the pocl water, use your hoine pool chemisny tent kit to- 0 Send dir.ty cfeaning wdter clown a sink or toilet, verify ME,' paril Water is free A ail not into the Meet quttei; or storm drain chemicals, system. > Drain pool water to iandara;)ed rarsla :. Try rbr•ioxicalternxives.Calt1-800-50E-2555 alms,yardst or any area that will absorb to order a FIREE brochure nn environmentally ni of the water You may have to drain - fderidlyctean ng alternatives`Yorthe home, the pool waWr over period of few days to allow the landscape areas to absn?b Never clean brushes or rinse paint containers mast of the water into the, Street, gutter or stone r'rain inlet. Clean WAx pAnt from hr-ushes In ,sink. Filter ' Avoid discharging pool wr tc�r into the and reuse thfnneis and solvents for oil based gullet of slo7ndi,ain. paints. Qiveri hher rin�alro ;er add backwash intq 114xwe of uuus iblu paints, thinners, thinner a7srlscapec or 7raWorb !lfirrra:>. residue, and JePnjn(j l cr is; at a Wdon event C all yDg �yP 52F6 or ww wi Itver glr or�r for he AN and 100AM the deal `'10LISel101d ONLY RAIN T Collectlar-I Event oil IP'S-I Empty a drys V firt teals m y go r vviiF7 r(da±lfr7 tlQir+'P-i ^t:u3 $(t7�'fN_ rt.? ff}GPj N)E ri7;=f. No1`tsrr-iirs 7c'rsar.Le!yd r irrerris,retat,r rs and , j r ;p � Maintenance "f?/photos itnmv th at storm c'Ya"'o'sflow 'fi:"rl4;n to Mai rhers, !'okes- indi .sIr&z-rns wrthoof R yop ti_2 i sc'.pfic syjt_rn nla= e suno it is tremor-nr NEVER dispossoina storm drain. functioning prspedy. Overflowing sepw 'stem release ra4., ihat can !!ow i.4 ivmm. Was and ,-owid water cuu mnq Ay -Ht 6i of t 1 your tat a vol need pur tfttixl �}§ �tl �u'1'i e uL ^ epenib ar,,»efy 1 7i o size �f tile' arl c the r x1 number & people in tea hot sehoW and I the 0 Con Vol njae by regulalirqcworint levels.Ci0 kinds ^ .vasite,,,�atei diqclinrqifjq ;il l lia tcos rMUSe copper(used as acocontrolp,'ud ucls. ?tou0sw ':t r aL need to dmM Van pool itu cAl `OUI i,'he:n septic tinik sot c'tCa I Flt'>.ni(E':I IO m set'ering agency to tend out it `u pump _ul to contents of we sewic'lam, rr�ntu.t. 3pii to the cn 7teiy seu i .into i!: a`et; Trust jispt.>s 1 contr rt; Of lapproved atl7 wed (Mon infon-pation up the reverse dispnSal sites, ;`.;all q09 j!.75 q80 xw a Home if your we w gene YWH not e d e ,l i001 w le Int tip tl ny4t6i11 yl ifj tree i,csepllC 4 rhf LirVPr* 'r74N 79Sp4Ut$ aiiU u ?7 L !iuPl;+lc}tY(t�' canhsy id+ txater from herd onto ; unss and .1a+ir;eabhDWtohelohttefharmAY) �d;befa.rr�f_ • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) RENAISSANCE STATION Appendix E • Soils Report INLAND, INC. Geotechnical Consulting • PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 3RD STREET ADJACENT TO MURRIETA CREEK, ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 922-046-012, CITY OF TEMECULA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Project No.1051222-10 • Dated. March 17, 2006 Prepared For. Mr. Al Rattan RENAISSANCE BUILDERS,INC. 42031 Main Street, Suite G Temecula, California 92590 • 41531 Date Street • Murrieta, CA 92562 • (951) 461-1919 • Fax (951) 461-7677 INLAND, INC. Geotechnical Consulting &ch 17, 2006 Project No. I051222-10 Mr. Al Rattan RENAISSANCE BUILDERS, INC. 42031 Main Street, Suite G Temecula, California 92590 Subject. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Retail Development Located at 3'd Street Adjacent to Murrieta Creek, Assessors Parcel No. 922-046-012, City of Temecula, Riverside County, California LGC Inland, Inc. (LGC) is pleased to submit herewith our geotechnical investigation report for the approximately V2-acre parcel, Assessors Parcel Number 922-046-012, located at 3`d Street adjacent to Murrieta Creek, and in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. This work was performed in accordance with the scope of work outlined in our proposal, dated December 28, 2005. This report presents the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing and our engineering judgment, opinions, conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical design aspects of the proposed development. It has been a pleasure to be of service to you on this project. Should you have any questions regarding the ent of this report or should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office at earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, LGC INLAND, INC. Mark Bergmann President SR/CW/SMP/kg Distribution: (6) Addressee • 41531 Date Street - Murrieta, CA 92562 - (951) 461-1919 - Fax (951) 461-7677 TABLE OF CONTENTS ction Page INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services................................................................................................................1 1.2 Location and Site Description .................................................................................................................3 1.3 Proposed Development and Grading.......................................................................................................3 2.0 INVESTIGATIONAND LABORATORY TESTING.....................................................................................3 2.1 Field Investigation...................................................................................................................................3 2.2 Laboratory Testing...................................................................................................................................4 2.3 Aerial Photograph Interpretation............................................................................................................4 3.0 FINDINGS...................................................................................................................................................4 3.1 Regional Geologic Setting.......................................................................................................................4 3.2 Local Geology and Soil Conditions.........................................................................................................4 3.3 Groundwater............................................................................................................................................6 3.4 Faulting....................................................................................................................................................6 3.5 Landslides................................................................................................................................................6 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................6 4.1 General....................................................................................................................................................6 4.2 Earthwork................................................................................................................................................7 4.2.1 General Earthwork and Grading Specifications .............................................................................7 4.2.2 Clearing and Grubbing....................................................................................................................7 4.2.3 Excavation Characteristics..............................................................................................................7 4.2.4 Groundwater....................................................................................................................................7 • 4.2.5 Ground Preparation—Fill Areas ....................................................................................................7 4.2.6 Disposal of Oversize Rock...............................................................................................................8 4.2.7 Fill Placement..................................................................................................................................8 4.2.8 Import Soils for Grading..................................................................................................................8 4.2.9 Cut/Fill Transition Lots...................................................................................................................8 4.2.10 Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence.................................................................................................9 4.2.11 Geotechnical Observations..............................................................................................................9 4.3 Post Grading.Considerations ..................................................................................................................9 4.3.1 Slope Landscaping and Maintenance..............................................................................................9 4.3.2 Site Drainage.................................................................................................................................10 4.3.3 Utility Trenches..............................................................................................................................10 5.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS...................................................................................................10 5.1 Ground Motions.....................................................................................................................................10 5.2 Secondary Seismic Hazards...................................................................................................................11 5.3 Liquefaction ...........................................................................................................................................12 6.0 TENTATIVEFOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................12 6.1 General..................................................................................................................................................12 6.2 Allowable Bearing Values......................................................................................................................12 6.3 Settlement...............................................................................................................................................13 6.4 Lateral Resistance..................................................................................................................................13 6.5 Footing Observations.............................................................................................................................13 6.6 Expansive Soil Considerations ..............................................................................................................13 •6.6.1 Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less) ..................................................14 6.6.1.1 Footings.........................................................................................................................................14 6.6.1.2 Building Floor Slabs......................................................................................................................14 6.7 Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) ......................................................................15 6.7.1 Footings.........................................................................................................................................15 • 6.7.2 Building Floor Slabs......................................................................................................................15 6.8 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations ................................................................16 6.9 Corrosivity to Concrete and Metal........................................................................................................18 6.10 Structural Setbacks ................................................................................................................................19 7.0 RETAINING WALLS..................................................................................................................................19 7.1 Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures.......................................................................................................19 7.2 Drainage................................................................................................................................................20 7.3 Temporary Excavations.........................................................................................................................20 7.4 Wall Baclfill...........................................................................................................................................20 8.0 CONCRETE FLATWORK.........................................................................................................................20 8.1 Thickness and Joint Spacing..................................................................................................................20 8.2 Subgrade Preparation............................................................................................................................21 9.0 PRELIMINARYASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN..........................................................21 10.0 GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTR UCTION SERVICES.............................................................22 11.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS.............................................................................................................22 Attachments: Figure 1 —Site Location Map (Page 2) Figure 2—Regional Geologic Map (Page 5) APPENDIX A—References (Rear of Text) APPENDIX B —Boring Logs (Rear of Text) APPENDIX C—Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text) APPENDIX D—Seismicity (Rear of Text) APPENDIX E—Liquefaction Analysis (Rear of Text) APPENDIX F—Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Calculations (Rear of Text) APPENDIX G— General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text) Plate 1 — Geotechnical Map (Rear of Text) • Project No. I051222-10 Page ii March 17, 2006 1.0 INTRODUCTION JWC Inland, Inc. (LGC) is pleased to present this geotechnical investigation report for the subject property. purposes of this investigation were to determine the nature of surface and subsurface soil conditions, evaluate their in-place characteristics, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations based on the accompanying site map provided by you. The general location of the property is indicated on the Site Location Map (Figure 1). The plans you provided were used as the base map to show geologic conditions within the subject site (see Geotechnical Map, Plate 1). 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services The purposes of this investigation were to obtain information on the surface/subsurface soil and geologic conditions within the subject site, evaluate the data, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations. The scope of our investigation included the following: Review of readily available published and unpublished literature and geologic maps pertaining to active and potentially active faults that lie in close proximity to the site which may have an impact on the proposed development (see Appendix A, References). • Field reconnaissance to observe existing site conditions and coordinate with Underground Service Alert to locate any known underground utilities. Geologic mapping of the site. • Excavating, logging, and selective sampling of three (3) hollow-stem-auger borings to depths between 26 to 50%z feet. Exploration locations are shown on the enclosed Geotechnical Map (Plate 1) and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B. Laboratory testing and analysis of representative samples of soil materials (bulk and undisturbed) obtained during exploration to determine their engineering properties (Appendix C). Engineering and geologic analysis of the data with respect to the proposed development. An evaluation of faulting and seismicity of the region as it pertains to the site (Appendix D). Liquefaction Analysis (Appendix E). Preliminary asphaltic concrete pavement analysis (Appendix F). Preparation of General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix G). Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions and preliminary geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development. • r" " t w- d C e 1J IS31 /'yy� : s YY r', � � Io. 3u{b°� \ COtlMl3 l-pw �b W J o W � � \Or 1 _. T�FIINNRII lhTJOIM �� � ,, +e2'�� igrg suvtPclou M ddOJ W W Vz ikJ,�. Y Y d Ca i1VMOH3 dab -2sbr J 916 . ,w.. 9 m Z Q $> b _.y CANYON 4� '4( Q O U (O $m,;.. a o �H� ( dffi, �.., U) N N 4 �I °� �C 1� � ` \ \ jd'. 1k,° ^ MNi Q J 5 O d l 1 '4�. INN c r Z O co j dz 1, /esP}-' ✓ } \ .... o '' '^* -.tau Q' Z `--� 6 d� � \_u H I'Hb A 4 { Tf t t V� /� P B F 1 r � O1 ✓ � ..�`�`.' ,. ''— a.%-- ,x." o v`" .:_,.r' v' Z Z E ow ' b/11 �'' a�i w a) 3dY31H�H� ^ k b� ,$ aaJ gs F./ A s 4;.rr t ' N U !o -IT i" r e laF d d C7 (n 0 "s x 'ltRY�{ 'Z4�" r PQII .moo .../ `t'+.y ST �` , ,1 I, " P`oyzs� 4 ll _„��''_.,�--• `.sa' w o o �{ .✓ mhvIlk ' y..,. ♦�C ^a: I v O P / �,acrt� ' O Q �a O LL J �„✓ .011 l/ / car i{ ,t 1 /U„,/ .. W p{S9 /. d r ass� T �`�`S ! k 9 Al 4 I z a- N `fib .h,'`v' j v y $pb p 6�'' � of ,ws.l.'..C" � i a dr "Y.+✓ �;ti�`4�'9s red '�.. # i�r )IAO ��� �v Rf��`�iF� 0 � $� � 3 `. cY. F VIA`+ n I G "� I `�'N5' 4LtEPP�RESE CDColta -d N 1.2 Location and Site Description • The subject site is located on the southeast side of Third Street in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California. The general location and configuration of the site is shown on the Site Location Map (Figure 1). The topography of the site is relatively flat. The general elevation of the property is 1,007 feet above mean sea level (msl) with differences of less than 2t feet across the entire site. Local drainage is generally directed to the southwest. The topography southwest of the site drops off rather quickly towards Murrieta Creek. An existing single family residence is located in the central portion of the subject site. Associated utilities for water, gas, and power were also noted as marked by Underground Service Alert of Southern California. No other underground structures are known to exist at the site. Vegetation consists of a sparse cover of annual weeds/grasses along with a few scattered trees. Third Street to the northwest, Murrieta Creek to the southwest, commercial parking to the southeast, and commercial building and alley to the northeast form the property boundaries. 1.3 Proposed Development and Grading The proposed commercial development is expected to consist of wood framed four-story structure utilizing slab on ground construction with associated streets, landscape areas, and utilities. The proposed development includes one (1) building on the site. Formal plans have not been prepared and • await the conclusions and recommendations of this report. The plans you provided were utilized to form the base for our Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Since the site has never been rough graded and due to the elevations of the existing development to the northeast and southeast, LGC assumes that existing grade elevations will remain essentially unchanged. Cut and fill slopes should be less than 5 feet in height. 2.0 INVESTIGATIONAND LABORATORY TESTING 2.1 Field Investigation Subsurface exploration within the subject site was performed on December 27, 2005 for the exploratory borings. A hollow-stem-auger drill rig was utilized to drill three (3) borings within the site to depths ranging from 26 to 50% feet. Prior to the subsurface work, an underground utilities clearance was obtained from Underground Service Alert of Southern California. Due to the existing residence, associated utilities, and gas-line location along 3`d Street, access for our field investigation was limited to the western portion of the subject site. Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Visual-Manual Soils Descriptions and Identification procedures of ASTM D 2488. The approximate exploration locations are shown on Plate 1 and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 3 March 17, 2006 Associated with the subsurface exploration was the collection of bulk (disturbed) samples and relatively • undisturbed samples of soil materials for laboratory testing. The relatively undisturbed samples were obtained with a 3-inch outside diameter modified California split-spoon sampler lined with 1-inch high brass rings. In addition, samples were obtained using a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler. The soil samples obtained with the hollow stem auger drill rig, were driven mechanically with successive 30- inch drops of an automatic 140-pound, sampling hammer. The blow count for each six inch increment was recorded in the boring logs. The central portions of the driven-core samples were placed in scaled containers and transported to our laboratory for testing. 2.2 Laboratory Testing Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, expansion potential, R-value, collapse potential, sulfate content, pH, resistivity, chloride content, and in-situ density/moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed and bulk samples of soil materials, considered representative of those encountered. A brief description of laboratory test criteria and summaries of test data are presented in Appendix C. An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report. 2.3 Aerial Photograph Interpretation No strong geomorphic lineaments were interpreted to project through the site during our review of aerial photographs of the subject property. Geomorphic evidence of active landsliding was not observed on the site. A table summarizing the aerial photographs utilized in our geomorphic interpretation of lineaments and landslides is included in Appendix A - Aerial Photograph Interpretation Table. is 3.0 FINDINGS 3.1 Regional Geologic Setting Regionally, the site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The Peninsular Ranges are characterized by steep, elongated valleys that trend west to northwest. The northwest-trending topography is controlled by the Elsinore fault zone, which extends from the San Gabriel River Valley southeasterly to the United States/Mexico border. The Santa Ana Mountains lie along the western side of the Elsinore fault zone, while the Perris Block is located along the eastern side of the fault zone. The mountainous regions are underlain by Pre-Cretaceous, metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks and Cretaceous plutonic rocks of the Southern California Batholith. Tertiary and Quaternary rocks are generally comprised of non-marine sediments consisting of sandstone, mudstones, conglomerates, and occasional volcanic units. A map of the regional geology is presented on the Regional Geologic Map, Figure 2. 3.2 Local Geology and Soil Conditions The earth materials on the site are primarily comprised of artificial fill and Quaternary older alluvial flood plain deposits. A general description of the earth materials observed on the site is provided in the following paragraphs: • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 4 March 17, 2006 .@ wKDR..y' 5 71 r � v ° te, K� `�^ >��{ K3` � � x� x-. < s` -� .v � 1J r�"�Y h •�����d 1 i �,' i0 ! IO REY V+r 4YCE BLIILDERK i wax / + [ " 1PPROXLYIdTE i]l LUCdIION i� �� ! Y ' E�le ' O 70 1.Y .f ♦ M9 �1�\ J t i /l \ 6 T V� V���� <'}'1� l'I tsul §: _ A �)`1'°� a"a° �'^ � \ e�A`s�.G yF • 7-16! of n r @b �.t * �v, \€� �\ '���s ����{�ti�9f•����r`i°r\�` �GOPhi ' v �f/ ' A't +I� �`���n� dlJ ,+1,0 41 - rT� � "ry .���+ �t air 1,• �a \ � �i-�"� �'5� �' Tt t y + " +(�pvmt OW ri"e G� zZ1YNKtf� G.: t O op y irg / Kgb 44 QC �+ fi r Ie_ ?y y�• i4 Will; GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE TEMECULA 7 5'QUADRANGLE SAN DIEGO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA:A DIGITAL DATABASE VERSION 1.0 By Siang S.Tanl and Michael P. - .' Kennedyl Ii Digital Database by Brad Nelson2 and Gary Patt2 2000 - 1.California Division of Mines and Geology, Los Angeles,CA - �c 1t� "')a'r 2.U.S.Geological Survey,Riverside,CA -- ` t�,,.<. r. if III .{ Project Name RENAISSANCE 3RD STREET FIGURE 2 Project No. 1061222-10 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP Geol./ Eng. MB/ SMP i E Scale NOT TO SCALE Date March 2006 Artificial Fill, Undocumented (map symbol Afn): Undocumented artificial fill materials were • encountered along the Murrieta Creek perimeter of the site in the upper 7 to 10 feet within Borings Numbers 1 and 2, respectively. These materials are typically locally derived from the native materials and consist generally of dark yellowish brown clayey sand trace gravel. These materials are generally loose inconsistent, poorly consolidated fills with evidence of debris. • Quaternary Older Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits (map symbol Ooa): Quaternary older alluvial flood plain deposits were encountered in the southern portion of the subject site and to a maximum depth of 50'/a feet. These deposits consist predominately of dark yellowish brown to grey, silty sand, clayey sand, and sand. This unit is generally moist to wet and medium dense to very dense in condition. 3.3 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered at approximately 26% feet in Boring Number 1. 3.4 Faulting The geologic structure of the entire Southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas Fault system. Faults, such as the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier- Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas are major faults in this system and all are known to be active: In addition, the San Andreas, Elsinore, and San Jacinto faults are known to have ruptured the ground surface in historic times. • Based on our review of published and unpublished geologic maps and literature pertaining to the site and regional geology, the closest active fault producing the highest anticipated peak ground acceleration at site is the Elsinore-Temecula Fault located approximately 0.5 kilometers to the southwest. This fault is capable of producing a moderate magnitude earthquake. No active faults are known to project through the site and the site does not lie within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (previously called an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone). 3.5 Landslides No landslide debris was noted during our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the site. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General From a soils engineering and engineering geologic point of view, the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the design criteria and project specifications. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 6 March 17, 2006 4.2 Earthwork • 4,ZI General Earthwork and Grading Specifications All earthwork and grading should be performed in accordance with all applicable requirements of the Grading and Excavation Code and the Grading Manual of the appropriate reviewing agency, in addition to the provisions of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC), including Appendix Chapter 33. Grading should also be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix G), prepared by LGC, unless specifically revised or amended herein. 4.2.2 Clearing and Grubbing All weeds, grasses, brush, shrubs, trees, debris and trash in the areas to be graded should be stripped and hauled offsite. During site grading, laborers should clear from fills any roots, branches, and other deleterious materials missed during clearing and grubbing operations. The project geotechnical engineer or his qualified representative should be notified at appropriate times to provide observation and testing services during clearing operations and to verify compliance with the above recommendations. In addition, any buried structures or unusual or adverse soil conditions encountered that are not described or anticipated herein should be brought to the immediate attention of the geotechnical consultant. 4.2.3 Excavation Characteristics • Based on the results of our exploration, the near surface soil materials, will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment. 4.2.4 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered during our subsurface exploration at a depth of 26'h feet. Therefore, groundwater is not expected to be a factor during grading or construction. However, localized groundwater could be encountered during construction due to the limited number of exploratory locations or other factors. 4.2.5 Ground Preparation —Fill Areas All existing low density and potentially collapsible soil materials, such as topsoil and loose manmade fill, should be removed to underlying competent alluvial deposits, from each area to receive compacted fill. Dense native soils are subject to verification by the project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing structural fills, the exposed bottom surfaces in each removal area should first be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions and then re-compacted in-place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 7 March 17, 2006 Based on LGC's exploration, anticipated depths of removal are shown on the enclosed • Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 8 to 10 feet. However, actual depths and horizontal limits of any removals will have to be determined during grading on the basis of in-grading observations and testing performed by the geotechnical consultant and/or engineering geologist. 4.2.6 Disposal of Oversize Rock Oversize rock is not expected to be encountered during grading. 4.2.7 Fill Placement Any fill should be placed in 6- to 8-inch maximum (uncompacted) lifts, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content (preferred at or slightly above optimum moisture content) and then compacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for each change in soil type should be determined in general accordance with ASTM D 1557-00. 4.2.8 Import Soils for Grading In the event import soils are needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to commencement of delivery onsite. • 4.2.9 Cut/Fill Transition Lots To mitigate distress to structures related to the potential adverse affects of excessive differential settlement, cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed within the "fill" portion exceeds proposed footing depths. The entire structure should be founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the "cut" portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Recommended depths of overexcavation are provided in the following table: �DEPTHOF...FILLDEPTH'OF OYEREYGAVtI•PION,.(`,`cut '..• orhori ,'' Up to 5 feet Equal Depth 5 to 10 feet 5 feet Greater than 10 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the"fill"portion(10 feet maximum) Overexcavation of the "cut" portion should extend beyond the perimeter building lines a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or to a minimum distance of 5 feet, whichever is greater. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 8 March 17, 2006 4.2.10 Shrinkage. Bulking and Subsidence • Volumetric changes in earth quantities will occur when excavated onsite earth materials are replaced as properly compacted fill. The following is an estimate of shrinkage and bulking factors for the various geologic units found onsite. These estimates are based on in-place densities of the various materials and on the estimated average degree of relative compaction achieved during grading. Artificial Fill 8 to 13 Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits 6 to 11 Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces in removal areas to receive fill is expected to vary from negligible to approximately 0.1-foot. The above estimates of shrinkage and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. However, these estimates should be used with some caution since they are not absolute values. Contingencies should be made for balancing earthwork quantities based on actual shrinkage and subsidence that occurs during grading. 4.2.11 Geotechnical Observations An observation of clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading • procedures should be performed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. Fills should not be placed without prior approval from the geotechnical consultant. The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should also be present onsite during all grading operations to verify proper placement and adequate compaction of all fill materials, as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. 4.3 Post Grading Considerations 4.3.1 Slope Landscaping and Maintenance Adequate slope and pad drainage facilities are essential in the design of the finish grading for the subject site. An anticipated rainfall equivalency of 60 to 100 inches per year at the site can result due to irrigation. The overall stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained thereafter and provided all engineered slopes are landscaped with a deep rooted, drought tolerant and maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. Additional comments and recommendations are presented below with respect to slope drainage, landscaping and irrigation. A discussion of drainage is given in the following section. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 9 March 17, 2006 4.3.2 Site Drainage • Positive-drainage devices, such as sloping sidewalks, graded swales and/or area drains, should be provided around buildings to collect and direct all water away from the structures. Pad drainage should be designed for at least the minimum gradient required by the UBC with drainage directed to the adjacent drainage facilities or other location approved by the building official. Ground adjacent to foundations shall be graded so that it is sloped away from the building at least 12H:1 V (4.8°) for a minimum distance of 6 feet, or another alternative approved way shall be found to divert water from the foundation. Neither rain nor excess irrigation water should be allowed to collect or pond against building foundations. Roof gutters and downspouts may be required on the sides of buildings where yard-drainage devices cannot be provided and/or where roof drainage is directed onto adjacent slopes. All drainage should be directed to adjacent driveways, adjacent streets or storm-drain facilities. 4.3.3 Utility Trenches All utility trench backfill within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under sidewalks, driveways and building-floor slabs, as well as within or in proximity to slopes should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Where onsite soils are utilized as backfill, mechanical compaction will be required. Density testing, along with probing, should be performed by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify proper compaction. For deep trenches with vertical walls, backfill should be placed in approximately 8- to 10-inch • maximum lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro-hammer, pneumatic tampers or similar equipment. For deep trenches with sloped walls, backfill materials should be placed in approximately 6- to 8-inch maximum lifts and then compacted by rolling with a sheepsfoot tamper or similar equipment. Where utility trenches are proposed parallel to any building footing (interior and/or exterior trenches), the bottom of the trench should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the adjacent footing. 5.0 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Ground Motions Structures within the site should be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the 1997 UBC Sections 1626 through 1633. The method of design is dependent on the seismic zoning, site characteristics, occupancy category, building configuration, type of structural system and building height. For structural design in accordance with the 1997 UBC, a computer program developed by Thomas F. Blake (UBCSEIS, 1998) was used that compiles fault information for a particular site using a modified • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 10 March 17, 2006 version of a data file of approximately 183 California faults that were digitized by the California Division of Mines and Geology and the U.S. Geological Survey. This program computes various • information for a particular site, including; the distance of the site from each of the faults in the data file, the estimated slip rate for each fault and the"maximum moment magnitude" of each fault. The program then selects the closest Type A, Type B and Type C faults from the site and computes the seismic design coefficients for each of the fault types. The program then selects the largest of the computed seismic design coefficients and designates these as the design coefficients for the subject site. The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for the site was completed for three (3) different attenuation relationships (Campbell & Bozorgnia, 1997, Sadigh et al., 1997, and Abrahamson & Silva, 1997). The peak ground acceleration value of 0.75 g is the mean of the three (3) values obtained. The probability of exceedance versus acceleration waves for the different attenuation relationships are presented in Appendix D. Probability curves were calculated using the computer program FRISKSP Version 4.0 (Blake, 2000). Based on our evaluation, the Elsinore-Temecula Fault zone would probably generate the most severe site ground motions with an anticipated maximum moment magnitude of 6.8 and anticipated slip rate of 5 mm/yr. The following 1997 UBC seismic design coefficients should be used for the proposed structures. These criteria are based on the soil profile type as determined by subsurface geologic conditions, on the proximity of the Elsinore-Temecula Fault and on the maximum moment magnitude and slip rate. • Figure 16-2 Seismic Zone 4 Table 16-I Seismic Zone Factor Z 0.4 Table 16-U Seismic Source Type B Table 16-J Seismic Profile Type Sp Table 16-5 Near-Source Factor,Na 1.3 Table 16-T Near-Source Factor,N, 1.6 Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.57 Table 16-R Seismic Coefficient, C, 1.02 5.2 Secondary Seismic Hazards Secondary effects of seismic activity normally considered as possible hazards to a site include several types of ground failure as well as induced flooding. Various general types of ground failures, which might occur as a consequence of severe ground shaking of the site, include land sliding, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, subsurface soils, groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our subsurface exploration, all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely. Project No. I051222-10 Page II March 17, 2006 Seismically induced flooding normally includes flooding due to a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche • (i.e., a wave-like oscillation of the surface of water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake) or failure of a major reservoir or retention structure upstream of the site. Since the site is located more than 23 miles inland from the nearest coastline of the Pacific Ocean at an elevation in excess of 100 feet above mean sea level, the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunamis run-up is considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to the site, the potential for induced flooding at the site due to a seiche is also considered nonexistent. 5.3 Liquefaction Liquefaction involves the substantial loss of shear strength in saturated soil, usually taking place within a soil medium exhibiting a uniform, fine grained characteristic, loose consistency and low confining pressure when subjected to impact by seismic or dynamic loading. Factors influencing a site's potential for liquefaction include area seismicity, onsite soil type and consistency and groundwater level. The project site will be underlain by compacted fill and competent alluvial deposits with groundwater at a depth of approximately 26 feet. The potential for earthquake induced liquefaction within the site is considered very low to remote due to the recommended engineered fill, relatively low groundwater, and the dense nature of the deeper onsite soils. A liquefaction analysis was performed for the existing (un-graded) site conditions. The soil and groundwater conditions encountered in Boring Number 1 were utilized in our analysis. Our field investigation indicated groundwater to be at a depth of 26`/z feet below the existing surface in Boring Number 1. A conservative level of 5 feet was used for the liquefaction analysis to represent the historic • high groundwater level. Our analyses indicated potentially liquefiable soils in Boring No. I at a depth of 5 to 7 feet below the existing ground surface. However, the effects of liquefaction should not be a factor due to removal and reprocessing of the soils in the liquefiable zone. Therefore liquefaction should not manifest itself at the surface. The results of the liquefaction analysis is presented in AppendixE. 6.0 TENTATIVE FOUNDA TIONDESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 General Provided site grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, conventional shallow foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structure. Tentative foundation recommendations are provided herein. However, these recommendations may require modification depending on as-graded conditions existing within the building site upon completion of grading. 6.2 Allowable Bearing Values An allowable bearing value of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design of 24-inch square pad footings and 12-inch wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values include both dead and live loads and may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration • wind and seismic forces. Project No. 1051222-10 Page 12 March 17, 2006 6.3 Settlement • Based on the general settlement characteristics of the soil types that underlie the building sites and the anticipated loading, it has been estimated that the maximum total settlement of conventional footings will be less than approximately 1/4 inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about %2 inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during construction or shortly thereafter as loads are applied. . The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction is performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the soil conditions in the footing excavations. 6.4 Lateral Resistance A passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to determine lateral bearing resistance for footings. Where structures are planned in or near descending slopes, the passive earth pressure should be reduced to 150 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 1,500 psf. In addition, a coefficient of friction of 0.40 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting soils to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. • The above values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly against compacted fill or competent alluvial deposits. In the case where footing sides are formed, all backfill placed against the footings should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. 6.5 Footinz Observations All foundation excavations should be observed by the project geotechnical engineer to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing materials. The foundation excavations should be observed prior to the placement of forms, reinforcement or concrete. The excavations should be trimmed neat, level and square. All loose, sloughed or moisture-softened soil should be removed prior to concrete placement. Materials from footing excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the soils are compacted to a minimum 90 percent of maximum dry density. 6.6 Expansive Soil Considerations Results of preliminary laboratory tests indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of VERY LOW as classified in accordance with 1997 UBC Table 18-1-B. Accordingly, expansive soil conditions should be evaluated for individual lots during and at the completion of rough grading. The design and construction details herein are intended to provide recommendations for the various levels of expansion potential, which may be evident at the completion of rough grading. Project No. 1051222-10 Page 13 March 17, 2006 6.6.1 Very Low Expansion Potential(F-vans4on Index of20 or Less) • Results of our laboratory tests indicate onsite soils exlu-bit a VERY LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with Table 18-I-B of the 1997 Unifoan Building Code (UBC). Since the onsite soils exhibit expansion indices of 20 or less, the design of slab on ground foundations is exempt from the procedures outlined in Section 1815. Based on the above soil conditions, it is recommended that footings and floors be constructed and reinforced in accordance with the following minimum criteria. However, additional slab thickness, footing sizes and/or reinforcement should be provided as required by the project architect or structural engineer. 6.6.LI Footinas • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in UBC Table 18-I-C (i.e. 12-inch minimum depth for one-story and 18-inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one-story and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1)bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No • special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. 6.6.1.2 Buildinn Floor Slabs • Concrete floor slabs should be 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid-depth. • Interior floor slabs with moisture sensitive floor coverings should be underlain by a 15- mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying subgrade soils. The moisture/vapor barrier product used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 302. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barrier systems are placed in accordance with the project plans and specifications, and that the moisture/vapor retarder materials are free of tears and punctures prior to concrete placement. Additional moisture reduction and/or prevention measures may be needed, depending on the performance requirements of future interior floor coverings. Recommendations are traditionally included with geotechnical foundation recommendations or sand layers placed below slabs and above/below vapor barriers and retarders for the purpose of protecting the barrier/retarder and to assist in concrete curing. Sand layer requirements are the purview of the foundation engineer/structural engineer, • and should be provided in accordance with ACI Publication 302 "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction". We have provided recommendations in Table 1 that we consider to be a minimum from a geotechnical perspective. These recommendations must Project No. 1051222-10 Page 14 March 17, 2006 be confirmed (and/or altered) by the foundation engineer, based upon the performance • expectations of the foundation. Ultimately, the design of the moisture retarder system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, in consideration of the project requirements provided by the architect and developer. • Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. 6.7 Low Expansion Potential(Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Onsite soils may exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with Table 18-I-B of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). The 1997 UBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on soils with expansion indices greater than 20, require speciAl design considerations in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815. The design procedures outlined in 1997 UBC Section 1815 are based on the thickness and plasticity index of each different soil type existing within the upper 15 feet of the building site. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an effective plasticity index of 14 for in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815.4.2. 6.7.1 Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths indicated in UBC Table 18- I-C (i.e. 12-inch minimum depth for one-story and 18-inch minimum depth for two-story construction). Interior continuous footings for both one- and two-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches, for one-story and two-story buildings, respectively, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. Exterior pad footings intended for the support of roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways, near the bottom-third of the footings. 6.7.2 Building Floor Slabs • The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor slab thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 1997 UBC Section 1815 based on an effective plasticity index of 14. Unless a more stringent design is recommended by the architect or the structural engineer, we recommend a minimum slab thickness of 4 inches for floor slabs, and be reinforced with No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, both ways. All slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement near mid-depth. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 15 March 17, 2006 Interior floor slabs with moisture sensitive floor coverings should be underlain by a 15-mil thick • moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying subgrade soils. The moisture/vapor barrier product used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 302. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barrier systems are placed in accordance with the project plans and specifications, and that the moisture/vapor retarder materials are free of tears and punctures prior to concrete placement. Additional moisture reduction and/or prevention measures may be needed, depending on the performance requirements of future interior floor coverings. Recommendations are traditionally included with geotechnical foundation recommendations or sand layers placed below slabs and aboveibelow vapor barriers and retarders for the purpose of protecting the barrier/retarder and to assist in concrete curing. Sand layer requirements are the purview of the foundation engineer/structural engineer, and should be provided in accordance with ACI Publication 302 "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction". We have provided recommendations in Table 1 that we consider to be a minimum from a geotechnical perspective. These recommendations must be confirmed (and/or altered) by the foundation engineer, based upon the performance expectations of the foundation. Ultimately, the design of the moisture retarder system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, in consideration of the project requirements provided by the architect and developer. Prior to placing concrete, the subgrade soils below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture • content. This moisture content should penetrate to a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade soils. 6.8 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations In lieu of the proceeding recommendations for conventional footing and floor slabs, post tensioned slabs may be utilized for the support of the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the geotechnical parameters provided below in Table A. These parameters have been determined in general accordance with Chapter 18 Section 1816 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), 1997 edition. Alternate designs are allowed per 1997 UBC Section 1806.2 that addresses the effects of expansive soils when present. In utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection criteria of applicable codes and the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. Please note that the post tensioned design methodology reflected in UBC Chapter 18 is in part based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and beneath the post-tensioned slabs are influenced only by climatological conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to expansive soil. The UBC design methodology has no consideration for • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 16 March 17, 2006 presaturation, owner irrigation, or other nonclimate related influences on the moisture content of • subgrade soils. In recognition of these factors, we have modified the geotechnical parameters obtained from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and mover homeowner maintenance. In addition, we recommend that prior to foundation construction, slab subgrades be presoaked to 12 inches prior to trenching and maintained at above optimum moisture up to concrete construction. We further recommend that the moisture content of the soil around the immediate perimeter of the slab be maintained near optimum moisture content (or above) during construction and up to occupancy. The following geotechnical parameters provided in Table A assume that if the areas adjacent to the foundation are planted and irrigated, these areas will be designed with proper drainage so ponding, which causes significant moisture change below the foundation, does not occur. Our recommendations do not account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Sunken planters placed adjacent to the foundation, should either be designed with an efficient drainage system or liners to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on the design parameters we have provided, and our experience with monitoring similar sites on these types of soils, we anticipate that if the soils become saturated below the perimeter of the foundations due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, then up to approximately 1/4-inch of uplift could occur at the perimeter of the foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated regarding the importance of maintaining a consistent level of soil moisture. The owners should be made aware of the potential negative consequences of both • excessive watering, as well as allowing expansive soils to become too dry. The soil will undergo shrinkage as it dries up, followed by swelling during the rainy winter season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will result in distress to site improvements and structures. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 17 March 17, 2006 TABLE A: • Preliminary Geotechnical Parameters for Post Tensioned Foundation Stab Design ...wim+iPfll_VIIMETEL�'.,, Expansion Index Very Low Low Percent that is Finer than 0.002 nun in the Fraction Passing the No. 200 Sieve. <20 percent(assumed) <20 percent(assumed) Clay Mineral Type Montmorillonite(assumed) Montmorillonite(assumed) Thomthwaite Moisture Index -20 -20 Depth to Constant Soil Suction (estimated as the depth to constant moisture content 7 feet 7 feet over time,but within UBC limits) Constant Soil Suction P.F. 3.6 P.F. 3.6 Moisture Velocity 0.7 inches/month 0.7 inches/month Center Lift Edge moisture 5.5 feet 5.5 feet variation distance,e. Center lift,ym 1.5 inches 2.0 inches Edge Lift Edge moisture 2.5 feet 3.0 feet variation distance,em Edge lift, 0.4 inches 0.8 inches m Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Contact with Site Soils in Accordance with 1997 UBC Table Negligible Negligible 19-A-4 Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k ( ming presaturation as indicated 200 pci 200 pci o NI%Wnum Perimeter Foundation 12 18 Embedment Under slab moisture retarder and sand 15-mil thick moisture retardant in conformance with an ASTM E 1745 Class A material layer overlain by 1-inch of sand' 1. Assumed for design purposes or obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report,and structural engineering considerations. 3. Recommendations for sand below slabs are traditionally included with the geotechnical foundation recommendations, although they are not the purview of the geotechnical consultant. The sand layer requirements are the purview of the foundation engineer/structural engineer and should be provided in accordance with ACI Publication 302,Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction. 6.9 Corrosivity to Concrete and Metal The National Association of Corrosion Engineers (MACE) defines corrosion as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "environment' is the prevailing foundation soils and the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or various buried metallic elements. Some of the many factors that can contribute to corrosivity, include the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 18 March 17, 2006 In general, soil environments that are detrimental to steel include high concentrations of chloride measured per California Test Method (CTM) 422 and/or pH values of less than 5.5 measured per CTM • 643. Another major factor contributing to soil corrosivity to buried metal is low electrical resistivity, which can also be measured using CTM 643. The mirrimum amount of chloride in the soil environment that is corrosive to steel, either in the form of reinforcement protected by concrete cover or plain steel substructures such as steel pipes or piles, is 500 ppm. As the soil resistivity measured in ohm-cm decreases, the corrosion potential increases. Soil resistivity test results less than 1,000 ohm-cm are generally considered very highly corrosive to buried steel. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing and the generally accepted criteria mentioned above, it is our opinion that onsite soils should be considered mildly corrosive to buried metals. Table 19-A-4 of the U.B.C., 1997, provides specific guidelines for the concrete mix design when the soluble sulfate content of the soils exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing performed on samples from the project area using CTM 417, the onsite soils are classified as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition in accordance with Table 19-A-4, of U.B.C., 1997. Therefore, in accordance with Table 19-A-4 structural concrete in contact with earth materials should have cement of Type 1 or II. These test results are based on limited samples of the subsurface soils. The initiation of grading at the site could blend various soil types and import soils may be used locally. These changes made to the foundation soils could alter and increase the detrimental properties of the soil. Accordingly, it is recommended that additional testing be performed at the completion of grading. • LGC does not employ a registered corrosion engineer, therefore, we recommend that you consult with a competent registered corrosion engineer and conduct additional testing (if required) to evaluate the actual corrosion potential of the site and provide recommendations to mitigate the corrosion potential with respect to the proposed improvements. The recommendations of the registered corrosion engineer may supercede the above requirements. 6.10 Structural Setbacks Structural setbacks, in addition to those required per the UBC, are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Building setbacks from slopes, property lines, etc. should conform to 1997 UBC requirements. 7.0 RETAINING WALLS 7.1 Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures An active earth pressure represented by an equivalent fluid having a density of 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) should tentatively be used for design of retaining walls up to 10 feet high retaining a drained level backfrll. Where the wall backfill slopes upward at 2:1 (h:v), the above value should be increased to 52 pcf All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above active earth pressures. • Project No. I051222-10 Page 19 March 17, 2006 For design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, an at-rest earth pressure equivalent to a fluid ishaving a density of 53 pcf should tentatively be used for walls up to 10 feet high supporting a level backfill. This value should be increased to 78 pcf for ascending 2:1 (h:v) backfill. All retaining walls should be designed to resist any surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls or structures in addition to the above at-rest earth pressures. 7.2 DrainaQe Weep holes or open vertical masonry joints should be provided in retaining walls to prevent entrapment of water in the backfill. Weep holes, if used, should be 3 inches in minimum diameter and provided at minimum intervals of 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints, if used, should be provided at 32-inch minimum intervals. A continuous gravel fill, 12 inches by 12 inches, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the gravel. Filter fabric may consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. In lieu of weep holes or open joints, a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain may be used. Perforated pipe should consist of 4-inch minimum diameter PVC Schedule 40 or ABS SDR-35, with the perforations laid down. The pipe should be embedded in 1'/2 cubic feet per foot of/<- or I%z-inch open graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. Filter fabric may consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The backfilled side of the retaining wall supporting backfill should be coated with an approved waterproofing compound to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. • Temporary Excavations All excavations should be made in accordance with OSHA requirements. LGC is not responsible for job site safety. 7.4 Wall Backf111 Retaining-wall backfill materials should be approved by the soils engineer prior to placement. All retaining-wall backfill should be placed in 6- to 8-inch maximum lifts, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and compacted in place to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. 8.0 CONCRETE FLATWORK 8.1 Thickness and JointSpacine To reduce the potential of unsightly cracking, concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least 3%2 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less. Any concrete driveway slabs should be at least 5 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 20 March 17, 2006 8.2 Subgrade Preparation • As a further measure to minimize cracking of concrete flatwork, the subgrade soils underlying concrete flatwork should first be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent and then thoroughly wetted to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal to or slightly greater than optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained in the soils during the placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the soils will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. A representative of the project geotechnical engineer should observe and verify the density and moisture content of the soils and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. 9.0 PRELIMINARYASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN A representative sample of soil was tested. The laboratory test results indicated an R-value of 60. However, a design value of 50 has been used in our analysis. Assumed Traffic Indices are presented in the table below. This table shows our minimum recommended street sections. Further evaluation should be carried out once grading is complete, and R-values have been confirmed. The following asphaltic concrete pavement sections have been computed in accordance with the State of California design procedures. Although, the City of Temecula also has minimum requirements for the AB thickness of asphaltic concrete pavement sections. These and alternative asphaltic concrete pavement calculations are attached in Appendix F. .<�x' _w, x. n ri r Prekmma AshaihctCorciete Pavement Desi n dA ,r,AilrO,PaP1Lln Assumed Traffic Index 5.0 6.0 7.0 Design R-value 50 50 50 AC Thickness 0.25 feet 0.25 feet 0.30 feet AB Thickness 0.35 feet 0.40 feet 0.50 feet Notes: AC—Asphaltic Concrete(feet) AB—Aggregate Base(feet) Subgrade soil immediately below the aggregate base (base) should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D 1557 to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Final subgrade compaction should be performed prior to placing base or asphaltic concrete and after all utility trench backfills have been compacted and tested. Base materials should consist of Class 2 aggregate base conforming to Section 26-1.0213 of the State of California Standard Specifications or crushed aggregate base conforming to Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D 1557. The base materials should be at or slightly below optimum moisture content when compacted. Asphaltic concrete materials and construction should conform to Section 203 of the Greenbook. • Project No. I051222-10 Page 21 March 17, 2006 10.0 GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTIONSER VICES Os report has been prepared for the exclusive use of RENAISSANCE BUILDERS to assist the project engineer and architect in the design of the proposed development. It is recommended that LGC be engaged to review the final design drawings and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly interpreted and are incorporated into the project specifications. If LGC is not accorded the opportunity to review these documents, we can take no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that LGC be retained to provide geotechnical engineering services during construction of the excavation and foundation phases of the work. This is to observe compliance with the design, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. If the project plans change significantly (e.g., building loads or type of structures), we should be retained to review our original design recommendations and their applicability to the revised construction. If conditions are encountered during the construction operations that appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately. Design and construction revisions may be required. 11.0 INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other Wanty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. This report is based on data obtained from limited observations of the site, which have been extrapolated to characterize the site. While the scope of services performed is considered suitable to adequately characterize the site geotechnical conditions relative to the proposed development, no practical investigation can completely eliminate uncertainty regarding the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject site. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his/her representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other consultants and incorporated into the plans. The contractor should properly implement the recommendations during construction and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe, or unsuitable. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can and do occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if LGC has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. This report is intended exclusively for use by the client, any use of or reliance on this report by a third party shall be at such party's sole risk. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 22 March 17, 2006 In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by *nges outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and modification. The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Should you have any questions regarding the content of this report, or should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, LGC INLAND, INC. Chad E. Welke, CEG 2378,PE 63712 `P 1 E• WF °Foy Stephen M. Poole, GE 692 PoFEsstp Associate Geologist/Engineer p'f o Vice President pQ tq ¢ m �E MICyq Principal Engineer o co y No. 692 0 �' / � � Srq�OF CAv1E°P� sfQl OF CALIF F��P tt E. Richtmyer, PG 7933 Project Geologist � Riey Z0�, SER/CW/SMP/JAM/kg ¢ t0 N .Q srq�OF CAS\F°P� • Project No. I051222-10 Page 23 March 17, 2006 APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX A • References Allen, Walter R., 2006, Renaissance Mixed-Use Building, 3 a Street, Temecula, California, Sheet PRA�1, dated January, 30, Blake, T.F., 1998b, UBCSEIS, Version 1.30, A Computer Program for the Estimation of Uniform Building Code Coefficients Using 3-D Fault Sources. 2000, FRISKSP, Version 4.0, A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Estimation of Peak Acceleration and uniform Hazard Spectra Using 3-D Faults as Earthquake Sources. Campbell K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 1994 Near Source Attenuation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Worldwide Accelerograms Recorder from 1957 to 1993; Proceedings of the fifth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake En ingi eering, Vol. III, Earthquake Engineering Institute,pp. 283-292. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1976, Geologic Hazards in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California, Special Report 113. Campbell K.W., 1997, Empirical Near-Source Attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and Vertical Components of Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity and Pseudo-Absolute Acceleration Response Spectra, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68,No. 1, pp. 154-179. �orme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USA®. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code, Structural Engineering Design Provisions. 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada, Prepared by California Division of Mines and Geology. Jenkins, Olaf P., 1978, Geologic Map of California, Santa Ana Sheet; CDMG, Scale 1:250,000. Jennings, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California. Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30'x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Temecula 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 1.0: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. 0 APPENDIX B BORING LOGS Geotechnical Boring Log B- 1 27-Dec-05 Project Name: Renaissance Builders - 3rd St. Page 1 of 2 Project Number: 1051222.10 Logged By: AW g Company: 2R Type of Rig: CME-55 Drive Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop (in): 30 Hole Dia (in): 8 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): Hole Location: See Geotechnical Ma Eo n U C O A o O N H Z y w p c d C O a E 0 - U T N d C° "' CD DESCRIPTION �- 0 Bag-1 Afu Artificial Fill(Undocumented): MAX, EI, 0-5 SC Clayey SAND; dark yellowish brown, slightly moist, loose, fine to Sulfate, pH, coarse sand, trace fine gravel s Resistivity, 5 R-1 106.6 3.2 Chloride, 5 R-Value 6 6 R-2 , 104.11 5.1 1 Collapse 7 . Qoa Quaternary Older Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits: 12 13 R-3 105.5 7.3 SM Silty SAND; dark yellowish brown, slight moist, medium dense, fine to coarse sand 10 10 • 16 1s R-4 109.9 4.8 15 13 11 SPT-1 — 14.5 yellowish brown, medium dense 20 23 33 43 R-s 117.2 3.5 grey, slightly moist, dense ----- ---- ------ ----- ------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- SP-SM SAND with silt; grey, moist dense, fine to coarse sand, fine gravel 25 16 23 25 SPT-2 — 12.1 • Geotechnical Boring Log B- 1 27-Dec-05 Project Name: Renaissance Builders -3rd St. Page 2 of 2 P ' ct Number: 1051222-10 Logged By: AW g Company: 2R Type of Rig: CME-55 Drive Weight(lbs): 140 Drop (in): 30 Hole Dia (in): 8 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): Hole Location: See Geotechnical Ma co Co U U M Z �' 75 N O W C N U E H Q 3 E 0 5 O Cn O O m co 0 M N d DESCRIPTION12 1- 30 35 50 for 5" R-8 118.7 15.9 very dense SM Silty Sand; grey, wet, dense, fine to medium sand 35 10 18 35 SPT-3 — 22.0 I_ ---_'-------- ------- 50 R-7 115.8 14.4 Sp SAND; grey, moist, very dense, fine to coarse sand for 2" 45 50 sRT a — 10.9 50 50 R-8 — Total Depth: 50!12 feet Groundwater at 26% feet 55 • Geotechnical Boring Log B- 3 27-Dec-05 Project Name: Renaissance Builders - 3rd St. Page 1 of 1 Project Number: 1051222-10 Logged By: AW g Company: 2R Type of Rig: CME-55 MM Weight(Ibs): 140 Drop (in): 30 Hole Dia (in): 8 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): Hole Location: See Geotechnical Ma N 2 E w O C U ~ o n 3 E o _CZ o W 00 CO 0 DESCRIPTION � 0 Qoa (Quaternary Older Alluvial Flood Plain Deposits: SC Clayey SAND; dark yellowish brown, moist, dense, fine to coarse sand 30 1s 3s R-1 121.5 9.9 5 1s 18 25 R-2 122.2 9.2 medium dense 24 4 42 R-3 125.6 6.9 very dense 10 ...-•-------- - ------ --- --- --- -- -- - - -- ---- - - • so R4 128.7 8.5 SM Silty SAND; dark yellowish brown, moist, dense, fine to coarse sand ----- ---- ------ ----- ------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SP SAND; yellowish brown, slightly moist, very dense, fine to coarse 15 20 sand 40 50 R-5 113.5 1.4 20 14 12 22 sPT-1 — — dense, interfingered with silty sand ----- ---- ------- ----- ------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25 25 SM Silty SAND; grey moist, very dense, fine to coarse sand 40 so R-s 110.5 16.2 Total Depth: 26% feet No Groundwater APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C • Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results The laboratory testing program was directed towards providing quantitative and qualitative data relating to the relevant engineering properties of the soils. Samples considered representative of site conditions were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures and/or California Test Methods (CTM), where applicable. The following summary is a brief outline of the test type and a table summarizing the test results. Soil Classification: Representative samples were classified with ASTM D 2487. The soil classifications (or group symbol) are shown on the laboratory test data and/or exploratory logs. Soil classifications are supplemented with Visual-Manual Soils Descriptions and Identification with ASTM D 2488. Moisture and Density Determination Tests: Moisture content (ASTM D 2216) and dry density determinations (ASTM D 2937) were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the exploratory excavations. The results of these tests are presented in the exploratory excavation logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was determined from undisturbed or disturbed samples. Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined with ASTM D 1557. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: SAMPLE SAMPLE' .' YIAXIMUMDRY' OPTIMUMMOISTURE"- LOCATION, DESCRIPTION, DENSITY'(Pc� CONTENT,(%) ' Dark grayish brown, B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace 134.5 8.5 gravel Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples were evaluated with the Expansion Index Test, ASTM D 4829. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: SAMPLE SAMPLE EXPANSION, EXPANSIONINDEX LOCATION DESCRIPTION 4 POTENTL9L, B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace 5 VERY LOW gravel * Per Table 18-1-B of 1997 UBC. • Collapse Potential. Collapse potential test(s) were performed on selected, relatively undisturbed ring samples with ASTM D 5333. The test results are presented below: SAMPLELOCA NON`—' h PLIED r COLLAPSE INDEX(%) s DEGREE OF COLLAPSE "O.TRBUR??EN(P9/j.. .. . V u . 94 ,,.,ti B-1 @ 5 feet 1.378 4.46 Moderate B-2 @ 7'h feet 1.378 0.17 Slight Note: Positive values of collapse index represent collapse of the soil structure,while negative values represent heave(or swelling) of the soil structure. R-Value: The R-value of representative samples were determined with CTM 301. The test results are presented in the table below: SAMPLEL'OCA,TION SAMPLrEDESCR7PTION w , ='. MUE, B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace gravel 60 Minimum Resistivity and PH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed with CTM 643. The results are presented in the table below: SAMPLE SAMPLE H MINIMUMRESIS77VITY LOCATION,,, DESCRIPTION P (0,M. m) ` B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace 7.2 3976 gravel Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of selected samples were determined with CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below: SAMPLE SAMPLE SULFATE CONTENT LOCATION DESCRIPTION % b wet ht *' SULFATE EXPOSURE* ( Y- S. ). - „ B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace 0.00 Negligible gravel * Based on the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code (U.B. C.),Table No. 19-A-4, prepared by the International Conference of Building Officials(ICBO, 1997). Chloride Content. Chloride content was tested with CTM 422. The results are presented below: SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DESCRIPTION " CHLORIDE CONTENT . ,., „ , . ._ . �a . ,.. ._ B-1 @ 0-5 feet Clayey Sand with trace gravel 10 • Project No. I051222-10 Page 2 March 17, 2006 APPENDIX D SEISMICITY CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP Renaissance Builders- 3rd Street 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 • 500 400 300 200 100 -- -100 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 • • TEST * U B C S E I S * * * version 1.03 * * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS JOB NUMBER: 1051222-10 DATE: 01-31-2006 JOB NAME: Renaissance 3rd FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.4919 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.1483 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SO �EAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JULIAN DISTANCE: 17.9 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-TEMECULA DISTANCE: 0.5 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1.3 Nv: 1.6 Ca: 0.57 Cv: 1.02 Ts: 0.716 To: 0.143 * CAUTION: The digitized data points used to model faults are * limited in number and have been digitized from small- scale maps (e.g. , 1:750,000 scale) . Consequently, * the estimated fault-site-distances may be in error by * several kilometers. Therefore, it is important that * the distances be carefully checked for accuracy and * adjusted as needed, before they are used in design. • Page 1 • -------------TEST SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ELSINORE-TEMECULA I 0.6 I B I 6.8 5.00 I SS ELSINORE-JULIAN I 17.9 I A I 7.1 I 5.00 I SS ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 25.0 I B I 6.8 I 5.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I 34.9 I B I 6.9 I 12.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 34.9 I A I 7.2 I 12.00 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 43.9 I B I 6.9 I 1.50 I Ss ROSE CANYON I 47.7 I B 6.9 I 1. 50 I SS CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) I 53.9 I B I 6.7 I 1.00 I DS SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 1 59.0 I B I 6.7 I 12.00 I SS SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I 59.5 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 I SS ELSINORE-WHITTIER I 60.6 I B I 6.8 I 2.50 I SS EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 62.9 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS - Southern I 63.0 I A I 7.4 I 24.00 I SS CORONADO BANK I 71.4 I B I 7.4 I 3.00 I SS NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.BaSin) I 72.9 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS PINTO MOUNTAIN 1 74.3 I B 1 7.0 I 2.50 I SS PALOS VERDES I 76.7 I B I 7.1 I 3.00 I SS CUCAMONGA I 81.4 I A I 7.0 I 5.00 I DS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) I 84.6 1 B I 7.0 I 1.00 DS •SAN JOSE I 85.2 I B I 6.5 I 0.50 DS BURNT MTN. I 87.5 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 SS CLEGHORN I 87.6 1 B I 6.5 I 3.00 I SS SIERRA MADRE (Central) I 89.1 I B I 7.0 I 3.00 DS NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 89.7 I B I 6.7 I 0.50 I DS EUREKA PEAK I 92.1 I B I 6.5 1 0.60 I SS ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I 93.5 I B I 6.8 I 4.00 I SS SAN JACINTO - BORREGO I 94.3 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 1 SS SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture I 97.7 I A I 7.8 I 34.00 I SS LANDERS I 100.9 I B I 7.3 I 0.60 1 SS HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT I 101.1 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 105.4 I B I 6. 5 I 0.50 DS LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 1 107.0 I B I 7.3 1 0.60 I SS RAYMOND 1 109.3 I B I 6.5 1 0.50 I DS JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) I 112.6 I B I 6.7 I 0.60 I SS EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. I 115.3 I B I 6.9 1 0.60 I SS VERDUGO I 117.2 B I 6.7 I 0.50 I DS HOLLYWOOD I 122.2 B I 6.5 I 1.00 I DS SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 126. 5 I B I 6.6 I 5.00 I SS CALICO - HIDALGO I 126.6 B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK I 127.3 I B I 7.1 I 0.60 I SS ELMORE RANCH I 130. 5 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 I SS SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) I 132.7 I B I 6.6 I 4.00 I SS SANTA MONICA I 134.0 I B I 6.6 I 1.00 I DS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 134.6 I B I 6.5 I 25.00 I SS SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) I 137.6 I B ( 6.7 I 2.00 I DS SAN GABRIEL I 139.5 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 I SS • Page 2 • ------------ TEST SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (MW) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) MALIBU COAST I 141.7 I B I 6.7 I 0.30 I DS ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA I 145.1 I B I 7.0 I 3.50 I SS ANACAPA-DUME I 153. 5 I B I 7.3 I 3.00 I DS GRAVEL HILLS - HARPER LAKE I 155.0 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS SANTA SUSANA I 155.4 I B I 6.6 ( 5.00 I DS IMPERIAL I 159.8 I A I 7.0 I 20.00 I SS HOLSER I 164.4 I e I 6. 5 I 0.40 I DS BLACKWATER I 170.8 I B I 6.9 I 0.60 I SS OAK RIDGE (Onshore) I 175.3 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS SIMI-SANTA ROSA I 176.9 I B I 6.7 I 1.00 I DS SAN CAYETANO I 182.8 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I DS SANTA YNEZ (East) I 202.0 I B I 7.0 I 2.00 I SS VENTURA - PITAS POINT I 207.7 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS GARLOCK (West) I 207.7 I A I 7.1 I 6.00 I SS GARLOCK (East) 215.2 I A I 7.3 I 7.00 I SS M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA ( 216.4 I B ( 6.7 I 0.40 I DS PLEITO THRUST I 219.1 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS RED MOUNTAIN I 222.1 I B I 6.8 I 2.00 I DS SANTA CRUZ ISLAND I 226.4 I B I 6.8 I 1.00 I DS �BIG PINE I 227.0 ( B I 6.7 0.80 I SS HITE WOLF I 234.3 I B I 7.2 I 2.00 I DS OWL LAKE I 236.5 I B I 6.5 I 2.00 I 55 PANAMINT VALLEY I 236.8 I B I 7.2 I 2. 50 I SS So. SIERRA NEVADA I 238.2 I B I 7.1 I 0.10 I DS TANK CANYON I 239.2 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I DS LITTLE LAKE I 240.1 I B I 6.7 I 0.70 I SS DEATH VALLEY (South) I 244.4 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I SS SANTA YNEZ (West) I 255.6 I B I 6.9 I 2.00 I SS SANTA ROSA ISLAND I 262. 5 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Graben) I 286.8 I B I 6.9 I 4.00 I DS LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE I 298.6 I B I 6.8 I 0.70 I DS OWENS VALLEY I 309.9 I B I 7.6 I 1.50 I SS LIONS HEAD I 316.1 I B I 6.6 0.02 I DS SAN JUAN I 319.2 I B I 7.0 I 1.00 SS SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) 323.7 I B I 7.0 0.20 I DS HUNTER MTN. - SALINE VALLEY I 333.0 I B I 7.0 I 2.50 SS CASMALIA (OrCUtt Frontal Fault) I 333.3 I B I 6. 5 I 0.25 I DS DEATH VALLEY (Northern) I 340.6 I A I 7.2 I 5.00 I SS INDEPENDENCE 345.9 I B I 6.9 I 0.20 I DS LOS OSOS 353.1 ( B I 6.8 0.50 I DS HOSGRI I 362.2 I B I 7.3 I 2.50 I SS RINCONADA I 371.3 I B I 7.3 I 1.00 I SS BIRCH CREEK I 402.7 I B I 6.5 I 0.70 I DS WHITE MOUNTAINS I 406.4 I B I 7.1 I 1.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) I 421.9 I B I 5.0 I 34.00 I SS DEEP SPRINGS I 424.2 I B I 6.6 I 0.80 I DS 0 Page 3 • TEST --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (MW) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) I 427.6 I A 1 7.0 1 5.00 1 SS ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns.) 1 438.8 1 B 1 6.8 1 1.00 1 DS FISH SLOUGH I 445.4 1 B I 6.6 I 0.20 I DS HILTON CREEK I 465.1 1 B 1 6. 7 I 2.50 1 DS HARTLEY SPRINGS I 490.0 I B I 6.6 I 0.50 I DS ORTIGALITA I 503.3 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I SS CALAVERAS (So.of CalaveraS Res) I 510.9 I B I 6.2 I 15.00 1 SS MONTEREY BAY - TULARCITOS I 516.8 1 B I 7.1 I 0.50 I DS PALO COLORADO - SUR I 519.9 I B 1 7.0 I 3.00 I SS QUIEN SABE I 523.6 I B 1 6. 5 I 1.00 I SS MONO LAKE I 526.2 B I 6.6 I 2.50 I DS ZAYANTE-VERGELES I 543.0 I B I 6.8 I 0.10 I SS SARGENT I 547.8 I B 6.8 I 3.00 I SS SAN ANDREAS (1906) I 548.2 1 A I 7.9 I 24.00 ( SS ROBINSON CREEK I 557.7 1 B 1 6. 5 I 0.50 DS SAN GREGORIO I 591.9 I A 1 7.3 I 5.00 1 SS GREENVILLE I 595.1 B 6.9 I 2.00 SS HAYWARD (SE Extension) I 597.1 I B I 6. 5 I 3.00 I SS 0M ONTE VISTA - SHANNON I 598.0 B I 6. 5 I 0.40 I DS NTELOPE VALLEY 1 598.4 I B I 6.7 1 0.80 I DS AYWARD (Total Length) I 616.3 I A I 7.1 I 9.00 I SS CALAVERAS (No.of CalaveraS Res) I 616.3 I B I 6.8 I 6.00 I SS GENOA I 624.4 I B I 6.9 I 1.00 I DS CONCORD - GREEN VALLEY 1 662.8 I B I 6.9 I 6.00 1 SS RODGERS CREEK 1 702.1 I A I 7.0 I 9.00 1 SS WEST NAPA 1 702.3 I B I 6.5 I 1.00 I SS POINT REYES I 723.2 I B 1 6.8 I 0.30 i DS HUNTING CREEK - BERRYESSA 1 723.6 1 B 1 6.9 I 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (South) I 764.2 I B I 6.9 I 9.00 I SS COLLAYOMI I 780.3 I B I 6.5 I 0.60 1 SS BARTLETT SPRINGS I 782.8 I A I 7.1 1 6.00 I SS MAACAMA (Central) I 805.8 I A 1 7.1 I 9.00 1 SS MAACAMA (North) 1 864.6 I A 1 7.1 I 9.00 I SS ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) 1 869.4 1 B 1 6.8 i 6.00 1 SS BATTLE CREEK I 887.6 1 B 6. 5 I 0.50 I DS LAKE MOUNTAIN ( 927.8 I B 1 6.7 I 6.00 I SS GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND I 945.6 I B 6.9 I 9.00 I SS MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE 11002.7 1 A 7.4 I 35.00 DS LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) 11007.8 A 1 7.0 I 5.00 I DS MAD RIVER 11009.7 1 B 7.1 I 0.70 I DS CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE 1 1017.0 A I 8.3 I 35.00 I DS MCKINLEYVILLE 1 1020.3 1 B 1 7.0 1 0.60 I DS TRINIDAD 11021.6 B 7.3 1 2. 50 I DS FICKLE HILL 1 1022.4 1 B 6.9 I 0.60 I DS TABLE BLUFF 11028.6 B I 7.0 0.60 I DS LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 11041.8 1 B I 7.1 1.00 I DS 0 Page 4 • TEST --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPROX. ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP I FAULT ABBREVIATED IDISTANCEI TYPE I MAG. I RATE I TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) l (Mw) I (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) BIG LAGOON - BALD MTN.FLT.ZONE 1058.2 B 7.3 0.50 DS • • Page 5 DESIGN RESP01SE SPECTRUM* Seismic Zone: 0.4 Soil Profile: SD 2 .50 2.25 ^ 2. 00 0) 1 .75 0 1 .50 CO 1 .25 U Q 1 . 00 0. 75 U a 0. 50 0.25 0.00 0.0 0.5 1 .0 1 .5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Period Seconds RETURN PERIOD V . ACCELERATIO)b ABRAHAMSON & SILVA ( 1997) SOIL 1 1000 ZZ 0 a� 100 0. 00 0.25 0.50 0. 75 1 .00 1 .25 1 . 50 Acceleration (q) PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE SADIGH ET AL. (1997) DEEP SOIL 1 0 2F 50�y-rs 100 75 yrs 100 rs 90 80 0 0 %-.�, 70 60 ° 50 a_ 40 c a� 30 a� X 20 w 10 0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (g) PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE ABRAHAMSON & SILVA (1997) SOIL I 25 yrs 50 yrs 100 75 rs 100 rs 90 �. 80 0 a 70 4-1 60 ° 50 d (11 40 c -tea 30 a� a� x 20 w 10 0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) 4ETURN PERIOD * . ACCELERATIO* SADIGH ET AL. ( 1997) DEEP SOIL 1 cn 1000 L `/ 0 ^W a. L 100 -Lill 1 1111 1111 1111 1 1 L-4 1111 0. 00 0.25 0. 50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE CAMP. & BOZ. (1997 Rev.) AL 1 0 25 yrs 50 yrs 0 F_V ] 100 75 yrs 100 rs 90 80 0 70 • m 60 ° 50 o_ 40 c -6 30 a� a� X 20 w 10 - 0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) #ETURN PERIOD * . ACCELERATIO-4 CAMP. & BOZ. ( 1997 Rev.) AL 1 10000 Cn L 0 i= 1000 a) n c L a)� A/ 100 0. 00 0.25 0. 50 0.75 1 .00 1 .25 1 .50 Acceleration (q) APPENDIX E LIQ UEFA CTION ANALYSIS • • LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION Based on Proceeding of the NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Technical Report NCEER-97.0022,December 31,1997 and Evaluation of Settlements in Sand due to Earthquake Shaking.Tokimatsu and Seed,1987 Seismic Event Profile Constants Depth to GWT Project Name Renaissance Builders Max_Moment Magnitude 6-8 Total Unit Weight(Ibi 125 During Investigation(it) 26.5 Project Number 1051222-10 Design Ground Motion 0.75 Unit Weight of Water FbsIfI3 624 During Design Event(ft) 5 Boring B-1 Determination of C clic Resistance Ratio Sampling Data 0 ring Investigation Sampling Sempling Correction Factors Blow Count Total Stress Pore Pressure Effective Sampler SET Overburden Energy Borehole Rod Length Sampler Type Fines Depth hi Depth Intl SPT Rings Stress l st) Pressure lost) Stress(psf) Diameter N,� Cr. CE Cs CR Cs (N1ka Content IN,),w„ K DER, 4 1.2 8 500 0 5000 0,750 6,000 2,000 1,50 1.00 0.75 1.00 13.5 25.0 19.3 100 0.21 7 2.1 11 875 0 8750 0.750 8,250 1,545 1,50 1.00 0.75 1.00 143 25.0 20.3 1.00 0,22 9.5 2.9 25 1188 0 1187.5 0750 18.750 1.326 1,50 1.00 0,75 100 28.0 25.0 35.5 100 SET>30 NL 12 32 33 1500 0 1500.0 0.750 24.750 1.180 1,50 1.00 0.85 1.00 37.2 25.0 45.8 1.00 SPT>30 NL 18 5.5 24 2250 0 2250.0 1.000 24.000 0.963 1,50 1,00 0.95 1,20 39.5 25.0 48.4 0.98 SET>W NL 23 TO 76 2875 0 2375.0 0.750 57.000 0.852 1,50 1.00 0.95 1.00 69.2 25.0 81.5 0.94 SPT>30 NL 28 85 48 3500 936 3406.4 1.000 48.000 0,783 1.50 1.00 0.95 1.20 643 8.0 65.4 0.91 SET>30 NL 33 10.1 85 4125 405.6 3]19.4 0.750 63.750 0.749 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 71.E 8.0 72.9 0.89 SPT>30 NL 40 12.2 53 5000 842 4157.5 1.000 53.000 0.709 1.50 1,00 1.00 1 20 67,6 25.0 79.7 0.87 SPT>30 NL 42 128 90 1 5250 1 9672 4282.8 0]50 67.500 0.698 1,50 1,00 1.00 1.00 70.7 4.0 70.7 0.86 SPT>30 NL 48 14E 81 6000 1341.E 4658.4 1000 81.000 0.669 1,50 1.00 1.00 1.20 97.6 4.0 97.E 084 SPT>30 NL 51.5 157 50 1 6438 1560 4877.5 0.750 37,500 0.654 1.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 36.8 4.0 36.8 083 1 SPT>30 NL Determination of Cyclic Stress Ratio Sampling Data During Design Event Blow Count Total Stress Pore Pressure Effective Depth(it) Depth mi SET se Rings the (psf) Pressure(ps1)I Stress(psf) 11 CSR USE FS (NI)60cs 4 122 1 8 500 0 1 500 0,993 0484 1.285 Above GWT Not Liquefiable 19.3 7 2.13 11 875 124S 7502 0.986 0.560 1.285 0.50 20.3 9.5 2.90 25 1187.5 280.8 906.7 0.980 0,626 1.285 Corr.SPT>30 35.5 12 3.66 33 1500 436.8 1063.2 0,975 0.671 1.285 Corr.SPT>30 45.8 18 5.49 24 2250 811.2 1438.8 0.962 0.733 1.285 Corr,SPT>30 48.4 23 7,01 76 2875 1123.2 1751.8 0.948 0.759 1.285 Corr.SPT>30 81.5 28 853 48 3500 1435.2 2064.8 0.930 0,769 1.285 Corr.SPT>30 65.4 33 10.06 85 4125 1747.2 2377.8 0.904 0,764 1 285 Corr.SPT>30 72.9 40 12,19 53 5000 2184 2816 0.851 0.737 1 285 Corr.SPT>30 79.7 42 1 12.80 90 5250 2308.8 29412 0.833 0.725 1,285 Corr.SPT>30 70.7 14 48 63 81 6000 2683.2 3316.8 0]73 0.682 1285 Carr.SPT>30 97.6 51.5 15 70 50 643]5 2901 E 3535.9 0.738 0.655 1 285 Corr.SPT>30 36.8 Assumptions 4.5 inch diameter boring(inside of hollow stem auger) 3 Rod Silck up above boring in feet in liner In SPT(Cs=1.20 for SET) APPENDIX F ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT CALCULATIONS PAVING DESIGN JN: 1061222-10 CONSULT: JAM CLIENT Renaissance Builders CALCULATION SHEET# 1 CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (TI) 5 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 0.8 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 9.6 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Go for A/C paving 2.53 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Go 1.0 IAL EQUIVALENT PAVEMENT SECTIONS: A/C SECTION BASE SECTION FEET Section Gravel Equivalent Minimum A/C Section Minimum Thickness GE GE Delta Base Thickness Base (inches) feet inches inches inches feet (feet) 3 0.63 7.60 2.00 1.8 0.25 0.15 3.6 0.76 9.13 0.47 0.6 0.30 0.05 4.2 0.89 10.65 -1.05 #VALUE! 0.35 #VALUE! 4.8 1.01 12.17 -2.57 #VALUE! 0.40 #VALUE! 5.4 1.14 13.69 -4.09 #VALUE! 0.45 #VALUE! 6 1.27 15.21 -5.61 #VALUE! 0.50 #VALUE! 6.6 1.39 16.73 -7.13 #VALUE! 0.55 #VALUE! 7 1.48 17.74 -8.14 #VALUE! 0.58 #VALUE! 8 1.69 20.28 -10.68 #VALUE! 0.67 #VALUE! 9 1.90 22.81 -13.21 #VALUE! 0.75 #VALUE! 10 2.11 25.35 -15.75 #VALUE! 0.83 #VALUE! PAVING DESIGN JN: 1051222-10 CONSULT: JAM CLIENT Renaissance Builders CALCULATION SHEET# 2 CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (TI) 6 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 0.96 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 11.52 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gf) for A/C paving 2.31 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Go 1.0 IAL EQUIVALENT PAVEMENT SECTIONS: A/C SECTION BASE SECTION FEET Section Gravel Equivalent Minimum A/C Section Minimum Thickness GE GE Delta Base Thickness Base (inches) feet inches inches inches feet (feet) 3 0.58 6.94 4.58 4.8 0.25 0.40 3.6 0.69 8.33 3.19 3.0 0.30 0.25 4..2 0.81 9.72 1.80 1.8 0.35 0.15 4.8 0.93 11.11 0.41 0.6 0.40 0.05 5.4 1.04 12.50 -0.98 #VALUE! 0.45 #VALUE! 6 1.16 13.88 -2.36 #VALUE! 0.50 #VALUE! 6.6 1.27 15.27 -3.75 #VALUE! 0.55 #VALUE! 7 1.35 16.20 -4.68 #VALUE! 0.58 #VALUE! 8 1.54 18.51 -6.99 #VALUE! 0.67 #VALUE! 9 1.74 20.83 -9.31 #VALUE! 0.75 #VALUE! 10 1.93 23.14 -11.62 #VALUE! 0.83 #VALUE! PAVING DESIGN JN: 1051222-10 CONSULT: JAM .133 CLIENT Renaissance Builders CALCULATION SHEET# 3 CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (TI) 7 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1.12 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 13.44 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Go for A/C paving 2.14 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gf) 1.0 IAL EQUIVALENT PAVEMENT SECTIONS: A/C SECTION BASE SECTION FEET Section Gravel Equivalent Minimum A/C Section Minimum Thickness GE GE Delta Base Thickness Base inches feet inches inches inches feet feet 3 0.54 6.43 7.01 7.2 0.25 0.60 3.6 0.64 7.71 5.73 6.0 0.30 0.50 4.2 0.75 9.00 4.44 4.2 0.35 0.35 4.8 0.86 10.28 3.16 3.0 0.40 0.25 5.4 0.96 11.57 1.87 1.8 0.45 0.15 6 1.07 12.85 0.59 0.6 0.50 0.05 6.6 1.18 14.14 -0.70 #VALUE! 0.55 #VALUEI 7 1.25 15.00 -1.56 #VALUE! 0.58 #VALUE! 8 1.43 17.14 -3.70 #VALUE! 0.67 #VALUE! 9 1.61 19.28 -5.84 #VALUE! 0.75 #VALUE! 10 1.79 21.42 -7.98 #VALUE! 0.83 #VALUE! APPENDIX G GENERAL EARTHWORKAND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS LGCINLAND,INC. • General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). L2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record. Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. • During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to confirm that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the project plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "equipment' of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan • at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation and testing. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, • these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. It is the contractor's sole responsibility to provide proper fill compaction. 2.0 Preparation ofAreas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than I percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and • handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. The contractor is responsible for all hazardous waste relating to his work. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Client should acquire the services of a qualified environmental assessor. 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 2 March 17, 2006 2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a • graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. • 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Lavers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 3 March 17, 2006 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum • density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). • 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one (1) test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two (2) grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after • installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. Project No. I051222-10 Page 4 March 17, 2006 6.0 Excavation • Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.0 Trench Backftlls 7.I The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. • 7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one (1) test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. • Project No. 1051222-10 Page 5 March 17, 2006 Proposed Grade Deeper in Areas of Swimming Pools,Etc. / ,• .. r.: Slope Face �/ q v°Oversrzed '�`,4,Mitt Boulder ` .-Wind row with -_ ",Oversize Material - Compacted • 'Nindrow Parallel io Slope Face r. Fill Seised or Flooded Approved - - - - Gi^ovular Material :',,:;.-.=_a:--" � :�.c�c'�S• - �> 4-` :fir o yA , Excavated "French - or Dozer V-cut Id¢i'a: ()YEPSi]_e kQC4 is L¢rgP.!` than S' in Maxunum Dimension. C ection A _ A OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL 11/26/02 Cut Lot • (Exposing Unsuitable Soils at Design Grade) Proposed Grade 1:1 Projection To Remove Unsuitable Competent Material Material Compacted Fill 5' Min. 2, IJ Projection To Competent Material Competent Material Overexcavate and Recompact Note is Removal Bottom Should be Graded Note 2: Where Design Cut Lots are With Minimum 2 %Fall Towards Street or Excavated Entirely Into Competent Other Suitable Area (as Determined by Material,Overexcavation May Still be Soils Engineer)to Avoid Ponding Below Required for Hard-Rock Conditions or for Building Materials With Variable Expansion Characteristics, Cut/Fill Transition Lot Proposed Grade G Orvig' round 1:1 Projection To Competent Mai erial e 7 5' Min.' GomP° Y Overexcavcte Go ond Reermpoct Cut at no 5ieeper than 2J (RV) Competent Material Below Building Footprint "Deeper if-Speci hed by Soils Engineer- CUT AND TI�XNSITION • LOT 017EREXCAVATION DETAIL 11/26102 5' Typical Compacted Fill if Recommended by 5oils Engineer Proposed Grade h`—' 15' Min. 4" Perf.PVC Bcckarnin •?" Solid PVC Outlet (30' Max.) Typical 1 Competent Material 5' Min. \ 2:1 (H:V)Back Cut or as \Designed by Soils Engineer �--- 15' Min. Key bimensions Per Soils , \ Engineer (Typically H/2 or 15' Min) Greater of 2 %Slope l or 1 foot Tilt Back • Perf.PVC Pipe ` \ Perforations Doom �\ 12"Min. Overlap, Secured Every 6 Feet l: Served. 40 Solid PVC Outlet Pipe, (Backf i and Compacted 1Nith.Native Materlerialiss) --- Outlets to be Placed Every 1.00' ('Max.;Q.C. r 5'Ft./Ft. 3/4"- ? 1/2" Oren Graded Kaek / jf C- Approved F'40 val_ntTYPICAL STABILIZATION MFILL DETAIL 11/26/02 Fill Slope • Proposed -- Grade :.,,.'compacted Fili';:;:::'�:_,,:?,.._` Natural Ground �",� o\s l l Projection To y der Competent Material _-�:•�' u`tab�e ."- ..i e ak Ui . _—C 4' Typical ✓ P-ei �---��- B Typical Competent Material Greater of 2/Slope or I•oot Tilt Back ?' Mon. 15' Min, Key Width Fill-Over-Cut Slope Compacted Proposed Fill ' - � — Grade Natural Ground `` ✓ V�tab\i of �,,val�one� L 4' Typical Cut Face Competent terial • 1 Widt Varies 8' Typical Mdn- Slo 1 FOOT Tilt Back 15' Min. Key Width *Construct Cut Slope First Cut-Over-Fill Slope / Natural Ground \/ '! Overbuild and Trim Back Cut Face proposed Grady 37P 1 . ' to f Compacted Fill as. +�pA*ei��t Material _ `• —_ Competent Material : ,• Greater f %Slope or I Foot Tilt Back �--- -�— 15 Min. Key Width Note.Natural Slopes .Steeper Than 5:1. I:H'.v) Must Be Benched. • M 11/26/02 KEYING AND BENCHING? Natural Ground • Proposed Grade Compacted Fill 77.1 .. ......... S Remove Unsuitable 0" ........... Materials Notes "I Min.R 1) Conlinuotic Runs in Excess of 500' Shall Use 8" Diameter Pipe, 2)Final 20' of Pipe at Outlet Shot!be 12" Min. Overlap, Solid and Bac�,hllpd with Fine-grained Secured Every 6 Feet hk 6" Min Material. 6" Collector Pipe (5ched.40,Perf,PVC) 9 Ft./FI 3/4" - 1 1/2" Crushed Rock Geofabric (Mirafi 140N or Approied Equivalent) Proposed Outlet Detail Wy beLezp T)POlender'l Isoon 5-1e 11- nbdion5 ---or 10 , Min. tr"perforated rV-C Schedule 40 2 Crushed Roc.k IQ' Min, 5 Min, eaf' -5- Min, -1bric(Vurafi 140N 5ehd PVC Pipe -- or Approved Equivalent) CANYON SUBDRAINS • 11/26/02 • 5' Typical Compacted Fill if Recommended by.Soils Engineer Pranosed Grade I 1.5 ,Wn --� v 10 Ahrn Typical a Pes f. �\P oockdraun 4" .Sc d '.0 ..=u'l el �� 3 ♦—.�.� (,30! Max Typical �1 { jCompetent Material 5' r+AT>>1. ,1 (i-i:V)Back Cut or as Designed by Soils Engineer Key Dimensions Per Soils Engineer \ Greater of %Slope l \ nr V Til Bock �`y • I'erf.PVC,Pine \� Perforations Down 12"Min. Overlap, 5ecured Evers,/6 Feet ,>rhe•i 4 0 So Ild er Ou let Pipe (Ba reined Compact end om _t'e !4nth iJatiNr M�Jtc-iois) ,�---- ) Out'e"s io de Pincers t v_n-106 (,V,ax.l O.C. i � i 'Ft. 3/4` - 1 I/?_" Open Graded Roc',r. i i e0fabi'ir. (Elf^:;1'i ;:Fnp.j 'Jr ?i p!'OyG_d EGfJi M'^ien'i) TYPICAL BUTTRESS • DETAIL 1 1126/02 /� Ran •v�r�le�:a :s.Y; i i A!u tf_4d Hit, n. (.id M,n !61nml D_uPns Ix^ nry -_ I Z� _. i i.hnffs of this Report t Af IQoa z 7 � a I 6eoloJic fontmc: 4 2-f3� _ GVf428_; D Boring Location Iw 13 2' PROPbSED, JII DWG' "' �r.R.=2.ft�i1 � R,mnaal llep4c 1/ TT NO(', a t lll f�5- I I i I I ff � LGC INLAND GEOTECPINIC.AL MAP APN 922-046-012 nc'- Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Appendix F Treatment Control BMP Sizing Calculations and Design Details • Worksheet 2 Design Procedure Form for Design Flow Uniform Intensity Design Flow Designer: HECTOR CORREA Company: HLC CIVIL ENGINEERING Date: Project: LA Location: 1. Determine Impervious Percentage 0 . 51 a. Determine total tributary area A,mal= acres (1) b. Determine Impervious% i = 94 % (2) 2. Determine Runoff Coefficient Values Use Table 4 and impervious % found in step 1 a. A Soil Runoff Coefficient Ca = (3) b. B Soil Runoff Coefficient Cb = 0 . 86 (4) • c. C Soil Runoff Coefficient C� = (5) d. D Soil Runoff Coefficient Ca = (6) 3. Determine the Area decimal fraction of each soil type in tributary area a. Area of A Soil / (1) = A. = (7) b. Area of B Soil / (1) = Ab = 1 (8) c. Area of C Soil / (1) = k = (9) d. Area of D Soil / (1) = Ad = (10) 4. Determine Runoff Coefficient a. C = (3)x(7) + (4)x(8) + (5)x(9) + (6)X(10) = C = 0 . 86 (11) 5. Determine BMP Design flow a. QBMP = CxlxA= (11)xO.2x(1) QBMP = 0 . 09 ft3 (1Y) s • 10 • Table 4 Runoff Coefficients for an In ensity - 0 2 '"/hr for Urban Soil Ty pes' ° A So�I' � B Soil � �C�Soil a �DrSoll� INS Impervious /off o w uut. � r,3? a ,r,XY Y^'* Z�S y,.._t Y " t."' x ea d T 'ap v"'j x ��YRVF32 �RI . 56 RI,w 69 RI w 75 ss 0 Natural 0.06 0.14 0.23 0.28 5 0.10 0.18 0.26 0.31 10 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.34 15 0.19 0.26 0.33 0.37 20 0-Acre 0.23 0.30 0.36 0.40 25 0.27 0.33 0.39 0.43 30 0.31 0.37 0.43 0.47 35 0.35 0.41 0.46 0.50 40 1/2-Acre 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.53 45 0.44 0.48 0.53 0.56 50 1/4-Acre 0.48 0.52 1 0.56 0.59 55 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.62 60 0.56 0.60 0.63 0.65 65 Condominiums 0.61 0.64 0.66 0.68 70 0.65 0.67 0.70 0.71 75 Mobilehomes 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.74 80 (Apartments) 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.78 • 85 0.77 0.79 0.80 0.81 90 Commercial 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.84 95 0.86 0.86 0.87 0.87 100 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 `Complete District's standards can be found in the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual • 9 Determining the number of cartridges for a highly impervious site To determine the number of StormFilter cartridges needed for a highly impervious site • (>_70% impervious): 1. Calculate the peak flow rate from the water quality storm (Qtreat)for your site using the approved hydrologic models established by your local agency. If there are no agency guidelines,we recommend using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Method. 2. Calculate the number of cartridges required to treat the peak water quality flow rate(Nflc,) for your site. Nflow= Qtreat(449 gpm/cfs/Qcan gpm/cart) Notes: • Assume Q.rt= 15 gpm/cart, which is the maximum flow rate that an individual cartridge can treat. In some areas or situations, cartridges with a flow rate other than 15 gpm may be required, resulting in a different Qcart value. • If the number of cartridges is not a whole number, round the number of cartridges up to the next whole number. Exam lesof carted e,number shgt in foir agy i,ht hi` P m envious ���<^ sF ��'T"nr� Oq r� 1�l�Assume that a sitehas a peak+flow rate of(0°443cfs�.�,�� � �'w � �` „�)� `a2� Determine the+numberKof cartndges requred to treat this flow rate` � n� „'��; °.���" '� s •n aw- & s �� ,z �,�sso- a �.a_�G€�' �P'k^ry w,zr ra 'hi , fe�.� �� Y, 4� �` -�y�.�N {0 44 cfs)(449igpMcis'%15 gpm/cart) 13 2 rartndges "���,'"� '�4�5 'Answer Rounding up to the next wholesnumber ithe number,of requiredpeartndges is�14 r�r'�'� 01 C CAvt 13 r�s �ITS �b 02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions 29 GENERAL NOTES 1)5TORMFILTER BY CONTECH 5TORMWATER SOLUTIONS; PORTLAND, OR(800) 548-4GG7; 5CARBOROUGH, ME(877)907-8G7G; ELKRIDGE, MD (8GG)740-3318. 2) FILTER CARTRIDGE(5)TO BE 51PHON-ACTUATED AND SELF-CLEANING. STANDARD DETAIL 5HOW5 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CARTRIDGES. ACTUAL NUMBER REQUIRED TO BE SPECIFIED ON SITE PLANS OR IN DATA TABLE BELOW. 3) PRECAST MANHOLE STRUCTURE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH A5TM C478. DETAIL REFLECTS DE51GN INTENT ONLY. ACTUAL DIMENSIONS AND CONFIGURATION OF STRUCTURE WILL BE SHOWN ON PRODUCTION SHOP DRAWING. 4)STRUCTURE AND ACCESS COVERS TO MEET AA5HTO H-20 LOAD RATING. 5)5TORMFILTER REQUIRES 2.3 FEET OF DROP FROM INLET TO OUTLET. IF LE55 DROP 15 AVAILABLE, CONTACT CONTECH 5TORMWATER SOLUTIONS. MINIMUM ANGLE BETWEEN INLET AND OUTLET 1545°. G) INLET PIPING TO BE SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER AND PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. PRECAST MANHOLE 5TORMPILTER EQUIPPED WITH A DUAL DIAMETER HOPE OUTLET STUB AND SAND COLLAR. EIGHT INCH DIAMETER OUTLET SECTION MAY BE SEPARATED FROM OUTLET STUB AT MOLDED-IN CUT LINE TO ACCOMMODATE A 12 INCH OUTLET PIPE. CONNECTION TO DOWNSTREAM PIPING TO BE MADE USING A FLEXIBLE COUPLING OR ECCENTRIC REDUCER, AS REQUIRED. COUPLING BY FERNCO OR EQUAL AND PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. 7)PROVIDE MINIMUM CLEARANCE FOR MAINTENANCE ACCESS. IF A SHALLOWER SYSTEM 15 REQUIRED, CONTACT CONTECH 5TORMWATEP.SOLUTIONS FOR OTHER OPTIONS. 8) ANTI-FLOTATION BALLAST TO BE SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER AND PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR, IF REQUIRED. BALLAST TO BE SET AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE STRUCTURE. 9)ALL 5TORMFILTER5 REQUIRE REGULAR MAINTENANCE. REFER TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES FOR MORE INFORMATION. PRECAST MANHOLE 30"0 FRAME STORMFILTER DATA AND COVER(5TD) STRUCTUREID XXX WATER QUALITY FLOW RATE(cfs) X.XX !.: PEAK FLOW RATE(<I cfs) X.XX :�• .s:;.'�' ; RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW( rs) XXX • # OF CARTRIDGES REQUIRED XX .• t '.•:.�'_. CARTRIDGE FLOW RATE(I 5 or 7.5 m) XX " '%' ':• i:... MEDIA TYPE (C5F, PERLITE, ZPG) XXXXX •\'. ''. . '•: /..' RIM ELEVATION XXX.XX' • j PIPE DATA: I.E. ORIENTATION MATERIAL DIAMETER INLET PIPE#I LE, XX° XXX XX" INLET PIPE#2 XXX.XX XX° I XXX XX" MANHOLE STORMFILTER - TOPVIEW 1 OUTLET5TU15 VX.XX' o° 1 XXX 8"/12' 2 ECCENTRIC REDUCER YE5W0 SIZE (BY CONTRACTOR) XXX XX"x XX" SAND COLLAR ANTI-FLOTATION BALLAST WIDTH HEIGHT OUTLET XX" XX° RI5ER 1 2"O OUTLET STUB NOTES/SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: PIPE ORIENTATION KEY: Ga MOLDED-IN CUT LINE 90° 8"0 OUTLET STUB 180°— -0° 270° • OUTLET PIPE (BY CONTRACTOR) . ° COUPLING (BY CONTRACTOR) (SEE NOTE G) BALLAST GROUT (SEE NOTE 8) THE STORMto T r MANAGEMENT (BY CONTRACTOR) StormFrzer® MANHOLE STORMFILTER - OUTLET DETAIL �21 5.PATENTNo.5.6.027,9. Na. .PATr527,No.G,027,0, No.G,G49,048,No.5.C24,57G, 2 AND OTHER U.5.AND FOREIGN • 112006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions PATENT5 FENDING DRAWING A�_�/�_L19r1e^ . 10 PRECAST 48" MANHOLE STORMFILTER _ 'pv41F_'qq1 ■ TOP AND SECTION VIEWS, NOTES AND DATA 2 STORMWATERR STANDARD DETAIL 70 BALLAST 41 (SEE NOTE 8) 48"0 a A 1 INLET PIPE (SEE NOTES 5 6 6) 87 1 2"0 HDPE OUTLET STUB (SEE NOTES 5 4 6) MANHOLE STORMFILTER - PLAN VIEW @1 1 30"0 FRAME AND COVER(5TD) CONCRETE (5EE NOTE 4) GRADE RING STEP (TYF) HDPE OUTLET 1 INLET PIPE P15EP WITH (SEE NOTES 5 4 6) SCUM BAFFLE 4'-G"MIN e� (SEE NOTE 7) 5TORMFILTEP.CARTRIDGE (TYP) (SEE NOTE 2) BALLAST / ! (SEE NOTE 6) /l HEIGHT " t �—,WIDTH UNDERDRAIN SEE DETAIL 2/2 MANIFOLD MANHOLE STORMFILTER - SECTION VIEW A 1 THE 5rORMWATER MANAGEMENT U.5.PATENT No. 5,322,G29, No.5.707,527.No,G,027,G39 No,G.G49,045.No.5,G24.57G, AND OTHER U5.AND FOREIGN PATeNTs PENDING02006 CONTECH Stormwater Solutions • A.�A/,_U4lE/oL 0 PRECAST 48" MANHOLE STORMFILTER NWNGagFvdkv , ° °'IIIIIII—� �' PLAN AND SECTION VIEWSSTORMWATER SOLUTIONS_ STANDARD DETAIL Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Appendix H PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT- SUMMARY OF SITE REMEDIATION CONDUCTED AND USE RESTRICTIONS NOT CONDUCTED