Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2017-248_20171121_Preliminary WQMP City of Newport Beach County of Orange/Santa Ana Region Priority Project Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Project Name: MARINER SQUARE 1244 IRVINE AVENUE, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TTM 18135, LOT 1, APN: 425-061-09 Prepared for: Melia Homes 8951 Research Drive, #100 Irvine, CA 92618 Chad Brown, Vice President of Planning & Development (949) 759-4367 Prepared by: C&V Consulting, Inc./ Dane McDougall, P.E. 6 Orchard, Suite 200, Lake Forest, CA 92630 (949) 916-3800/ dmcdougall@cvc-inc.net November 2017 Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Owner’s Certification    MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page i  This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for Melia Homes by C&V Consulting, Inc. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the City of Newport Beach and County of Orange NPDES Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of the plan. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan , including the ongoing operation and maintenance of all best management practices (BMPs), and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with the current Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the intent of the non-point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the incorporated Cities of Orange County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors-in-interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement and amend the WQMP. An appropriate number of approved and signed copies of this document shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. Owner: Chad Brown Title Vice President of Planning & Development Company Melia Homes Address 8951 Research Drive, #100, Irvine, CA 92618 Email chad@melia-homes.com Telephone # (949) 759-4367 I understand my responsibility to implement the provisions of this WQMP including the ongoing operation and maintenance of the best management practices (BMPs) described herein. Owner Signature       Date       Project Owner’s Certification Planning Application No. (If applicable) TBD Grading Permit No. TBD  Tract/Parcel Map and Lot(s) No. TTM 18135, Lot 1 Building Permit No. TBD  Address of Project Site and APN (If no address, specify Tract/Parcel Map and Lot Numbers) 1244 Irvine Avenue  Newport Beach,       CA 92660  APN: 425‐061‐09  Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Owner’s Certification  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page ii   Preparer (Engineer): Dane McDougall, P.E. Title Principal PE Registration # 80705 Company C&V Consulting, Inc. Address 6 Orchard, Suite 200, Lake Forest, CA 92630 Email dmcdougall@cvc‐inc.net   Telephone # (949) 916-3800 I hereby certify that this Water Quality Management Plan is in compliance with, and meets the requirements set forth in, Order No. R8-2009-0030/NPDES No. CAS618030, of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Preparer Signature       Date       Place Stamp Here Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Table of Contents  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page iii Contents Page No. Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance .......... 1 Section II Project Description .................................................................................. 2 Section III Site Description ........................................................................................ 8 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) ...................................................... 12 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs ................................. 28 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) .......................................................................... 32 Section VII Educational Materials ............................................................................. 33 Attachments Attachment A . ..........................................................................TGD Worksheets & Figures Attachment B . .............................................................................................. WQMP Exhibit Attachment C . ..................................................................................................... Site BMPs Attachment D . .................................................................................. Geotechnical Reports Attachment E .. ................................................................... Operation & Maintenance Plan Attachment F .. ............................................................ Notice of Transfer of Responsibility Attachment G . .................................................................................. Educational Materials Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section I  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 1    Section I Permit(s) and Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance   Project Infomation Permit/Application No. (If applicable) TBD Grading or Building Permit No. (If applicable) TBD Address of Project Site (or Tract Map and Lot Number if no address) and APN 1244 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92660 TTM 18135, Lot 1 Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance Water Quality Conditions of Approval or Issuance applied to this project. (Please list verbatim.) Conditions of Approval have not been issued at this time.  Water Quality  Conditions of Approval will be provided during final engineering.  Conceptual WQMP Was a Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan previously approved for this project? This is a Preliminary WQMP to support entitlement processing.  Watershed-Based Plan Conditions Provide applicable conditions from watershed - based plans including WIHMPs and TMDLS. n/a  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 2 Section II Project Description II.1 Project Description Description of Proposed Project Development Category (From Model WQMP, Table 7.11-2; or -3): All significant redevelopment projects, where significant redevelopment is defined as projects that include the addition or replacement of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface on a developed site. Redevelopment does not include routine maintenance activities that are conducted to maintain original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, original purpose of the facility, or emergency redevelopment activity required to protect public health and safety. If the redevelopment results in the addition or replacement of less than 50 percent of the impervious area on-site and the existing development was not subject to WQMP requirement, the numeric sizing criteria discussed in Section 7.II-2.0 only applies to the addition or the replacement area. If the addition or replacement accounts for 50 percent or more of the impervious area, the Project WQMP requirements apply to the entire development. Project Area (ft2): 251,217 Number of Dwelling Units: 92 SIC Code: n/a Project Area Pervious Impervious Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Area (acres or sq ft) Percentage Pre-Project Conditions 0.87 ac (37,683 sf) 15% 4.90 ac (213,534 sf) 85% Post-Project Conditions 1.19 ac (51,905 sf) 21%  4.58 ac (199,312 sf) 79% Drainage Patterns/Connections The existing site is relatively flat in nature and sheet flows overland in the easterly direction towards Rutland Road. Onsite there are existing area drains, grate inlet catch basins and underground storm drain piping that collects and conveys stormwater runoff to an existing City public underground 30” RCP storm drain system located within the westerly sidewalk of Rutland Road. Flows within this existing storm drain system drain to the north and converge with an existing 36” RCP storm drain system within Mariners Drive and continue flowing in the easterly direction. The proposed project will design the site to match existing drainage conditions Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 3 via surface flow and onsite underground drainage system. The drainage system will be designed to collect and convey stormwater runoff to the proposed treatment system prior to discharge into the public storm drain system. During larger storm events when treatment systems are at capacity, runoff will overflow through onsite proposed curb inlet catch basins and be conveyed offsite via two (2) proposed points of connection to the existing 30” storm drain system within Rutland Road. All existing onsite storm drain connections, piping and inlets will be demolished and capped at the right-of-way as part of this development’s construction. Narrative Project Description: (Use as much space as necessary.) The existing site currently is utilized as the Mariner Square Apartment Community with several residential buildings with associated parking, landscaped areas and recreational pool/ spa area. The existing building coverage is approximately 76,480 square feet. Majority of the site is impervious consisting of car ports, building roof coverage, asphalt pavement, and Portland concrete cement areas. The existing site has approximately 137,054 square feet of impervious coverages such as asphalt/ PCC pavement, parking areas, car ports, and walkways and approximately 37,683 square feet landscaping. The entire existing site will be demolished as part of this development by Melia Homes. The proposed development will consist of 92 attached residential units consisting of twenty-eight (28) buildings over approximately 5.77 acres. The site has been designed into five (5) Drainage Management Areas (DMA) based on the site’s preliminary Grading and Drainage design. The site is bounded by Irvine Avenue to the west, Mariners Drive to the north, Rutland Road to the east and an existing Commercial/ Retail development to the south. The proposed buildings will consist of fourteen (14) 2-plex (duplex) buildings, seven (7) 4-plex buildings and six (6) 6-plex buildings. Along the Irvine Avenue frontage, a set of three 6-plexes and a set of two 6-plexes will be connected and appear to be one large building referred as the 18-plex and 12- plex buildings, respectively. The roof downspouts roof located along the outer walls will outlet onto pervious landscaping. Runoff will be collected by surface flow and an onsite area drain system and be routed to the proposed treatment device prior to discharge to the public storm drain system. The project will consist of three (3) 3-story building types, 2-plex/ 4-plex and the 6-plex referred to as the Townhomes ranging from 3 to 5 bedroom units with 2.5 to 5 bathrooms, 3-story buildings with four (4) plan types. The development will provide a total 231 parking spaces to serve the residential units and guests. Guest/ Visitor parking is located at grade surrounding the site. The site has one (1) main entrance/ exit from Irvine Avenue and two (2) secondary entrance/ exits from Rutland Road. Each unit will have a private open space patio or balcony associated with individual water and sewer services. No community trash enclosure are proposed. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 4 Individual trash removal service will be provided for each unit. The proposed development will have community open space areas, recreational pool/spa area, BBQ/ Outdoor Fire Place Gathering Area and grassy turf area for the resident’s pets. The site will create an open green throughway from Rutland Road to Irvine Avenue to promote a connection to the surrounding community. A pedestrian access to the existing commercial/ retail development to the south to allow for direct access and additional parking. The drive aisles and parking areas will consist of asphalt concrete pavement and sidewalks comprised of portland concrete cement (PCC). Decorative hardscape is proposed and will consist of pavers and stone work within the motorcourts, alley drive aisles, walkways and main entrances. Landscaping will be incorporated in open space areas including vegetation, potted plants and trees. Refer to WQMP Exhibit for proposed pervious areas in Attachment B of this report. The following proposed areas have been calculated based on the current preliminary site design: Sidewalk – 17,287 square feet Asphalt Street Pavement – 33,715 square feet Miscellaneous Site Work, Curb & Gutter, Pool, Walls, Patios, etc. – 27,234 square feet Decorative Pavement – 27,529 square feet Landscaped Areas – 51,905 square feet Building Coverage – 93,547 square feet BMP selection for storm water runoff treatment has been described in Section IV of this report. Implementation of BMPs will be consisted of addressing the pollutants of concerns generated by residential use. No car washing, outdoor storage or food processing areas will be incorporated on this project. The project will be serviced by on-site public water system that will be publicly maintained by means of a proposed easement and on-site private sanitary sewer system that will be privately maintained by the HOA. The proposed public water system will be looped between two (2) points of connection from Irvine Avenue and Rutland Road. The proposed private sewer system will be gravity feed to one (1) of point connection to an existing onsite sewer main located near the southeast corner of the site. At this time, it is unknown if future roadway dedications are required by City of Newport Beach to meet the ultimate right-of-way width conditions. Any proposed public dedications of the site will be excluded from the WQMP calculations and treatment areas. Refer to Attachment B of this report for a copy of the WQMP Exhibit. Long- term maintenance is planned to be handled by an appointed Homeowner’s Associated (HOA) selected by Melia Homes. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 5   II.2 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Pollutants of Concern Pollutant Check One for each: E=Expected to be of concern N=Not Expected to be of concern Additional Information and Comments Suspended-Solid/ Sediment E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Nutrients E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Heavy Metals E N Expended by proposed onsite streets and parking areas. Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus) E N Expected by proposed residence and pets. Pesticides E N Expected by proposed landscaped areas. Oil and Grease E N Expected by uncovered parking areas. Toxic Organic Compounds E N Per TGD, Table 2.1 this pollutant is not expected for attached residential developments. Trash and Debris E N Expected by proposed residence.           Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 6 II.3 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern No – Show map Yes – Describe applicable hydrologic conditions of concern below. Per the TGD Figure 4, Susceptibility Analysis of Newport Bay‐Newport Coastal Streams, HCOC Map dated  February 2013 located within Attachment A of this report, the project site is located within an exempt area.  In  addition, the site’s runoff drains into engineered channels until discharging into the Newport Bay.  The  proposed drainage path of travel has been indicated by arrows on the map.          Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section II  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 7 II.4 Post Development Drainage Characteristics Post–development drainage will be consistent with a proposed attached Multi-Family Residential project. The tributary areas and direction of run-off flows for the proposed site are delineated on the attached WQMP Exhibit based on the preliminary grading and drainage design. Refer to the WQMP Exhibit in Attachment B of this report. Currently, the site drains overland and is conveyed via an existing onsite private storm drain system to the easterly property line. The historic drainage patterns will be preserved in order to control onsite grading. The proposed drainage runoff will be collected by a private underground storm drain system that been design to convey storm water runoff to the proposed BMP treatment device prior to discharge into the public storm drain system within Rutland Road. During large storm events, storm water runoff will overflow within the curb inlet catch basins and will be conveyed offsite. Emergency overflow will be directed over the proposed secondary driveway entrances on Rutland Road. The proposed drainage pattern matches the existing historical drainage pattern from the site. Runoff from this area historically flows in the northerly direction within an existing 30” storm drain system in Rutland Road and converges with an existing storm drain system in Mariners Drive, continuing in the easterly direction. Storm water runoff within this existing public storm drain system discharges into the East Costa Mesa Channel and ultimately outlets to the Lower Newport Bay/ Pacific Ocean.   II.5 Property Ownership/Management The property is currently owned by Melia Homes.  The Owner will be responsible for the long term  maintenance of the project’s storm water facilities and conformance to this WQMP after  construction is complete.    A Notice of Transfer of Responsibility is located in Attachment F of this report and should be  executed as part of any ownership transfer after construction is complete.  Melia Homes will appoint a Homeowner’s Associated (HOA) to provide long term BMP maintenance  for the proposed development.  Refer to Section V of this report for additional information.  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section III  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 8 Section III Site Description III.1 Physical Setting Name of Planned Community/Planning Area (if applicable) City of Newport Beach Location/Address 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92660 General Plan Land Use Designation Multiple Unit Residential Existing Zoning Multi-Family Residential (RM-6000) Proposed Zoning Multi-Family Residential (RM-6000) (115/92) Acreage of Project Site 5.77 acres Predominant Soil Type Per TGD, Figure XVI-2a, NRCS Hydrologic Soils Groups the site is located with Soil Type B. Refer to Attachment A of this report for a copy of the map. For site specific soil information, refer to Section III.2 and Attachment D of this report.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section III  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 9 III.2 Site Characteristics Site Characteristics Precipitation Zone The site falls under the 0.70” per the TGD, Figure XVI-1, Rainfall Zones map. Refer to Attachment A of this report for a copy of the map. Topography The site topography is fairly flat and sheet flows to the easterly property line to Rutland Road. The site ranges in elevations from approximately 85.7 to 84.8 feet above mean sea level. Drainage Patterns/Connections The existing site is flat in nature and sheet flows overland to the easterly property line. The existing site is currently occupied by an Apartment Community with associated landscaping, walkways, parking lots and multiple buildings. There is an existing City of Newport Beach 30” storm drain system located within Rutland Road flowing in the northerly direction and converges with an existing City of Newport Beach 36” storm drain system within Mariners Drive and continues to flow in the easterly direction. The existing site’s runoff is conveyed to the existing 30” storm drain system within Rutland Road at three (3) separate points of connection. The proposed development will match the historic drainage pattern and drainage points of connection. Soil Type, Geology, and Infiltration Properties Per the Geotechnical Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated July 21, 2017, the site’s geotechnical properties are described as the following: “Undocumented artificial fill soils were encountered in the test borings to an approximate depth of up to five feet. The fill materials generally consist of fine grained sandy silt to clayey silt which are brown, slightly moist to moist and medium stiff to stiff. Based on our recent subsurface exploration and review of the readily available regional geologic maps for the project site area (Morton, D.M., 2004), Quaternary age older paralic deposits underlie the artificial fill materials in the immediate site area. The older paralic deposits encountered in the hollow stem borings generally consist of gray to brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense silty fine to coarse sands along with medium stiff to hard silty clays or clayey silts.” Refer to Attachment D of this report for a copy of the Geotechnical Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section III  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 10 report. Hydrogeologic (Groundwater) Conditions Per the Infiltration Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated June 21, 2017, the site’s groundwater conditions are described as the following: “Groundwater was encountered in three of the deeper borings excavated at the site by this firm. The shallowest reading of groundwater was 11 feet bgs in the southwest corner of the site. The deepest reading of groundwater was 11.5 feet bgs in the northwestern and southcentral portion of the site. This groundwater is considered to be in a perched condition as materials beneath are not saturated to the depth explored (51 feet bgs).” Refer to Attachment D of this report for a copy of the Geotechnical report.  Geotechnical Conditions (relevant to infiltration) Per the Infiltration Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated June 21, 2017, the site’s geotechnical infiltration properties are described as the following: “Two test borings were excavated for infiltration purposes to five feet below ground surface with a hollow stem auger drill rig within the subject property. The two test boring locations can be seen on the Boring and Infiltration Location Map (Figure 2). Infiltration testing was performed in two of the excavations within the lower 24 inches by a representative from our firm in general conformance with the referenced document. The depths tested were intended to correlate to the bottom several feet of the projected storm water infiltration systems. The infiltration rates are presented in the following table for each of the borings after the rates had stabilized. Boring No. Approximate depth of testing (feet) Infiltration Rate (inches per hour) B-3 5 0.07 B-5 5 0.20 Over the lifetime of the storm water disposal areas, the infiltration rates may be affected by silt build up and biological activities, as well as local variations in near surface soil conditions. As per the Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, a factor of safety of 2.0 should be applied to the Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes  Section III  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 11 infiltration rate for each test.” Refer to Attachment D of this report for a copy of the referenced geotechnical recommendations.  Off-Site Drainage No off-site drainage enters the property.  Utility and Infrastructure Information Utilities are proposed to be underground. No special setbacks are needed or proposed. Proposed storm drain, sanitary sewer and underground fire water system will be private and maintained by the appointed HOA. The proposed domestic water system will be public and maintained by the City of Newport Beach.    III.3 Watershed Description Receiving Waters Site runoff drains to the easterly property line towards Rutland Road and enters into an existing underground City public storm drain system that flows in the northerly direction. This system converges with an existing underground City public storm drain system within Mariners Drive that continues flowing in the easterly direction, discharging into the East Costa Mesa Channel which outlets to the Lower Newport Bay/ Pacific Ocean. The site is located within the East Costa Mesa/ Newport Beach Watershed.  303(d) Listed Impairments Lower Newport Bay is listed for Chlordane, Copper, DDT, Indicator Bacteria, Nutrients, PCBs, Pesticides, and Sediment Toxicity pollutants. Applicable TMDLs The Newport Bay currently has applicable TMDLs for Selenium, Fecal Coliform, Copper and Sediment pollutants. Pollutants of Concern for the Project Anticipated and Potential Pollutants of Concern for Attached Residential Development is Suspended Solid/Sediments, Pathogens (Bacteria/Virus), Nutrients (Oxygen Demanding Substances), Pesticides, Oil & Grease and Trash & Debris.  Environmentally Sensitive and Special Biological Significant Areas The project is not located within any known Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) or Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS).  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 12 Section IV Best Management Practices (BMPs) IV. 1 Project Performance Criteria (NOC Permit Area only) Is there an approved WIHMP or equivalent for the project area that includes more stringent LID feasibility criteria or if there are opportunities identified for implementing LID on regional or sub-regional basis? YES NO If yes, describe WIHMP feasibility criteria or regional/sub-regional LID opportunities. There are currently no approved WIHMPs for the East Costa Mesa/ Newport Beach Watershed. Project Performance Criteria If HCOC exists, list applicable hydromodification control performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.2.2 in MWQMP) Per 7.II‐2.4.2.2 of the MWQMP, the volumes and time of concentration of stormwater  runoff for the post development condition do not significantly exceed those of the  predevelopment condition for a two‐year frequency storm event (a difference of five  percent or less is considered insignificant).  If the excess volume cannot feasibly be retained, then retain the excess volume from  the two‐year runoff event to the maximum extent possible and implement on‐site  hydromodification controls such that post development runoff two‐year peak flow rate  is not greater than 110 percent of the predevelopment runoff two‐year peak flow rate.  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 13 List applicable LID performance criteria (Section 7.II-2.4.3 from MWQMP) According to Section 7.II‐2.4.3 of the MWQMP Priority Projects must biotreat/biofilter  the 85th percentile, 24‐hour storm event (Design Capture Volume).  A properly designed biotreatment system may only be considered if infiltration,  harvest and use, and evapotranspiration (ET) cannot be feasibly implemented for the  full design capture volume. In this case, infiltration, harvest and use, and ET practices  must be implemented to the greatest extent feasible and biotreatment be provided for  the remaining design capture.   This project proposes to utilize Biotreatment BMPs to treat the required stormwater  runoff.   List applicable treatment control BMP performance criteria (Section 7.II-3.2.2 from MWQMP) If it is not feasible to meet LID performance criteria through retention and/or  biotreatment provided on‐site or at a sub‐regional/regional scale, then treatment  control BMPs shall be provided on‐site or off‐site prior to discharge to waters of the  US.  Since the project proposes to satisfy LID performance criteria, therefore treatment  control performance criteria is also fully satisfied.  Sizing of treatment control BMPs  (Biofiltration Systems) shall be based flow‐based for the area being redeveloped to  medium and high effectiveness for reducing the primary pollutants of concern, which  will be considered in compliance.    This project proposes to utilize Biotreatment BMPs to treat the required stormwater  runoff.  Calculate LID design storm capture volume for Project. See Attachment B of this report for DCV and treatment flow rate calculations.  Biotreatment BMPs will be utilized to treat the required treatment flow rate.  Refer to  section IV.3.4 of this report for additional BMP information.  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 14 IV.2. Site Design and Drainage The site proposes five (5) Drainage Management Areas as indicated on the WQMP Exhibit. The DMAs were based on the Preliminary Grading and Drainage design. Each DMA will have an area drain system to collect and convey runoff from landscape, surface and roof drainage to the proposed treatment devices. Pervious coverages located throughout the site will promote impervious area dispersion from roof and sidewalk runoff. Street surface runoff will be collected and conveyed through a curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that will divert low flows to proposed Modular Wetlands System (MWS), Biofiltration vaults for water quality treatment. The Dvert System will allow for overflow of stormwater runoff within the catch basin once the Biofiltration vault has reached maximum capacity. An Area drain system will connect directly to the Biofiltration vaults for treatment of landscaped areas. Appropriate overflow structures will be implemented within the area drain system upstream to convey stormwater runoff for larger storm events. The Modular Wetland System (MWS) Biofiltration vaults are designed to provide a 3 phase treatment train. Initially, when the stormwater enters the system, a trash rack, filter media and settling chamber will capture large trash/ debris and sediment in the stormwater before entering into the planting media. This system is designed to treat stormwater flow horizontally. Before the stormwater enters the planting or “wetland” chamber, the runoff flows through the 2nd phase, a pre-filter cartridge which captures fines TSS, metals, nutrients and bacteria. The pre-filter chamber eliminates additional maintenance of the planting area. The wetland chamber is the 3rd phase of the system which provides final treatment through a combination of physical, chemical and biological processes. Refer the WQMP Exhibit in Attachment B for the location of the proposed BMPs. The proposed Biofiltration vaults have been sized based on the impervious coverage and tributary area per DMA. Refer to the separately prepared Preliminary Grading and Drainage plan for additional information. Drainage Management Areas (DMA)s: Refer to the WQMP Exhibit in Attachment B of this report for referenced area designations. Drainage Management Area (DMA) Area (ac) Treatment Flow Rate (cfs) Proposed BMPs 1 0.48 0.076 BIO-7: Proprietary Biofiltration 2 1.47 0.278 BIO-7: Proprietary Biofiltration 3 1.39 0.244 BIO-7: Proprietary Biofiltration 4 1.10 0.204 BIO-7: Proprietary Biofiltration 5 1.33 0.224 BIO-7: Proprietary Biofiltration ∑ 5.57 1.026 --   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 15 IV.3 LID BMP Selection and Project Conformance Analysis IV.3.1 Hydrologic Source Controls (HSCs) Name Included? Localized on-lot infiltration Impervious area dispersion (e.g. roof top disconnection) Street trees (canopy interception) Residential rain barrels (not actively managed) Green roofs/Brown roofs Blue roofs Impervious area reduction (e.g. permeable pavers, site design) Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other: Other:   * HSC BMPs are not required since the project is located within an HCOC exempt area. Refer to the Susceptility Analysis Map for Newport Bay-Newport Coastal Streams, TGD Figure 4 dated February 2013 in Attachment A of this report for project location.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 16 IV.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Name Included? Bioretention without underdrains Rain gardens Porous landscaping Infiltration planters Retention swales Infiltration trenches Infiltration basins Drywells Subsurface infiltration galleries French drains Permeable asphalt Permeable concrete Permeable concrete pavers Other:           Infiltration BMPs will not be utilized and have been determined to be infeasible for this site due to existing high  groundwater levels, low infiltration rates and building setbacks requirements.   Biotreatment BMPs will be utilized  to provide the required treatment flow rates.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 17 IV.3.3 Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs Name Included? All HSCs; See Section IV.3.1 Surface-based infiltration BMPs Biotreatment BMPs Above-ground cisterns and basins Underground detention Other: Other: Other:   Evapotranspiration, Rainwater Harvesting BMPs will not be utilized and have been determined to be infeasible for  this site due to development type, density and available amount of landscaped area for irrigation purposes.  Refer  to Worksheet J for feasibility calculations within Attachment A of this report.  Biotreatment BMPs will be utilized  to provide the required treatment flow rates.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 18 IV.3.4 Biotreatment BMPs Name Included? Bioretention with underdrains Stormwater planter boxes with underdrains Rain gardens with underdrains Constructed wetlands Vegetated swales Vegetated filter strips Proprietary vegetated biotreatment systems Wet extended detention basin Dry extended detention basins Other: Proprietary Vegetated Biotreatment Systems:  Modular Wetland System (MWS) Biofiltration vaults will utilize to capture and treat the stormwater runoff  before leaving the site.  The MWS Biofiltration vaults utilize a 3 phase treatment train by collecting the  stormwater runoff in a Pre‐Treatment Chamber, Planting or “Wetland” Chamber and Discharge Chamber.   Treated stormwater runoff will discharge into an existing City public 30” storm drain system located within  Rutland Road.    Refer to Attachment C for additional manufacturer’s BMP information.  The MWS Biofiltration vaults were sized separately per DMA using the treatment flow rate method per the  Orange County Technical Guidance Document worksheets.  Refer to Worksheet D in Attachment A for  calculations.    DMA Area (ac) Required  Treatment, Q (cfs) MWS Model Treatment Capacity,  Q (cfs)  1 0.48 0.076 MWS‐L‐4‐8 0.115  2 1.47 0.278 MWS‐L‐8‐8* 0.278  3 1.39 0.244 MWS‐L‐8‐8* 0.245  4 1.10 0.204 MWS‐L‐8‐8 0.231  5 1.33 0.224 MWS‐L‐8‐8 0.231  Total 5.77 1.026 ‐‐ 1.100  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 19   * A modified MWS Biofiltration vault will be designed by the manufacturer to meet project‐specific required  treatment flow rates during final engineering.  Refer to additional manufacturer sizing information located within  Attachment C of this report.   Conclusion:  The utilization of five (5) MWS Biofiltration vaults will provide more than the required water quality treatment  flow rate for this development.  GIS Coordination information for BMP locations will be provided during final engineering.                                          Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 20 IV.3.5 Hydromodification Control BMPs Hydromodification Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description n/a n/a Hydromodification Control BMPs are not required as this project is located within an HCOC exempt area. Refer to Section II.3 of this report for additional information. IV.3.6 Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Regional/Sub-Regional LID BMPs Not Applicable for this project. IV.3.7 Treatment Control BMPs Treatment Control BMPs BMP Name BMP Description n/a n/a Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 21 IV.3.8 Non-structural Source Control BMPs   Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable N1 Education for Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants N2 Activity Restrictions N3 Common Area Landscape Management N4 BMP Maintenance N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) N6 Local Industrial Permit Compliance Proposed residential project. N7 Spill Contingency Plan Proposed residential project. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance Proposed residential project. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation N11 Common Area Litter Control N12 Employee Training N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks Proposed residential project. N14 Common Area Catch Basin Inspection N15 Street Sweeping Private Streets and Parking Lots N16 Retail Gasoline Outlets Proposed residential project.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 22 N1: Education for Property Owners, Tenants & Occupants Project conditions of approval will require that the Property Management Company (HOA) periodically provide environmental awarness education materials, made available by the municipalities, to all of its members. Among other things, these materials will be descrive the use of chemcials (including household type) that should be limited to the property, with no discharge of wastes via hosing or other direct discharge to gutters, catch basins and storm drains. Educational materials available from the County of Orange can be downloaded here: http://www.ocwatersheds.com/PublicEd/resources/default.aspx  N2: Activity Restrictions Conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) must be prepared by the developer for the appointed HOA for the purpose of surface water quality protection. The CC&Rs shall incorporate the restrictions based on the Project WQMP. N3: Common Area Landscape Management All common landscaping and/ or open space areas shall have on-going landscape maintenance by an appointed professional landscaping maintenance company as selected by the HOA. Maintenance shall incorporate all current County Water Conservation Resolution usage and follow the Management Guidelines for Use of Fertilizers per the DAMP Section 5.5. Refer to Section 5 of this report for additional landscape maintenance requirements. N4: BMP Maintenance Refer to Section 5 and Attachment C of this report for additional non-structural BMP maintenance requirements, responsibility and frequency. N5: Title 22 CCR Compliance HOA is responsible for compliance with Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) and relevant sections of the California Health & Safety Code regarding hazardous waste management is enforced by the County Environmental Heath and behalf of the State. Inforamtion regarding hazardous waste management must be provided to all employees, homeowners, tenants and occupants. N9: Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance HOA is responsible for compliance with the local agencies’ ordinances enforced by City Fire Department for the management of hazardous materials including enforcement, waste handling, disposal regulations and documentation. N10: Uniform Fire Code Implementation HOA is responsible for compliance with Article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code enforced by the local fire protection agency.  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 23 N11: Common Area Litter Control HOA to implement trash management and litter control procedures in the common areas aimed at reducing pollution of drainage water. HOA to contract with landscape maintenance company to provide this service during regularly scheduled maintenance, which will consist of litter patrol, emptying of trash receptacles in common areas, and noting trash disposals violations by homeowners, tenants or occupants and reporting the violations to the HOA for investigation.  N12: Employee Training HOA to provide Educational Materials and Property Management manuals to all employees upon initial hiring. Any updated information shall be provided to employees within a timely manner along with information on implementation.  N14: Common Area Catch Basin Inspections HOA to inspect, clean and repair common area catch basins within the development to verify that the private drainage system is working properly. All trash/ debris and sediment build up is removed and any repairs/ replacements are conducted. Cleaning should take place in late summer/ early fall prior to the start of the raining season. Drainage facilities include catch basins (storm drain inlets), detention basins, retention basins, sediment basins, open drainage channels, area drains, and lift stations. Records shall be kept onsite to document the annual maintenance.  N15: Street Sweeping of Private Streets & Parking Lots HOA to schedule at a minimum street sweeping of private streets and parking areas prior to the start of the rainy seasons, in late summer or early fall. Additional sweeping may be required to remove landscaping foliage and/ or pollution. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 24 IV.3.9 Structural Source Control BMPs    Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One If not applicable, state brief reason Included Not Applicable S1 Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction No proposed outdoor storage areas. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction No proposed trash enclosure areas. S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control S5 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation No proposed slopes or channels. Incorporate requirements applicable to individual priority project categories (from SDRWQCB NPDES Permit) Not Applicable. S6 Dock areas No proposed dock areas. S7 Maintenance bays No proposed maintenance bay areas. S8 Vehicle wash areas No proposed vehicle wash areas. S9 Outdoor processing areas No proposed outdoor processing areas. S10 Equipment wash areas No proposed equipment wash areas. S11 Fueling areas No proposed fueling areas. S12 Hillside landscaping No proposed hillside landscaping areas. S13 Wash water control for food preparation areas No wash water control for food preparation areas. S14 Community car wash racks No proposed community car washing racks.   Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 25 S1 (SD-13): Storm Drain Stenciling & Signage HOA to inspect, repair and/ or replace storm drain stenciling and signage immediately. Inspection of stenciling and signage shall occur at least once per month and prior to the start of the raining season. Storm Drain stenciling and signage with a reference that indicates “Drains to Ocean” per CASQA BMP SD-13 Fact Sheet is required. S4 (SD-12): Use Efficient Irrigation Systems & Landscape Design HOA shall implement the timing and application methods of irrigation water to minimize the runoff of excess irrigation water into the storm drain systems. HOA to implement the following methods to reduce excessive irrigation water runoff, where applicable:  Employ rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation  Utilizing landscape specific irrigation water requirements  Utilize flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by pressure drop to control water loss due to broken sprinkler heads  Implement landscaping practices per the County Water Conservation Resolution or City agency equivalent  Group plants or landscaping with similar water consumption in order to promote surface infiltration Refer to CASQA BMP Fact Sheet SD-12 for additional information. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 26 IV.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (If Applicable) IV.4.1 Water Quality Credits Description of Proposed Project Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits (Select all that apply): Redevelopment projects that reduce the overall impervious footprint of the project site. Brownfield redevelopment, meaning redevelopment, expansion, or reuse of real property which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants, and which have the potential to contribute to adverse ground or surface WQ if not redeveloped. Higher density development projects which include two distinct categories (credits can only be taken for one category): those with more than seven units per acre of development (lower credit allowance); vertical density developments, for example, those with a Floor to Area Ratio (FAR) of 2 or those having more than 18 units per acre (greater credit allowance). Mixed use development, such as a combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses which incorporate design principles that can demonstrate environmental benefits that would not be realized through single use projects (e.g. reduced vehicle trip traffic with the potential to reduce sources of water or air pollution). Transit-oriented developments, such as a mixed use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transportation; similar to above criterion, but where the development center is within one half mile of a mass transit center (e.g. bus, rail, light rail or commuter train station). Such projects would not be able to take credit for both categories, but may have greater credit assigned Redevelopment projects in an established historic district, historic preservation area, or similar significant city area including core City Center areas (to be defined through mapping). Developments with dedication of undeveloped portions to parks, preservation areas and other pervious uses. Developments in a city center area. Developments in historic districts or historic preservation areas. Live-work developments, a variety of developments designed to support residential and vocational needs together – similar to criteria to mixed use development; would not be able to take credit for both categories. In-fill projects, the conversion of empty lots and other underused spaces into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas. Calculation of Water Quality Credits (if applicable) Water Quality credits will not be utilized on this development site. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section IV MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP Page 27 IV.4.2 Alternative Compliance Plan Information Not applicable for this project.  Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VI  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 28 Section V Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility for BMPs The property is currently owned by Melia Homes.  The Owner will be responsible for the  long term maintenance of the project’s storm water facilities and conformance to this  WQMP after construction is complete.    A Notice of Transfer of Responsibility is located in Attachment F of this report and should be  executed as part of any ownership transfer after construction is complete.  The owner will appoint a Homeowner’s Association (HOA) to provide long term BMP  maintenance for the proposed development upon completion of construction.    Owner/ Developer:  Melia Homes  8951 Research Drive, #100  Irvine, CA 92618  (949) 759‐7367  Chad Brown, Vice President of Planning & Development    Homeowner’s Association  To be determined    The owner is aware of the maintenance responsibilities of the proposed BMPs. A funding  mechanism is in place to maintain the BMPs at the frequency stated in the WQMP.  The following BMP Inspection/ Maintenance table will be completed as part of the final  engineering.  This table will include BMP description, responsible party(ies), required  inspection/ maintenance routine and frequency.                        Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VI  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 29 BMP Inspection/Maintenance BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Education for Property Owners, Tenants, Occupants & Employees Homeowner’s Association (HOA) HOA to provide education material, a copy of the approved WQMP and Operation & Maintenance Plan (O&M) to new property owners, tenants, occupants & employees. At time of hiring, leasing and/ or home purchase. Activity Restrictions HOA HOA employees notified of activities that are prohibited by homeowners. Restrictions identified in Employee Manual and reviewed yearly by employees. Common Area Landscape Management HOA HOA to hire professional landscape company to conduct maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency and keep plants healthy and bio areas maintained with proper soil amendments. Regular maintenance once a week and monthly inspection to determine deficiencies. BMP Maintenance HOA HOA to hire professional BMP maintenance company to conduct regular inspections, repairs and cleanings per manufacturer’s specifications. A minimum 2 inspections/ cleanings per year per manufacturer’s specifications prior to October 1st (before rainy season) Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VI  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 30 Title 22 CCR Compliance HOA The distribution of these materials will be the responsibility of the HOA at the time of hire, lease signing or home purchase per property owner, tenant or occupant or at the initial time of hiring. At time of hiring, leasing and/ or home purchase. Uniform Fire Code Implementation HOA HOA to comply with fire regulations and keep informed of the latest rules and requirements. Comply with annual fire inspections and maintain building and access per the latest fire codes. Common Area Litter Control HOA HOA to provide litter removal of site parking lot and landscape areas and to empty common area trash bins. Once per week. Employee Training HOA The distribution of these materials will be the reasonability of the HOA at the initial hiring of the employee. At time of hiring. Private Street & Parking Lot Sweeping HOA HOA to provide maintenance of Parking Lot and provide Street Sweeping services. Weekly basis. Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control HOA HOA to provide maintenance of landscaping to meet current water efficiency standards, and keep plants healthily. Regular maintenance once a week and monthly inspection to determine any water deficiencies. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VI  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 31 Common Area Catch Basin Inspections HOA HOA shall inspection common areas where catch basins are located within the surrounding area and remove any trash/ debris. Inspections/ Cleaning shall occur at least twice per month. Storm Drain System Stencilling & Signage HOA HOA to inspect and repair as needed all onsite storm drain stencilling & signage. Inspection should occur at minimum twice per year. Modular Wetlands System (MWS) Biofiltration Vaults HOA HOA will be required to hire a professional maintenance company to provide regular inspections, repairs and cleaning per manufacturer’s specifications. Inspections/ Cleanings should occur at least two times per year and before the start of the rainy season (October 1st). Refer to Attachment C for additional information and manufacturer’s specifications. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VI  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 32 Section VI BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) VI.1 BMP Exhibit (Site Plan) Refer to Attachment B of this report for the WQMP Exhibit which provides the location of all proposed BMPs and a site plan of the project. During final engineering, refer to separately prepared Precise Grading plans for BMP cross sectional information and details. VI.2 Submittal and Recordation of Water Quality Management Plan Following approval of the Final Project-Specific WQMP, three copies of the approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) shall be submitted. In addition, these documents shall be submitted in a PDF format. Each approved WQMP (including BMP Exhibit, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, and Appendices) shall be recorded in the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s Office, prior to close-out of grading and/or building permit. Educational Materials are not required to be included. Priority Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) MARINER SQUARE, NEWPORT BEACH       Melia Homes Section VII  MELA‐001 Pre‐WQMP    Page 33 Section VII Educational Materials Refer to the Orange County Stormwater Program (www.ocwatersheds.com) for a library of materials available. Education Materials Residential Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable Business Material (http://www.ocwatersheds.com) Check If Applicable The Ocean Begins at Your Front Door Tips for the Automotive Industry Tips for Car Wash Fund-raisers Tips for Using Concrete and Mortar Tips for the Home Mechanic Tips for the Food Service Industry Homeowners Guide for Sustainable Water Use Proper Maintenance Practices for Your Business Household Tips Other Material Check If Attached Proper Disposal of Household Hazardous Waste Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (North County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (Central County) Recycle at Your Local Used Oil Collection Center (South County) Tips for Maintaining a Septic Tank System Responsible Pest Control Sewer Spill Tips for the Home Improvement Projects Tips for Horse Care Tips for Landscaping and Gardening Tips for Pet Care Tips for Pool Maintenance Tips for Residential Pool, Landscape and Hardscape Drains Tips for Projects Using Paint   ATTACHMENT A  TGD WORKSHEETS & FIGURES     Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A1 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.70 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder=0.70 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.48 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.60 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.60 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 732 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate N/A 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A2 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.70 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder=0.70 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.47 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.86 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.795 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 2,970 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate N/A 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A3 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.70 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder=0.70 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.39 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.74 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.705 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 2,490 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate N/A 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A4 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.70 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder=0.70 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.10 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.84 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.78 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 2,180 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate N/A 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A5 Worksheet B: Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter design capture storm depth from Figure III.1, d (inches) d= 0.70 inches 2 Enter the effect of provided HSCs, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 3 Calculate the remainder of the design capture storm depth, dremainder (inches) (Line 1 – Line 2) dremainder=0.70 inches Step 2: Calculate the DCV 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.33 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.80 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.75 4 Calculate runoff volume, Vdesign= (C x dremainder x A x 43560 x (1/12)) Vdesign= 2,535 cu-ft Step 3: Design BMPs to ensure full retention of the DCV Step 3a: Determine design infiltration rate N/A 1 Enter measured infiltration rate, Kmeasured (in/hr) (Appendix VII) Kmeasured= In/hr 2 Enter combined safety factor from Worksheet H, Sfinal (unitless) Sfinal= 3 Calculate design infiltration rate, Kdesign = Kmeasured / Sfinal Kdesign= In/hr Step 3b: Determine minimum BMP footprint 4 Enter drawdown time, T (max 48 hours) T= Hours 5 Calculate max retention depth that can be drawn down within the drawdown time (feet), Dmax = Kdesign x T x (1/12) Dmax= feet 6 Calculate minimum area required for BMP (sq-ft), Amin = Vdesign/ dmax Amin= sq-ft Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A1 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc=5.00 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.2625 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2=0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2=0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.2625 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 0.48 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.60 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C=0.60 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.076 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff enters into a series of area drains and curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for water quality treatment and discharges into a proposed private underground storm drain system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration has been referenced from the separately prepared Preliminary Hydrology Study dated November 2017 prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example III.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A2 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc=8.41 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.2375 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2=0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2=0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.2375 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.47 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.86 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C= 0.795 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.278 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff enters into a series of area drains and curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for water quality treatment and discharges into a proposed private underground storm drain system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration has been referenced from the separately prepared Preliminary Hydrology Study dated November 2017 prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example III.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A3 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc=9.41 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.225 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2=0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2=0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.225 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.39 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.74 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C=0.78 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.244 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff enters into a series of area drains and curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for water quality treatment and discharges into a proposed private underground storm drain system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration has been referenced from the separately prepared Preliminary Hydrology Study dated November 2017 prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example III.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A4 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc=8.57 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.2375 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2=0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2=0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.2375 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.10 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.84 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C=0.78 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.204 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff enters into a series of area drains and curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for water quality treatment and discharges into a proposed private underground storm drain system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration has been referenced from the separately prepared Preliminary Hydrology Study dated November 2017 prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example III.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx DMA A5 Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Step 1: Determine the design capture storm depth used for calculating volume 1 Enter the time of concentration, Tc (min) (See Appendix IV.2) Tc= 10.28 2 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the estimated time of concentration (Tc) achieves 80% capture efficiency, I1 I1= 0.2375 in/hr 3 Enter the effect depth of provided HSCs upstream, dHSC (inches) (Worksheet A) dHSC=0 inches 4 Enter capture efficiency corresponding to dHSC, Y2 (Worksheet A) Y2=0 % 5 Using Figure III.4, determine the design intensity at which the time of concentration (Tc) achieves the upstream capture efficiency(Y2), I2 I2=0 6 Determine the design intensity that must be provided by BMP, Idesign= I1-I2 Idesign= 0.2375 Step 2: Calculate the design flowrate 1 Enter Project area tributary to BMP (s), A (acres) A= 1.33 acres 2 Enter Project Imperviousness, imp (unitless) imp= 0.80 3 Calculate runoff coefficient, C= (0.75 x imp) + 0.15 C=0.75 4 Calculate design flowrate, Qdesign= (C x idesign x A) Qdesign= 0.237 cfs Supporting Calculations Describe system: Surface runoff enters into a series of area drains and curb inlet catch basin equipped with a Dvert System that diverts low flows to proposed Biofiltration Vault for water quality treatment and discharges into a proposed private underground storm drain system. Provide time of concentration assumptions: The time of concentration has been referenced from the separately prepared Preliminary Hydrology Study dated November 2017 prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet D: Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-Based BMPs Graphical Operations Provide supporting graphical operations. See Example III.7. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 1 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Refer to Appendix VII (Worksheet I) for guidance on groundwater-related infiltration feasibility criteria. X Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 2 Would Infiltration BMPs pose significant risk of increasing risk of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? (Yes if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert):  The BMP can only be located less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent  The BMP can only be located less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback.  A study prepared by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study substantiates that stormwater infiltration would potentially result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level. X Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 3 Would infiltration of the DCV from drainage area violate downstream water rights? X Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Partial Infeasibility Criteria Yes No 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on HSG D soils or the site geotechnical investigation identifies presence of soil characteristics which support categorization as D soils? X Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 5 Is measured infiltration rate below proposed facility less than 0.3 inches per hour? This calculation shall be based on the methods described in Appendix VII. X Provide basis: Refer to Infiltration Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated June 21, 2017 for Infiltration testing results and information. Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 6 Would reduction of over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 7 Would an increase in infiltration over predeveloped conditions cause impairments to downstream beneficial uses, such as change of seasonality of ephemeral washes or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? X Provide citation to applicable study and summarize findings relative to the amount of infiltration that is permissible: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Table 2.7: Infiltration BMP Feasibility Worksheet (continued) Infiltration Screening Results (check box corresponding to result): 8 Is there substantial evidence that infiltration from the project would result in a significant increase in I&I to the sanitary sewer that cannot be sufficiently mitigated? (See Appendix XVII) Provide narrative discussion and supporting evidence: Summarize findings of studies provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. No 9 If any answer from row 1-3 is yes: infiltration of any volume is not feasible within the DMA or equivalent. Provide basis: Summarize findings of infeasibility screening No 10 If any answer from row 4-7 is yes, infiltration is permissible but is not presumed to be feasible for the entire DCV. Criteria for designing biotreatment BMPs to achieve the maximum feasible infiltration and ET shall apply. Provide basis: Per the Infiltration Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated June 21, 2017, high groundwater levels are located approximately 11 feet below existing grade. In order to implement Infiltration BMPs, due to the existing high groundwater levels only surface flow infiltration BMPs will be acceptable. However, placement of these type BMPs will be extremely limited on this site due to the building setback requirements. In addition, the subsurface soils represent very low infiltrations rates, therefore, it has been concluded that Infiltration BMPs are not feasible for this site. Summarize findings of infeasibility screening Yes 11 If all answers to rows 1 through 11 are no, infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, BMPs must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the maximum extent practicable. Not Feasible Worksheets from Orange County Technical Guidance Document (5-19-2011) See TGD for instructions and/or examples related to these worksheets www.ocwatersheds.com/WQMP.aspx Worksheet J: Summary of Harvested Water Demand and Feasibility 1 What demands for harvested water exist in the tributary area (check all that apply): 2 Toilet and urinal flushing □ 3 Landscape irrigation  4 Other:_______________________________________________________ □ 5 What is the design capture storm depth? (Figure III.1) d 0.70 inches 6 What is the project size? A 5.77 ac 7 What is the acreage of impervious area? IA 4.58 ac For projects with multiple types of demand (toilet flushing, irrigation demand, and/or other demand) 8 What is the minimum use required for partial capture? (Table X.6) gpd 9 What is the project estimated wet season total daily use (Section X.2)? gpd 10 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 9 > Line 8?) For projects with only toilet flushing demand 11 What is the minimum TUTIA for partial capture? (Table X.7) 12 What is the project estimated TUTIA? 13 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 12 > Line 11?) For projects with only irrigation demand 14 What is the minimum irrigation area required based on conservation landscape design? (Table X.8) [0.77x1.19] = 3.53 3.53 ac 15 What is the proposed project irrigated area? (multiply conservation landscaping by 1; multiply active turf by 2) 1.19 ac 16 Is partial capture potentially feasible? (Line 15 > Line 14?) No Provide supporting assumptions and citations for controlling demand calculation: Due to the proposed development type, density and amount of available landscaping, Harvest and Use BMPs for irrigation purposes will not be feasible. ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYRIVERSIDE COUNTYRIVERSIDE COUNTY ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY1010351030103010201010550330303030 20510203050103020P:\9526E\6-GIS\Mxds\Reports\InfiltrationFeasability_20110215\9526E_FigureXVI-2d_DepthToGroundwaterOverview_20110215.mxdFIGUREXVI-2dJOBTITLESCALE1" = 1.25 milesDESIGNEDDRAWINGCHECKEDBMP02/09/11DATEJOB NO.9526-ETHTHORANGE COUNTYINFILTRATION STUDYORANGE CO.CANORTH ORANGE COUNTYMAPPED DEPTH TO FIRST GROUNDWATERSUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISIONNote: Data are not available for South Orange County at this time.Source:Sprotte, Fuller and Greenwood, 1980.California Division of Mines and Geology;California Geological Survey!I02.551.25Miles0482KilometersLEGENDDepth To First Groundwater ContoursCity BoundariesOCWD Groundwater Basin Protection Boundary P:\9526E\6-GIS\Mxds\SuceptabilityMaps_20100505\9526E_NewportBaySusceptibility_20100430.mxdRSanta Ana RiverWatershedSanta Ana RiverWatershedSouth OrangeCountyAnaheim Bay-Huntington HarborWatershedJohnWayneAirportLower PetersCanyonRetarding BasinHicks CanyonRetardingBasinSiphonReservoirRound CanyonRetardingBasinBee CanyonRetardingBasinEastfootRetardingBasinOrchard EstatesRetention BasinAgua ChinonRetardingBasinVillagePond ParkSand CanyonReservoirSan JoaquinReservoirLagunaReservoirBig CanyonReservoirBonitaCanyonReservoirBasinNumber 1NorthLakeSouthLakeBasinNumber 2El Modena-IrvineRetarding BasinHarborView DamEast HicksCanyonRetarding BasinRattlesnakeReservoirTrabucoRetardingBasinMarshburnRetardingBasinFIGURE4JOBTITLESCALE1" = 12000'DESIGNEDDRAWINGCHECKEDBMP04/30/10DATEJOB NO.9526-ETHTHORANGE COUNTYWATERSHEDMASTER PLANNINGORANGE CO. CASUSCEPTIBILITY ANALYISNEWPORT BAY-NEWPORT COASTAL STREAMS!I0 9,000 18,000FeetSusceptibilityPotential Areas of Erosion, Habitat, &Physical Structure SusceptibilityChannel TypeEarth (Unstable)Earth (Stabilized)StabilizedTidel Influence<= Mean High Water Line (4.28')Water BodyBasinDamLakeReservoirOther LandsAirport/Military686&(37,%,/,7<0$383$7( )(% ORA N G E C O U NT Y ORA N GE C O U NT Y RIVE R SI D E C O U NT Y RIVE RSI D E C O U NT Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY1.050.71 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.950.70.90.90.75P:\9526E\6-GIS\Mxds\Reports\InfiltrationFeasability_20110215\9526E_FigureXVI-1_RainfallZones_20110215.mxdFIGUREJOBTITLESCALE1" = 1.8 milesDESIGNEDDRAWINGCHECKEDBMP04/22/10DATEJOB NO.9526-ETHTHORANGE COUNTYTECHNICAL GUIDANCEDOCUMENTORANGE CO.CARAINFALL ZONESSUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION03.67.21.8Miles06123KilometersLEGENDOrange County Precipitation Stations24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches)24 Hour, 85th Percentile Rainfall (Inches) - ExtrapolatedCity BoundariesRainfall ZonesDesign Capture Storm Depth (inches)0.65"0.70.750.800.850.900.951.001.10"Note: Events defined as 24-hour periods (calendar days) with greater than 0.1 inches of rainfall. For areas outside of available data coverage, professional judgment shall be applied.XVI-1 ORA N G E C O U NTY ORA N G E C O U NT Y RIVE R SI D E C O U NT Y RIVE R SI D E C O U NT Y ORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYSAN BERNARDINO COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYORANGE COUNTYORANGE COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTYP:\9526E\6-GIS\Mxds\Reports\InfiltrationFeasability_20110215\9526E_FigureXVI-2a_HydroSoils_20110215.mxdFIGUREXVI-2aJOBTITLESCALE1" = 1.8 milesDESIGNEDDRAWINGCHECKEDBMP02/09/11DATEJOB NO.9526-ETHTHORANGE COUNTYINFILTRATION STUDYORANGE CO.CANRCS HYDROLOGICSOILS GROUPSSUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISIONSource: Soils: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)Soil Survey - soil_ca678, Orange County & Western RiversideDate of publication: 2006-02-08!I03.67.21.8Miles05102.5KilometersLEGENDCity BoundariesHydrologic Soil GroupsA SoilsB SoilsC SoilsD Soilshttp://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm ATTACHMENT B  WQMP EXHIBIT     DWG: P:\M\MELA-001\dwg\Sheets\EH\EH-P-WQMP-01.dwg BY: jhendricks Nov 16, 2017 - 6:10:04pmPROJ:STRA-004BEFORE YOU DIGTWO WORKING DAYS8-1-1DIAL TOLL FREE0SCALE: 1" = 30'1530602020202020 ATTACHMENT C  SITE BMPs     1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.33.43.5 3.6 3.65 3.70 3.75 3.80 3.85 3.90 3.95MWS‐L‐4‐46.70 1.00.022 0.023 0.025 0.026 0.028 0.029 0.031 0.032 0.034 0.035 0.037 0.038 0.040 0.042 0.043 0.045 0.046 0.048 0.049 0.0510.0520.054 0.055 0.056 0.057 0.058 0.058 0.059 0.060 0.061MWS‐L‐3‐610.06 1.00.032 0.035 0.037 0.039 0.042 0.044 0.046 0.048 0.051 0.053 0.055 0.058 0.060 0.062 0.065 0.067 0.069 0.072 0.074 0.0760.0780.081 0.083 0.084 0.085 0.087 0.088 0.089 0.090 0.091MWS‐L‐4‐69.30 1.00.030 0.032 0.034 0.036 0.038 0.041 0.043 0.045 0.047 0.049 0.051 0.053 0.055 0.058 0.060 0.062 0.064 0.066 0.068 0.0700.0730.075 0.077 0.078 0.079 0.080 0.081 0.082 0.083 0.084MWS‐L‐4‐814.80 1.00.048 0.051 0.054 0.058 0.061 0.065 0.068 0.071 0.075 0.078 0.082 0.085 0.088 0.092 0.095 0.099 0.102 0.105 0.109 0.1120.1150.119 0.122 0.124 0.126 0.127 0.129 0.131 0.132 0.134MWS‐L‐4‐1318.40 1.00.059 0.063 0.068 0.072 0.076 0.080 0.084 0.089 0.093 0.097 0.101 0.106 0.110 0.114 0.118 0.122 0.127 0.131 0.135 0.1390.1440.148 0.152 0.154 0.156 0.158 0.160 0.163 0.165 0.167MWS‐L‐4‐1522.40 1.00.072 0.077 0.082 0.087 0.093 0.098 0.103 0.108 0.113 0.118 0.123 0.129 0.134 0.139 0.144 0.149 0.154 0.159 0.165 0.1700.1750.180 0.185 0.188 0.190 0.193 0.195 0.198 0.200 0.203MWS‐L‐4‐1726.40 1.00.085 0.091 0.097 0.103 0.109 0.115 0.121 0.127 0.133 0.139 0.145 0.151 0.158 0.164 0.170 0.176 0.182 0.188 0.194 0.2000.2060.212 0.218 0.221 0.224 0.227 0.230 0.233 0.236 0.239MWS‐L‐4‐1930.40 1.00.098 0.105 0.112 0.119 0.126 0.133 0.140 0.147 0.153 0.160 0.167 0.174 0.181 0.188 0.195 0.202 0.209 0.216 0.223 0.2300.2370.244 0.251 0.255 0.258 0.262 0.265 0.269 0.272 0.276MWS‐L‐4‐2134.40 1.00.111 0.118 0.126 0.134 0.142 0.150 0.158 0.166 0.174 0.182 0.189 0.197 0.205 0.213 0.221 0.229 0.237 0.245 0.253 0.2610.2680.276 0.284 0.288 0.292 0.296 0.300 0.304 0.308 0.312MWS‐L‐6‐818.80 1.00.060 0.065 0.069 0.073 0.078 0.082 0.086 0.091 0.095 0.099 0.104 0.108 0.112 0.116 0.121 0.125 0.129 0.134 0.138 0.1420.1470.151 0.155 0.157 0.160 0.162 0.164 0.166 0.168 0.170MWS‐L‐8‐829.60 1.00.095 0.102 0.109 0.115 0.122 0.129 0.136 0.143 0.149 0.156 0.163 0.170 0.177 0.183 0.190 0.197 0.204 0.211 0.217 0.2240.2310.238 0.245 0.248 0.251 0.255 0.258 0.262 0.265 0.268MWS‐L‐8‐1244.40 1.00.143 0.153 0.163 0.173 0.183 0.194 0.204 0.214 0.224 0.234 0.245 0.255 0.265 0.275 0.285 0.296 0.306 0.316 0.326 0.3360.3460.357 0.367 0.372 0.377 0.382 0.387 0.392 0.397 0.402MWS‐L‐8‐1659.20 1.00.190 0.204 0.217 0.231 0.245 0.258 0.272 0.285 0.299 0.312 0.326 0.340 0.353 0.367 0.380 0.394 0.408 0.421 0.435 0.4480.4620.476 0.489 0.496 0.503 0.509 0.516 0.523 0.530 0.537MWS‐L‐8‐2074.00 1.00.238 0.255 0.272 0.289 0.306 0.323 0.340 0.357 0.374 0.391 0.408 0.425 0.442 0.459 0.476 0.493 0.509 0.526 0.543 0.5600.5770.594 0.611 0.620 0.628 0.637 0.645 0.654 0.662 0.671MWS‐L‐10‐20 or      MWS‐L‐8‐2488.80 1.00.285 0.306 0.326 0.346 0.367 0.387 0.408 0.428 0.448 0.469 0.489 0.509 0.530 0.550 0.571 0.591 0.611 0.632 0.652 0.6730.6930.713 0.734 0.744 0.754 0.764 0.774 0.785 0.795 0.8054'x'4 media cage14.80 1.0 0.048 0.051 0.054 0.058 0.061 0.065 0.068 0.071 0.075 0.078 0.082 0.085 0.088 0.092 0.095 0.099 0.102 0.105 0.109 0.1120.1150.119 0.122 0.124MWS MODEL SIZEWETLAND PERMITER LENGTHLOADING RATE GPM/SFHGL HEIGHTSHALLOW MODELSSTANDARD HEIGHT MODELHIGH CAPACITY MODELSMWS Linear 2.0 HGL Sizing Calculations MWS Linear Advanced Stormwater Biofiltration Contents 1 Introduction 2 Applications 3 Configurations 4 Advantages 5 Operation 6 Orientations | Bypass 7 Performance | Approvals 8 Sizing 9 Installation | Maintenance | Plants www.ModularWetlands.com The Urban Impact For hundreds of years natural wetlands surrounding our shores have played an integral role as nature’s stormwater treatment system. But as our cities grow and develop, these natural wet- lands have perished under countless roads, rooftops, and parking lots. Plant A Wetland Without natural wetlands our cities are deprived of water purification, flood control, and land stability. Modular Wetlands and the MWS Linear re-establish nature’s presence and rejuvenate water ways in urban areas. MWS Linear The Modular Wetland System Linear represents a pioneering breakthrough in stormwater tech- nology as the only biofiltration system to utilize patented horizontal flow, allowing for a smaller footprint and higher treatment capacity. While most biofilters use little or no pre-treatment, the MWS Linear incorporates an advanced pre-treatment chamber that includes separation and pre- filter cartridges. In this chamber sediment and hydrocarbons are removed from runoff before it enters the biofiltration chamber, in turn reducing maintenance costs and improving performance. Parking Lots Parking lots are designed to maximize space and the MWS Linear’s 4 ft. standard planter width al- lows for easy integration into parking lot islands and other landscape medians. Mixed Use The MWS Linear can be installed as a raised plant- er to treat runoff from rooftops or patios, making it perfect for sustainable “live-work” spaces. Industrial Many states enforce strict regulations for dis- charges from industrial sites. The MWS Linear has helped various sites meet difficult EPA mandated effluent limits for dissolved metals and other pol- lutants. Residential Low to high density developments can benefit from the versatile design of the MWS Linear. The system can be used in both decentralized LID de- sign and cost-effective end-of-the-line configura- tions. Streets Street applications can be challenging due to limited space. The MWS Linear is very adaptable, and offers the smallest footprint to work around the constraints of existing utilities on retrofit pro- jects. Commercial Compared to bioretention systems, the MWS Lin- ear can treat far more area in less space - meeting treatment and volume control requirements. Applications The MWS Linear has been successfully used on numerous new construction and retrofit projects. The system’s superior versatility makes it beneficial for a wide range of stormwater and waste water applications - treating rooftops, streetscapes, parking lots, and industrial sites. More applications are available on our website: www.ModularWetlands.com/Applications • Agriculture • Reuse • Low Impact Development • Waste Water www.ModularWetlands.com Configurations The MWS Linear is the preferred biofiltration system of Civil Engineers across the country due to its versatile design. This highly versatile system has available “pipe-in” options on most models, along with built-in curb or grated inlets for simple integration into your stormdrain design. Curb Type The Curb Type configuration accepts sheet flow through a curb opening and is commonly used along road ways and parking lots. It can be used in sump or flow by conditions. Length of curb opening varies based on model and size. Grate Type The Grate Type configuration offers the same features and benefits as the Curb Type but with a grated/drop inlet above the systems pre-treatment chamber. It has the added benefit of allowing for pedestrian access over the inlet. ADA compliant grates are available to assure easy and safe access. The Grate Type can also be used in scenarios where runoff needs to be intercepted on both sides of landscape islands. Downspout Type The Downspout Type is a variation of the Vault Type and is designed to accept a vertical downspout pipe from roof top and podium areas. Some models have the option of utilizing an internal bypass, simplifying the overall design. The system can be installed as a raised planter and the exterior can be stuccoed or covered with other finishes to match the look of adjacent buildings. Vault Type The system’s patented horizontal flow biofilter is able to accept inflow pipes directly into the pre-treatment chamber, meaning the MWS Linear can be used in end-of-the-line installations. This greatly improves feasibility over typical decentralized designs that are required with other biofiltration/bioretention systems. Another benefit of the “pipe in” design is the ability to install the system downstream of underground detention systems to meet water quality volume requirements. Page 3 Cartridge Housing Pre-filter Cartridge Curb Inlet Individual Media Filters Advantages & Operation The MWS Linear is the most efficient and versatile biofiltration system on the market, and the only system with horizontal flow which improves performance, reduces footprint, and minimizes maintenance. Figure-1 and Figure-2 illustrate the invaluable benefits of horizontal flow and the multiple treatment stages. • Horizontal Flow Biofiltration • Greater Filter Surface Area • Pre-Treatment Chamber • Patented Perimeter Void Area • Flow Control • No Depressed Planter Area Separation • Trash, sediment, and debris are separated before entering the pre-filter cartridges • Designed for easy maintenance access Pre-Filter Cartridges • Over 25 ft2 of surface area per cartridge • Utilizes BioMediaGREEN filter material • Removes over 80% of TSS & 90% of hydrocarbons • Prevents pollutants that cause clogging from migrating to the biofiltration chamber Pre-Treatment1 1 2 Drain-Down Line 1 2Vertical Underdrain Manifold Featured Advantages www.ModularWetlands.com Fig. 1 Horizontal Flow • Less clogging than downward flow biofilters • Water flow is subsurface • Improves biological filtration Patented Perimeter Void Area • Vertically extends void area between the walls and the WetlandMEDIA on all four sides. • Maximizes surface area of the media for higher treatment capacity WetlandMEDIA • Contains no organics and removes phosphorus • Greater surface area and 48% void space • Maximum evapotranspiration • High ion exchange capacity and light weight Flow Control • Orifice plate controls flow of water through WetlandMEDIA to a level lower than the media’s capacity. • Extends the life of the media and improves performance Drain-Down Filter • The Drain-Down is an optional feature that completely drains the pre-treatment chamber • Water that drains from the pre-treatment chamber between storm events will be treated 2x to 3x More Surface Area Than Traditional Downward Flow Bioretention Systems.Fig. 2 - Top View Biofiltration2 Discharge3 Perimeter Void A r e a 3 4 3Flow Control Riser Drain-Down Line Outlet Pipe Page 5 Orientations Bypass Internal Bypass Weir (Side-by-Side Only) The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chambers adjacent to one an- other allowing for integration of internal bypass. The wall between these chambers can act as a by- pass weir when flows exceed the system’s treatment capacity, thus allowing bypass from the pre-treat- ment chamber directly to the discharge chamber. External Diversion Weir Structure This traditional offline diversion method can be used with the MWS Linear in scenarios where run- off is being piped to the system. These simple and effective structures are generally configured with two outflow pipes. The first is a smaller pipe on the upstream side of the diversion weir - to divert low flows over to the MWS Linear for treatment. The second is the main pipe that receives water once the system has exceeded treatment capacity and water flows over the weir. Flow By Design This method is one in which the system is placed just upstream of a standard curb or grate inlet to intercept the first flush. Higher flows simply pass by the MWS Linear and into the standard inlet down- stream. End-To-End The End-To-End orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chambers on opposite ends of the biofiltration chamber therefore minimizing the width of the system to 5 ft (outside dimension). This orientation is perfect for linear projects and street retrofits where existing utilities and sidewalks limit the amount of space available for installation. One limitation of this orientation is bypass must be ex- ternal. Side-By-Side The Side-By-Side orientation places the pre-treat- ment and discharge chamber adjacent to one an- other with the biofiltration chamber running paral- lel on either side. This minimizes the system length, providing a highly compact footprint. It has been proven useful in situations such as streets with di- rectly adjacent sidewalks, as half of the system can be placed under that sidewalk. This orientation also offers internal bypass options as discussed below. This simple yet innovative diversion trough can be installed in existing or new curb and grate inlets to divert the first flush to the MWS Linear via pipe. It works similar to a rain gutter and is installed just below the opening into the inlet. It captures the low flows and channels them over to a connecting pipe exiting out the wall of the inlet and leading to the MWS Linear. The DVERT is perfect for retrofit and green street applications that allows the MWS Lin- ear to be installed anywhere space is available. DVERT Low Flow Diversion DVERT Trough www.ModularWetlands.com Rhode Island DEM Approved Approved as an authorized BMP and noted to achieve the following minimum removal efficiencies: 85% TSS, 60% Pathogens, 30% Total Phosphorus for discharges to freshwater systems, and 30% Total Nitrogen for discharges to saltwater or tidal systems. MASTEP Evaluation The University of Massachusetts at Amherst – Water Resources Research Center, issued a technical evaluation report noting removal rates up to 84% TSS, 70% Total Phosphorus, 68.5% Total Zinc, and more. Washington State DOE Approved The MWS Linear is approved for General Use Level Designation (GULD) for Basic, En- hanced, and Phosphorus treatment at 1 gpm/ft2 loading rate. The highest performing BMP on the market for all main pollutant categories. Approvals The MWS Linear has successfully met years of challenging technical reviews and testing from some of the most prestigious and demanding agencies in the nation, and perhaps the world. DEQ Assignment The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality assigned the MWS Linear, the highest phosphorus removal rating for manufactured treatment devices to meet the new Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) Technical Criteria. VA TSS Total Phosphorus Ortho Phosphorus Nitrogen Dissolved Zinc Dissolved Copper Total Zinc Total Copper Motor Oil 85%64%67%45%66%38%69%50%95% Performance The MWS Linear continues to outperform other treatment methods with superior pollutant removal for TSS, heavy metals, nutrients, hydrocarbons and bacteria. Since 2007 the MWS Linear has been field tested on nu- merous sites across the country. With it’s advanced pre-treatment chamber and innovative horizontal flow biofilter, the system is able to effectively remove pollutants through a combination of physical, chemical, and biological filtration processes. With the same biological processes found in natural wetlands, the MWS Linear harnesses natures ability to process, transform, and remove even the most harmful pollutants. Page 7 Treatment Flow Sizing Table Model #Dimensions WetlandMediaSurface Area Treatment Flow Rate (cfs) MWS-L-4-4 4’ x 4’23 ft2 0.052 MWS-L-4-6 4’ x 6’32 ft2 0.073 MWS-L-4-8 4’ x 8’50 ft2 0.115 MWS-L-4-13 4’ x 13’63 ft2 0.144 MWS-L-4-15 4’ x 15’76 ft2 0.175 MWS-L-4-17 4’ x 17’90 ft2 0.206 MWS-L-4-19 4’ x 19’103 ft2 0.237 MWS-L-4-21 4’ x 21’117 ft2 0.268 MWS-L-8-8 8’ x 8’100 ft2 0.230 MWS-L-8-12 8’ x 12’151 ft2 0.346 MWS-L-8-16 8’ x 16’201 ft2 0.462 Flow Based Sizing The MWS Linear can be used in stand alone applica- tions to meet treatment flow requirements. Since the MWS Linear is the only biofiltration system that can ac- cept inflow pipes several feet below the surface it can be used not only in decentralized design applications but also as a large central end-of-the-line application for maximum feasibility. Volume Based Sizing Many states require treatment of a water quality volume and do not offer the option of flow based design. The MWS Linear and its unique horizontal flow makes it the only biofilter that can be used in volume based design installed downstream of ponds, detention basins, and underground storage systems. Treatment Volume Sizing Table Model #Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.) @ 24-Hour Drain Down Treatment Capacity (cu. ft.) @ 48-Hour Drain Down MWS-L-4-4 1140 2280 MWS-L-4-6 1600 3200 MWS-L-4-8 2518 5036 MWS-L-4-13 3131 6261 MWS-L-4-15 3811 7623 MWS-L-4-17 4492 8984 MWS-L-4-19 5172 10345 MWS-L-4-21 5853 11706 MWS-L-8-8 5036 10072 MWS-L-8-12 7554 15109 MWS-L-8-16 10073 20145 www.ModularWetlands.com Installation The MWS Linear is simple, easy to install, and has a space efficient design that offers lower excavation and in- stallation costs compared to traditional tree-box type systems. The structure of the system resembles pre-cast catch basin or utility vaults and is installed in a similar fashion. The system is delivered fully assembled for quick in- stallation. Generally, the structure can be unloaded and set in place in 15 minutes. Our experienced team of field technicians are available to supervise installations and provide technical support. Plant Selection Abundant plants, trees, and grasses bring value and an aesthetic benefit to any urban setting, but those in the MWS Linear do even more - they increase pollutant removal. What’s not seen, but very important, is that below grade the stormwater runoff/flow is being subjected to nature’s secret weapon: a dynamic physical, chemi- cal, and biological process working to break down and remove non-point source pollutants. The flow rate is controlled in the MWS Linear, giving the plants more “contact time” so that pollutants are more successfully decomposed, volatilized and incorporated into the biomass of The MWS Linear’s micro/macro flora and fauna. A wide range of plants are suitable for use in the MWS Linear, but selec- tions vary by location and climate. View suitable plants by selecting the list relative to your project location’s hardy zone. Please visit www.ModularWetlands.com/Plants for more information and various plant lists. Maintenance Reduce your maintenance costs, man hours, and materials with the MWS Linear. Unlike other biofiltration systems that provide no pre-treatment, the MWS Linear is a self-contained treatment train which incorporates simple and effective pre-treatment. Maintenance requirements for the biofilter itself are almost completely eliminated, as the pre-treatment chamber removes and isolates trash, sediments, and hydrocarbons. What’s left is the simple maintenance of an easily accessible pre-treatment chamber that can be cleaned by hand or with a standard vac truck. Only periodic replacement of low- cost media in the pre-filter cartridges is required for long term opera- tion and there is absolutely no need to replace expensive biofiltration media. Page 9 MWS – Linear Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System SPECIFICATIONS Modular Wetland Systems, Inc. www.modularwetlands.com P.O. Box 869 P 760-433-7640 Oceanside, CA 92049 F 760-433-3179 MWS – Linear Hybrid Stormwater Filtration System Save valuable space with small otprint for urban sites. d tropical ndscape plants. er and ss expensive maintenance ystem unoff is in d ischarge chamber the rate of discharge is controlled by valves set to a desired rate”. ested Pollutant Removal Efficiencies: fo Improve BMP aesthetics with attractive native an la Reduce lifetime costs with saf le “The MWS – Linear hybrid stormwater treatment system is described as a self contained treatment train. This system utilizes an innovative combination of l treatment processes. Stormwater runoff flows into the s via pipe or curb/grate type catch basin opening. Polluted runoff first encounters a screening device to remove larger pollutants and then enters a hydrodynamic separation chamber which settles out the sediments and larger suspended solids. Next the r treated by a revolutionary filter media, BioMediaGREEN that removes fines and associated pollutants, including bacteria. From there runoff enters of bioretention filter the form of a subsurface flow vegetated gravel wetland. Within the wetland physical, chemical, and biological mechanisms remove the remaining particulate and dissolve pollutants. The purified runoff leaves the system via the discharge chamber. In the d T Removal Di d Removal D Removal TPH Removal Removal TSS ssolve Lead issolved Copper E. coli Turbidity 98% 81% 92% 99% 60.2% 92% “Nature and Harmony Working Together in Perfect Harmony” SPECIFICATIONS – MWS- LINEAR gaged in the engineering design and roduction of treatment systems for stormwater. treat the entire water quality olume when used with pre-storage and properly sized. ls. g ¾” x 1 nels are g ted of UV protected/marine grade berglass and stainless steel hinge and mount. uires tails of this are provided in the installation section of the WS-Linear Design Kit. Track Record: The MWS- Linear Hybrid Stormwater Treatment System is manufactured by a company whom is regularly en p Coverage: The MWS- Linear is designed to treat the water quality volume or water quality flow. For flow based design, high flow bypass is internal, for volume based design, high flow bypass is external and prior to pre-detention system. For offline volume based designs the MWS - Linear has the ability to v Non-Corrosive Materials: The MWS – Linear is designed with non-corrosive materia All internal piping is SD35 PVC. Catch basin filter components, including mountin hardware, fasteners, support brackets, filtration material, and support frame are constructed of non-corrosive materials (316 stainless steel, and UV protected/marine grade fiberglass). Fasteners are stainless steel. Primary filter mesh is 316 stainless steel welded screens. Filtration basket screens for coarse, medium and fine filtration is ¾“expanded, 10 x 10 mesh, and 35 x 35 mesh, respectively. No polypropylene, monofilament netting or fabrics shall be used in this system. Media Protective Pa constructed of UV protected/marine grade fiberglass. Mounts are constructed of stainless steel. BioMediaGREEN is an inert rock substrate and is non-corrosive. Perimeter filter structure is constructed of lightweight injection molded plastic. Mountin brackets are constructed of SD40 PVC and are mounted with 3/8” diameter stainless steel redheads. Drain down filter cover is construc fi Weight: Each complete unit weighs approximately 29,000 to 40,000 pounds and req a boom crane to install. De M Transportation: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is designed to be transported a standard flat bed t on ruck. The unit easily fits on a flat bed truck without the need of pecial permitting. d noff can enter the system through a pipe, and/or a uilt in curb or grate type opening. etland System – Linear is completely passive and quires no external energy sources. he tation. As a precaution a footing can lso be built into the systems concrete structure. re o slippage, breaking, or tearing. All filters are warranted for a minimum of five (5) years. e hydrocarbon removal abilities. Within the wetland filter biological processes capture and s Alternative Technology Configurations: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is modular is design. Each module will be up to 22 feet long and 5 feet wide. The system can be made in lengths varying from 13 to 100s of feet long. For lengths longer than 22 feet the system will shipped in modules and assembled on site. The Modular Wetlan System – Linear has many alternative configurations. This allows the system to be adapted to many site conditions. Ru b Energy Requirements: The Modular W re Buoyancy Issues: Buoyancy is only a an issue when ground water levels rise above t bottom of the Modular Wetland System – Linear’s concrete structure. With 8.5 cubic yards of wetland media there is no concern of floa a Durability: The structure of the box will be precast concrete. The concrete will be 28 day compressive strength fc = 5,000 psi. Steel reinforcing will be ASTM A – C857. Structu will support an H20 loading as indicted by AASHTO. The joint between the concrete sections will ship lap and joint sealed with ram-nek. Filter (excluding oil absorbent media) and support structures are of proven durability. The filter and mounting structures are of sufficient strength to support water, sediment, and debris loads when the filter is full, with n Oil Absorbent Media: The MWS – Linear utilizes both physical and biological mechanisms to capture and filter oil and grease. A skimmer and boom system will b positioned on the internal perimeter of the catch basin insert. The primary filtration media, BioMediaGreen, utilized in the perimeter and drain down filters, has excellent break down oil and grease. Much of the breakdown and transformation of oil and grease performed by natural occurring bacteria. n system. For eak flows that exceed internal bypass capacity, external bypass is use. for internally bypassed flows. External bypass will bypass of eatment processes. ze. Annual een and quarter-scale boratory tests on the MWS – Linear flow based system. POLLUTANT FICIENCY is Overflow Protection: The grate and curb type MWS – Linear are designed with an internal bypass consisting of two SD PVC pipes which direct high flows around the perimeter and wetland filter, directly into the discharge chamber. For the volume based vault type configuration, bypass should be located prior to the pre-detentio p Filter Bypass: Runoff will bypass filtration (BioMediaGREEN and wetland filter) components of the MWS - Linear. The system will still provide screening and settling during higher flow rates tr Pollutant Removal Efficiency: The MWS - Linear is capable of removing over 90% of the net annual total suspended solids (TSS) load based on a 20-micron particle si TSS removal efficiency models are based on documented removal efficiency performance from full-scale laboratory tests on BioMediaGr la REMOVAL EF Trash & Litter 99% TPH (mg/L) 99% TSS (mg/L) 98% E. Coli (MPN/100ml) 60% Turbidity (NTU) 92% Dissolved Metals (mg/L) 76% Non-Scouring: During heavy storm events the runoff bypasses perimeter and wetland lter components. The system will not re-suspend solids at design flows. rticle diameter = 19 microns Sil-Co-Sil 106. Mean pa fi Uniqueness: The Modular Wetland System – Linear is a complete self contain treatment train that incorporates capture, screening, sedimentation, filtration, bioretention, high flow bypass, and flow control into a single modular structure. This system provides four stages of treatment making it the only 4 stage treatment train stormwater filtration system, therefore making it unique to the industry. Other s not incorporate all the necessary attributes to make it a complete stormwater management device as ed ystems do with the Modular Wetland System – Linear. Therefore, no equal xists for this system. ter management system no external retreatment of preconditioning is necessary. PECIFICATIONS – BioMediaGREEN se nd is also biodegradable. It is stable with no nown adverse environmental effects. injection) studies have hown that the products disappear very rapidly from the lung. dies that show no relation between inhalation exposure nd the development of tumors. e Pretreatment & Preconditioning: Since the Modular Wetland System – Linear is a complete capture and treatment train stormwa p S BioMediaGREEN is a proprietary engineered filter media. Made of a unique combination of the inert naturally occurring material this product is non-combustible and do not po a fire hazard, stable and non-reactive, a k This product has been tested in long-term carcinogenicity studies [inhalation and intraperitoneal injection (i.p.)] with no significant increase in lung tumors or abdominal tumors. Short-term biopersistent (inhalation and intra-tracheal s In October 2001, IARC classified this product as Group 3, "not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans". The 2001 decision was based on the latest epidemiological studies and animal inhalation stu a The product can typically be disposed of in an ordinary landfill (local regulations may apply). If you are unsure of the regulations, contact your local Public Health Department r the local office of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). nt REEN ut ut filters, catch basin inserts, ater polishing units, and hydrodynamic separators. ve Materials: The BioMediaGreen material is made of non-corrosive aterials. MediaGREEN material has been tested through gorous flow and loading conditions. has been proven to capture and tain hydrocarbons. and liage, sediments, TSS, particulate and dissolved etals, nutrients, and bacteria. le o Coverage: When properly installed BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks provide sufficie contact time, at rated flows, of passing contaminate water. The BioMediaG material will capture and retain most pollutants that pass through it. The BioMediaGREEN material is made of a proprietary blend of inert substances. The BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks can be used in different treatment devices, including b not limited to flume filters, trench drain filters, downspo w Non-Corrosi m Durability: The BioMediaGREEN material has been chosen for its proven durability, with an expected life of 2 plus years. The BioMediaGREEN material is of sufficient strength to support water, sediment, and debris loads when the media is at maximum flow; with no slippage, breaking, or tearing. The Bio ri Oil Absorbent Media: The BioMediaGREEN material re Pollutant Removal Efficiency: The BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks are designed to capture high levels of Hydrocarbons including but not limited to oils & grease, gasoline, diesel, and PAHs. BioMediaGREEN Filter Blocks have the physical ability to block filter trash and litter, grass and fo m BioMediaGREEN technology is based on a proprietary blend of synthetic inert natural substances aimed at removal of various stormwater pollutants. BioMediaGREEN was created to have a very porous structure capable of selectively removing pollutants whi allowing high flow through rates for water. As pollutants are captured by its structure, ioMediaGREEN captures most pollutants and maintains porosity and filtering rge percentage of TSS, hydrocarbons, nutrients, and heavy metals. Microbial reduction ary depending on colony size, flow rates and site specific conditions. REMOVAL EFFICIENCY B capabilities. Field and laboratory tests have confirmed the BioMediaGREEN capability to capture la efficiency will v POLLUTANT Oil & Grease (mg/L) 90% TPH (mg/L) 99% TSS (mg/L) 85% Turbidity (NTU) 99% Total Phosphorus (mg/L) 69.6% Dissolved Metals (mg/L) 75.6% Replacement: Removal and replacement of the blocks is simple. Remove blocks from ltration system. Replace with new block of equal size. Sil-Co-Sil 106. Mean particle diameter = 19 microns fi www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Guidelines for Modular Wetland System - Linear Maintenance Summary o Remove Trash from Screening Device – average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months.  (5 minute average service time). o Remove Sediment from Separation Chamber – average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months.  (10 minute average service time). o Replace Cartridge Filter Media – average maintenance interval 12 to 24 months.  (10-15 minute per cartridge average service time). o Replace Drain Down Filter Media – average maintenance interval is 12 to 24 months.  (5 minute average service time). o Trim Vegetation – average maintenance interval is 6 to 12 months.  (Service time varies). System Diagram Access to screening device, separation chamber and cartridge filter Access to drain down filter Pre-Treatment Chamber Biofiltration Chamber Discharge Chamber Outflow Pipe Inflow Pipe (optional) www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Procedures Screening Device 1. Remove grate or manhole cover to gain access to the screening device in the Pre- Treatment Chamber. Vault type units do not have screening device. Maintenance can be performed without entry. 2. Remove all pollutants collected by the screening device. Removal can be done manually or with the use of a vacuum truck. The hose of the vacuum truck will not damage the screening device. 3. Screening device can easily be removed from the Pre-Treatment Chamber to gain access to separation chamber and media filters below. Replace grate or manhole cover when completed. Separation Chamber 1. Perform maintenance procedures of screening device listed above before maintaining the separation chamber. 2. With a pressure washer spray down pollutants accumulated on walls and cartridge filters. 3. Vacuum out Separation Chamber and remove all accumulated pollutants. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Cartridge Filters 1. Perform maintenance procedures on screening device and separation chamber before maintaining cartridge filters. 2. Enter separation chamber. 3. Unscrew the two bolts holding the lid on each cartridge filter and remove lid. 4. Remove each of 4 to 8 media cages holding the media in place. 5. Spray down the cartridge filter to remove any accumulated pollutants. 6. Vacuum out old media and accumulated pollutants. 7. Reinstall media cages and fill with new media from manufacturer or outside supplier. Manufacturer will provide specification of media and sources to purchase. 8. Replace the lid and tighten down bolts. Replace screening device, grate or manhole cover when completed. Drain Down Filter 1. Remove hatch or manhole cover over discharge chamber and enter chamber. 2. Unlock and lift drain down filter housing and remove old media block. Replace with new media block. Lower drain down filter housing and lock into place. 3. Exit chamber and replace hatch or manhole cover. www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Notes 1. Following maintenance and/or inspection, it is recommended the maintenance operator prepare a maintenance/inspection record. The record should include any maintenance activities performed, amount and description of debris collected, and condition of the system and its various filter mechanisms. 2. The owner should keep maintenance/inspection record(s) for a minimum of five years from the date of maintenance. These records should be made available to the governing municipality for inspection upon request at any time. 3. Transport all debris, trash, organics and sediments to approved facility for disposal in accordance with local and state requirements. 4. Entry into chambers may require confined space training based on state and local regulations. 5. No fertilizer shall be used in the Biofiltration Chamber. 6. Irrigation should be provided as recommended by manufacturer and/or landscape architect. Amount of irrigation required is dependent on plant species. Some plants may require irrigation. www.modularwetlands.com Maintenance Procedure Illustration Screening Device The screening device is located directly under the manhole or grate over the Pre-Treatment Chamber. It’s mounted directly underneath for easy access and cleaning. Device can be cleaned by hand or with a vacuum truck. Separation Chamber The separation chamber is located directly beneath the screening device. It can be quickly cleaned using a vacuum truck or by hand. A pressure washer is useful to assist in the cleaning process. www.modularwetlands.com Cartridge Filters The cartridge filters are located in the Pre-Treatment chamber connected to the wall adjacent to the biofiltration chamber. The cartridges have removable tops to access the individual media filters. Once the cartridge is open media can be easily removed and replaced by hand or a vacuum truck. Drain Down Filter The drain down filter is located in the Discharge Chamber. The drain filter unlocks from the wall mount and hinges up. Remove filter block and replace with new block. www.modularwetlands.com Trim Vegetation Vegetation should be maintained in the same manner as surrounding vegetation and trimmed as needed. No fertilizer shall be used on the plants. Irrigation per the recommendation of the manufacturer and or landscape architect. Different types of vegetation requires different amounts of irrigation. For Office Use Only (city) (Zip Code)(Reviewed By) Owner / Management Company (Date) Contact Phone ( )_ Inspector Name Date / / Time AM / PM Weather Condition Additional Notes Yes Depth: Yes No Modular Wetland System Type (Curb, Grate or UG Vault):Size (22', 14' or etc.): Other Inspection Items: Storm Event in Last 72-hours? No Yes Type of Inspection Routine Follow Up Complaint Storm Office personnel to complete section to the left. 2972 San Luis Rey Road, Oceanside, CA 92058 P (760) 433-7640 F (760) 433-3176 Inspection Report Modular Wetlands System Is the filter insert (if applicable) at capacity and/or is there an accumulation of debris/trash on the shelf system? Does the cartridge filter media need replacement in pre-treatment chamber and/or discharge chamber? Any signs of improper functioning in the discharge chamber? Note issues in comments section. Chamber: Is the inlet/outlet pipe or drain down pipe damaged or otherwise not functioning properly? Structural Integrity: Working Condition: Is there evidence of illicit discharge or excessive oil, grease, or other automobile fluids entering and clogging the unit? Is there standing water in inappropriate areas after a dry period? Damage to pre-treatment access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lifting pressure? Damage to discharge chamber access cover (manhole cover/grate) or cannot be opened using normal lifting pressure? Does the MWS unit show signs of structural deterioration (cracks in the wall, damage to frame)? Project Name Project Address Inspection Checklist CommentsNo Does the depth of sediment/trash/debris suggest a blockage of the inflow pipe, bypass or cartridge filter? If yes, specify which one in the comments section. Note depth of accumulation in in pre-treatment chamber. Is there a septic or foul odor coming from inside the system? Is there an accumulation of sediment/trash/debris in the wetland media (if applicable)? Is it evident that the plants are alive and healthy (if applicable)? Please note Plant Information below. Sediment / Silt / Clay Trash / Bags / Bottles Green Waste / Leaves / Foliage Waste:Plant Information No Cleaning Needed Recommended Maintenance Additional Notes: Damage to Plants Plant Replacement Plant Trimming Schedule Maintenance as Planned Needs Immediate Maintenance For Office Use Only (city) (Zip Code)(Reviewed By) Owner / Management Company (Date) Contact Phone ( )_ Inspector Name Date / / Time AM / PM Weather Condition Additional Notes Site Map # Comments: 2972 San Luis Rey Road, Oceanside, CA 92058 P. 760.433.7640 F. 760.433.3176 Inlet and Outlet Pipe Condition Drain Down Pipe Condition Discharge Chamber Condition Drain Down Media Condition Plant Condition Media Filter Condition Long: MWS Sedimentation Basin Total Debris Accumulation Condition of Media 25/50/75/100 (will be changed @ 75%) Operational Per Manufactures' Specifications (If not, why?) Lat:MWS Catch Basins GPS Coordinates of Insert Manufacturer / Description / Sizing Trash Accumulation Foliage Accumulation Sediment Accumulation Type of Inspection Routine Follow Up Complaint Storm Storm Event in Last 72-hours? No Yes Office personnel to complete section to the left. Project Address Project Name Cleaning and Maintenance Report Modular Wetlands System TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-69 December 20, 2013 BIO-7: Proprietary Biotreatment Proprietary biotreatment devices are devices that are manufactured to mimic natural systems such as bioretention areas by incorporating plants, soil, and microbes engineered to provide treatment at higher flow rates or volumes and with smaller footprints than their natural counterparts. Incoming flows are typically filtered through a planting media (mulch, compost, soil, plants, microbes, etc.) and either infiltrated or collected by an underdrain and delivered to the storm water conveyance system. Tree box filters are an increasingly common type of proprietary biotreatment device that are installed at curb level and filled with a bioretention type soil. For low to moderate flows they operate similarly to bioretention systems and are bypassed during high flows. Tree box filters are highly adaptable solutions that can be used in all types of development and in all types of soils but are especially applicable to dense urban parking lots, street, and roadways. Feasibility Screening Considerations x Proprietary biotreatment devices that are unlined may cause incidental infiltration. Therefore, an evaluation of site conditions should be conducted to evaluate whether the BMP should include an impermeable liner to avoid infiltration into the subsurface. Opportunity Criteria x Drainage areas of 0.25 to 1.0 acres. x Land use may include commercial, residential, mixed use, institutional, and subdivisions. Proprietary biotreatment facilities may also be applied in parking lot islands, traffic circles, road shoulders, and road medians. x Must not adversely affect the level of flood protection provided by the drainage system. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Frequent maintenance and the use of screens and grates to keep trash out may decrease the likelihood of clogging and prevent obstruction and bypass of incoming flows. □ Consult proprietors for specific criteria concerning the design and performance. □ Proprietary biotreatment may include specific media to address pollutants of concern. However, for proprietary device to be considered a biotreatment device the media must be capable of supporting rigorous growth of vegetation. □ Proprietary systems must be acceptable to the reviewing agency. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to request performance information. Reviewing agencies shall have the discretion to deny the use of a proprietary BMP on the grounds of performance, maintenance considerations, or other relevant factors. Also known as: ¾Catch basin planter box ¾Bioretention vault ¾Tree box filter Proprietary biotreatment Source: http://www.americastusa.com /index.php/filterra/ TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-70 December 20, 2013 □ In right of way areas, plant selection should not impair traffic lines of site. Local jurisdictions may also limit plant selection in keeping with landscaping themes. Computing Sizing Criteria for Proprietary Biotreatment Device x Proprietary biotreatment devices can be volume based or flow-based BMPs. x Volume-based proprietary devices should be sized using the Simple Design Capture Volume Sizing Method described in Appendix III.3.1 or the Capture Efficiency Method for Volume-Based, Constant Drawdown BMPs described in Appendix III.3.2. x The required design flowrate for flow-based proprietary devices should be computed using the Capture Efficiency Method for Flow-based BMPs described in Appendix III.3.3). In South Orange County, the provided ponding plus pore volume must be checked to demonstrate that it is greater than 0.75 of the remaining DCV that this BMP is designed to address. Many propretary biotreatment BMPs will not be able to meet the definition of “biofiltration” that applies in South Orange County. See Section III.7 and Worksheet SOC-1. Additional References for Design Guidance x Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Stormwater Technical Manual, Chapter 4: http://www.laschools.org/employee/design/fs-studies-and- reports/download/white_paper_report_material/Storm_Water_Technical_Manual_2009-opt- red.pdf?version_id=76975850 x Los Angeles County Stormwater BMP Design and Maintenance Manual, Chapter 9: http://dpw.lacounty.gov/DES/design_manuals/StormwaterBMPDesignandMaintenance.pdf x Santa Barbara BMP Guidance Manual, Chapter 6: http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/91D1FA75-C185-491E-A882- 49EE17789DF8/0/Manual_071008_Final.pdf Street Sweeping and Vacuuming SE-7 January 2011 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 2 Construction www.casqa.org Description and Purpose Street sweeping and vacuuming includes use of self-propelled and walk-behind equipment to remove sediment from streets and roadways, and to clean paved surfaces in preparation for final paving. Sweeping and vacuuming prevents sediment from the project site from entering storm drains or receiving waters. Suitable Applications Sweeping and vacuuming are suitable anywhere sediment is tracked from the project site onto public or private paved streets and roads, typically at points of egress. Sweeping and vacuuming are also applicable during preparation of paved surfaces for final paving. Limitations Sweeping and vacuuming may not be effective when sediment is wet or when tracked soil is caked (caked soil may need to be scraped loose). Implementation  Controlling the number of points where vehicles can leave the site will allow sweeping and vacuuming efforts to be focused, and perhaps save money.  Inspect potential sediment tracking locations daily.  Visible sediment tracking should be swept or vacuumed on a daily basis. Categories EC Erosion Control SE Sediment Control  TC Tracking Control  WE Wind Erosion Control NS Non-Stormwater Management Control WM Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control Legend:  Primary Objective  Secondary Objective Targeted Constituents Sediment  Nutrients Trash  Metals Bacteria Oil and Grease  Organics Potential Alternatives None If User/Subscriber modifies this fact sheet in any way, the CASQA name/logo and footer below must be removed from each page and not appear on the modified version. Street Sweeping and Vacuuming SE-7 January 2011 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 2 of 2 Construction www.casqa.org  Do not use kick brooms or sweeper attachments. These tend to spread the dirt rather than remove it.  If not mixed with debris or trash, consider incorporating the removed sediment back into the project Costs Rental rates for self-propelled sweepers vary depending on hopper size and duration of rental. Expect rental rates from $58/hour (3 yd3 hopper) to $88/hour (9 yd3 hopper), plus operator costs. Hourly production rates vary with the amount of area to be swept and amount of sediment. Match the hopper size to the area and expect sediment load to minimize time spent dumping. Inspection and Maintenance  Inspect BMPs in accordance with General Permit requirements for the associated project type and risk level. It is recommended that at a minimum, BMPs be inspected weekly, prior to forecasted rain events, daily during extended rain events, and after the conclusion of rain events.  When actively in use, points of ingress and egress must be inspected daily.  When tracked or spilled sediment is observed outside the construction limits, it must be removed at least daily. More frequent removal, even continuous removal, may be required in some jurisdictions.  Be careful not to sweep up any unknown substance or any object that may be potentially hazardous.  Adjust brooms frequently; maximize efficiency of sweeping operations.  After sweeping is finished, properly dispose of sweeper wastes at an approved dumpsite. References Stormwater Quality Handbooks - Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual, State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), November 2000. Labor Surcharge and Equipment Rental Rates, State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), April 1, 2002 – March 31, 2003. ATTACHMENT D  GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS     GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION FOR PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1244 IRVINE AVENUE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR MELIA HOMES 8951 RESEARCH DRIVE IRVINE,CALIFORNIA 92618 PREPARED BY GEOTEK,INC. 710 E.PARKRIDGE AVENUE,SUITE 105 CORONA,CALIFORNIA 92879 PROJECT NO.1704-CR JULY 21,2017 GEOTECHNICAL | ENVIRONMENTAL | MATERIALS July 21, 2017 Project No.1704-CR Melia Homes 8951 Research Drive Irvine, California 92618 Attention:Ms.Christine Harmon-Harris Subject:Geotechnical Evaluation Proposed Multi-Family Residential Development Mariner’s Square Project 1244 Irvine Avenue City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California Dear Ms.Harmon-Harris: We are pleased to provide the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the subject site located in the city of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California. This report presents a discussion of our evaluation and provides preliminary geotechnical recommendations for earthwork,foundation design,and construction. In our opinion,site development appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. Respectfully submitted, GeoTek, Inc. Edward H.LaMont CEG 1892, Exp.7/31/18 Principal Geologist Robert R. Russell GE 2042, Exp.12/31/18 Senior Geotechnical Engineer Distribution:(3) Addressee G:\Projects\1701 to 1750\1704CR Melia Homes Mariner's Square Newport Beach\Geotechnical Investigation\1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation Mariner's Square.doc Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES.............................................................................................1 2.SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ..............................................................1 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................................................................1 2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.....................................................................................................................................................2 3.FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING................................................................2 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION...............................................................................................................................................................2 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING ..........................................................................................................................................................2 4.GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS...........................................................................................3 4.1 REGIONAL SETTING ................................................................................................................................................................3 4.2 GENERAL SOIL/GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................3 4.2.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill ........................................................................................................................................................3 4.2.2 Older Paralic Deposits ..................................................................................................................................................................3 4.3 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER ...........................................................................................................................................4 4.3.1 Surface Water.................................................................................................................................................................................4 4.3.2 Groundwater....................................................................................................................................................................................4 4.4 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY ..........................................................................................................................................4 4.4.1 Seismic Design Parameters.........................................................................................................................................................4 4.4.2 Liquefaction and Seismically-Induced Settlement ................................................................................................................5 4.4.3 Other Seismic Hazards ................................................................................................................................................................6 5.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................6 5.1 GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................................................6 5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS..........................................................................................................................................6 5.2.1 Site Clearing and Demolition......................................................................................................................................................6 5.2.2 Removals/Overexcavations..........................................................................................................................................................7 5.2.3 Preparation of Areas to Receive Engineered Fill...................................................................................................................7 5.2.4 Engineered Fills................................................................................................................................................................................7 5.2.5 Excavation Characteristics...........................................................................................................................................................7 5.2.6 Trench Excavations and Backfill..............................................................................................................................................8 5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................................................................................8 5.3.1 Foundation Design Criteria..........................................................................................................................................................8 Miscellaneous Foundation Recommendations.................................................................................................................................11 5.3.2 Foundation Set Backs..................................................................................................................................................................11 5.3.3 Retaining Wall Design and Construction..............................................................................................................................11 5.3.4 Soil Corrosivity................................................................................................................................................................................14 5.3.5 Soil Sulfate Content .....................................................................................................................................................................14 5.3.6 Import Soils.....................................................................................................................................................................................15 5.4 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION ..................................................................................................................................15 5.4.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................................................15 5.4.2 Concrete Mix Design...................................................................................................................................................................15 5.4.3 Concrete Flatwork........................................................................................................................................................................15 5.4.4 Concrete Performance ................................................................................................................................................................15 5.5 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................................16 Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.5.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting...................................................................................................................................16 5.5.2 Drainage..........................................................................................................................................................................................16 5.6 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ...................................................................................................17 6.INTENT...............................................................................................................................................18 7.LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................................18 8.SELECTED REFERENCES.................................................................................................................19 ENCLOSURES Figure 1 –Site Location Map Figure 2 –Boring and Infiltration Test Location Map Appendix A –Hollow Stem Boring Logs Appendix B –Laboratory Test Results Appendix C –General Grading Guidelines Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 1 1.PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of this study was to evaluate the geotechnical conditions in the area of proposed construction.Services provided for this study included the following: Research and review of available geologic data and general information pertinent to the site, Site exploration consisting of the excavation, logging, and sampling of five hollow-stem auger exploratory boring, Laboratory testing of soil samples obtained during the field investigation, Review and evaluation of site seismicity,and Compilation of this geotechnical report which presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the proposed development. 2.SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located at 1244 Irvine Avenue in the city of Newport Beach,Orange County, California (see Figure 1).The subject site is located north of Westcliff Plaza, east of Irvine Avenue and south of Mariners Drive in the city of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Based on our site reconnaissance completed on June 14, 2017, the area to be developed currently has 20 multi-family residential two-to three-story buildings with associated landscape, parking and drive areas.The irregular shaped site is approximately 5.76 acres and can be considered as having relatively flat to gently sloping terrain with existing elevations ranging from approximately 94 to 83 mean sea level (msl)and generally sloping down to the southwest. The adjacent area to the west of the subject site is occupied by commercial retail buildings. Roadways encompass the adjacent north, east, and south sides of the subject site. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 2 2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Information regarding the proposed development was provided by SUMMA Architecture, dated May 29, 2017.It is our understanding that proposed site improvements include razing of all the existing buildings,concreted areas and landscape areas. The proposed new development is to consist of 95 new multi-family residential buildings ranging from two to three stories. A recreation center with a pool is proposed in the western central portion of the site. It is our understanding that the new improvements are to consist of wood-frame construction and incorporate a concrete slab-on-grade floor.Based on the information provided improvements look to be at least five feet or further away from the site boundary. If the site development differs from that described above, the recommendations should be subject to further review and evaluation.Final site development plans should be reviewed by GeoTek, Inc. 3.FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION The field exploration was conducted on June 14,2017.A geologist from GeoTek observed the excavation of five hollow stem borings on the site (see Figure 2). The depth of the borings ranged from 5 feet to 50 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs).Logs of the borings is included in Appendix A.Soil samples were obtained from the boring excavations for use in subsequent laboratory testing. 3.2 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was performed on selected bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples collected during our field exploration. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to confirm the field classification of the soils encountered and to evaluate their physical properties for use in the engineering design and analysis. Results of the laboratory testing program along with a brief description and relevant information regarding testing procedures are included in Appendix B and on the exploratory log included in Appendix A. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 3 4.GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS 4.1 REGIONAL SETTING The subject property is situated in the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges province is one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America. Basically, it extends from the point of contact with the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province, southerly to the tip of Baja California. This province varies in width from about 30 to 100 miles. It is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province. The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks. Several major fault zones are found in this province. The Elsinore Fault zone and the San Jacinto Fault zone trend northwest-southeast and are found near the middle of the province. The San Andreas Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province.The Newport- Inglewood Fault, located approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the site, is the closest known active fault to the subject site. 4.2 GENERAL SOIL/GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS A brief description of the earth materials underlying the site is presented in the following section. Based on our field exploration, the site area evaluated is underlain by approximately up to five feet of fill materials underlain by older paralic deposits.Based on the results of the laboratory testing and our experience in the project area with similar soils, the expansion potential of the on-site soils anticipated to be encountered during earthwork generally indicated a “very low” (0≤EI≤20) expansion potential when tested in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4829. 4.2.1 Undocumented Artificial Fill Undocumented artificial fill soils were encountered in the test borings to an approximate depth of up to five feet. The fill materials generally consist of fine grained sandy silt to clayey silt, which are brown,slightly moist to moist and medium stiff to stiff. 4.2.2 Older Paralic Deposits Based on our recent subsurface exploration and review of readily available regional geologic maps for the project site area (Morton, D.M., 2004),Quaternary age older paralic deposits underlie the artificial fill materials in the immediate site area.The older paralic deposits Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 4 encountered in the hollow stem borings generally consist of gray to grayish brown,moist to wet,loose to medium dense silty fine to coarse sands along with medium stiff to hard silty clays or clayey silts. 4.3 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER 4.3.1 Surface Water If encountered during the earthwork construction, surface water on this site is the result of precipitation or surface run-off from surrounding sites. Overall area drainage is towards the west/southwest. Provisions for surface drainage will need to be accounted for by the project civil engineer. 4.3.2 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in three of the deeper borings excavated at the site by this firm. The shallowest reading of groundwater was 11 feet bgs in the southwest corner of the site. The deepest reading of groundwater was 11.5 feet bgs in the northwestern and southcentral portion of the site.This groundwater is considered to be in a perched condition as materials beneath are not saturated to the depth explored (51 feet bgs). Based on the results of our field exploration, review of site area geomorphology and geology, groundwater is not anticipated to adversely affect the proposed improvements.Locally perched groundwater may be encountered in deeper utility trench excavations. 4.4 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated mainly by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas system. The site is in a seismically active region. No active or potentially active fault is known to exist at this site nor is the site situated within an “Alquist-Priolo”Earthquake Fault Zone or a Special Studies Zone (Bryant and Hart, 2007; CGS, 1980).The nearest zoned fault is the Newport-Inglewood fault,2.5 miles to the southwest. 4.4.1 Seismic Design Parameters The site is located at approximately 33.62994 Latitude and -117.90569 Longitude. Site spectral accelerations (Ss and S1), for 0.2 and 1.0 second periods for a Class “D” site, were determined from the USGS Website, Earthquake Hazards Program, Interpolated Probabilistic Ground Motion for the Conterminous 48 States by Latitude/Longitude. The results are presented in the following table: Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 5 2016 CBC SITE SEISMIC PARAMETERS Mapped 0.2 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss 1.689g Mapped 1.0 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S1 0.621g Site Coefficient for Site Class “D”, Fa 1.0 Site Coefficient for Site Class “D”, Fv 1.3 Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for 0.2 Second, SMS 1.689g Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for 1.0 Second, SM1 0.807g Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Parameter at 0.2 Second, SDS 1.126g Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Parameter at 1.0 second, SD1 0.538g Peak Ground Acceleration (PGAM)0.688g 4.4.2 Liquefaction and Seismically-Induced Settlement Liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which cyclic stresses, produced by earthquake-induced ground motion, create excess pore pressures in relatively cohesionless soils. These soils may thereby acquire a high degree of mobility, which can lead to lateral movement, sliding, settlement of loose sediments, sand boils and other damaging deformations. This phenomenon occurs only below the water table, but, after liquefaction occurs, the liquefied soil/water matrix can propagate upward into overlying non-saturated soil as excess pore water dissipates. The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and grain size, relative density, groundwater level, confining pressures, and both intensity and duration of ground shaking.In general, materials that are susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated granular soils having low fines content under low confining pressures. Based on the California Geological Survey, the site is not mapped within a zone of potentially liquefiable soil. Perched groundwater was encountered in our test borings however, the site liquefaction potential is considered negligible due to the material type, relatively firm nature, and age of the underlying materials (older paralic deposits under near-surface fill). Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 6 4.4.3 Other Seismic Hazards Evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities at this site was not observed during our investigation. The site vicinity is located in an area that has relatively flat to gently sloping terrain.Thus, the potential for landslides is considered negligible.Additionally, the project site is not located in an area identified by the State of California as an earthquake-induced landslide hazard zone (CGS,2000). Based on a review of the Tsunami Inundation Map for the Newport Beach Quadrangle, this site is not located within an established tsunami inundation zone. The potential for secondary seismic hazards such as a tsunami are considered to be negligible due to site elevation and distance from an open body of water. 5.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 GENERAL The anticipated site development appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint provided that the following recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction phases of development. 5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS Earthwork and grading should be performed in accordance with the applicable grading ordinances of the City of Newport Beach, the 2016 California Building Code (CBC),and recommendations contained in this report.The Grading Guidelines included in Appendix C outline general procedures and do not anticipate all site specific situations. In the event of conflict, the recommendations presented in the text of this report should supersede those contained in Appendix C. 5.2.1 Site Clearing and Demolition In areas of planned grading or improvements, the site should be cleared of existing improvements, vegetation, trash and debris, and properly disposed of off-site.Demolition of the existing improvements should include removal of all foundations and any other below- grade construction.Voids resulting from demolition of the existing structures and improvements should be backfilled with engineered fill materials with expansion characteristics similar to or less than the on-site soils. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 7 5.2.2 Removals/Overexcavations It is recommended that all undocumented artificial fill below the planned buildings be removed until competent native soil is encountered.Competent native soil should have a relative compaction of at least 85% and little to no visible porosity.Undocumented artificial fill was encountered to a depth of up to approximately five feet in our test borings. Deeper areas of fill may be present on the site. In areas where no fill is encountered, the natural soils should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet below existing grade or one foot below the bottom of the proposed foundations, whichever is greater. The horizontal limits of overexcavation should extend at least three feet outside the perimeter of the structural elements or a distance equal to the depth of the removals, whichever is greater. A representative of this firm should observe the bottom of all excavations. Removals along property lines should extend down at a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) projection to the required removal depth. 5.2.3 Preparation of Areas to Receive Engineered Fill A representative of this firm should observe the bottom of all excavations. Upon approval, the exposed soils and all soils in areas to receive engineered fill should be scarified to a depth of approximately eight inches, moistened to at least the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent (ASTM D 1557). 5.2.4 Engineered Fills The on-site soils are generally considered suitable for reuse as engineered fill provided they are free from vegetation, debris and other deleterious material.Rock fragments greater than six inches in maximum dimension should not be incorporated into the fill. Engineered fill should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness, moisture conditioned to at least the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90%(ASTM D 1557). 5.2.5 Excavation Characteristics Excavation in the on-site soils is expected to be feasible using heavy-duty grading equipment in good operating condition. All temporary excavations for grading purposes and installation of underground utilities should be constructed in accordance with local and Cal-OSHA guidelines. Temporary excavations within the on-site materials should be stable at 1:1 (H:V)inclinations for cuts less than five feet in height. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 8 5.2.6 Trench Excavations and Backfill Trench excavations should conform to Cal-OSHA regulations. The contractor should have a competent person, per OSHA requirements, on site during construction to observe conditions and to make the appropriate recommendations. Utility trench backfill should consist of sandy soil with a “very low” expansion potential and compacted to at least 90% relative compaction (as determined per ASTM D 1557). Compaction should be achieved with a mechanical compaction device. Jetting of trench backfill is not recommended. If soils to be used as backfill have dried out, they should be thoroughly moisture conditioned prior to placement in trenches. 5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Preliminary foundation design criteria for on-grade slabs, conventional foundations and deepened foundations are presented in this report. These are typical design criteria and are not intended to supersede the design by the structural engineer. 5.3.1 Foundation Design Criteria Based on the results of our recent testing, the on-site soils near subgrade may be classified as having a “very low” (0 <EI <20)potential for expansion in accordance with ASTM D 4829. Presented below are foundation design parameters for proposed single-family residences. Foundations should be designed in accordance with the 2016 California Building Code (CBC). Given the “very low”expansion potential classification, post-tensioned slabs are not required by the CBC.The slab designer may choose the post-tension design methodology, since the CBC indicated Post Tensioning Institute (PTI) design methodology is intended for expansive soils conditions which do not apply, based on the conditions observed and soils tested. Consequently, no em or ym parameters as used in the PTI methodology are provided. Additional testing of the soils should be performed during construction to evaluate the as- graded conditions. Additional recommendations may be necessary based on the as-graded soils conditions. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 9 MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS DESIGN PARAMETER 0≤EI≤20 Foundation Depth or Minimum Perimeter Beam Depth (inches below lowest adjacent grade) One-Story Exterior Footing –12” One-Story Interior Footing –12” Two-Story Exterior Footing –18” Two-Story Interior Footing –18” Minimum Foundation Width One-Story -12” Two-Story –15” Minimum Slab Thickness (actual)4” Presaturation of Subgrade Soil (Percent of Optimum/Depth in Inches)110% to a depth of 12 inches It should be noted that the above recommendations are based on soil support characteristics only. The structural engineer should design the slab and beam reinforcement based on actual loading conditions. The bottom of the perimeter edge beam/deepened footing should be designed to resist tension forces using either cable or conventional reinforcement, per the structural engineer. Other applicable recommendations presented for conventionally reinforced foundations should be incorporated into the design and construction phases of the project. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of continuous and perimeter footings a minimum of 12 inches deep and 12 inches wide. An allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) may also be used for design of isolated pad footings 24 inches square and 12 inches deep. These values may be increased by 250 pounds per square foot for each additional 12 inches in depth and 125 pounds per square foot for each additional 12 inches in width to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 230 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf for footings founded on engineered fill. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used with dead load forces. The upper one foot of soil below the adjacent grade should not be used in calculating passive pressure. The above values may be increased as allowed by Code to resist short-term transient loads (e.g. seismic and wind loads). Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 10 Based on our experience in the area,we estimate that foundations may experience a total static settlement of up to approximately one (1) inch as a result of structural loading. Differential settlement of up to one-half of the total settlement over a horizontal distance of 40 feet could result from structural loading. The foundation engineer should incorporate these settlement estimates from the structural loads into the design of the slab, as appropriate. A grade beam, 12 inches wide by a minimum of 12 inches deep, should be utilized across large opening or garage entrances. The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as the bottom of the adjoining footings. A moisture and vapor retarding system should be placed below slabs-on-grade where moisture migration through the slab is undesirable.Guidelines for these systems are provided in the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) Section 4.505.2 and the 2016 CBC Section 1910.1. It should be realized that the effectiveness of the vapor retarding membrane can be adversely impacted as the result of construction related punctures (e.g. stake penetrations, tears, punctures from walking on the aggregate layer, etc.). These occurrences should be limited as much as possible during construction. Thicker membranes are generally more resistant to accidental puncture than thinner ones. Products specifically designed for use as moisture/vapor retarders may also be more puncture resistant. It is GeoTek’s opinion that a minimum 10 mil thick membrane with joints properly overlapped and sealed should be considered, unless otherwise specified by the slab design professional. Moisture and vapor retarding systems are intended to provide a certain level of resistance to vapor and moisture transmission through the concrete, but do not eliminate it. The acceptable level of moisture transmission through the slab is to a large extent based on the type of flooring used and atmospheric conditions. Ultimately, the vapor retarding system should be comprised of suitable elements to limit migration of water and reduce transmission of water vapor through the slab to acceptable levels. The selected elements should have suitable properties (.e. thickness, composition, strength, and permeance) to achieve the desired performance level. Consideration should be given to consulting with an individual possessing specific expertise in this area for additional evaluation. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 11 Miscellaneous Foundation Recommendations 5.3.1.1 To minimize moisture penetration beneath the slab-on-grade areas,utility trenches should be backfilled with engineered fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they intercept the perimeter footings or thickened slab edge. 5.3.1.2 Soils from the footing excavations should not be placed in the slab-on-grade areas unless properly compacted and tested. The excavations should be free of loose/sloughed materials and be neatly trimmed at the time of concrete placement. 5.3.1.3 Soils from the footing excavations should not be placed in the slab-on-grade areas unless properly compacted and tested. The excavations should be free of loose/sloughed materials and be neatly trimmed at the time of concrete placement. 5.3.1.4 Under-slab utility trenches should be compacted to project specifications. Compaction should be achieved with a mechanical compaction device. If soils to be used as backfill have dried out, they should be thoroughly moisture conditioned prior to placement in trenches. 5.3.2 Foundation Set Backs Minimum setbacks to all foundations should comply with the 2016 CBC or City of Newport Beach requirements, whichever is greater.Improvements not conforming to these setbacks are subject to the increased likelihood of excessive lateral movements and/or differential settlements. If large enough,these movements can compromise the integrity of the improvements. The bottom of any proposed foundations should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) upward projection from the bottom edge of the closest footing. 5.3.3 Retaining Wall Design and Construction 5.3.3.1 General Design Criteria Recommendations presented in this report apply to typical masonry,concrete or modular retaining walls to a maximum height of up to 6 feet. Additional review and recommendations should be requested for higher walls. These are typical design criteria and are not intended to supersede the design by the structural engineer. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 12 Retaining wall foundations should be embedded a minimum of 12 inches into engineered fill and should be designed in accordance with Section 5.3.1 of this report. Structural needs may govern and should be evaluated by the project structural engineer. All earth retention structure plans, as applicable, should be reviewed by this office prior to finalization. The seismic design parameters as discussed in this report remain applicable to all proposed earth retention structures at this site, and should be properly incorporated into the design and construction of the structures. Earthwork considerations, site clearing and remedial earthwork for all earth retention structures should meet the requirements of this report, unless specifically provided otherwise, or more stringent requirements or recommendations are made by the designer. The backfill material placement for all earth retention structures should meet the requirement of Section 5.3.4.4 in this report. In general, cantilever earth retention structures, which are designed to yield at least 0.001H, where H is equal to the height of the earth retention structure to the base of its footing, may be designed using the active condition.Rigid earth retention structures (including but not limited to rigid walls, and walls braced at top, such as typical basement walls) should be designed using the at-rest condition. In addition to the design lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharges due to improvements, such as an adjacent building or traffic loading, should be considered in the design of the earth retention structures. Loads applied within a 1:1 (h:v) projection from the surcharge on the stem and footing of the earth retention structure should be considered in the design. Final selection of the appropriate design parameters should be made by the designer of the earth retention structures. 5.3.3.2 Cantilevered Walls The recommendations presented below are for cantilevered retaining walls up to 10 feet high. Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflections. An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit weights are given below for specific slope gradients of the retained material. These do not include other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, or adverse geologic conditions. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 13 ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURES Surface Slope of Retained Materials (h:v) Equivalent Fluid Pressure (pcf) (Native/Select Backfill)* Level 40 2:1 60 *The design pressures assume the backfill material has an expansion index less than or equal to 20. Backfill zone includes area between back of the wall to a plane (1:1 h:v) up from bottom of the wall foundation (on the backside of the wall) to the (sloped) ground surface. It should be noted that the 2016 CBC only requires the additional earthquake induced lateral force to be considered on retaining walls in excess of 6 feet. Additional lateral forces can be induced on retaining walls during an earthquake. For level backfill, the minimum earthquake- induced load onto retaining walls may be considered to be equivalent to a fluid pressure of 15.5 pcf. The seismic pressure can be assumed to be a conventional triangular distribution. 5.3.3.3 Restrained Retaining Walls Retaining walls that will be restrained at the top that support level backfill or that have reentrant or male corners, should be designed for an equivalent at-rest fluid pressure of 60 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading for level backfill conditions. For areas of male or reentrant corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of the wall laterally from the corner, or a distance otherwise determined by the project structural engineer. 5.3.3.4 Retaining Wall Backfill and Drainage Retaining walls should be provided with an adequate pipe and gravel back drain system to help prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated collector pipe (Schedule 40, SDR 35, or approved equivalent) embedded in a minimum of one (1) cubic foot per linear foot of ¾-to 1-inch clean crushed rock or an approved equivalent, wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or an approved equivalent). The drain system should be connected to a suitable outlet.Waterproofing of site walls should be performed where moisture migration through the wall is undesirable. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 14 Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than eight (8) inches in thickness and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. The wall backfill should also include a minimum one (1) foot wide section of ¾-to 1-inch clean crushed rock (or an approved equivalent). The rock should be placed immediately adjacent to the back of the wall and extend up from a back drain to within approximately 24 inches of the finish grade. The rock should be separated from the earth with filter fabric. The upper 24 inches should consist of compacted on-site soil. As an alternative to the drain rock and fabric, Miradrain 2000, or approved equivalent, may be used behind the retaining wall. The Miradrain 2000 should extend from the base of the wall to within 2 feet of the ground surface. The subdrain should be placed at the base of the wall in direct contact with the Miradrain 2000. The presence of other materials might necessitate revision to the parameters provided and modification of the wall designs. Proper surface drainage needs to be provided and maintained. 5.3.3.5 Other Design Considerations Wall design should consider the additional surcharge loads from superjacent slopes and/or footings, where appropriate. No backfill should be placed against concrete until minimum design strengths are evident by compression tests of cylinders. The retaining wall footing excavations, backcuts, and backfill materials should be approved the project geotechnical engineer or their authorized representative. 5.3.4 Soil Corrosivity The soil resistivity at this site was tested in the laboratory on a sample collected during the field exploration. The results of the testing indicate that the soil sample was considered “mildly corrosive” to buried ferrous metals in accordance with current standards commonly used by corrosion engineers. These characteristics are considered typical of soils commonly found in Southern California.Consideration should be given to consulting with a corrosion engineer. 5.3.5 Soil Sulfate Content The sulfate content was determined in the laboratory for a representative on-site soil sample. The results indicate that the water-soluble sulfate range is less than 0.1 percent by weight, which is considered “not applicable” (i.e. negligible) as per Table 4.2.1 of ACI 318. Based upon the test results,no special concrete mix design is required for sulfate attack resistance. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 15 5.3.6 Import Soils Import soils should have expansion characteristics similar to the on-site soils. GeoTek also recommends that, as a minimum, proposed import soils be tested for corrosivity and soluble sulfate content.GeoTek should be notified a minimum of 72 hours prior to importing so that appropriate sampling and laboratory testing can be performed. 5.4 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION 5.4.1 General Concrete construction should follow the 2016 CBC and ACI guidelines regarding design, mix placement and curing of the concrete. If desired, we could provide quality control testing of the concrete during construction. 5.4.2 Concrete Mix Design As indicated in Section 5.3.5, no special concrete mix design is required by Code to resist sulfate attack based on the existing test results. However, additional testing should be performed during grading so that specific recommendations can be formulated based on the as- graded conditions. 5.4.3 Concrete Flatwork Exterior concrete flatwork is often one of the most visible aspects of site development. They are typically given the least level of quality control, being considered “non-structural” components. Cracking of these features is fairly common due to various factors. While cracking is not usually detrimental, it is unsightly. We suggest that the same standards of care be applied to these features as to the structure itself. Flatwork should consist of 4-inch thick concrete and the use of reinforcement is suggested. The project structural engineer should provide final design recommendations. 5.4.4 Concrete Performance Concrete cracks should be expected. These cracks can vary from sizes that are essentially unnoticeable to more than 1/8 inch in width. Most cracks in concrete while unsightly do not significantly impact long-term performance. While it is possible to take measures (proper concrete mix, placement, curing, control joints, etc.) to reduce the extent and size of cracks that occur, some cracking will occur despite the best efforts to minimize it. Concrete undergoes chemical processes that are dependent on a wide range of variables, which are difficult, at best, to control. Concrete, while seemingly a stable material, is subject to internal expansion and contraction due to external changes over time. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 16 One of the simplest means to control cracking is to provide weakened control joints for cracking to occur along. These do not prevent cracks from developing; they simply provide a relief point for the stresses that develop. These joints are a widely accepted means to control cracks but are not always effective. Control joints are more effective the more closely spaced they are. GeoTek suggests that control joints be placed in two directions and located a distance apart approximately equal to 24 to 36 times the slab thickness. 5.5 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 5.5.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from graded slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Controlling surface drainage and runoff, and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover can minimize erosion. Plants selected for landscaping should be lightweight, deep-rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Overwatering should be avoided. Care should be taken when adding soil amendments to avoid excessive watering. Leaching as a method of soil preparation prior to planting is not recommended. An abatement program to control ground-burrowing rodents should be implemented and maintained. This is critical as burrowing rodents can decreased the long- term performance of slopes. It is common for planting to be placed adjacent to structures in planter or lawn areas. This will result in the introduction of water into the ground adjacent to the foundation. This type of landscaping should be avoided. 5.5.2 Drainage The need to maintain proper surface drainage and subsurface systems cannot be overly emphasized. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond or seep into the ground adjacent to the footings. Soil areas within 10 feet of the proposed structure should slope at a minimum of 5 percent away from the building, if possible unless the area is paved. Paved areas are to be sloped at 2 percent away from the structure. Roof gutters and downspouts should discharge onto paved surfaces sloping away from the structure or into a closed pipe system which outfalls to the street gutter pan or Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 17 directly to the storm drain system. Pad drainage should be directed toward approved areas and not be blocked by other improvements. It is the owner’s responsibility to maintain and clean drainage devices on or contiguous to their lot. In order to be effective, maintenance should be conducted on a regular and routine schedule and necessary corrections made prior to each rainy season. 5.6 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS We recommend that grading and foundation plans be reviewed by this office prior to construction to check for conformance with the recommendations of this report. We also recommend that GeoTek, Inc.representatives be present during site grading and foundation construction to check for proper implementation of the geotechnical recommendations. The owner/developer should have the representative from GeoTek, Inc.perform at least the following duties: Observe site clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable materials. Observe and test bottom of removals prior to fill placement. Evaluate the suitability of on-site and import materials for fill placement, and collect soil samples for laboratory testing where necessary. Observe the fill for uniformity during placement,including utility trenches. Perform field density testing of the fill materials. Observe and probe foundation soils to confirm suitability of bearing materials. If requested, a construction observation and compaction report can be provided by GeoTek, Inc.which can comply with the requirements of the governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project.We recommend that these agencies be notified prior to commencement of construction so that necessary grading permits can be obtained. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 18 6.INTENT It is the intent of this report to aid in the design and construction of the proposed development. Implementation of the advice presented in Section 5 of this report is intended to reduce risk associated with construction projects.The professional opinions and geotechnical advice contained in this report are not intended to imply total performance of the project or guarantee that unusual or variable conditions will not be discovered during or after construction. The scope of our evaluation is limited to the boundaries of the subject residential lot. This review does not and should in no way be construed to encompass any areas beyond the specific area of the proposed construction as indicated to us by the client. Further, no evaluation of any existing site improvements is included. The scope is based on our understanding of the project and the client’s needs, our proposal (P-0503417) dated May 25, 2017 and geotechnical engineering standards normally used on similar projects in this region. 7.LIMITATIONS The materials observed on the project site appear to be representative of the area; however, soil materials vary in character between excavations formed during site construction. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. GeoTek, Inc. assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing or recommendations performed or provided by others. Since our recommendations are based on the site conditions observed and encountered, and laboratory testing, our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page 19 8.SELECTED REFERENCES American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2006, Publication 302.2R-06, Guide for Concrete Slabs That Receive Moisture Sensitive Flooring Materials. ASTM, 2011, “Soil and Rock: American Society for Testing and Materials,” vol. 4.08 and 4.09. Morton, D,M.,2004, “Preliminary Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30’X60’ Quadrangle,” U.S. Geological Survey open-file Report 99-172. Bryant, W.A., and Hart, E.W., 2007, "Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps," California Geological Survey: Special Publication 42. California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2016 “California Building Code,” 3 volumes. National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, “Corrosion Basics An Introduction.” Seismic Design Values for Buildings (http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php). State of California, 1997 “Seismic Hazard Zone, New Port Beach Quadrangle.” APPENDIX A Hollow Stem Boring Logs 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach,Orange County, California Project No.1704-CR Mariner’s Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page A-1 A -FIELD TESTING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES Bulk Samples (Large) These samples are normally large bags of representative earth materials over 20 pounds in weight collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings. Bulk Samples (Small) These are plastic bag samples which are normally airtight and contain less than 5 pounds in weight of representative earth materials collected from the field by means of hand digging or exploratory cuttings. These samples are primarily used for determining natural moisture content and classification indices. B -BORING LOG LEGEND The following abbreviations and symbols often appear in the classification and description of soil and rock on the logs of borings: SOILS USCS Unified Soil Classification System f-c Fine to coarse f-m Fine to medium GEOLOGIC B: Attitudes Bedding: strike/dip J: Attitudes Joint: strike/dip C:Contact line ………..Dashed line denotes USCS material change Solid Line denotes unit / formational change Thick solid line denotes end of boring (Additional denotations and symbols are provided on the log of boring) GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML 11.0 123.0 DS, MD EI = 10 10 ML 20 13.5 28 8 SM 12 6.1 HC 14 5 12 18.4 16 5 SM 12 17 ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test F sandy SILT, brown to orangish brown, moist F sandy SILT with CLAY, brown, moist, stiff, trace brownish gray clay mottles Same as above, becomes wet Silty f-m SAND, brownish gray, wet, medium dense, little shell fragments BORING TERMINATED AT 15 FEET EI = Expansion Index Trench backfilled with soil cuttings SA = Sieve Analysis Groundwater encountered at 11.5 feet 30 RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum DensityLEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing: 20 25 5 10 15 Silty f SAND, gray, very moist, medium dense OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS Dry Density(pcf)OthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTSARTIFICIAL FILL SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-1 Laboratory Testing Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberWaterContent (%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 DRW PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY: PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML 15 SC 17 8.0 30 4 SM 7 9 8 SM 16 21 4 SM/ML 11 13 ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum DensityLEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing:EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 20 25 30 Groundwater encountered at 11.5 feet Trench backfilled with soil cuttings Silty f-c SAND to f-c sandy SILT, gray, wet, medium dense 15 BORING TERMINATED AT 15 FEET Silty f-m SAND, grayish brown, wet, medium dense 10 Clayey f-c SAND, brown, moist, dense 5 OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS Silty f-m SAND, brown, moist, medium dense, trace clay nodules F sandy SILT, brown, moist Dry Density(pcf)Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberOthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-2 Laboratory Testing Water Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum DensityLEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing:EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 20 25 30 15 Trench backfilled with soil cuttings 10 5 BORING TERMINATED AT 5 FEET No groundwater encountered F sandy SILT, brown to orangish brown, moist Dry Density(pcf)Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberOthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-3 Laboratory Testing Water Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CABML 12 ML 18 13.6 25 4 SM 7 P200 = 28.5% 11 11 13 17.4 22 2 SM 4 5 3 CL 5 7 2 CL 4 8 4 CL 7 11 ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density Silty CLAY, grayish brown, very moist, stiff Silty CLAY, brown to black, very moist, stiff Silty CLAY, dark brown to black, very moist, stiff LEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing:EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 20 25 30 Silty f-c SAND to sandy SILT, grayish brown, wet, loose/medium stiff 15 Silty f-c SAND, gray, wet, medium dense 10 Clayey SILT, brownish gray, moist, very stiff 5 OLDER PARALIC DEPOSITS Silty f-m SAND, gray, moist, medium dense, little brown mottles F sandy SILT, brown to orangish brown, moist Dry Density(pcf)Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberOthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-4 Sheet 1 of 2 Laboratory Testing Water Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 5 8 12 4 9 13 5 10 17 5 11 13 ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum Density 35 40 45 50 Groundwater encountered at 11 feet Trench backfilled with soil cuttings LEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing:EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis Silty CLAY, dark gray to black, very moist, stiff BORING TERMINATED AT 50 FEET Same as above Same as above, trace shell fragments Same as above Dry Density(pcf)OthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-4 Sheet 2 of 2 Laboratory Testing Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberWater Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table AL = Atterberg Limits SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test RV = R-Value Test SH = Shear Test HC= Consolidation MD = Maximum DensityLEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk Lab testing:EI = Expansion Index SA = Sieve Analysis 20 25 30 15 No groundwater encountered Trench backfilled with soil cuttings 10 F-m sandy SILT, brown, moist 5 BORING TERMINATED AT 5 FEET Dry Density(pcf)OthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL Water Content(%)SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-5 Laboratory Testing Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberLOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, Orange County, California Project No.1704-CR Mariner’Square Project Project No.1704-CR Geotechnical Evaluation July 21, 2017 1244 Irvine Avenue, City of Newport Beach, California Page B-1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING In Situ Moisture Content and Unit Weight The field moisture content was measured in the laboratory on selected samples collected during the field investigation. The field moisture content is determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. The dry density was measured in the laboratory on selected ring samples. The results are shown on the logs of exploratory borings in Appendix A. Direct Shear Shear testing was performed in a direct shear machine of the strain-control type in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3080. The rate of deformation was approximately 0.035 inch per minute. The sample was sheared under varying confining loads in order to determine the coulomb shear strength parameters, angle of internal friction and cohesion.One test was performed on a remolded sample. The shear test results are presented in Appendix B. Moisture-Density Relations Laboratory testing was performed on a site sample collected during the recent subsurface exploration. The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the sample tested was determined in general accordance with test method ASTM Test Procedure D 1557. The results are included herein. Boring No.Depth (ft.)Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) B-1 1-3.5 Sandy Silt 123.0 11.0 Expansion Index Expansion Index (EI) testing was performed on a soil sample collected from boring HA-1 between 0 and 5 feet. Testing was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4829. The results indicate an EI of 0. Boring No.Depth (ft.)Description Expansion Index Classification B-1 1-3.5 Sandy Silt 10 Very Low Sulfate Content, Resistivity and Chloride Content Testing to determine the water-soluble sulfate content was performed by others in general accordance with California Test No. 417. Resistivity testing was completed by others in general accordance with California Test 643. Testing to determine the chloride content was performed by others in general accordance with California Test No. 422. The results of the testing are included herein. Boring No.Depth (ft.)pH ASTM G51 Chloride ASTM D512B (mg/kg)) Sulfate ASTM D516 (% by weight) Resistivity ASTM G187 (ohm-cm) B-1 0-3.5 8.12 240 0.0180 2,345 Date: W.O.:sample ID Client:depth Technician: in.mm. 3 3.00 76.2 150 100.0% 2 2.00 50.8 150 100.0% 1 1/2 1.50 37.5 150 100.0% 1 1.00 25.4 150 100.0% 3/4 0.742 18.85 150 100.0% 1/2 0.500 12.7 150 100.0% 3/8 0.371 9.423 150 100.0% 1/4 0.250 6.350 150 100.0% #4 0.185 4.699 150 100.0% #8 0.093 2.362 150 100.0% #10 0.0787 2.000 150 100.0% #16 0.0460 1.168 150 100.0% #20 0.0331 0.840 150 100.0% #30 0.0232 0.589 150 100.0% #40 0.0165 0.420 150 100.0% #50 0.0116 0.295 150 100.0% #60 0.0085 0.265 150 100.0% #100 0.0058 0.147 150 100.0% #200 0.0029 0.074 107.3 42.7 28.5% #270 0.0021 0.053 42.7 28.5% Pan 42.7 28.5% Total Dry Weight Gradation Analysis 7/3/2017 1704-CR Melia Homes % Passing B-4 6 Specs 150 Sieve Size Particle Diameter Wt. Retained Wt. Passing DI Ring #:Ring Dia. :Ring Ht.:1" A Weight of compacted sample & ring (gm) B Weight of ring (gm) C Net weight of sample (gm) D E F Moisture Content, % G Specific Gravity, assumed H Unit Wt. of Water @ 20 °C, (pcf) I % Saturation EXPANSION INDEX =10 782.9 16.4 62.3 48.7 FINAL MOISTUREFinal Weight of wet sample & tare % Moisture 2.70 6/30/2017 9:30 0.1570 Final 10.0 SATURATION DETERMINATION Dry Density, lb / ft3 (D/1.F)108.2 Wet Density, lb / ft3 (C*0.3016)119.0 9:25 0.1470 10 min/Dry 394.6 6/29/2017 9:15 0.1470 Initial DENSITY DETERMINATION 757.6 READINGS 363.0 DATE TIME READING Sample Description: 4.01" Project Number:1704-CR Date Tested:6/29/2017 Project Location:Mariners Square Sample Source:B-1 @ 0 - 3.5 EXPANSION INDEX TEST (ASTM D4829) Client:Melia Homes Tested/ Checked By:DA/DI Lab No Corona Seating Cycle PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435 Loading Prior to Inundation Loading After Inundation Rebound Cycle PROJECT NO.: 1152-CR3 Date: 04/14 Chino, California CONSOLIDATION REPORT CHECKED BY: EHL Lab: DI Parcel 4 of Tract No. 18785 Plate C-1 Sample: B-2 @ 15' 0.00 1.00 2.00 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 CONSOLIDATION-PERCENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESS (%)STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT Sample Location: Date Tested: Shear Strength: =28.0 O ,C =0.00 psf Notes: B-4 @ 6 7/7/2017 DIRECT SHEAR TEST 2 - The above reflect direct shear strength at saturated conditions. 1 - The soil specimen used in the shear box was a ring sample remolded to approximately 90% relative compaction from a bulk sample collected during the field investigation. Project Name: Project Number: 3 - The tests were run at a shear rate of 0.035 in/min. Mariners Square 1704-CR 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 3500.0 4000.0 4500.0 5000.0SHEAR STRESS (psf)NORMAL STRESS (psf) MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP Client:Melia Homes Job No.:1704-CR Project:Mariners Square Lab No.:Corona Location:Newport BeachMaterial Type:Brown Fine Sandy Clayey Silt Material Supplier: Material Source: Sample Location:B-1 @ 0 - 3.5 Sampled By:DRW Date Sampled:0-Jan-00 Received By:DLI Date Received: Tested By:DA Date Tested:29-Jun-17Reviewed By:Date Reviewed: Test Procedure:ASTM 1557 Method:AOversized Material (%):0.0 Correction Required: yes x no MOISTURE CONTENT (%):13.89522 11.91942 9.89011 7.874865 13.89522 11.91942 9.8901099 7.874865 DRY DENSITY (pcf):115.9627 122.341 122.6062 118.4333 CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf):#DIV/0!#DIV/0!#DIV/0!#DIV/0! ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY (pcf): MOISTURE DENSITY RELATIONSHIP VALUES Maximum Dry Density, pcf 123.0 @ Optimum Moisture, %11.0 Corrected Maximum Dry Density, pcf @ Optimum Moisture, % MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONGrain Size Distribution:Atterberg Limits: % Gravel (retained on No. 4)Liquid Limit, % % Sand (Passing No. 4, Retained on No. 200)Plastic Limit, % % Silt and Clay (Passing No. 200)Plasticity Index, % Classification: Unified Soils Classification: AASHTO Soils Classification: 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20DRY DENSITY, PCFMOISTURE CONTENT, % MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP CURVE DRY DENSITY (pcf): CORRECTED DRY DENSITY (pcf): ZERO AIR VOIDS DRY DENSITY (pcf) S.G. 2.7 S.G. 2.8 S.G. 2.6 Poly. (DRY DENSITY (pcf):) OVERSIZE CORRECTED ZERO AIR VOIDS Poly. (S.G. 2.7) Poly. (S.G. 2.8) Poly. (S.G. 2.6) Project X REPORT S170629A Corrosion Engineering Page 1 Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab Results Only Soil Testing for Mariners Home July 3, 2017 Prepared for: Anna Scott Geotek Inc 1548 North Maple Street Corona, CA 92880 ascott@geotekusa.com Project X Job #: S170629A Client Job or PO #: 1703-CR 29970 Technology Dr, Suite 105F, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com Project X REPORT S170629A Corrosion Engineering Page 2 Corrosion Control – Soil, Water, Metallurgy Testing Lab 29970 Technology Dr, Suite 105F, Murrieta, CA 92563 Tel: 213-928-7213 Fax: 951-226-1720 www.projectxcorrosion.com SOIL ANALYSIS LAB RESULTS Client: Geotek Inc Job Name: Mariners Home Client Job Number: 1703-CR Project X Job Number: S170629A June 29, 2017 Unk = Unknown NT = Not Tested ND = 0 = Not Detected mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil weight mg/L - milligrams per liter of liquid volume Chemical Analysis performed on 1:3 Soil-To-Water extract Please call if you have any questions. Respectfully Submitted, Eddie Hernandez, M.Sc., P.E. Sr. Corrosion Consultant NACE Corrosion Technologist #16592 Professional Engineer California No. M37102 ehernandez@projectxcorrosion.com Method ASTM G187 ASTM G187 SM 4500-E SM 4500-C SM 4500-D SM 2580-B ASTM G51 Bore# / Description Depth As-Rec'd Resistivity Min-Resistivity Nitrate Ammonia Sulfide Redox pH (ft)(Ohm-cm)(Ohm-cm)(mg/kg)(wt%)(mg/kg)(wt%)(mg/kg)(mg/kg)(mg/kg)(mV) B-1 0 - 3.5 24,790 2,345 180 0.0180 240 0.0240 198 49.5 4.08 273 8.12 Sulfates ASTM D516 Chlorides ASTM D512B APPENDIX C GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, Orange County, California Project No.1704-CR GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-1 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES Guidelines presented herein are intended to address general construction procedures for earthwork construction. Specific situations and conditions often arise which cannot reasonably be discussed in general guidelines, when anticipated these are discussed in the text of the report. Often unanticipated conditions are encountered which may necessitate modification or changes to these guidelines. It is our hope that these will assist the contractor to more efficiently complete the project by providing a reasonable understanding of the procedures that would be expected during earthwork and the testing and observation used to evaluate those procedures. General Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of governing agencies, Chapters 18 and 33 of the Uniform Building Code, CBC (2016)and the guidelines presented below. Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction meeting should be held prior to site earthwork. Any questions the contractor has regarding our recommendations, general site conditions, apparent discrepancies between reported and actual conditions and/or differences in procedures the contractor intends to use should be brought up at that meeting. The contractor (including the main onsite representative)should review our report and these guidelines in advance of the meeting. Any comments the contractor may have regarding these guidelines should be brought up at that meeting. Grading Observation and Testing 1.Observation of the fill placement should be provided by our representative during grading. Verbal communication during the course of each day will be used to inform the contractor of test results. The contractor should receive a copy of the "Daily Field Report" indicating results of field density tests that day. If our representative does not provide the contractor with these reports, our office should be notified. 2.Testing and observation procedures are, by their nature, specific to the work or area observed and location of the tests taken, variability may occur in other locations. The contractor is responsible for the uniformity of the grading operations; our observations and test results are intended to evaluate the contractor’s overall level of efforts during grading. The contractor’s personnel are the only individuals participating in all aspect of site work. Compaction testing and observation should not be considered as relieving the contractor’s responsibility to properly compact the fill. 3.Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed by our representative prior to placing any fill. It will be the contractor's responsibility to notify our representative or office when such areas are ready for observation. 4.Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as considered warranted by this firm. GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-2 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR 5.In general, density tests would be made at maximum intervals of two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and size of the fill. More frequent testing may be performed. In any case, an adequate number of field density tests should be made to evaluate the required compaction and moisture content is generally being obtained. 6.Laboratory testing to support field test procedures will be performed, as considered warranted, based on conditions encountered (e.g. change of material sources, types, etc.) Every effort will be made to process samples in the laboratory as quickly as possible and in progress construction projects are our first priority. However, laboratory workloads may cause in delays and some soils may require a minimum of 48 to 72 hours to complete test procedures. Whenever possible, our representative(s) should be informed in advance of operational changes that might result in different source areas for materials. 7.Procedures for testing of fill slopes are as follows: a)Density tests should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill, three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope. b)If a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be employed, slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. 8.Finish grade testing of slopes and pad surfaces should be performed after construction is complete. Site Clearing 1.All vegetation, and other deleterious materials, should be removed from the site. If material is not immediately removed from the site it should be stockpiled in a designated area(s) well outside of all current work areas and delineated with flagging or other means. Site clearing should be performed in advance of any grading in a specific area. 2.Efforts should be made by the contractor to remove all organic or other deleterious material from the fill, as even the most diligent efforts may result in the incorporation of some materials. This is especially important when grading is occurring near the natural grade. All equipment operators should be aware of these efforts. Laborers may be required as root pickers. 3.Nonorganic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas provided the procedures used are observed and found acceptable by our representative. Treatment of Existing Ground 1.Following site clearing, all surficial deposits of alluvium and colluvium as well as weathered or creep effected bedrock, should be removed unless otherwise specifically indicated in the text of this report. GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-3 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR 2.In some cases, removal may be recommended to a specified depth (e.g. flat sites where partial alluvial removals may be sufficient). The contractor should not exceed these depths unless directed otherwise by our representative. 3.Groundwater existing in alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months. 4.Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards. 5.Exploratory back hoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. Fill Placement 1.Unless otherwise indicated, all site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however, some special processing or handling may be required (see text of report). 2.Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted in thin lifts six (6) to eight (8) inches in compacted thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a nearly horizontal plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by our representative. 3.If the moisture content or relative density varies from that recommended by this firm, the contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: a)Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. Moisture should be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre-watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or dry surficial soils. The ability of the contractor to obtain the proper moisture content will control production rates. b)Each six-inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In most cases, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D 1557. 4.Rock fragments less than eight inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided: a)They are not placed in concentrated pockets; b)There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks; c)The distribution of the rocks is observed by, and acceptable to, our representative. 5.Rocks exceeding eight (8) inches in diameter should be taken off site, broken into smaller fragments, or placed in accordance with recommendations of this firm in areas designated suitable for rock disposal. On projects where significant large quantities of oversized materials are anticipated, alternate guidelines for placement may be included. If significant oversize materials are encountered during construction, these guidelines should be requested. 6.In clay soil, dry or large chunks or blocks are common. If in excess of eight (8) inches minimum dimension, then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-4 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR methods should be used to break up blocks. When dry, they should be moisture conditioned to provide a uniform condition with the surrounding fill. Slope Construction 1.The contractor should obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. 2.Slopes trimmed to the compacted core should be overbuilt by at least three (3) feet with compaction efforts out to the edge of the false slope. Failure to properly compact the outer edge results in trimming not exposing the compacted core and additional compaction after trimming may be necessary. 3.If fill slopes are built "at grade" using direct compaction methods, then the slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades. Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes should be back rolled or otherwise compacted at approximately every 4 feet vertically as the slope is built. 4.Corners and bends in slopes should have special attention during construction as these are the most difficult areas to obtain proper compaction. 5.Cut slopes should be cut to the finished surface. Excessive undercutting and smoothing of the face with fill may necessitate stabilization. UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL Utility trench excavation and backfill is the contractors responsibility. The geotechnical consultant typically provides periodic observation and testing of these operations. While efforts are made to make sufficient observations and tests to verify that the contractors’ methods and procedures are adequate to achieve proper compaction, it is typically impractical to observe all backfill procedures. As such, it is critical that the contractor use consistent backfill procedures. Compaction methods vary for trench compaction and experience indicates many methods can be successful. However, procedures that “worked” on previous projects may or may not prove effective on a given site. The contractor(s) should outline the procedures proposed, so that we may discuss them prior to construction. We will offer comments based on our knowledge of site conditions and experience. 1.Utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas, in streets and beneath flat work or hardscape should be brought to at least optimum moisture and compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Soil should be moisture conditioned prior to placing in the trench. GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-5 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR 2.Flooding and jetting are not typically recommended or acceptable for native soils. Flooding or jetting may be used with select sand having a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or higher. This is typically limited to the following uses: a)shallow (12 + inches) under slab interior trenches and, b)as bedding in pipe zone. The water should be allowed to dissipate prior to pouring slabs or completing trench compaction. 3.Care should be taken not to place soils at high moisture content within the upper three feet of the trench backfill in street areas, as overly wet soils may impact subgrade preparation. Moisture may be reduced to 2% below optimum moisture in areas to be paved within the upper three feet below sub grade. 4.Sand backfill should not be allowed in exterior trenches adjacent to and within an area extending below a 1:1 projection from the outside bottom edge of a footing, unless it is similar to the surrounding soil. 5.Trench compaction testing is generally at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Testing frequency will be based on trench depth and the contractors procedures. A probing rod would be used to assess the consistency of compaction between tested areas and untested areas. If zones are found that are considered less compact than other areas, this would be brought to the contractors attention. JOB SAFETY General Personnel safety is a primary concern on all job sites. The following summaries are safety considerations for use by all our employees on multi-employer construction sites. On ground personnel are at highest risk of injury and possible fatality on grading construction projects. The company recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site and that job site safety is the contractor's responsibility. However, it is, imperative that all personnel be safety conscious to avoid accidents and potential injury. In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following precautions are to be implemented for the safety of our field personnel on grading and construction projects. 1.Safety Meetings: Our field personnel are directed to attend the contractor's regularly scheduled safety meetings. 2.Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for and are to be worn by our personnel while on the job site. 3.Safety Flags: Safety flags are provided to our field technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicle when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits. GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-6 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above, we request that it be brought to the attention of our office. Test Pits Location, Orientation and Clearance The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. The primary concern is the technician's safety. However, it is necessary to take sufficient tests at various locations to obtain a representative sampling of the fill. As such, efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractors authorized representatives (e.g. dump man, operator, supervisor, grade checker, etc.), and to select locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferably outside of current traffic. The contractors authorized representative should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test period. Again, safety is the paramount concern. Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away from oncoming traffic. The technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates that the fill be maintained in a drivable condition. Alternatively, the contractor may opt to park a piece of equipment in front of test pits, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access. A zone of non-encroachment should be established for all test pits (see diagram below). No grading equipment should enter this zone during the test procedure. The zone should extend outward to the sides approximately 50 feet from the center of the test pit and 100 feet in the direction of traffic flow. This zone is established both for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration, which typically decreases test results. 50 ft Zone of Non-Encroachment 50 ft Zone of Non-Encroachment Traffic Direction Vehicle parked here Test Pit Spoil pile Spoil pile Test Pit SIDE VIEW PLAN VIEW TEST PIT SAFETY PLAN 10 0 ft Zone of Non-Encroachment GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-7 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR Slope Tests When taking slope tests, the technician should park their vehicle directly above or below the test location on the slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe operation distance (e.g. 50 feet) away from the slope during testing. The technician is directed to withdraw from the active portion of the fill as soon as possible following testing. The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location. Trench Safety It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is needed. Trenches for all utilities should be excavated in accordance with CAL-OSHA and any other applicable safety standards. Safe conditions will be required to enable compaction testing of the trench backfill. All utility trench excavations in excess of 5 feet deep, which a person enters, are to be shored or laid back. Trench access should be provided in accordance with OSHA standards. Our personnel are directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment. Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation which; 1.is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back, 2.exit points or ladders are not provided, 3.displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the trench, or 4.displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth. If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy requires that the soil technician withdraws and notifies their supervisor. The contractors representative will then be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. All backfill not tested due to safety concerns or other reasons is subject to reprocessing and/or removal. Procedures In the event that the technician's safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractor's failure to comply with any of the above, the technician is directed to inform both the developer's and contractor's representatives. If the condition is not rectified, the technician is required, by company policy, to immediately withdraw and notify their supervisor. The contractor’s representative will then be contacted in an effort to effect a solution. No further testing will be performed until the situation is rectified. Any fill placed in the interim can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing, recompaction or removal. In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety guidelines,we request that the contractor bring this to technicians attention and notify our project GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIX C 1244 Irvine Avenue Page C-8 Newport Beach,Orange County,California Project No.1704-CR manager or office. Effective communication and coordination between the contractors' representative and the field technician(s) is strongly encouraged in order to implement the above safety program and safety in general. The safety procedures outlined above should be discussed at the contractor's safety meetings. This will serve to inform and remind equipment operators of these safety procedures particularly the zone of non-encroachment. The safety procedures outlined above should be discussed at the contractor's safety meetings. This will serve to inform and remind equipment operators of these safety procedures particularly the zone of non-encroachment. June 21, 2017 Project No. 1704-CR Melia Homes Ms. Christine Harmon-Harris 8951 Research Drive Irvine, California 92618 Attention: Ms. Christine Harmon-Harris Subject: Infiltration Evaluation Proposed Multi-Family Residential Development Mariner’s Square Project North of Westcliff Plaza, West of Irvine Avenue, and South of Mariners Drive Newport Beach, Orange County, California References: See Page 5 Dear Ms. Harmon-Harris: As requested and authorized, GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) has performed an infiltration evaluation at the subject property. The intent of this study is to evaluate the infiltration properties of the underlying soils in the proposed single-family residence development area. This report presents the results of the infiltration testing completed by GeoTek. Site and Project Description The subject site is located north of Westcliff Plaza, east of Irvine Avenue and south of Mariners Drive in the city of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Based on our recent site reconnaissance completed on June 14, 2017, the area to be developed currently has 20 multi- family residential buildings with associated landscape, parking and drive areas. The irregular shaped site is approximately 5.76 acres and can be considered as having relatively flat to gently sloping terrain with existing elevations ranging from approximately 94 to 83 mean sea level (msl) and generally sloping down to the southwest. Site specific topography is shown on the enclosed Site Location Map (Figure 1). Groundwater was encountered in three of the deeper borings excavated at the site by this firm. The shallowest reading of groundwater was 11 feet bgs in the southwest corner of the site. The deepest reading of groundwater was 11.5 feet bgs in the northwestern and southcentral portion of the site. This groundwater is considered to be in a perched condition as materials beneath are not saturated to the depth explored (51 feet bgs). MELIA HOMES Project No. 1704-CR Infiltration Evaluation June 21, 2017 Newport Beach, Orange County, California Page 2 Based on our understanding of proposed development, the project will consist of the construction of a multi-family residential community consisting of approximately 14 buildings with associated landscape, parking and drive areas. The proposed structures are anticipated to be two- to three-story. Storm water infiltration systems are also proposed. It is anticipated that the systems will have a depth of up to approximately five feet below existing grade. Infiltration Testing Two test borings were excavated for infiltration purposes to five feet below ground surface with a hollow stem auger drill rig within the subject property. The two test boring locations can be seen on the Boring and Infiltration Location Map (Figure 2). Infiltration testing was performed in two of the excavations within the lower 24 inches by a representative from our firm in general conformance with the referenced document. The depths tested were intended to correlate to the bottom several feet of the projected storm water infiltration systems. The infiltration rates are presented in the following table for each of the borings after the rates had stabilized. Boring No. Approximate depth of testing (feet) Infiltration Rate (inches per hour) B-3 5 0.07 B-5 5 0.20 Copies of the percolation data sheets and conversion sheets (Porchet Method) are included in Appendix B. Given the nature of the materials encountered and infiltration rates attained in the boring excavations tested, the number of test performed should be considered adequate for preliminary design purposes. Over the lifetime of the storm water disposal areas, the infiltration rates may be affected by silt build up and biological activities, as well as local variations in near surface soil conditions. As per the Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations, a factor of safety of 2.0 should be applied to the infiltration rate for each test. MELIA HOMES Project No. 1704-CR Infiltration Evaluation June 21, 2017 Newport Beach, Orange County, California Page 3 LIMITATIONS The materials observed on the project site appear to be representative of the area; however, soil materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during site construction. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. GeoTek, Inc. assumes no responsibility or liability for work, testing or recommendations performed or provided by others. Our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are limited to the extent of the available data. Observations during construction are important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. MELIA HOMES Project No. 1704-CR Infiltration Evaluation June 21, 2017 Newport Beach, Orange County, California Page 4 The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. Respectfully submitted, GeoTek, Inc. Edward H. LaMont CEG 1892, Exp. 07/31/18 Principal Geologist Enclosures: Figure 1 – Site Location Map Figure 2 – Boring and Infiltration Location Map Appendix A – Logs of Exploratory Borings Appendix B – Percolation Data Sheets and Conversion Sheets (Porchet Method) Distribution: (1) Addressee via email (PDF file) G:\Projects\1701 to 1750\1704CR Melia Homes Mariner's Square Newport Beach\Geotechnical Investigation\1704-CR Infiltration Report.doc MELIA HOMES Project No. 1704-CR Infiltration Evaluation June 21, 2017 Newport Beach, Orange County, California Page 5 REFERENCES Morton, D.M., 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30’x60’ Quadrangle, Southern California; U.S Geological Survey Report 99-172, scale 1:100,000. Orange County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, “Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations,” dated May 19, 2011. Figure 1 Site Location Map Melia Homes Proposed Multi-family Residential Development 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach,Orange County, California GeoTek Project No. 1704-CR Modified from USGS 7.5-minute Newport Beach Topographic Map SUBJECT AREA OF DEVELOPMENT Figure 2 Boring and Infiltration Test Location Map Melia Homes Mariner’s Square 1244 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, Orange County, California GeoTek Project No. 1704-CR B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4B-5 LEGEND Approximate Location of Exploratory Boring Approximate Location of Exploratory Infiltration Test Boring SUBJECT AREA OF IMPROVEMENT APPENDIX A LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS Mariner’s Square Project Newport Beach, Orange County, California Project No. 1704-CR MELIA HOMES Project No. 1704-CR Infiltration Evaluation June 21, 2017 Newport Beach, Orange County, California Page A-1 BORING LOG LEGEND The following abbreviations and symbols often appear in the classification and description of soil and rock on the log of borings: SOILS USCS Unified Soil Classification System f-c Fine to coarse f-m Fine to medium GEOLOGIC B: Attitudes Bedding: strike/dip J: Attitudes Joint: strike/dip C: Contact line ……….. Dashed line denotes USCS material change Solid Line denotes unit / formational change Thick solid line denotes end of the boring (Additional denotations and symbols are provided on the log of boring) GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table LEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk 20 25 30 15 Trench backfilled with soil cuttings 10 5 BORING TERMINATED AT 5 FEET No groundwater encountered F sandy SILT, brown to orangish brown, moist Dry Density(pcf)Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberOthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qafc) SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-3 Laboratory Testing Water Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW GeoTek, Inc.LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING 3" AC 4" CAB ML ---Ring ---Small Bulk ---No Recovery ---Water Table LEGENDSample type:---SPT ---Large Bulk 20 25 30 15 No groundwater encountered Trench backfilled with soil cuttings 10 F-m sandy SILT, brown, moist 5 BORING TERMINATED AT 5 FEET Dry Density(pcf)OthersMATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qafc) SAMPLES USCS Symbol BORING NO.: B-5 Laboratory Testing Depth (ft)Sample TypeBlows/ 6 inSampleNumberWater Content(%)LOCATION:See Boring Location Map DATE:6/14/2017 PROJECT NO.:1704-CR HAMMER:140lb/30in RIG TYPE: PROJECT NAME:Mariners Square DRILL METHOD:Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: CLIENT:Malea Homes DRILLER:LOGGED BY:DRW APPENDIX B PERCOLATION DATA SHEETS AND CONVERSION SHEETS Mariner’s Square Project Newport Beach, Orange County, California Project No. 1704-CR Equation -It = Havg = (HO+HF)/2 = It =Inches per Hour Client:Melia Homes Project:Mariner's Square Project Initial Depth to Water, DO =7.25 Project No:1704-CR Date:6/15/2017 Boring No.B-3 Percolation Rate (Porchet Method) Time Interval,Δt =30 Final Depth to Water, DF =8.25 Test Hole Radius, r =4 0.07 Total Test Hole Depth, DT =60 ΔH (60r) Δt (r+2Havg) HO = DT - DO =52.75 HF = DT - DF =51.75 52.25 ΔH =ΔD = HO- HF =1 Equation -It = Havg = (HO+HF)/2 = It =Inches per Hour0.20 Total Test Hole Depth, DT =60 ΔH (60r) Δt (r+2Havg) HO = DT - DO =55.25 HF = DT - DF =52.5 ΔH =ΔD = HO- HF =2.75 53.875 Final Depth to Water, DF =7.5 Test Hole Radius, r =4 Initial Depth to Water, DO =4.75 Time Interval,Δt =30 Client:Melia Homes Project:Mariner's Square Project Project No:1704-CR Date:6/15/2017 Boring No.B-5 Percolation Rate (Porchet Method) ATTACHMENT E  OPERATION & MAINTENANCE PLAN     To be provided during final engineering  ATTACHMENT F  NOTICE OF TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY     Water Quality Management Plan  Notice of Transfer of Responsibility    Submission of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility constitutes notice to the City of Newport  Beach  that  responsibility  for  the Water  Quality  Management  Plan  (“WQMP”)  for  the  subject  property identified below, and implementation of that plan, is being transferred from the Previous  Owner (and his/ her agent) of the site (or a portion thereof) to the New Owner, as further described  below.    I. Previous Owner/ Previous Responsibility Party Information    Company/ Individual Name  Contact Person  Street Address  Title  City  State  Zip  Phone    II. Information about Site Transferred    Name of Project   Title of WQMP Applicable to Site:  Street Address of Site  Tract Number(s) for Site  Lot Numbers   Date WQMP Prepared (or Revised)    III. New Owner/ New Responsible Party Information    Company/ Individual Name  Contact Person  Street Address  Title  City  State  Zip  Phone    IV. Ownership Transfer Information    General Description of Site Transferred  to New Owner    General Description of Portion of Project/ Parcel  Subject to WQMP Retained by Owner (if any)  Lot/ Tract Number(s) of Site Transferred to New Owner  Remaining Lot/ Tract Number(s) to WQMP still held by Owner (if any)  Date of Ownership Transfer    Note: When the Previous Owner is transferring a Site that is a portion of a larger project/ parcel  addressed by the WQMP, as opposed to the entire project/ parcel addressed by the WQMP, the  General Description of the Site transferred and the remainder of the project/ parcel no transferred  shall be set forth as maps attached to this notice.  These maps shall show those portions of the  project/ parcel addressed by the WQMP that are transferred to the New Owner (the Transferred  Site), those portions retained by the Previous Owner, and those portions previously transferred by  the Previous Owner.  Those portions retained by the Previous Owner shall be labeled “Previous  Owner,”  and  those  portions  previously  transferred  by  the  Previous Owner shall be labeled as  “Previously Transferred.”      V. Purpose of Notice of Transfer    The purposes of this Notice of Transfer of Responsibility are: 1) to track transfer of responsibility for  implementation and amendment of the WQMP when property to which the WQMP is transferred  from the Previous Owner to the New Owner, and 2) to facilitate notification to a transferee of  property subject to a WQMP that such New Owner is now the Responsible Party of record for the  WQMP for this portions of the site that it owns.    VI. Certifications    A. Previous Owner    I certify under penalty of law that I am no longer the owner of the Transferred Site as described in  Section II above.  I have provided the New Owner with a copy of the WQMP applicable to the  Transferred Site that the New Owner is acquiring from the New Owner.    Print Name of Previous Owner  Representative    Title  Signature of Previous Owner Representative  Date        B. New Owner    I certify under penalty of law that I am the owner of the Transferred Site, as described in Section II  above, that I have been provided a copy of the WQMP, and that I  have  informed  myself  and  understand the New Owner’s responsibilities related to the WQMP, its implementation, and Best  Management Practices associated with it.  I understand that by signing this notice, the New Owner is  accepting all ongoing responsibilities for implementation and amendment of the WQMP for the  Transferred Site, which the New Owner has acquired from the Previous Owner.    Print Name of New Owner  Representative    Title  Signature of New Owner Representative  Date        ATTACHMENT G  EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS  To be provided during final engineering