Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Appendix I - Water Quality Management Plan
Alta Fontana Mixed Use Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration APPENDIX I WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan For: FONTANA APARTMENTS 14817 FOOTHILL BLVD, FONTANA, CA 92335 Prepared for: WOOD PARTNERS 11849 W. OLYMPIC BLVD, SUITE 204 LOS ANGELES, CA 90064 949-333-9026 Prepared by: URBAN RESOURCE CORPORATION 2923 SATURN STREET, UNIT H BREA, CA 92821 949-727-9095 Submittal Date: 12-14-2021 Revision Date: - Preliminary for Entitlements Complete Date:_____________________ Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Owner’s Certification Project Owner’s Certification This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for Wood Partners by Urban Resource Corporation. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the City of Fontana and the NPDES Areawide Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of a WQMP. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with San Bernardino County’s Municipal Storm Water Management Program and the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors in interest and the city/county shall be notified of the transfer. The new owner will be informed of its responsibility under this WQMP. A copy of the approved WQMP shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. “I certify under a penalty of law that the provisions (implementation, operation, maintenance, and funding) of the WQMP have been accepted and that the plan will be transferred to future successors.” . Project Data Permit/Application Number(s): Grading Permit Number(s): Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): Building Permit Number(s): CUP, SUP, and/or APN (Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): Owner’s Signature Owner Name: Joe Gambill Title Managing Director Company Wood Partners Address 11849 W. Olympic Blvd, Suite 204, Los Angeles, CA 90064 Email joe.gambill@woodpartners.com Telephone # 949-333-9026 Signature Date Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents Preparer’s Certification Project Data Permit/Application Number(s): Grading Permit Number(s): Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): Building Permit Number(s): CUP, SUP, and/or APN (Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): “The selection, sizing and design of stormwater treatment and other stormwater quality and quantity control measures in this plan were prepared under my oversight and meet the requirements of Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036.” Engineer: Terry Au, P.E. PE Stamp Below Title Principal Company Urban Resource Corporation Address 2923 Saturn Street, Unit H, Brea, CA 92821 Email terry@urbresource.com Telephone # 949-727-9095 Signature Date Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents ii Table of Contents Section 1 Discretionary Permits ......................................................................................... 1-1 Section 2 Project Description ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Information........................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Property Ownership / Management .............................................................. 2-2 2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants ................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Water Quality Credits ........……………………………………………………………………………. 2-4 Section 3 Site and Watershed Description ......................................................................... 3-1 Section 4 Best Management Practices ................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Source Control BMP ....................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Pollution Prevention.................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices ....................................................... 4-6 4.2 Project Performance Criteria ......................................................................... 4-7 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis ....................................................................... 4-12 4.3.1 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP .............................................. 4-14 4.3.2 Infiltration BMP .......................................................................................... 4-16 4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP .................................................................................. 4-18 4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP ....................................................................................... 4.19 4.3.5 Conformance Summary ............................................................................... 4-23 4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP ............................................................... 4-24 4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (if applicable) ................................................. 4-25 Section 5 Inspection & Maintenance Responsibility Post Construction BMPs ................. 5-1 Section 6 Site Plan and Drainage Plan ................................................................................ 6-1 6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan .......................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Electronic Data Submittal ............................................................................. 6-1 Forms Form 1-1 Project Information ............................................................................................... 1-1 Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project ......................................................................... 2-1 Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management ..................................................................... 2-2 Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern ......................................................................................... 2-3 Form 2.4-1 Water Quality Credits ......................................................................................... 2-4 Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features ................................................................. 3-1 Form 3-2 Hydrologic Characteristics .................................................................................... 3-2 Form 3-3 Watershed Description .......................................................................................... 3-3 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMP ................................................................... 4-2 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMP .......................................................................... 4-4 Form 4.1-3 Site Design Practices Checklist ........................................................................... 4-6 Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume ............................. 4-7 Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment .......................................................................... 4-8 Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume ............................................................... 4-9 Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration .................................................. 4-10 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents iii Form 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff .................................................................... 4-11 Form 4.3-1 Infiltration BMP Feasibility ................................................................................ 4-13 Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP ..................................................... 4-14 Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP ........................................................................................... 4-17 Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMP ......................................................................................... 4-18 Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP ................................................ 4-19 Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment – Bioretention and Planter Boxes w/Underdrains 4-20 Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment- Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention 4-21 Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment ................................................................................... 4-22 Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative Compliance Volume Estimate .......... 4-23 Form 4.3-10 Hydromodification Control BMP ..................................................................... 4-24 Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance ........................................................................ 5-1 APPENDIX A - LOCATION MAP APPENDIX B - WATER QUALITY SITE PLAN APPENDIX C - INFILTRATION RESULTS/SOILS REPORT APPENDIX D - BMP DETAILS, CALCULATIONS, AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX E - EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS APPENDIX F - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL(S) Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 1-1 Section 1 Discretionary Permit(s) Form 1-1 Project Information Project Name Rancho Cuvee Project Owner Contact Name: Joe Gambill Mailing Address: 11849 W. Olympic Blvd, Suite 204, Los Angeles, CA 90064 E-mail Address: joe.gambill@woodpartners .com Telephone: 949-333-9026 Permit/Application Number(s): Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): Additional Information/ Comments: Description of Project: The project proposes 344 dwelling units over two buildings. There are (2) 4-story residential buildings constructed on grade. Surface parking is provided to the west and to the south of each building. A Club Room, Fitness Center, leasing center, pool courtyard and four additional courtyards are proposed.. Provide summary of Conceptual WQMP conditions (if previously submitted and approved). Attach complete copy. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-1 Section 2 Project Description 2.1 Project Information This section of the WQMP should provide the information listed below. The information provided for Conceptual/ Preliminary WQMP should give sufficient detail to identify the major proposed site design and LID BMPs and other anticipated water quality features that impact site planning. Final Project WQMP must specifically identify all BMP incorporated into the final site design and provide other detailed information as described herein. The purpose of this information is to help determine the applicable development category, pollutants of concern, watershed description, and long term maintenance responsibilities for the project, and any applicable water quality credits. This information will be used in conjunction with the information in Section 3, Site Description, to establish the performance criteria and to select the LID BMP or other BMP for the project or other alternative programs that the project will participate in, which are described in Section 4. Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project 1 Development Category (Select all that apply): Significant re-development involving the addition or replacement of 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface on an already developed site New development involving the creation of 10,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface collectively over entire site Automotive repair shops with standard industrial classification (SIC) codes 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532- 7534, 7536-7539 Restaurants (with SIC code 5812) where the land area of development is 5,000 ft2 or more Hillside developments of 5,000 ft2 or more which are located on areas with known erosive soil conditions or where the natural slope is 25 percent or more Developments of 2,500 ft2 of impervious surface or more adjacent to (within 200 ft) or discharging directly into environmentally sensitive areas or waterbodies listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. Parking lots of 5,000 ft2 or more exposed to storm water Retail gasoline outlets that are either 5,000 ft2 or more, or have a projected average daily traffic of 100 or more vehicles per day Non-Priority / Non-Category Project May require source control LID BMPs and other LIP requirements. Please consult with local jurisdiction on specific requirements. 2 Project Area (ft2): 385,431sf/8.85ac. 3 Number of Dwelling Units: 344 4 SIC Code: 5 Is Project going to be phased? Yes No If yes, ensure that the WQMP evaluates each phase as a distinct DA, requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion. 6 Does Project include roads? Yes No If yes, ensure that applicable requirements for transportation projects are addressed (see Appendix A of TGD for WQMP) *NOT A TRANSPORTATION PROJECT Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-2 2.2 Property Ownership/Management Describe the ownership/management of all portions of the project and site. State whether any infrastructure will transfer to public agencies (City, County, Caltrans, etc.) after project completion. State if a homeowners or property owners association will be formed and be responsible for the long-term maintenance of project stormwater facilities. Describe any lot-level stormwater features that will be the responsibility of individual property owners. Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management Describe property ownership/management responsible for long-term maintenance of WQMP stormwater facilities: The property owner/developer is Wood Partners. Wood Partners is responsible for long term maintenance of WQMP stormwater facilities. Wood Partners may form a homeowners or property owners assocation for the long-term maintenance of project stormwater facilities. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-3 2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Determine and describe expected stormwater pollutants of concern based on land uses and site activities (refer to Table 3-3 in the TGD for WQMP). Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern Pollutant Please check: E=Expected, N=Not Expected Additional Information and Comments Pathogens (Bacterial / Virus) E N From animal or human fecal waste Nutrients - Phosphorous E N Landscape fertilizer Nutrients - Nitrogen E N Landscape fertilzer Noxious Aquatic Plants E N From landscaping Sediment E N From landscaping Metals E N From autos Oil and Grease E N From autos Trash/Debris E N From litter, outdoor activities Pesticides / Herbicides E N Pest control, landscape areas Organic Compounds E N Landscape Other: E N Other: E N Other: E N Other: E N Other: E N Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-4 2.4 Water Quality Credits A water quality credit program is applicable for certain types of development projects if it is not feasible to meet the requirements for on-site LID. Proponents for eligible projects, as described below, can apply for water quality credits that would reduce project obligations for selecting and sizing other treatment BMP or participating in other alternative compliance programs. Refer to Section 6.2 in the TGD for WQMP to determine if water quality credits are applicable for the project. Form 2.4-1 Water Quality Credits 1 Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits: Select all that apply Redevelopment projects that reduce the overall impervious footprint of the project site. [Credit = % impervious reduced] Higher density development projects Vertical density [20%] 7 units/ acre [5%] Mixed use development, (combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses which incorporate design principles that demonstrate environmental benefits not realized through single use projects) [20%] Brownfield redevelopment (redevelop real property complicated by presence or potential of hazardous contaminants) [25%] Redevelopment projects in established historic district, historic preservation area, or similar significant core city center areas [10%] Transit-oriented developments (mixed use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transportation) [20%] In-fill projects (conversion of empty lots & other underused spaces < 5 acres, substantially surrounded by urban land uses, into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas) [10%] Live-Work developments (variety of developments designed to support residential and vocational needs) [20%] 2 Total Credit % (Total all credit percentages up to a maximum allowable credit of 50 percent) Description of Water Quality Credit Eligibility (if applicable) Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-1 Section 3 Site and Watershed Description Describe the project site conditions that will facilitate the selection of BMP through an analysis of the physical conditions and limitations of the site and its receiving waters. Identify distinct drainage areas (DA) that collect flow from a portion of the site and describe how runoff from each DA (and sub-watershed DMAs) is conveyed to the site outlet(s). Refer to Section 3.2 in the TGD for WQMP. The form below is provided as an example. Then complete Forms 3.2 and 3.3 for each DA on the project site. If the project has more than one drainage area for stormwater management, then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA / outlet. Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features Site coordinates take GPS measurement at approximate center of site Latitude 34.1058 Longitude -117.4812 Thomas Bros Map page 1 San Bernardino County climatic region: Valley Mountain 2 Does the site have more than one drainage area (DA): Yes No If no, proceed to Form 3-2. If yes, then use this form to show a conceptual schematic describing DMAs and hydrologic feature connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s). An example is provided below that can be modified for proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMA and flow routing may be attached Conveyance Briefly describe on-site drainage features to convey runoff that is not retained within a DMA DMA-1 to Water Quality System #1. Peak flow Bypass to Outlet 1. Refer to Water Quality Site Plan in Appendix B for DMA-1. Approximately 8.85 acres conveyed southerly and westerly to water quality System #1 for infiltration. Large storm flows will bypass System #1 and outlet via storm drain lines to an existing channel drain located at the southwest corner of the site. The infiltration system proposed will be an underground perforated CMP storage system encased in gravel. A Contech CDS hydrodynamic separator (or approved similar) is proposed upstream of the infiltration system for pretreatment. The infiltration system will also serve as a peak flowrate detention system to mitigate increases in flows in the proposed/developed condition. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-2 Form 3-2 Existing Hydrologic Characteristics for Drainage Area 1 For Drainage Area 1’s sub-watershed DMA, provide the following characteristics DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D 1 DMA drainage area (ac.) 8.85ac. 2 Existing site impervious area (ft2) 0 3 Antecedent moisture condition For desert areas, use http://www.sbcounty.gov/dpw/floodcontrol/pdf/2 0100412_map.pdf 3 (for 100 yr storm) 4 Hydrologic soil group Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ A 5 Longest flowpath length (ft) 860 feet 6 Longest flowpath slope (ft/ft) 0.017 7 Current land cover type(s) Select from Fig C-3 of Hydrology Manual BARREN 8 Pre-developed pervious area condition: Based on the extent of wet season vegetated cover good >75%; Fair 50-75%; Poor <50% Attach photos of site to support rating POOR (SEE APPENDIX C FOR PHOTOS) Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-3 Form 3-3 Watershed Description for Drainage Area Receiving waters Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool - http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ See ‘Drainage Facilities” link at this website Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel Applicable TMDLs Refer to Local Implementation Plan None 303(d) listed impairments Refer to Local Implementation Plan and Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ and State Water Resources Control Board website – http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_iss ues/programs/tmdl/index.shtml pH, Total Nitrogen as N Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ Riversidian Alluvial Sage Scru Unlined Downstream Water Bodies Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ n/a Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Yes Complete Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) Assessment. Include Forms 4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 and Hydromodification BMP Form 4.3-10 in submittal No Watershed–based BMP included in a RWQCB approved WAP Yes Attach verification of regional BMP evaluation criteria in WAP • More Effective than On-site LID • Remaining Capacity for Project DCV • Upstream of any Water of the US • Operational at Project Completion • Long-Term Maintenance Plan No Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-1 Section 4 Best Management Practices (BMP) 4.1 Source Control BMP 4.1.1 Pollution Prevention Non-structural and structural source control BMP are required to be incorporated into all new development and significant redevelopment projects. Form 4.1-1 and 4.1-2 are used to describe specific source control BMPs used in the WQMP or to explain why a certain BMP is not applicable. Table 7-3 of the TGD for WQMP provides a list of applicable source control BMP for projects with specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities. The source control BMP in this table must be implemented for projects with these specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities. The preparers of this WQMP have reviewed the source control BMP requirements for new development and significant redevelopment projects. The preparers have also reviewed the specific BMP required for project as specified in Forms 4.1-1 and 4.1-2. All applicable non-structural and structural source control BMP shall be implemented in the project. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-2 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, if not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable N1 Education of Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants on Stormwater BMPs Prior to occupancy, Wood Partners or POA (if formed) will provide the CC&R’s (if applicable) and environmental awareness education materials to the new tenants. Educational materials are included in the Appendix. N2 Activity Restrictions Wood Partners or POA (if formed) will have the WQMP available for the tenant's needs and recommend the tenant review the WQMP. N3 Landscape Management BMPs Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall maintain landscape and irrigation on a weekly basis. N4 BMP Maintenance Wood Partners or POA (if formed) is responsible for implementating each of the stated non-structural BMPs, and shall maintain and clean all strutural BMP facilities in accordance with the Final WQMP Operations and Maintenance schedule. N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) No hazardous waste. N6 Local Water Quality Ordinances Wood Partners to comply with any City of Fontana Water Quality Ordinances. N7 Spill Contingency Plan N/A for project. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance N/A for project. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance No hazardous waste. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-3 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, if not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation No hazardous waste. N11 Litter/Debris Control Program Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall implement weekly sweeping and trash pick-up within landscape areas and outside walkways. Daily inspection of trash receptacles to ensure that lids are closed and any excess trash on the ground is picked up. N12 Employee Training Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall provide employee training monthly for both maintenance personnel and employees. N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks No loading docks. N14 Catch Basin Inspection Program Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall once a month have catch basins cleaned for debris and silt in bottom of catch basins. Intensified around October 1st of each year prior to the "first flush" storm. N15 Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and Parking Lots Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall sweep streets weekly. Intensified around October 1st of each year prior to "first flush" storm. N16 Other Non-structural Measures for Public Agency Projects n/a N17 Comply with all other applicable NPDES permits Comply with Construction General Permit. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-4 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, If not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable S1 Provide storm drain system stencilling and signage (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-13) Stencil all catch basins and brooks boxes in streets. S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-34) No outdoor material storage areas. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-32) No proposed outdoor trash and waste storage areas. S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control (Statewide Model Landscape Ordinance; CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) Wood Partners or POA (if formed) shall monitor landscape irrigation areas weekly in conjunction with maintenance activities. Verify that runoff minimizing landscape design continues to function by checking that water sensors are functioning properly, that irrigation heads are adjusted properly to eliminate overspray in hardscape areas, and to verify that irrigation timing and cycle lengths are adjusted in accordance with water demands, given time of year, weather and day or night time temperatures. S5 Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement Where possible, finish grade of landscapes areas will be set a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or hardscape. S6 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) Slopes shall be landscaped. S7 Covered dock areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-31) No dock areas. S8 Covered maintenance bays with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-31) No maintenance bays. S9 Vehicle wash areas with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No vehicle wash areas. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-5 S10 Covered outdoor processing areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-36) No outdoor processing areas. Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, If not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable S11 Equipment wash areas with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No equipment wash areas S12 Fueling areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-30) No fueling areas. S13 Hillside landscaping (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) Any slopes shall be landscaped. S14 Wash water control for food preparation areas Sinks provided for any proposed outdoor wash areas. Connected to sewer S15 Community car wash racks (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No car wash racks Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-6 4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices Site design practices associated with new LID requirements in the MS4 Permit should be considered in the earliest phases of a project. Preventative site design practices can result in smaller DCV for LID BMP and hydromodification control BMP by reducing runoff generation. Describe site design and drainage plan including: Refer to Section 5.2 of the TGD for WQMP for more details. Form 4.1-3 Preventative LID Site Design Practices Checklist Site Design Practices If yes, explain how preventative site design practice is addressed in project site plan. If no, other LID BMPs must be selected to meet targets Minimize impervious areas: Yes No Explanation: Landscaping proposed around buildings. Maximize natural infiltration capacity: Yes No Explanation: Landscaping proposed around buildings. Infiltration proposed to meet LID requirements. Preserve existing drainage patterns and time of concentration: Yes No Explanation: Detention system proposed to reduce peak flow rates for the 100 year storm event to reduce flows down to existing condition flows before discharging to existing storm drain in Foothill Blvd. Disconnect impervious areas: Yes No Explanation: Where possible, hardscape and impervious surface will drains to landscaping prior to entering the site storm drain system. Protect existing vegetation and sensitive areas: Yes No Explanation: No existing vegetation or sensitive areas to protect. Re-vegetate disturbed areas: Yes No Explanation: All disturbed areas will be redeveloped. Landscaping proposed around buildings. Minimize unnecessary compaction in stormwater retention/infiltration basin/trench areas: Yes No Explanation: Areas around proposed drywells will be compacted per geotechnical recommendations. Drywells will not be compacted, but will be installed per manufacturer's recommendations. Utilize vegetated drainage swales in place of underground piping or imperviously lined swales: Yes No Explanation: Vegetated swales will be proposed as needed to convey drainage to area drains. Stake off areas that will be used for landscaping to minimize compaction during construction : Yes No Explanation: Landscape areas to be compacted per geotechnical recommendations. A narrative of site design practices utilized or rationale for not using practices A narrative of how site plan incorporates preventive site design practices Include an attached Site Plan layout which shows how preventative site design practices are included in WQMP Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-7 4.2 Project Performance Criteria The purpose of this section of the Project WQMP is to establish targets for post-development hydrology based on performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit. These targets include runoff volume for water quality control (referred to as LID design capture volume), and runoff volume, time of concentration, and peak runoff for protection of any downstream waterbody segments with a HCOC. If the project has more than one outlet for stormwater runoff, then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA / outlet. Methods applied in the following forms include: For LID BMP Design Capture Volume (DCV), the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires use of the P6 method (MS4 Permit Section XI.D.6a.ii) – Form 4.2-1 For HCOC pre- and post-development hydrologic calculation, the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires the use of the Rational Method (San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section D). Forms 4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 calculate hydrologic variables including runoff volume, time of concentration, and peak runoff from the project site pre- and post-development using the Hydrology Manual Rational Method approach. For projects greater than 640 acres (1.0 mi2), the Rational Method and these forms should not be used. For such projects, the Unit Hydrograph Method (San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section E) shall be applied for hydrologic calculations for HCOC performance criteria. Refer to Section 4 in the TGD for WQMP for detailed guidance and instructions. Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume (DMA 1) 1 Project area DMA 1 (ac.): 385,431sq ft. 2 Imperviousness after applying preventative site design practices (Imp%): 85% 3 Runoff Coefficient (Rc): _0.66 Rc = 0.858(Imp%)^3-0.78(Imp%)^2+0.774(Imp%)+0.04 4 Determine 1-hour rainfall depth for a 2-year return period P2yr-1hr (in): 0.575" http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html 5 Compute P6, Mean 6-hr Precipitation (inches): 0.8514 (Valley) P6 = Item 4 *C1, where C1 is a function of site climatic region specified in Form 3-1 Item 1 (Valley = 1.4807; Mountain = 1.909; Desert = 1.2371) 6 Drawdown Rate Use 48 hours as the default condition. Selection and use of the 24 hour drawdown time condition is subject to approval by the local jurisdiction. The necessary BMP footprint is a function of drawdown time. While shorter drawdown times reduce the performance criteria for LID BMP design capture volume, the depth of water that can be stored is also reduced. 24-hrs 48-hrs 7 Compute design capture volume, DCV (ft3): 35,498cu-ft DCV = 1/12 * [Item 1* Item 3 *Item 5 * C2], where C2 is a function of drawdown rate (24-hr = 1.582; 48-hr = 1.963) Compute separate DCV for each outlet from the project site per schematic drawn in Form 3-1 Item 2 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-8 Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume (DA 1) Weighted Curve Number Determination for: Pre-developed DA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H 1a Land Cover type N/A 2a Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) 3a DMA Area, ft2 sum of areas of DMA should equal area of DA 4a Curve Number (CN) use Items 1 and 2 to select the appropriate CN from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for WQMP Weighted Curve Number Determination for: Post-developed DA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H 1b Land Cover type 2b Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment (DA 1) Does project have the potential to cause or contribute to an HCOC in a downstream channel: Yes No Go to: http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ If “Yes”, then complete HCOC assessment of site hydrology for 2yr storm event using Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 and insert results below (Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 may be replaced by computer software analysis based on the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual) If “No,” then proceed to Section 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis Condition Runoff Volume (ft3) Time of Concentration (min) Peak Runoff (cfs) Pre-developed 1 N/A Form 4.2-3 Item 12 2 Form 4.2-4 Item 13 3 Form 4.2-5 Item 10 Post-developed 4 Form 4.2-3 Item 13 5 Form 4.2-4 Item 14 6 Form 4.2-5 Item 14 Difference 7 Item 4 – Item 1 8 Item 2 – Item 5 9 Item 6 – Item 3 Difference (as % of pre-developed) 10 % Item 7 / Item 1 11 % Item 8 / Item 2 12 % Item 9 / Item 3 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-9 3b DMA Area, ft2 sum of areas of DMA should equal area of DA 4b Curve Number (CN) use Items 5 and 6 to select the appropriate CN from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for WQMP 5 Pre-Developed area-weighted CN: 7 Pre-developed soil storage capacity, S (in): S = (1000 / Item 5) - 10 9 Initial abstraction, Ia (in): Ia = 0.2 * Item 7 6 Post-Developed area-weighted CN: 8 Post-developed soil storage capacity, S (in): S = (1000 / Item 6) - 10 10 Initial abstraction, Ia (in): Ia = 0.2 * Item 8 11 Precipitation for 2 yr, 24 hr storm (in): Go to: http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html 12 Pre-developed Volume (ft3): Vpre =(1 / 12) * (Item sum of Item 3) * [(Item 11 – Item 9)^2 / ((Item 11 – Item 9 + Item 7) 13 Post-developed Volume (ft3): Vpre =(1 / 12) * (Item sum of Item 3) * [(Item 11 – Item 10)^2 / ((Item 11 – Item 10 + Item 8) 14 Volume Reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement, (ft3): VHCOC = (Item 13 * 0.95) – Item 12 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-10 Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration (DA 1) Compute time of concentration for pre and post developed conditions for each DA (For projects using the Hydrology Manual complete the form below) Variables Pre-developed DA1 Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA Post-developed DA1 Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D 1 Length of flowpath (ft) Use Form 3-2 Item 5 for pre-developed condition N/A 2 Change in elevation (ft) 3 Slope (ft/ft), So = Item 2 / Item 1 4 Land cover 5 Initial DMA Time of Concentration (min) Appendix C-1 of the TGD for WQMP 6 Length of conveyance from DMA outlet to project site outlet (ft) May be zero if DMA outlet is at project site outlet 7 Cross-sectional area of channel (ft2) 8 Wetted perimeter of channel (ft) 9 Manning’s roughness of channel (n) 10 Channel flow velocity (ft/sec) Vfps = (1.49 / Item 9) * (Item 7/Item 8)^0.67 * (Item 3)^0.5 11 Travel time to outlet (min) Tt = Item 6 / (Item 10 * 60) 12 Total time of concentration (min) Tc = Item 5 + Item 11 13 Pre-developed time of concentration (min): Minimum of Item 12 pre-developed DMA 14 Post-developed time of concentration (min): Minimum of Item 12 post-developed DMA 15 Additional time of concentration needed to meet HCOC requirement (min): TC-HCOC = (Item 13 * 0.95) – Item 14 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-11 Form 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff (DA 1) Compute peak runoff for pre- and post-developed conditions Variables Pre-developed DA to Project Outlet (Use additional forms if more than 3 DMA) Post-developed DA to Project Outlet (Use additional forms if more than 3 DMA) DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA A DMA B DMA C 1 Rainfall Intensity for storm duration equal to time of concentration Ipeak = 10^(LOG Form 4.2-1 Item 4 - 0.6 LOG Form 4.2-4 Item 5 /60) N/A 2 Drainage Area of each DMA (Acres) For DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 3 Ratio of pervious area to total area For DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 4 Pervious area infiltration rate (in/hr) Use pervious area CN and antecedent moisture condition with Appendix C-3 of the TGD for WQMP 5 Maximum loss rate (in/hr) Fm = Item 3 * Item 4 Use area-weighted Fm from DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 6 Peak Flow from DMA (cfs) Qp =Item 2 * 0.9 * (Item 1 - Item 5) 7 Time of concentration adjustment factor for other DMA to site discharge point Form 4.2-4 Item 12 DMA / Other DMA upstream of site discharge point (If ratio is greater than 1.0, then use maximum value of 1.0) DMA A n/a n/a DMA B n/a n/a DMA C n/a n/a 8 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: Qp = Item 6DMAA + [Item 6DMAB * (Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAB)/(Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAB)* Item 7DMAA/2] + [Item 6DMAC * (Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAC)/(Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAC)* Item 7DMAA/3] 9 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: Qp = Item 6DMAB + [Item 6DMAA * (Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAA)/(Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAA)* Item 7DMAB/1] + [Item 6DMAC * (Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAC)/(Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAC)* Item 7DMAB/3] 10 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA C: Qp = Item 6DMAC + [Item 6DMAA * (Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAA)/(Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAA)* Item 7DMAC/1] + [Item 6DMAB * (Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAB)/(Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAB)* Item 7DMAC/2] 10 Peak runoff from pre-developed condition confluence analysis (cfs): Maximum of Item 8, 9, and 10 (including additional forms as needed) 11 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: Same as Item 8 for post-developed values 12 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: Same as Item 9 for post-developed values 13 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA C: Same as Item 10 for post-developed values 14 Peak runoff from post-developed condition confluence analysis (cfs): Maximum of Item 11, 12, and 13 (including additional forms as needed) 15 Peak runoff reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement (cfs): Qp-HCOC = (Item 14 * 0.95) – Item 10 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-12 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis Complete the following forms for each project site DA to document that the proposed LID BMPs conform to the project DCV developed to meet performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit (WQMP Template Section 4.2). For the LID DCV, the forms are ordered according to hierarchy of BMP selection as required by the MS4 Permit (see Section 5.3.1 in the TGD for WQMP). The forms compute the following for on-site LID BMP: Site Design and Hydrologic Source Controls (Form 4.3-2) Retention and Infiltration (Form 4.3-3) Harvested and Use (Form 4.3-4) or Biotreatment (Form 4.3-5). At the end of each form, additional fields facilitate the determination of the extent of mitigation provided by the specific BMP category, allowing for use of the next category of BMP in the hierarchy, if necessary. The first step in the analysis, using Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP, is to complete Forms 4.3-1 and 4.3-3) to determine if retention and infiltration BMPs are infeasible for the project. For each feasibility criterion in Form 4.3-1, if the answer is “Yes,” provide all study findings that includes relevant calculations, maps, data sources, etc. used to make the determination of infeasibility. Next, complete Forms 4.3-2 and 4.3-4 to determine the feasibility of applicable HSC and harvest and use BMPs, and, if their implementation is feasible, the extent of mitigation of the DCV. If no site constraints exist that would limit the type of BMP to be implemented in a DA, evaluate the use of combinations of LID BMPs, including all applicable HSC BMPs to maximize on-site retention of the DCV. If no combination of BMP can mitigate the entire DCV, implement the single BMP type, or combination of BMP types, that maximizes on-site retention of the DCV within the minimum effective area. If the combination of LID HSC, retention and infiltration, and harvest and use BMPs are unable to mitigate the entire DCV, then biotreatment BMPs may be implemented by the project proponent. If biotreatment BMPs are used, then they must be sized to provide sufficient capacity for effective treatment of the remainder of the volume-based performance criteria that cannot be achieved with LID BMPs (TGD for WQMP Section 5.4.4.2). Under no circumstances shall any portion of the DCV be released from the site without effective mitigation and/or treatment. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-13 Form 4.3-1 Infiltration BMP Feasibility (DA 1) Feasibility Criterion – Complete evaluation for each DA on the Project Site 1 Would infiltration BMP pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Yes No Refer to Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 2 Would installation of infiltration BMP significantly increase the risk of geotechnical hazards? Yes No (Yes, if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert): • The location is less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent • The location is less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback. • A study certified by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study determines that stormwater infiltration would result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards. If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 3 Would infiltration of runoff on a Project site violate downstream water rights? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on hydrologic soil group (HSG) D soils or does the site geotechnical investigation indicate presence of soil characteristics, which support categorization as D soils? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 5 Is the design infiltration rate, after accounting for safety factor of 2.0, below proposed facility less than 0.3 in/hr (accounting for soil amendments)? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 6 Would on-site infiltration or reduction of runoff over pre-developed conditions be partially or fully inconsistent with watershed management strategies as defined in the WAP, or impair beneficial uses? Yes No See Section 3.5 of the TGD for WQMP and WAP If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 7 Any answer from Item 1 through Item 3 is “Yes”: Yes No If yes, infiltration of any volume is not feasible onsite. Proceed to Form 4.3-4, Harvest and Use BMP. If no, then proceed to Item 8 below. 8 Any answer from Item 4 through Item 6 is “Yes”: Yes No If yes, infiltration is permissible but is not required to be considered. Proceed to Form 4.3-2, Hydrologic Source Control BMP. If no, then proceed to Item 9, below. 9 All answers to Item 1 through Item 6 are “No”: Infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, LID infiltration BMP must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the MEP. Proceed to Form 4.3-2, Hydrologic Source Control BMP. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-14 4.3.1 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP Section XI.E. of the Permit emphasizes the use of LID preventative measures; and the use of LID HSC BMPs reduces the portion of the DCV that must be addressed in downstream BMPs. Therefore, all applicable HSC shall be provided except where they are mutually exclusive with each other, or with other BMPs. Mutual exclusivity may result from overlapping BMP footprints such that either would be potentially feasible by itself, but both could not be implemented. Please note that while there are no numeric standards regarding the use of HSC, if a project cannot feasibly meet BMP sizing requirements or cannot fully address HCOCs, feasibility of all applicable HSC must be part of demonstrating that the BMP system has been designed to retain the maximum feasible portion of the DCV. Complete Form 4.3-2 to identify and calculate estimated retention volume from implementing site design HSC BMP. Refer to Section 5.4.1 in the TGD for more detailed guidance. Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA 1) 1 Implementation of Impervious Area Dispersion BMP (i.e. routing runoff from impervious to pervious areas), excluding impervious areas planned for routing to on-lot infiltration BMP: Yes No If yes, complete Items 2-5; If no, proceed to Item 6 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 2 Total impervious area draining to pervious area (ft2) 3 Ratio of pervious area receiving runoff to impervious area 4 Retention volume achieved from impervious area dispersion (ft3) V = Item2 * Item 3 * (0.5/12), assuming retention of 0.5 inches of runoff 5 Sum of retention volume achieved from impervious area dispersion (ft3): Vretention =Sum of Item 4 for all BMPs 6 Implementation of Localized On-lot Infiltration BMPs (e.g. on-lot rain gardens): Yes No If yes, complete Items 7- 13 for aggregate of all on-lot infiltration BMP in each DA; If no, proceed to Item 14 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 7 Ponding surface area (ft2) 8 Ponding depth (ft) 9 Surface area of amended soil/gravel (ft2) 10 Average depth of amended soil/gravel (ft) 11 Average porosity of amended soil/gravel 12 Retention volume achieved from on-lot infiltration (ft3) Vretention = (Item 7 *Item 8) + (Item 9 * Item 10 * Item 11) 13 Runoff volume retention from on-lot infiltration (ft3): Vretention =Sum of Item 12 for all BMPs Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-15 Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA 1) Form 4.3-2 cont. Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA 1) 14 Implementation of evapotranspiration BMP (green, brown, or blue roofs): Yes No If yes, complete Items 15-20. If no, proceed to Item 21 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 15 Rooftop area planned for ET BMP (ft2) 16 Average wet season ET demand (in/day) Use local values, typical ~ 0.1 17 Daily ET demand (ft3/day) Item 15 * (Item 16 / 12) 18 Drawdown time (hrs) Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1 19 Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Item 17 * (Item 18 / 24) 20 Runoff volume retention from evapotranspiration BMPs (ft3): Vretention =Sum of Item 19 for all BMPs 21 Implementation of Street Trees: Yes No If yes, complete Items 22-25. If no, proceed to Item 26 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 22 Number of Street Trees 23 Average canopy cover over impervious area (ft2) 24 Runoff volume retention from street trees (ft3) Vretention = Item 22 * Item 23 * (0.05/12) assume runoff retention of 0.05 inches 25 Runoff volume retention from street tree BMPs (ft3): Vretention = Sum of Item 24 for all BMPs 26 Implementation of residential rain barrel/cisterns: Yes No If yes, complete Items 27-29; If no, proceed to Item 30 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 27 Number of rain barrels/cisterns 28 Runoff volume retention from rain barrels/cisterns (ft3) Vretention = Item 27 * 3 29 Runoff volume retention from residential rain barrels/Cisterns (ft3): Vretention =Sum of Item 28 for all BMPs 30 Total Retention Volume from Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs: Sum of Items 5, 13, 20, 25 and 29 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-16 4.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Use Form 4.3-3 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed retention and infiltration BMPs. Volume retention estimates are sensitive to the percolation rate used, which determines the amount of runoff that can be infiltrated within the specified drawdown time. The infiltration safety factor reduces field measured percolation to account for potential inaccuracy associated with field measurements, declining BMP performance over time, and compaction during construction. Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP provides guidance on estimating an appropriate safety factor to use in Form 4.3-3. If site constraints limit the use of BMPs to a single type and implementation of retention and infiltration BMPs mitigate no more than 40% of the DCV, then they are considered infeasible and the Project Proponent may evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs lower in the LID hierarchy of use (Section 5.5.1 of the TGD for WQMP) If implementation of infiltrations BMPs is feasible as determined using Form 4.3-1, then LID infiltration BMPs shall be implemented to the MEP (section 4.1 of the TGD for WQMP). Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-17 Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP - including underground BMPs (DMA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC BMP (ft3): See calcs in Appendix D Vunmet = Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 BMP Type Use columns to the right to compute runoff volume retention from proposed infiltration BMP (select BMP from Table 5-4 in TGD for WQMP) - Use additional forms for more BMPs DA DMA 1 BMP Type UNDERGROUND PERFORATED 96" CMP WITH GRAVEL 2 Infiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) See Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP for minimum requirements for assessment methods 8.92"/hr (Near Infiltration Test Location #B3) 3 Infiltration safety factor See TGD Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D 3 4 Design percolation rate (in/hr) Pdesign = Item 2 / Item 3 2.97 in/hr 5 Ponded water drawdown time (hr) Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1 16.5 hr 6 Maximum ponding depth (ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details See calcs in Appendix D 7 Ponding Depth (ft) dBMP = Minimum of (1/12*Item 4*Item 5) or Item 6 8 Infiltrating surface area, SABMP (ft2) the lesser of the area needed for infiltration of full DCV or minimum space requirements from Table 5.7 of the TGD for WQMP 9 Amended soil depth, dmedia (ft) Only included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 in the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 10 Amended soil porosity 11 Gravel depth, dmedia (ft) Only included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details 12 Gravel porosity 13 Duration of storm as basin is filling (hrs) Typical ~ 3hrs 14 Above Ground Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) + (Item 13 * (Item 4 / 12))] 15 Underground Retention Volume (ft3) Volume determined using manufacturer’s specifications and calculations 16 Total Retention Volume from LID Infiltration BMPs: See calcs in Appendix D (Sum of Items 14 and 15 for all infiltration BMP included in plan) 17 Fraction of DCV achieved with infiltration BMP: 100% Retention% = Item 16 / Form 4.2-1 Item 7 18 Is full LID DCV retained onsite with combination of hydrologic source control and LID retention/infiltration BMPs? Yes No If yes, demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10; If no, then reduce Item 3, Factor of Safety to 2.0 and increase Item 8, Infiltrating Surface Area, such that the portion of the site area used for retention and infiltration BMPs equals or exceeds the minimum effective area thresholds (Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP) for the applicable category of development and repeat all above calculations. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-18 4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP Harvest and use BMP may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing infiltration BMPs. Use Form 4.3-4 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed harvest and use BMPs. Volume retention estimates for harvest and use BMPs are sensitive to the on-site demand for captured stormwater. Since irrigation water demand is low in the wet season, when most rainfall events occur in San Bernardino County, the volume of water that can be used within a specified drawdown period is relatively low. The bottom portion of Form 4.3-4 facilitates the necessary computations to show infeasibility if a minimum incremental benefit of 40 percent of the LID DCV would not be achievable with MEP implementation of on-site harvest and use of stormwater (Section 5.5.4 of the TGD for WQMP). Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMPs (DA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC or infiltration BMP (ft3): N/A Vunmet = Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 – Form 4.3-3 Item 16 BMP Type(s) Compute runoff volume retention from proposed harvest and use BMP (Select BMPs from Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP) - Use additional forms for more BMPs DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 2 Describe cistern or runoff detention facility 3 Storage volume for proposed detention type (ft3) Volume of cistern 4 Landscaped area planned for use of harvested stormwater (ft2) 5 Average wet season daily irrigation demand (in/day) Use local values, typical ~ 0.1 in/day 6 Daily water demand (ft3/day) Item 4 * (Item 5 / 12) 7 Drawdown time (hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 4.2-1 8Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Minimum of (Item 3) or (Item 6 * (Item 7 / 24)) 9 Total Retention Volume (ft3) from Harvest and Use BMP Sum of Item 8 for all harvest and use BMP included in plan 10 Is the full DCV retained with a combination of LID HSC, retention and infiltration, and harvest & use BMPs? Yes No If yes, demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10. If no, then re-evaluate combinations of all LID BMP and optimize their implementation such that the maximum portion of the DCV is retained on-site (using a single BMP type or combination of BMP types). If the full DCV cannot be mitigated after this optimization process, proceed to Section 4.3.4. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-19 4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP Biotreatment BMPs may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing retention and infiltration, and harvest and use BMPs. A key consideration when using biotreatment BMP is the effectiveness of the proposed BMP in addressing the pollutants of concern for the project (see Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP). Use Form 4.3-5 to summarize the potential for volume based and/or flow based biotreatment options to biotreat the remaining unmet LID DCV w. Biotreatment computations are included as follows: • Use Form 4.3-6 to compute biotreatment in small volume based biotreatment BMP (e.g. bioretention w/underdrains); • Use Form 4.3-7 to compute biotreatment in large volume based biotreatment BMP (e.g. constructed wetlands); • Use Form 4.3-8 to compute sizing criteria for flow-based biotreatment BMP (e.g. bioswales) Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP (DA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC, infiltration, or harvest and use BMP for potential biotreatment (ft3): Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 – Form 4.3-3 Item 16- Form 4.3-4 Item 9 List pollutants of concern Copy from Form 2.3-1. 2 Biotreatment BMP Selected (Select biotreatment BMP(s) necessary to ensure all pollutants of concern are addressed through Unit Operations and Processes, described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP) Volume-based biotreatment Use Forms 4.3-6 and 4.3-7 to compute treated volume Flow-based biotreatment Use Form 4.3-8 to compute treated volume Bioretention with underdrain Planter box with underdrain Constructed wetlands Wet extended detention Dry extended detention Vegetated swale Vegetated filter strip Proprietary biotreatment 3 Volume biotreated in volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): Form 4.3- 6 Item 15 + Form 4.3-7 Item 13 4 Compute remaining LID DCV with implementation of volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): Item 1 – Item 3 5 Remaining fraction of LID DCV for sizing flow based biotreatment BMP: % Item 4 / Item 1 6 Flow-based biotreatment BMP capacity provided (cfs): Use Figure 5-2 of the TGD for WQMP to determine flow capacity required to provide biotreatment of remaining percentage of unmet LID DCV (Item 5), for the project’s precipitation zone (Form 3-1 Item 1) 7 Metrics for MEP determination: • Provided a WQMP with the portion of site area used for suite of LID BMP equal to minimum thresholds in Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP for the proposed category of development: If maximized on-site retention BMPs is feasible for partial capture, then LID BMP implementation must be optimized to retain and infiltrate the maximum portion of the DCV possible within the prescribed minimum effective area. The remaining portion of the DCV shall then be mitigated using biotreatment BMP. Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-20 Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment (DA 1) – Bioretention and Planter Boxes with Underdrains Biotreatment BMP Type (Bioretention w/underdrain, planter box w/underdrain, other comparable BMP) DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP 2 Amended soil infiltration rate Typical ~ 5.0 3 Amended soil infiltration safety factor Typical ~ 2.0 4 Amended soil design percolation rate (in/hr) Pdesign = Item 2 / Item 3 5 Ponded water drawdown time (hr) Copy Item 6 from Form 4.2-1 6 Maximum ponding depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 7 Ponding Depth (ft) dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 4 * Item 5) or Item 6 8 Amended soil surface area (ft2) 9 Amended soil depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 10 Amended soil porosity, n 11 Gravel depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 12 Gravel porosity, n 13 Duration of storm as basin is filling (hrs) Typical ~ 3hrs 14 Biotreated Volume (ft3) Vbiotreated = Item 8 * [(Item 7/2) + (Item 9 * Item 10) +(Item 11 * Item 12) + (Item 13 * (Item 4 / 12))] 15 Total biotreated volume from bioretention and/or planter box with underdrains BMP: Sum of Item 14 for all volume-based BMPs included in this form Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-21 Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment (DA 1) – Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention Biotreatment BMP Type Constructed wetlands, extended wet detention, extended dry detention, or other comparable proprietary BMP. If BMP includes multiple modules (e.g. forebay and main basin), provide separate estimates for storage and pollutants treated in each module. DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) Forebay Basin Forebay Basin 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP forebay and basin List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP 2 Bottom width (ft) 3 Bottom length (ft) 4 Bottom area (ft2) Abottom = Item 2 * Item 3 5 Side slope (ft/ft) 6 Depth of storage (ft) 7 Water surface area (ft2) Asurface =(Item 2 + (2 * Item 5 * Item 6)) * (Item 3 + (2 * Item 5 * Item 6)) 8 Storage volume (ft3) For BMP with a forebay, ensure fraction of total storage is within ranges specified in BMP specific fact sheets, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details V =Item 6 / 3 * [Item 4 + Item 7 + (Item 4 * Item 7)^0.5] 9 Drawdown Time (hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 2.1 10 Outflow rate (cfs) QBMP = (Item 8forebay + Item 8basin) / (Item 9 * 3600) 11 Duration of design storm event (hrs) 12 Biotreated Volume (ft3) Vbiotreated = (Item 8forebay + Item 8basin) +( Item 10 * Item 11 * 3600) 13 Total biotreated volume from constructed wetlands, extended dry detention, or extended wet detention : (Sum of Item 12 for all BMP included in plan) Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-22 Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment (DA 1) Biotreatment BMP Type Vegetated swale, vegetated filter strip, or other comparable proprietary BMP DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in TGD Table 5-5 2 Flow depth for water quality treatment (ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 3 Bed slope (ft/ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 4 Manning's roughness coefficient 5 Bottom width (ft) bw = (Form 4.3-5 Item 6 * Item 4) / (1.49 * Item 2^1.67 * Item 3^0.5) 6 Side Slope (ft/ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 7 Cross sectional area (ft2) A = (Item 5 * Item 2) + (Item 6 * Item 2^2) 8 Water quality flow velocity (ft/sec) V = Form 4.3-5 Item 6 / Item 7 9 Hydraulic residence time (min) Pollutant specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 10 Length of flow based BMP (ft) L = Item 8 * Item 9 * 60 11 Water surface area at water quality flow depth (ft2) SAtop = (Item 5 + (2 * Item 2 * Item 6)) * Item 10 Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-23 4.3.5 Conformance Summary Complete Form 4.3-9 to demonstrate how on-site LID DCV is met with proposed site design hydrologic source control, infiltration, harvest and use, and/or biotreatment BMP. The bottom line of the form is used to describe the basis for infeasibility determination for on-site LID BMP to achieve full LID DCV, and provides methods for computing remaining volume to be addressed in an alternative compliance plan. If the project has more than one outlet, then complete additional versions of this form for each outlet. Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative Compliance Volume Estimate (DMA 1) 1 Total LID DCV for the Project DMA-1 (ft3): 35,498cu-ft Copy Item 7 in Form 4.2-1 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control LID BMP (ft3): - Copy Item 30 in Form 4.3-2 3 On-site retention with LID infiltration BMP (ft3): 36,193cu-ft Copy Item 16 in Form 4.3-3 4 On-site retention with LID harvest and use BMP (ft3): - Copy Item 9 in Form 4.3-4 5 On-site biotreatment with volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): - Copy Item 3 in Form 4.3-5 6 Flow capacity provided by flow based biotreatment BMP (cfs): - Copy Item 6 in Form 4.3-5 7 LID BMP performance criteria are achieved if answer to any of the following is “Yes”: • Full retention of LID DCV with site design HSC, infiltration, or harvest and use BMP: Yes No If yes, sum of Items 2, 3, and 4 is greater than Item 1 • Combination of on-site retention BMPs for a portion of the LID DCV and volume-based biotreatment BMP that address all pollutants of concern for the remaining LID DCV: Yes No If yes, a) sum of Items 2, 3, 4, and 5 is greater than Item 1, and Items 2, 3 and 4 are maximized; or b) Item 6 is greater than Form 4.3--5 Item 6 and Items 2, 3 and 4 are maximized On-site retention and infiltration is determined to be infeasible and biotreatment BMP provide biotreatment for all pollutants of concern for full LID DCV: Yes No If yes, Form 4.3-1 Items 7 and 8 were both checked yes 8 If the LID DCV is not achieved by any of these means, then the project may be allowed to develop an alternative compliance plan. Check box that describes the scenario which caused the need for alternative compliance: • Combination of HSC, retention and infiltration, harvest and use, and biotreatment BMPs provide less than full LID DCV capture: Checked yes for Form 4.3-5 Item 7, Item 6 is zero, and sum of Items 2, 3, 4, and 5 is less than Item 1. If so, apply water quality credits and calculate volume for alternative compliance, Valt = (Item 1 – Item 2 – Item 3 – Item 4 – Item 5) * (100 - Form 2.4-1 Item 2)% • An approved Watershed Action Plan (WAP) demonstrates that water quality and hydrologic impacts of urbanization are more effective when managed in at an off-site facility: Attach appropriate WAP section, including technical documentation, showing effectiveness comparisons for the project site and regional watershed Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-24 4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP Use Form 4.3-10 to compute the remaining runoff volume retention, after LID BMP are implemented, needed to address HCOC, and the increase in time of concentration and decrease in peak runoff necessary to meet targets for protection of waterbodies with a potential HCOC. Describe hydromodification control BMP that address HCOC, which may include off-site BMP and/or in-stream controls. Section 5.6 of the TGD for WQMP provides additional details on selection and evaluation of hydromodification control BMP. Form 4.3-10 Hydromodification Control BMPs (DA 1) 1 Volume reduction needed for HCOC performance criteria (ft3): (Form 4.2-2 Item 4 * 0.95) – Form 4.2-2 Item 1 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control, infiltration, and harvest and use LID BMP (ft3): Sum of Form 4.3-9 Items 2, 3, and 4 Evaluate option to increase implementation of on-site retention in Forms 4.3-2, 4.3-3, and 4.3-4 in excess of LID DCV toward achieving HCOC volume reduction 3 Remaining volume for HCOC volume capture (ft3): Item 1 – Item 2 4 Volume capture provided by incorporating additional on-site or off-site retention BMPs (ft3): Existing downstream BMP may be used to demonstrate additional volume capture (if so, attach to this WQMP a hydrologic analysis showing how the additional volume would be retained during a 2-yr storm event for the regional watershed) 5 If Item 4 is less than Item 3, incorporate in-stream controls on downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification Attach in-stream control BMP selection and evaluation to this WQMP 6 Is Form 4.2-2 Item 11 less than or equal to 5%: Yes No If yes, HCOC performance criteria is achieved. If no, select one or more mitigation options below: • Demonstrate increase in time of concentration achieved by proposed LID site design, LID BMP, and additional on-site or off-site retention BMP BMP upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate increased time of concentration through hydrograph attenuation (if so, show that the hydraulic residence time provided in BMP for a 2-year storm event is equal or greater than the addition time of concentration requirement in Form 4.2-4 Item 15) • Increase time of concentration by preserving pre-developed flow path and/or increase travel time by reducing slope and increasing cross-sectional area and roughness for proposed on-site conveyance facilities • Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification, in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California 7 Form 4.2-2 Item 12 less than or equal to 5%: Yes No If yes, HCOC performance criteria is achieved. If no, select one or more mitigation options below: • Demonstrate reduction in peak runoff achieved by proposed LID site design, LID BMPs, and additional on-site or off- site retention BMPs BMPs upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate additional peak runoff reduction through hydrograph attenuation (if so, attach to this WQMP, a hydrograph analysis showing how the peak runoff would be reduced during a 2-yr storm event) • Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification, in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-25 4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (if applicable) Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable) for projects not fully able to infiltrate, harvest and use, or biotreat the DCV via on-site LID practices. A project proponent must develop an alternative compliance plan to address the remainder of the LID DCV. Depending on project type some projects may qualify for water quality credits that can be applied to reduce the DCV that must be treated prior to development of an alternative compliance plan (see Form 2.4-1, Water Quality Credits). Form 4.3-9 Item 8 includes instructions on how to apply water quality credits when computing the DCV that must be met through alternative compliance. Alternative compliance plans may include one or more of the following elements: • On-site structural treatment control BMP - All treatment control BMP should be located as close to possible to the pollutant sources and should not be located within receiving waters; • Off-site structural treatment control BMP - Pollutant removal should occur prior to discharge of runoff to receiving waters; • Urban runoff fund or In-lieu program, if available Depending upon the proposed alternative compliance plan, approval by the executive officer may or may not be required (see Section 6 of the TGD for WQMP). Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 5-1 Section 5 Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP All BMP included as part of the project WQMP are required to be maintained through regular scheduled inspection and maintenance (refer to Section 8, Post Construction BMP Requirements, in the TGD for WQMP). Fully complete Form 5-1 summarizing all BMP included in the WQMP. Attach additional forms as needed. The WQMP shall also include a detailed Operation and Maintenance Plan for all BMP and may require a Maintenance Agreement (consult the jurisdiction’s LIP). If a Maintenance Agreement is required, it must also be attached to the WQMP. Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance (use additional forms as necessary) BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Underground Perforated CMP Infiltration System Wood Partners or POA (if formed) Refer to BMP Factsheet Operation and Maintenance recommendations in Appendix F. Contech CDS Unit Wood Partners or POA (if formed) Refer to Contech CDS Inspection and Maintenance Guide in Appendix F. 6-1 Section 6 WQMP Attachments 6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan Include a site plan and drainage plan sheet set containing the following minimum information: 6.2 Electronic Data Submittal Minimum requirements include submittal of PDF exhibits in addition to hard copies. Format must not require specialized software to open. If the local jurisdiction requires specialized electronic document formats (as described in their local Local Implementation Plan), this section will describe the contents (e.g., layering, nomenclature, geo-referencing, etc.) of these documents so that they may be interpreted efficiently and accurately. 6.3 Post Construction Attach all O&M Plans and Maintenance Agreements for BMP to the WQMP. 6.4 Other Supporting Documentation BMP Educational Materials Activity Restriction – C, C&R’s & Lease Agreements Project location Site boundary Land uses and land covers, as applicable Suitability/feasibility constraints Structural Source Control BMP locations Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP locations LID BMP details Drainage delineations and flow information Drainage connections APPENDIX A LOCATION MAP APPENDIX B WATER QUALITY SITE PLAN 949-727-9095 PHONE2923 SATURN STREET, UNIT HBREA, CA 92821 APPENDIX C INFILTRATION RESULTS/SOILS REPORT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR CRP/WP ALTA FONTANA VENTURE, LLC LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. W1450-06-01 NOVEMBER 22, 2021 Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 CRP/WP Alta Fontana Venture, LLC 11849 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 204 Los Angeles, California 90064 Attention: Mr. Adam Karaczynski Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA, CALIFORNIA APN’s: 023007103 & 023007104 Dear Mr. Karaczynski, In accordance with your authorization of our proposal dated June 15, 2021, we have prepared this geotechnical investigation report for the proposed multi-family residential development located at 14817 Foothill Boulevard in the City of Fontana, California. The accompanying report presents the findings of our study and our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of proposed design and construction. Based on the results of our investigation, it is our opinion that the site can be developed as proposed, provided the recommendations of this report are followed and implemented during design and construction. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, GEOCON WEST, INC. Joseph Hicks Project Engineer Neal Berliner GE 2576 Susan Kirkgard CEG 1754 (EMAIL) Addressee TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 1 2. SITE CONDITIONS & PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................... 1 3. GEOLOGIC SETTING .................................................................................................................... 2 4. GEOLOGIC MATERIALS .............................................................................................................. 2 4.1 Artificial Fill .......................................................................................................................... 2 4.2 Alluvium ................................................................................................................................ 3 5. GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................................... 3 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................................. 4 6.1 Surface Fault Rupture ............................................................................................................ 4 6.2 Seismicity ............................................................................................................................... 5 6.3 Seismic Design Criteria ......................................................................................................... 6 6.4 Liquefaction Potential ............................................................................................................ 8 6.5 Slope Stability ........................................................................................................................ 8 6.6 Earthquake-Induced Flooding ................................................................................................ 8 6.7 Tsunamis, Seiches and Flooding ............................................................................................ 9 6.8 Oil Fields & Methane ............................................................................................................. 9 6.9 Subsidence ............................................................................................................................. 9 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 10 7.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 10 7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ..................................................................................... 12 7.3 Minimum Resistivity, pH, and Water-Soluble Sulfate ........................................................ 13 7.4 Grading ................................................................................................................................ 13 7.5 Shrinkage ............................................................................................................................. 16 7.6 Foundation Design ............................................................................................................... 16 7.7 Foundation Settlement ......................................................................................................... 18 7.8 Miscellaneous Foundations .................................................................................................. 18 7.9 Lateral Design ...................................................................................................................... 19 7.10 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade ..................................................................................................... 19 7.11 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations ........................................................................... 20 7.12 Retaining Wall Design ......................................................................................................... 22 7.13 Retaining Wall Drainage ...................................................................................................... 24 7.14 Elevator Pit Design .............................................................................................................. 25 7.15 Elevator Piston ..................................................................................................................... 25 7.16 Temporary Excavations ....................................................................................................... 26 7.17 Stormwater Infiltration ......................................................................................................... 26 7.18 Surface Drainage .................................................................................................................. 28 7.19 Plan Review ......................................................................................................................... 28 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS LIST OF REFERENCES TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) MAPS, TABLES, AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Site Plan Figure 3, Regional Fault Map Figure 4, Regional Seismicity Map Figures 5 and 6, Retaining Wall Drain Detail Figures 7 through 9, Percolation Test Results APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figures A1 through A5, Boring Logs Figures A6 through A16, Test Pit Logs APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Figures B1 through B5, Direct Shear Test Results Figures B6 through B13, Consolidation Test Results Figures B14 and B15, Expansion Index Test Results Figure B16, Modified Compaction Test Results Figure B17, Corrosivity Test Results Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for a proposed multi-family residential development located at 14817 Foothill Boulevard in the City of Fontana, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate subsurface soil and geologic conditions underlying the property, and based on conditions encountered, to provide conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of proposed design and construction. The scope of this investigation included a site reconnaissance, field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and the preparation of this report. The site was explored on October 18, 2021, by excavating five 8-inch diameter borings using a truck-mounted hollow stem auger drilling machine. The borings were excavated to depths of 20½ and 50½ feet below existing ground surface. The site was also explored on October 20, 2021, by excavating nine test pits utilizing a backhoe. The test pits were excavated to depths of 4½ to 7½ feet below existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the exploratory borings are depicted on the Site Plan (Figure 2). A detailed discussion of the field investigation, including boring logs, is presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained during the investigation to determine pertinent physical and chemical soil properties. Appendix B presents a summary of the laboratory test results. The recommendations presented herein are based on analysis of the data obtained during the investigation and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. References reviewed to prepare this report are provided in the List of References section. If project details vary significantly from those described herein, Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report. 2. SITE CONDITIONS & PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at 14817 Foothill Boulevard in the City of Fontana, California. The site consists of an approximately 8.8 acre parcel that is undeveloped. The site is bounded by West Foothill Boulevard to the north, by multiple single-family residential structures to the south, by Live Oak Avenue to the east, and by single-family residential structures to the west. The site is relatively level, with no pronounced highs or lows. Surface water drainage at the site appears to be by sheet flow along the existing contours with no discernable pattern. Vegetation consists of native grasses and a few trees in the northern portion of the property. Based on the preliminary information provided to us by the client, it is our understanding that the proposed development will consist of a four-story, multi-family residential structure to be constructed at or near present grade. At this time there is no preliminary layout available. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 Based on the preliminary nature of the design at this time, wall and column loads were not available. It is anticipated that column loads for the proposed structure will be up to 300 kips, and wall loads are estimated to be up to 3 kips per linear foot. Once the design phase and foundation loading configuration proceeds to a more finalized plan, the recommendations within this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. Any changes in the design, location or elevation of any structure, as outlined in this report, should be reviewed by this office. Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report. 3. GEOLOGIC SETTING The site is located in the northeastern Chino Basin in San Bernardino County, California. The Chino Basin encompasses a broad area of coalescing alluvial fans that extend southward from the San Gabriel Mountains and overlie a down-dropped structural block which is bounded by the Elsinore Fault and the Chino Fault to the southwest, by the Red Hill Fault and the San Jose Fault to the northwest, by the San Gabriel Mountains and Sierra Madre Fault Zone to the north, by the Rialto-Colton Fault to the northeast, and the La Sierra Hills and Jurupa Hills to the south and southeast. The alluvial deposits within the Chino Basin consist of Holocene age (last 11,700 years old) and Pleistocene age (11,700 to 2 million years old) alluvial sediments. Locally, a thin veneer of eolian sand locally covers areas of the basin. 4. GEOLOGIC MATERIALS Based on our field investigation and published geologic maps, the soils underlying the site consist of undocumented artificial fill material over Holocene age alluvial fan deposits consisting of cobbles, gravel, sand and silt (CGS, 2010). Detailed stratigraphic profiles are provided in the boring logs in Appendix A. 4.1 Artificial Fill The site is partially mantled by artificial fill and was encountered only in boring B-5 to a maximum depth of 2 feet below existing ground surface. The artificial fill generally consists of brown sand with gravel. The fill is characterized as fine- to medium-grained, dry to slightly moist, and medium dense. The fill is likely the result of past grading and construction activities at the site. Deeper fill may exist between excavations and in other portions of the site that were not directly explored. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 4.2 Alluvium Holocene age alluvium is present at the ground surface and beneath the artificial fill, where present at the site. As encountered in our borings, the alluvium consists of grayish brown to brown or yellowish brown well-graded to poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt, fine to coarse gravel, and cobbles. The alluvium is characterized as dry to moist and medium dense to very dense. Although not directly observed in our borings, they were observed in the test pits at the site. Cobbles (up to 12 inches) and boulders are common in this geologic environment and should be anticipated to be encountered in future excavations. 5. GROUNDWATER The site is located in the Chino Basin of the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin. A review of groundwater contour maps published by the Chino Basin Watermaster ([CBWM], 2017), the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG, 1976), and the U. S. Geological Survey (Mendenhall, 1904) indicate that the groundwater level in the immediate site vicinity has historically been greater than 300 feet beneath the ground surface since 1904. Based on current groundwater basin management practices, it is unlikely that groundwater levels will ever exceed the historic high levels. Review of groundwater monitoring well data provided by the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS, 2021) indicates closest monitoring well to the site is Local Well No. CHINO-1002215 (State Well No. 340935N1174885W001), located approximately 0.8 mile southwest of the site. Monitoring data from this well is available for the period from October 1925 through April 2017. During this time, the depth to groundwater has been approximately greater 300 feet beneath the ground surface. The most recent groundwater level measurement was recorded on April 1, 2017 and the depth to groundwater was approximately greater than 450 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was not encountered in our field explorations, drilled to a maximum depth of 50½ feet below the ground surface. Based on the reported historic groundwater levels in the site vicinity (USGS, 2021; CBWM, 2017; CDMG, 1976; Mendenhall, 1904), the lack of groundwater encountered in our borings, and the depth of proposed construction, static groundwater is neither expected to be encountered during construction, nor have a detrimental effect on the project. However, groundwater seepage may be encountered during construction. It is not uncommon for groundwater levels to vary seasonally or for groundwater seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed, especially in impermeable fine-grained soils which are heavily irrigated or after seasonal rainfall. In addition, recent requirements for stormwater infiltration could result in shallower seepage conditions in the immediate site vicinity. Proper surface drainage of irrigation and precipitation will be critical for future performance of the project. Recommendations for drainage are provided in the Surface Drainage section of this report (see Section 7.18). Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 6.1 Surface Fault Rupture The numerous faults in Southern California include Holocene-active, pre-Holocene, and inactive faults. The criteria for these major groups are based on criteria developed by the California Geological Survey (CGS, formerly known as CDMG) for the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Program (CGS, 2018a). By definition, a Holocene-active fault is one that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,700 years). A pre-Holocene fault has demonstrated surface displacement during Quaternary time (approximately the last 1.6 million years) but has had no known Holocene movement. Faults that have not moved in the last 1.6 million years are considered inactive. The site is not within a state-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS, 2021a; 2021b; City of Fontana, 2017) for surface fault rupture hazards. No Holocene-active or pre-Holocene faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are known to pass directly beneath the site. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the site during the design life of the proposed development is considered low. However, the site is located in the seismically active Southern California region and could be subjected to moderate to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake on one of the many Holocene-active Southern California faults. The faults in the vicinity of the site are shown in Figure 3, Regional Fault Map. The closest active fault to the site is the Cucamonga Fault of the Sierra Madre Fault Zone located approximately 3.7 miles to the north (USGS, 2006; Ziony and Jones, 1989). Other nearby active faults are the Red Hill Fault, the San Jacinto Fault, and the San Andreas Fault Zone located 4 miles north, 5.4 miles north-northeast, and 9.8 miles northeast of the site, respectively (USGS, 2006; Ziony and Jones, 1989). Several buried thrust faults, commonly referred to as “blind" thrusts, underlie the Southern California area, at depth. These faults are not exposed at the ground surface and are typically identified at depths greater than three kilometers. The October 1, 1987 Mw 5.9 Whittier Narrows Earthquake and the January 17, 1994 Mw 6.7 Northridge Earthquake were a result of movement on the Puente Hills Blind Thrust and the Northridge Thrust, respectively. These blind thrusts and others in the Southern California area are not exposed at the surface and do not present a potential surface fault rupture hazard. However, these buried faults are considered active features and are capable of generating future earthquakes. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 6.2 Seismicity As with all of Southern California, the site has experienced historic earthquakes from various regional faults. The seismicity of the region surrounding the site was formulated based on research of an electronic database of earthquake data. The epicenters of recorded earthquakes with magnitudes equal to or greater than 5.0 in the site vicinity are depicted on Figure 4, Regional Seismicity Map. A partial list of moderate to major magnitude earthquakes that have occurred in the Southern California area within the last 100 years is included in the following table. LIST OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES Earthquake (Oldest to Youngest) Date of Earthquake Magnitude Distance to Epicenter (Miles) Direction to Epicenter Near Redlands July 23, 1923 6.3 15 ESE Long Beach March 10, 1933 6.4 44 SW Tehachapi July 21, 1952 7.5 107 NW San Fernando February 9, 1971 6.6 57 WNW Whittier Narrows October 1, 1987 5.9 34 W Sierra Madre June 28, 1991 5.8 32 WNW Landers June 28, 1992 7.3 60 E Big Bear June 28, 1992 6.4 38 E Northridge January 17, 1994 6.7 61 W Hector Mine October 16, 1999 7.1 77 ENE Ridgecrest July 5, 2019 7.1 115 N The site could be subjected to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. However, this hazard is common in Southern California and the effects of ground shaking can be mitigated if the proposed structures are designed and constructed in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 6.3 Seismic Design Criteria The following table summarizes the site-specific design criteria obtained from the 2019 California Building Code (CBC; Based on the 2018 International Building Code [IBC] and ASCE 7-16), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613 Earthquake Loads. The data was calculated using the online application Seismic Design Maps, provided by OSHPD. The short spectral response uses a period of 0.2 second. We evaluated the Site Class based on the discussion in Section 1613.2.2 of the 2019 CBC and Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7-16. The values presented on the following page are for the risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCER). 2019 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value 2019 CBC Reference Site Class D Section 1613.2.2 MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response Acceleration – Class B (short), SS 1.939g Figure 1613.2.1(1) MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response Acceleration – Class B (1 sec), S1 0.735g Figure 1613.2.1(2) Site Coefficient, FA 1 Table 1613.2.3(1) Site Coefficient, FV 1.7* Table 1613.2.3(2) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SMS 1.939g Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-36) Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response Acceleration – (1 sec), SM1 1.25g* Section 1613.2.3 (Eqn 16-37) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SDS 1.293g Section 1613.2.4 (Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SD1 0.833g* Section 1613.2.4 (Eqn 16-39) Note: *Per Section 11.4.8 of ASCE/SEI 7-16, a ground motion hazard analysis shall be performed for projects for Site Class “E” sites with Ss greater than or equal to 1.0g and for Site Class “D” and “E” sites with S1 greater than 0.2g. Section 11.4.8 also provides exceptions which indicates that the ground motion hazard analysis may be waived provided the exceptions are followed. Using the code-based values presented in the table above, in lieu of a performing a ground motion hazard analysis, requires the exceptions outlined in ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8 be followed. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 The table below presents the mapped maximum considered geometric mean (MCEG) seismic design parameters for projects located in Seismic Design Categories of D through F in accordance with ASCE 7-16. ASCE 7-16 PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION Parameter Value ASCE 7-16 Reference Mapped MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA 0.832g Figure 22-7 Site Coefficient, FPGA 1.1 Table 11.8-1 Site Class Modified MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration, PGAM 0.915g Section 11.8.3 (Eqn 11.8-1) The Maximum Considered Earthquake Ground Motion (MCE) is the level of ground motion that has a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, with a statistical return period of 2,475 years. According to the 2019 California Building Code and ASCE 7-16, the MCE is to be utilized for the evaluation of liquefaction, lateral spreading, seismic settlements, and it is our understanding that the intent of the Building code is to maintain “Life Safety” during a MCE event. The Design Earthquake Ground Motion (DE) is the level of ground motion that has a 10 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, with a statistical return period of 475 years. Deaggregation of the MCE peak ground acceleration was performed using the USGS online Unified Hazard Tool, 2014 Conterminous U.S. Dynamic edition (v4.2.0). The result of the deaggregation analysis indicates that the predominant earthquake contributing to the MCE peak ground acceleration is characterized as a 6.99 magnitude event occurring at a hypocentral distance of 10.27 kilometers from the site. Deaggregation was also performed for the Design Earthquake (DE) peak ground acceleration, and the result of the analysis indicates that the predominant earthquake contributing to the DE peak ground acceleration is characterized as a 6.89 magnitude occurring at a hypocentral distance of 12.76 kilometers from the site. Conformance to the criteria in the above tables for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur if a large earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 6.4 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated, relatively cohesionless soil deposits lose shear strength during strong ground motions. Primary factors controlling liquefaction include intensity and duration of ground motion, gradation characteristics of the subsurface soils, in-situ stress conditions, and the depth to groundwater. Liquefaction is typified by a loss of shear strength in the liquefied layers due to rapid increases in pore water pressure generated by earthquake accelerations. The current standard of practice, as outlined in the “Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California” and “Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California” requires liquefaction analysis to a depth of 50 feet below the lowest portion of the proposed structure. Liquefaction typically occurs in areas where the soils below the water table are composed of poorly consolidated, fine to medium-grained, primarily sandy soil. In addition to the requisite soil conditions, the ground acceleration and duration of the earthquake must also be of a sufficient level to induce liquefaction. According to the City of Fontana Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2017) and the San Bernardino Countywide Plan (2010), the site is not located in an area designated as having a potential for liquefaction. Based on the historic high groundwater levels in the site vicinity (greater than 300 feet beneath the ground surface, the lack of groundwater encountered in our borings, and depth to groundwater recorded in nearby water wells in the vicinity, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction of the soils underlying the site is very low. 6.5 Slope Stability The topography of the site is generally level and the topography in the site vicinity gently slopes to the southeast at a gradient of less than 5%. According to the City of Fontana Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2017) and the San Bernardino Countywide Plan (2010), the site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for slope instability. There are no known landslides near the site, nor is the site in the path of any known or potential landslides. The potential for slope instability or landslides adversely affecting the proposed project is considered low. 6.6 Earthquake-Induced Flooding Earthquake-induced flooding is inundation caused by failure of dams or other water-retaining structures due to earthquakes. A review of the City of Fontana Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2017) and the San Bernardino Countywide Plan (2010), indicates that the site is not located within a potential inundation area for an earthquake-induced dam failure. Therefore, the probability of earthquake- induced flooding is considered very low. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 6.7 Tsunamis, Seiches and Flooding The site is not located within a coastal area. Therefore, tsunamis are not considered a significant hazard at the site. Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. No major water-retaining structures are located immediately up gradient from the project site. Flooding from a seismically induced seiche is considered unlikely. The site is not within a 100-year flood zone or a 500-year flood zone. The potential for flooding to adversely impact the site is considered low (City of Fontana Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2017). 6.8 Oil Fields & Methane Based on a review of the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Well Finder website, the site is not located within the boundary of a known oil field and no oil wells are located in the immediate site vicinity. However, due to the voluntary nature of record reporting by the oil well drilling companies, wells may be improperly located or not shown on the location map and undocumented wells could be encountered during construction. Any wells encountered during construction will need to be properly abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of the CalGEM. Since the site is not located within the boundaries of a known oil field, the potential for the presence of methane or other volatile gases is considered low. However, should it be determined that a methane study is required for the proposed development it is recommended that a qualified methane consultant be retained to perform the study and provide mitigation measures as necessary. 6.9 Subsidence Subsidence occurs when a large portion of land is displaced vertically, usually due to the withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. Soils that are particularly subject to subsidence include those with high silt or clay content. The site is not located within an area of known ground subsidence. No large-scale extraction of groundwater, gas, oil, or geothermal energy is occurring or planned at the site. There appears to be little or no potential for ground subsidence due to withdrawal of fluid or gas at the site. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 General 7.1.1 It is our opinion that neither soil nor geologic conditions were encountered during the investigation that would preclude the construction of the proposed development provided the recommendations presented herein are followed and implemented during design and construction. 7.1.2 Up to 2 feet of existing artificial fill was encountered during the site investigation. Deeper fill may exist in other areas of the site that were not directly explored. It is our opinion that the existing fill, in its present condition, is not suitable for direct support of proposed foundations or slabs. The existing fill and site soils are suitable for re-use as engineered fill provided the recommendations in the Grading section of this report are followed (see Section 7.4). 7.1.3 Based on our observations onsite and our knowledge of the geologic setting, cobbles should be anticipated during earthwork at the subject site. Additionally, boulders may be encountered in the existing fill or alluvial soils. The contractor should be prepared for difficult excavation conditions. The presence of these materials and their impact on construction methods and equipment selection should be considered by both the developer and contractor prior to construction. 7.1.4 Screening of the earth materials will likely be required to remove oversize (greater than 6 inches) rock, prior to placement and compaction. Generation of oversized material (greater than 6 inches) should be anticipated. 7.1.5 Based on these considerations, it is recommended that the upper 5 feet of existing earth materials within the building footprint areas be excavated and properly compacted for foundation and slab support. Deeper excavations should be conducted as needed to remove any encountered fill or soft soils as necessary at the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). Proposed foundations should be underlain by a minimum of 3 feet of newly placed engineered fill. The limits of existing fill and/or soft soil removal will be verified by the Geocon representative during site grading activities. The excavation should extend laterally a minimum distance of three feet beyond the building footprint areas, including building appurtenances, or a distance equal to the depth of fill below the foundation, whichever is greater. Recommendations for earthwork are provided in the Grading section of this report (see Section 7.4). Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.1.6 Subsequent to the recommended grading, the proposed structures may be supported on a conventional shallow spread foundation system deriving support in newly placed engineered fill. Recommendations for the design of a conventional foundation system are provided in Section 7.6. 7.1.7 All excavations must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). 7.1.8 Where miscellaneous subterranean improvements are planned (Elevator Pits), these structures may be supported on a conventional foundation system deriving support in the undisturbed alluvial soils found at and below a depth of 5 feet. If necessary, these miscellaneous improvements may derive support in a combination of newly placed engineered fill and competent alluvial soils found at and below a depth of 5 feet. It is the intent of the Geotechnical Engineer to allow miscellaneous subterranean structures to derive support in both engineered fill and alluvial soils if project conditions warrant such an occurrence. Recommendations for elevator pit design is provided in Sections 7.14 of this report, respectively. 7.1.9 It is anticipated that stable excavations for the recommended grading associated with the proposed structures can be achieved with sloping measures. However, if excavations in close proximity to an adjacent property line and/or structure are required, special excavation measures may be necessary in order to maintain lateral support of offsite improvements. Excavation recommendations are provided in the Temporary Excavations section of this report (Section 7.16). 7.1.10 Foundations for small outlying structures, such as block walls up to 6 feet high, planter walls or trash enclosures, which will not be tied to the proposed structure, may be supported on conventional foundations bearing on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and proper compaction cannot be performed or is undesirable, foundations may derive support directly in the undisturbed alluvial soils at and below a depth of 24 inches and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a minimum 12-inch embedment into the recommended bearing materials. If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft or loose, compaction of the soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.1.11 Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill soils and soft alluvial soils be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. The client should be aware that excavation and compaction of all existing fill in the area of new paving is not required, however, paving constructed over existing uncertified fill or unsuitable soils may experience increased settlement and/or cracking, and may therefore have a shorter design life and increased maintenance costs. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of soil should be scarified and properly compacted. Paving recommendations are provided in the Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (see Section 7.11). 7.1.12 Based on the results of percolation testing performed at the site, a stormwater infiltration system is considered feasible for this project. Recommendations for infiltration are provided in the Stormwater Infiltration section of this report (see Section 7.17). 7.1.13 Once the design and foundation loading configuration for the proposed structures proceeds to a more finalized plan, the recommendations within this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. Based on the final foundation loading configurations, the potential for settlement should be reevaluated by this office. 7.1.14 Any changes in the design, location or elevation of improvements, as outlined in this report, should be reviewed by this office. Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report. 7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics 7.2.1 The in-situ soils can be excavated with moderate effort using conventional excavation equipment. Due to the granular nature of the soils, moderate to excessive caving should be anticipated in vertical excavations, especially where granular soils are encountered. Formwork may be required to prevent caving of foundation excavations. In addition, due to the presence of cobbles and possible boulders, the contractor should be prepared for difficult excavation conditions during drilling and earthwork activities. 7.2.2 It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shored and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and regulations to maintain safety and maintain the stability of adjacent existing improvements. 7.2.3 All onsite excavations must be conducted in such a manner that potential surcharges from existing structures, construction equipment, and vehicle loads are resisted. The surcharge area may be defined by a 1:1 projection down and away from the bottom of an existing foundation or vehicle load. Penetrations below this 1:1 projection will require special excavation measures such as sloping and shoring. Excavation recommendations are provided in the Temporary Excavations section of this report (see Section 7.16). Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.2.4 The upper 5 feet of existing site soils encountered during this investigation are considered to have a “very low” expansive potential (EI < 20 ), and the soils are classified as “non-expansive” based on the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) Section 1803.5.3. Recommendations presented herein assume that proposed foundations and slabs will derive support in these materials. 7.3 Minimum Resistivity, pH, and Water-Soluble Sulfate 7.3.1 Potential of Hydrogen (pH) and resistivity testing as well as chloride content testing were performed on representative samples of soil to generally evaluate the corrosion potential to surface utilities. The tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method Nos. 643 and 422 and indicate that the soils are considered “mildly corrosive” with respect to corrosion of buried ferrous metals on site. The results are presented in Appendix B (Figure B17) and should be considered for design of underground structures. 7.3.2 Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soil to measure the percentage of water-soluble sulfate content. Results from the laboratory water-soluble sulfate tests are presented in Appendix B (Figure B17) and indicate that the on-site materials possess a sulfate exposure class of “S0” to concrete structures as defined by 2019 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318-19 Table 19.3.1.1. 7.3.3 Geocon West, Inc. does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering and mitigation. If corrosion sensitive improvements are planned, it is recommended that a corrosion engineer be retained to evaluate corrosion test results and incorporate the necessary precautions to avoid premature corrosion of buried metal pipes and concrete structures in direct contact with the soils. 7.4 Grading 7.4.1 Grading is anticipated to include preparation of the building pad, excavation for proposed foundations and utility trenches, as well as placement of backfill for elevator pit walls and trenches. 7.4.2 A preconstruction conference should be held at the site prior to the beginning of grading operations with the owner, contractor, civil engineer and soil engineer in attendance. Special soil handling requirements can be discussed at that time. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.4.3 Earthwork should be observed, and compacted fill tested by representatives of Geocon West, Inc. The existing fill soil encountered during exploration is suitable for re-use as engineered fill, provided any encountered oversized material (greater than 12 inches) and any encountered deleterious debris are removed. It is recommended that materials greater than 6 inches not be placed in the upper 5 feet of the pad. If materials are to be buried in windrows they should be buried at least 10 feet below the surface, located outside of proposed building pad areas, and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. 7.4.4 Screening of the earth materials will likely be required to remove oversize (greater than 6 inches) rock, prior to placement and compaction. Generation of oversized material (greater than 6 inches) should be anticipated. The contractor should be prepared for difficult excavation conditions. The presence of these materials and their impact on construction methods and equipment selection should be considered by both the owner and contractor prior to construction. 7.4.5 Grading should commence with the removal of all existing vegetation and existing improvements from the area to be graded. Deleterious debris such as wood and root structures should be exported from the site and should not be mixed with the fill soils. Asphalt and concrete should not be mixed with the fill soils unless approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. All existing underground improvements planned for removal should be completely excavated and the resulting depressions properly backfilled in accordance with the procedures described herein. Once a clean excavation bottom has been established it must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.). 7.4.6 As a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 5 feet of existing site soils within the proposed building footprint areas be excavated and properly compacted for foundation and slab support. Deeper excavation should be conducted as necessary to completely remove all existing artificial fill or soft soil at the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). Proposed foundations should be underlain by a minimum of 3 feet of newly placed engineered fill. It is recommended that the grading contractor verify the depth of all building foundations prior to commencement of site grading activities in order to correctly determine the required grading overexcavations for foundations. The excavation should extend laterally a minimum distance of 3 feet beyond the building footprint area or a distance equal to the depth of fill below the foundation, whichever is greater. The limits of existing fill and/or soft fill soils removal will be verified by the Geocon representative during site grading activities. 7.4.7 All excavations must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon) prior to placing any fill. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.4.8 All fill and backfill soils should be placed in horizontal loose layers approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and properly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D 1557 (latest edition). 7.4.9 Foundations for small outlying structures, such as block walls up to 6 feet high, planter walls or trash enclosures, which will not be tied to the proposed buildings, may be supported on conventional foundations deriving support on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and proper compaction cannot be performed or is undesirable, foundations may derive support directly in the undisturbed alluvial soils at or below a depth of 24 inches, and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a minimum 12-inch embedment into the recommended bearing materials. If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft or loose, compaction of the soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative. 7.4.10. Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill and soft alluvium be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of soil should be scarified, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition). Paving recommendations are provided in Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (see Section 7.11). 7.4.11 Foundations for small outlying structures, such as block walls up to 6 feet high, planter walls or trash enclosures, which will not be tied to the proposed structure, may be supported on conventional foundations bearing on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and proper compaction cannot be performed or is undesirable, foundations may derive support directly in the undisturbed alluvial soils, and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a minimum 12-inch embedment into the recommended bearing materials. If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft or loose, compaction of the soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved in writing by a Geocon representative. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.4.12 All imported fill shall be observed, tested, and approved by Geocon West, Inc. prior to bringing soil to the site. Rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter shall not be used in the fill. Import soils used as structural fill should have an expansion index less than 20 and corrosivity properties that are equally or less detrimental to that of the existing onsite soils (see Figure B17). Import soils placed in the building area should be placed uniformly across the building pad or in a manner that is approved by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). 7.4.13 Utility trenches should be properly backfilled in accordance with the requirements of the Green Book (latest edition). The pipe should be bedded with clean sands (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) to a depth of at least 1 foot over the pipe, and the bedding material must be inspected and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). The use of gravel is not acceptable unless used in conjunction with filter fabric to prevent the gravel from having direct contact with soil. The remainder of the trench backfill may be derived from onsite soil or approved import soil, compacted as necessary, until the required compaction is obtained. The use of minimum 2-sack slurry as backfill is also acceptable. Prior to placing any bedding materials or pipes, the trench excavation bottom must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). 7.4.14 All trench and foundation excavation bottoms must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon), prior to placing bedding sands, fill, steel, gravel, or concrete. 7.5 Shrinkage 7.5.1 Shrinkage results when a volume of material removed at one density is compacted to a higher density. A shrinkage factor between 5 and 10 percent should be anticipated when excavating and compacting the upper 5 feet of existing earth materials on the site to an average relative compaction of 92 percent. The shrinkage factor does not include the removal of oversized material. 7.4.2 If import soils will be utilized in the building pads, the soils must be placed uniformly and at equal thickness at the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.). Soils can be borrowed from non-building pad areas and later replaced with imported soils. 7.6 Foundation Design 7.6.1 Subsequent to the recommended grading, a conventional shallow spread foundation system may be utilized for support of the proposed structures provided foundations derive support in newly placed engineered fill. Proposed foundations should be underlain by a minimum of 3 feet of newly placed engineered fill. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.6.2 Continuous footings may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf), and should be a minimum of 12 inches in width, 18 inches in depth below the lowest adjacent grade, and 12 inches into the recommended bearing material. 7.6.3 Isolated spread foundations may be designed for an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf, and should be a minimum of 24 inches in width, 18 inches in depth below the lowest adjacent grade, and 12 inches into the recommended bearing material. 7.6.4 The allowable soil bearing pressure above may be increased by 250 psf and 500 psf for each additional foot of foundation width and depth, respectively, up to a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,500 psf. 7.6.5 The allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 7.6.6 Continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of four No. 4 steel reinforcing bars, two placed near the top of the footing and two near the bottom. The reinforcement for isolated spread footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. 7.6.7 If depth increases are utilized for the exterior wall footings, this office should be provided a copy of the final construction plans so that the excavation recommendations presented herein could be properly reviewed and revised if necessary. Additional grading should be conducted as needed in order to maintain the recommended 3-foot-thick blanket of engineered fill below proposed foundations. 7.6.8 No special subgrade presaturation is required prior to placement of concrete. However, the slab and foundation subgrade should be sprinkled as necessary; to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any concrete placement. 7.6.9 Foundation excavations should be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that the excavations and exposed soil conditions are consistent with those anticipated. If unanticipated soil conditions are encountered, foundation modifications may be required. 7.6.10 This office should be provided a copy of the final construction plans so that the excavation recommendations presented herein could be properly reviewed and revised if necessary. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.7 Foundation Settlement 7.7.1 The maximum expected static settlement for the proposed structures supported on a conventional foundation system designed with a maximum bearing pressure of 3,500 psf and deriving support in the recommended bearing materials is estimated to be less than 1 inch and occur below the heaviest loaded structural element. Settlement of the foundation system is expected to occur on initial application of loading. Differential settlement is not expected to exceed ½ inch over a distance of 20 feet. 7.7.2 Once the design and foundation loading configurations for the proposed structures proceeds to a more finalized plan, the estimated settlements presented in this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. If the final foundation loading configurations are greater than the assumed loading conditions, the potential for settlement should be reevaluated by this office. 7.8 Miscellaneous Foundations 7.8.1 Foundations for small outlying structures, such as block walls up to 6 feet in height, planter walls or trash enclosures which will not be tied to the proposed structures may be supported on conventional foundations bearing on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and compaction cannot be performed or is undesirable, such as adjacent to property lines, foundations may derive support in the undisturbed alluvial soils at and below a depth of 24 inches below the existing ground surface, and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a minimum 12-inch embedment into undisturbed alluvial soils and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative. 7.8.2 If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft, compaction of the soft soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative. Miscellaneous foundations may be designed for a bearing value of 1,500 psf, and should be a minimum of 12 inches in width, 18 inches in depth below the lowest adjacent grade and 12 inches into the recommended bearing material. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. 7.8.3 Foundation excavations should be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that the excavations and exposed soil conditions are consistent with those anticipated. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.9 Lateral Design 7.9.1 Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations, slabs and by passive earth pressure. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be used with the dead load forces in the newly placed engineered fill or undisturbed alluvial soils. 7.9.2 Passive earth pressure for the sides of foundations and slabs poured against newly placed engineered fill or undisturbed alluvial soils may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 270 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) with a maximum earth pressure of 2,700 psf. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third. 7.10 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 7.10.1 Concrete slabs-on-grade subject to vehicle loading should be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (Section 7.11). 7.10.2 Subsequent to the recommended grading, concrete slabs-on-grade for structures, not subject to vehicle loading, should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and minimum slab reinforcement should consist of No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions. Steel reinforcing should be positioned vertically near the slab midpoint. 7.10.3 Slabs-on-grade at the ground surface that may receive moisture-sensitive floor coverings or may be used to store moisture-sensitive materials should be underlain by a vapor retarder placed directly beneath the slab. The vapor retarder and acceptable permeance should be specified by the project architect or developer based on the type of floor covering that will be installed. The vapor retarder design should be consistent with the guidelines presented in Section 9.3 of the American Concrete Institute’s (ACI) Guide for Concrete Slabs that Receive Moisture-Sensitive Flooring Materials (ACI 302.2R-06) and should be installed in general conformance with ASTM E 1643 (latest edition) and the manufacturer’s recommendations. A minimum thickness of 15 mils extruded polyolefin plastic is recommended; vapor retarders which contain recycled content or woven materials are not recommended. The vapor retarder should have a permeance of less than 0.01 perms demonstrated by testing before and after mandatory conditioning. The vapor retarder should be installed in direct contact with the concrete slab with proper perimeter seal. If the California Green Building Code requirements apply to this project, the vapor retarder should be underlain by 4 inches of clean aggregate. It is important that the vapor retarder be puncture resistant since it will be in direct contact with angular gravel. As an alternative to the clean aggregate suggested in the Green Building Code, it is our opinion that the concrete slab-on-grade may be underlain by a vapor retarder over 4 inches of clean sand (sand equivalent greater than 30), since the sand will serve a capillary break and will minimize the potential for punctures and damage to the vapor barrier. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.10.4 For seismic design purposes, a coefficient of friction of 0.4 may be utilized between concrete slabs and subgrade soils without a moisture barrier, and 0.15 for slabs underlain by a moisture barrier. 7.10.5 Exterior slabs for walkways or flatwork, not subject to traffic loads, should be at least 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions, positioned near the slab midpoint. Prior to construction of slabs, the upper 12 inches of subgrade should be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and properly compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition). Crack control joints should be spaced at intervals not greater than 10 feet and should be constructed using saw-cuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack control joints should extend a minimum depth of one-fourth the slab thickness. Construction joints should be designed by the project structural engineer. 7.10.6 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to settlement. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade may exhibit some cracking due to minor soil movement and/or concrete shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entrant slab corners occur. 7.11 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 7.11.1 Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill and soft alluvium materials be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. The client should be aware that excavation and compaction of all existing artificial fill and soft alluvium in the area of new paving is not required; however, paving constructed over existing uncertified fill or unsuitable alluvium material may experience increased settlement and/or cracking, and may therefore have a shorter design life and increased maintenance costs. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of paving subgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and properly compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition). 7.11.2 The following pavement sections are based on an assumed R-Value of 35. Once site grading activities are complete an R-Value should be obtained by laboratory testing to confirm the properties of the soils serving as paving subgrade, prior to placing pavement. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.11.3 The Traffic Indices listed below are estimates. Geocon does not practice in the field of traffic engineering. The actual Traffic Index for each area should be determined by the project civil engineer. If pavement sections for Traffic Indices other than those listed below are required, Geocon should be contacted to provide additional recommendations. Pavement thicknesses were determined following procedures outlined in the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans). It is anticipated that the majority of traffic will consist of automobile and large truck traffic. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN SECTIONS Location Estimated Traffic Index (TI) Asphalt Concrete (inches) Class 2 Aggregate Base (inches) Automobile Parking and Driveways 4.0 3.0 4.0 Trash Truck & Fire Lanes 7.0 4.0 9.0 7.11.4 Asphalt concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the “Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction” (Green Book). Class 2 aggregate base materials should conform to Section 26-1.02A of the “Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation” (Caltrans). The use of Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) in lieu of Class 2 aggregate base is acceptable. Crushed Miscellaneous Base should conform to Section 200-2.4 of the “Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction” (Green Book). 7.11.5 Unless specifically designed and evaluated by the project structural engineer, where exterior concrete paving will be utilized for support of vehicles, it is recommended that the concrete be a minimum of 6 inches of concrete reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions. Concrete paving supporting vehicular traffic should be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of aggregate base and a properly compacted subgrade. The subgrade and base material should be compacted to 95 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition). 7.11.6 The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent cracking, subsidence and pavement distress. If planters are planned adjacent to paving, it is recommended that the perimeter curb be extended at least 12 inches below the bottom of the aggregate base to minimize the introduction of water beneath the paving. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.12 Retaining Wall Design 7.12.1 The recommendations presented below are generally applicable to the design of rigid concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 5 feet. In the event that walls higher than 5 feet are planned, Geocon should be contacted for additional recommendations. 7.12.2 Retaining wall foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Foundation Design sections of this report (see Section 7.6). 7.12.3 Retaining walls with a level backfill surface that are not restrained at the top should be designed utilizing a triangular distribution of pressure (active pressure). Restrained walls are those that are not allowed to rotate more than 0.001H (where H equals the height of the retaining portion of the wall in feet) at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, walls may be designed utilizing a triangular distribution of pressure (at-rest pressure). The table below presents recommended pressures to be used in retaining wall design, assuming that proper drainage will be maintained. RETAINING WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL SURFACE HEIGHT OF RETAINING WALL (Feet) ACTIVE PRESSURE EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE (Pounds Per Cubic Foot) AT-REST PRESSURE EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE (Pounds Per Cubic Foot) Up to 5 30 60 7.12.4 The wall pressures provided above assume that the retaining wall will be properly drained preventing the buildup of hydrostatic pressure. If retaining wall drainage is not implemented, the equivalent fluid pressure to be used in design of undrained walls is 90 pcf. The value includes hydrostatic pressures plus buoyant lateral earth pressures. 7.12.5 The wall pressures provided above assume that the proposed retaining walls will support relatively undisturbed alluvium or engineered fill derived from on-site soils. 7.12.6 Additional active pressure should be added for a surcharge condition due to sloping ground, vehicular traffic or adjacent structures and should be designed for each condition as the project progresses. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.12.7 It is recommended that line-load surcharges from adjacent wall footings, use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2. The governing equations are: and where x is the distance from the face of the excavation or wall to the vertical line-load, H is the distance from the bottom of the footing to the bottom of excavation or wall, z is the depth at which the horizontal pressure is desired, QL is the vertical line-load and σH(z) is the horizontal pressure at depth z. 7.12.8 It is recommended that vertical point-loads, from construction equipment outriggers or adjacent building columns use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2. The governing equations are: and then where x is the distance from the face of the excavation/wall to the vertical point-load, H is distance from the outrigger/bottom of column footing to the bottom of excavation, z is the depth at which the horizontal pressure is desired, Qp is the vertical point-load, σH(z) is the horizontal pressure at depth z, ϴ is the angle between a line perpendicular to the excavation/wall and a line from the point-load to location on the excavation/wall where the surcharge is being evaluated, and σH(z) is the horizontal pressure at depth z. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.12.9 In addition to the recommended earth pressure, the upper 10 feet of the retaining wall adjacent to the street or driveway areas should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf, acting as a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the wall due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet from the wall, the traffic surcharge may be neglected. 7.13 Retaining Wall Drainage 7.13.1 Unless designed for hydrostatic pressures, retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system extended at least two-thirds the height of the wall. At the base of the drain system, a subdrain covered with a minimum of 12 inches of gravel should be installed, and a compacted fill blanket or other seal placed at the surface (see Figure 5). The clean bottom and subdrain pipe, behind a retaining wall, should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon), prior to placement of gravel or compacting backfill. 7.13.2 As an alternative, a plastic drainage composite such as Miradrain or equivalent may be installed in continuous, 4-foot-wide columns along the entire back face of the wall, at 8 feet on center. The top of these drainage composite columns should terminate approximately 18 inches below the ground surface, where either hardscape or a minimum of 18 inches of relatively cohesive material should be placed as a cap (see Figure 6). 7.13.3 Subdrainage pipes at the base of the retaining wall drainage system should outlet to an acceptable location via controlled drainage structures. Drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over descending slopes. 7.13.4 Moisture affecting below grade walls is one of the most common post-construction complaints. Poorly applied or omitted waterproofing can lead to efflorescence or standing water. Particular care should be taken in the design and installation of waterproofing to avoid moisture problems, or actual water seepage into the structure through any normal shrinkage cracks which may develop in the concrete walls, floor slab, foundations and/or construction joints. The design and inspection of the waterproofing is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer. A waterproofing consultant should be retained in order to recommend a product or method, which would provide protection to subterranean walls, floor slabs and foundations. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.14 Elevator Pit Design 7.14.1 The elevator pit slab and retaining wall should be designed by the project structural engineer. Elevator pit walls may be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the Foundation Design and Retaining Wall Design sections of this report (see Sections 7.6 and 7.12). The elevator slab and retaining wall footings may derive support in either newly placed engineered fill or the alluvial soils found at or below a depth of 5 feet if exposed in the elevator pit excavation bottom. 7.14.2 Additional active pressure should be added for a surcharge condition due to sloping ground, vehicular traffic or adjacent foundations and should be designed for each condition as the project progresses. 7.14.3 If retaining wall drainage is to be provided, the drainage system should be designed in accordance with the Retaining Wall Drainage section of this report (see Section 7.13). 7.14.4 It is suggested that the elevator pit walls and slab be waterproofed to prevent excessive moisture inside of the elevator pit. Waterproofing design and installation is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer. 7.15 Elevator Piston 7.15.1 If a plunger-type elevator piston is installed for this project, a deep drilled excavation will be required. It is important to verify that the drilled excavation is not situated immediately adjacent to a foundation, or the drilled excavation could compromise the existing foundation, especially if the drilling is performed subsequent to the foundation construction. 7.15.2 Casing will likely be required since caving is experienced in the drilled excavation. The contractor should be prepared to use casing and should have it readily available at the commencement of drilling activities. Continuous observation of the drilling and installation of the elevator piston by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.) is required. 7.15.3 The annular space between the piston casing and drilled excavation wall should be filled with a minimum of 1½-sack slurry pumped from the bottom up. As an alternative, pea gravel may be utilized. The use of soil to backfill the annular space is not acceptable. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.16 Temporary Excavations 7.16.1 Excavations on the order of 5 feet in height may be required during grading and construction operations. The excavations are expected to expose fill and alluvial soils, which may be subject to caving. Due to the presence of cobbles, the contractor should be prepared for difficult excavation conditions. Vertical excavations up to 5 feet in height may be attempted where not surcharged; however, the contractor should be prepared for caving, sloughing, and raveling in open excavations. Due to the granular nature of soils and potential for caving, the contractor should also be prepared to form foundation excavations at the excavation bottom. 7.16.2 Vertical excavations greater than 5 feet or where surcharged by existing structures will require sloping or shoring measures in order to provide a stable excavation. It is anticipated that stable excavations for construction of the proposed improvements can be achieved and maintained with sloping measures. Where sufficient space is available, temporary unsurcharged embankments could be sloped back at a uniform 1:1 slope gradient or flatter up to a maximum height of 8 feet. A uniform slope does not have a vertical portion. 7.16.3 Where temporary construction slopes are utilized, the top of the slope should be barricaded to prevent vehicles and storage loads at the top of the slope within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the slope. If the temporary construction slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are suggested along the tops of the slopes where necessary to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. Geocon personnel should inspect the soils exposed in the cut slopes during excavation so that modifications of the slopes can be made if variations in the soil conditions occur. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. 7.17 Stormwater Infiltration 7.17.1 During the October 18, 2021 site exploration, borings B3, B4 and B5 were utilized to perform percolation testing. The borings were advanced to the depth listed in the table below. Slotted casing was placed in the boring, and the annular space between the casing and excavation was filled with gravel. The boring was then filled with water to pre-saturate the soils. The casing was refilled with water and percolation test readings were performed after repeated flooding of the cased excavation. Based on the test results, the average infiltration rate (adjusted percolation rate), for the earth materials encountered, is provided in the following table. The field-measured percolation rate has been adjusted to infiltration rates in accordance with the County of San Bernardino Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans (June 2013). Additional correction factors may be required and should be applied by the engineer in responsible charge of the design of the stormwater infiltration system and based on applicable guidelines. Percolation test field data and calculation of the measured percolation rate and design infiltration rate are provided on Figures 7 through 9. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 Boring Soil Type Infiltration Depth (ft) Average Infiltration Rate (in / hour) B3 Sand (SW) 10-15 8.92 B4 Sand (SW) 5-10 10.67 B5 Sand (SW) 30-50 2.07 7.17.2 The results of the percolation testing indicate that the soils are conductive to infiltration. It is our opinion that the soil zones encountered at the depths and locations as listed in the table above are suitable for infiltration of stormwater. 7.17.3 It is our opinion that the introduction of stormwater at the depth and location indicated above will not induce excessive hydro-consolidation, will not create a perched groundwater condition, will not affect soil structure interaction of existing or proposed foundations due to expansive soils, will not saturate soils supported by existing or proposed retaining walls, and will not increase the potential for liquefaction. Resulting settlements are anticipated to be less than ¼ inch, if any. 7.17.4 Where infiltration systems will be utilized, it is recommended that a minimum 10-foot horizontal and vertical setback be maintained from existing or proposed foundations. Additional setbacks may be required by the governing jurisdiction and should be incorporated into the stormwater infiltration system design as necessary. 7.17.5 Subsequent to the placement of the infiltration system, it is acceptable to backfill the resulting void space between the excavation sidewalls and the infiltration system with minimum two-sack slurry provided the slurry is not placed in the infiltration zone. It is recommended that pea gravel be utilized adjacent to the infiltration zone so communication of water to the soil is not hindered. 7.17.6 Due to the preliminary nature of the project at this time, the type of stormwater infiltration system and location of the stormwater infiltration systems has not yet been determined. The design drawings should be reviewed and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. The installation of the stormwater infiltration system should be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.18 Surface Drainage 7.18.1 Proper surface drainage is critical to the future performance of the project. Uncontrolled infiltration of irrigation excess and storm runoff into the soils can adversely affect the performance of the planned improvements. Saturation of a soil can cause it to lose internal shear strength and increase its compressibility, resulting in a change in the original designed engineering properties. Proper drainage should be maintained at all times. 7.18.2 All site drainage should be collected and controlled in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond anywhere on the site, and especially not against any foundation or retaining wall. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures in accordance with 2019 CBC 1804.4 or other applicable standards. In addition, drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Discharge from downspouts, roof drains and scuppers are not recommended onto unprotected soils within 5 feet of the building perimeter. Planters which are located adjacent to foundations should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the soils providing foundation support. Landscape irrigation is not recommended within 5 feet of the building perimeter footings except when enclosed in protected planters. 7.18.3 Positive site drainage should be provided away from structures, pavement, and the tops of slopes to swales or other controlled drainage structures. The building pad and pavement areas should be fine graded such that water is not allowed to pond. 7.18.4 Landscaping planters immediately adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. Either a subdrain, which collects excess irrigation water and transmits it to drainage structures, or an impervious above-grade planter boxes should be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, it is recommended that consideration be given to providing a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 12 inches below the base material. 7.19 Plan Review 7.19.1 Grading, foundation, and, if applicable, shoring plans should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), prior to finalization to verify that the plans have been prepared in substantial conformance with the recommendations of this report and to provide additional analyses or recommendations. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 7.19.2 All site drainage should be collected and controlled in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond anywhere on the site, and especially not against any foundation or retaining wall. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures in accordance with 2019 CBC 1804.4 or other applicable standards. In addition, drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Discharge from downspouts, roof drains and scuppers are not recommended onto unprotected soils within 5 feet of the building perimeter. Planters which are located adjacent to foundations should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the soils providing foundation support. Landscape irrigation is not recommended within 5 feet of the building perimeter footings except when enclosed in protected planters. 7.19.3 Positive site drainage should be provided away from structures, pavement, and the tops of slopes to swales or other controlled drainage structures. The building pad and pavement areas should be fine graded such that water is not allowed to pond. 7.19.4 Landscaping planters immediately adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. Either a subdrain, which collects excess irrigation water and transmits it to drainage structures, or an impervious above-grade planter boxes should be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, it is recommended that consideration be given to providing a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 12 inches below the base material. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon West, Inc. should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon West, Inc. 2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 3. The findings of this report are valid as of the date of this report. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. 4. The firm that performed the geotechnical investigation for the project should be retained to provide testing and observation services during construction to provide continuity of geotechnical interpretation and to check that the recommendations presented for geotechnical aspects of site development are incorporated during site grading, construction of improvements, and excavation of foundations. If another geotechnical firm is selected to perform the testing and observation services during construction operations, that firm should prepare a letter indicating their intent to assume the responsibilities of project geotechnical engineer of record. A copy of the letter should be provided to the regulatory agency for their records. In addition, that firm should provide revised recommendations concerning the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development, or a written acknowledgement of their concurrence with the recommendations presented in our report. They should also perform additional analyses deemed necessary to assume the role of Geotechnical Engineer of Record. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 LIST OF REFERENCES California Department of Water Resources, 2021, Water Data Library (WDL) Station Map, Web Site https://wdl.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/ California Division of Mines and Geology, 1976, Geologic Hazards in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California, Special Report 113, Prepared in cooperation with the County of San Bernardino Environmental Improvement Agency, the County of San Bernardino Planning Department, and the U.S. Geological Society. California Geologic Energy Management Division, 2021, Geologic Energy Management Division Well Finder, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov.doggr/index.html#close. California Geological Survey, 2021a, CGS Information Warehouse, Regulatory Map Portal, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps. California Geological Survey, 2021b, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. California Geological Survey, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 2018. California Geological Survey, 2010, Geologic Compilation of Quaternary Surficial Deposits in southern California, San Bernardino 30’ X 60’ Quadrangle, A Project for the Department of Water Resources by the California Geological Survey, Compiled from existing sources by Trinda L. Bedrossian, CEG, Cheryl A. Hayhurst, PG, and Peter D. Roffers, dated July 2010. Chino Basin Water Master, 2017, 2016 State of the Basin Report, Prepared for the Chino Basin Watermaster by Wildermuth Environmental, Inc. dated June, 2017. FEMA, 2021, Online Flood Hazard Maps, http://www.esri.com/hazards/index.html. Fontana, City of, 2017, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Jennings, C. W. and Bryant, W. A., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6. Mendenhall, W. C., 1904, Map Showing the Artesian Areas and Hydrographic Contours in the Valley of Southern California, data compiled by W. C. Mendenhall, 1904, U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper No. 219, Plate III. San Bernardino, County of, 2010a, San Bernardino County General Plan, Safety Element. San Bernardino, County of, 2010b, San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General Plan, Geologic Hazard Overlays, Figure EHFH C VICTORVILLE/SAN BERNARDINO. San Bernardino, County of, 2010c, San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General Plan, Hazard Overlays, Figure EHFH B VICTORVILLE/SAN BERNARDINO. San Bernardino Countywide Plan, 2021, Hazards Element, Web Site https://countywideplan.com/policy-plan/beta/hz/. Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 LIST OF REFERENCES (Continued) Toppozada, T., Branum, D., Petersen, M, Hallstrom, C., and Reichle, M., 2000, Epicenters and Areas Damaged by M> 5 California Earthquakes, 1800 – 1999, California Geological Survey, Map Sheet 49. U.S. Geological Survey, 2021, National Water Information System: Web Interface, Web Site Address: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/gw. U.S. Geological Survey, 2018, Fontana, California 7.5-Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map. U.S. Geological Survey 2006, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the United States, accessed October 11, 2021, from USGS web site: http//earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults. Ziony, J. I., and Jones, L. M., 1989, Map Showing Late Quaternary Faults and 1978–1984 Seismicity of the Los Angeles Region, California, U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1964. REFERENCE: U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS, 7.5 MINUTE SERIES, FONTANA, CA QUADRANGLE FIG. 1 VICINITY MAP PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704 3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504 ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS CHECKED BY: SFKDRAFTED BY: RA PROJECT NO. W1450-06-01NOV. 2021 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA, CALIFORNIA SITE PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-17043303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALSCHECKED BY: NDBDRAFTED BY: JMHFIG. 2SITE PLANLEGENDPROJECT NO. W1450-06-01NOVEMBER 2021FONTANA, CALIFORNIA14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD80'160'North0Property LimitsApproximate Location of BoringLimits of Proposed StructureB5Approximate Location of BoringTP-9B2TP-1B1TP-2PROPOSED 4-STORY MFR STRUCTURE (ON GRADE)B3B4B5TP-3TP-9A/BTP-4TP-5TP-6TP-8PROPOSED 4-STORY MFR STRUCTURE (ON GRADE)TP-7A/B SITE01224 MilesReference: Jennings, C.W. and Bryant, W. A., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6.REGIONAL FAULT MAPFONTANA, CALIFORNIAPROJECT NO. W1450-06-01NOV. 2021FIG. 3PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-17043303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALSCHECKED BY: SFKDRAFTED BY: RA14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SITEDRAFTED BY: RA CHECKED BY: SFKPHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-17043303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALSREGIONAL SEISMICITY MAPFIG.402040MilesReference: Toppozada, T., Branum, D., Petersen, M., Hallstrom, C., Cramer, C., and Reichle, M., 2000,Epicenters and Areas Damaged by M>5 California Earthquakes, 1800 - 1999, CaliforniaGeological Survey, Map Sheet 49.FONTANA, CALIFORNIAPROJECT NO. W1450-06-01NOV. 202114817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD 2/3 H H 3/4" CRUSHED ROCK MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE 4" DIA. PERFORATED ABS OR ADS PIPE - EXTEND TO RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE SYSTEM WATERPROOF WALL PROPERLY COMPACTED BACKFILL GROUND SURFACE NO SCALE FOUNDATION PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704 3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504 ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS CHECKED BY: NDBDRAFTED BY: JMH RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL FIG. 5PROJECT NO. W1450-06-01NOVEMBER 2021 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA, CALIFORNIA RETAINING WALL NO SCALE FOUNDATION PROPERLY COMPACTED BACKFILL GROUND SURFACE 18" WATER PROOFING BY ARCHITECT DRAINAGE PANEL (J-DRAIN 1000 OR EQUIVALENT) 4" DIA. SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE EXTENDED TO APPROVED OUTLET (1 CU. FT./FT.) FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE 3/4" CRUSHED ROCK MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704 3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504 ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL CHECKED BY: NDBDRAFTED BY: JMH FIG. 6NOVEMBER 2021 PROJECT NO. W1450-06-01 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Project:Project No:Date:10/18/2021 B3 Tested By: 15 Length Width 8 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Greater than or Equal to 6"? (y/n) 1 2:00 2:25 25 120.0 163.2 43.2 y 2 2:27 2:52 25 120.0 156.6 36.6 y Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Percolation Rate (min/in) 1 2:38 2:48 10 120.0 156.0 36.0 400 2 2:53 3:03 10 120.0 156.4 36.4 396 3 3:08 3:18 10 120.0 156.0 36.0 400 4 3:23 3:33 10 120.0 155.5 35.5 405 5 3:38 3:48 10 120.0 155.5 35.5 405 6 3:53 4:03 10 120.0 153.6 33.6 429 7 8 Infiltration Rate Calculation: Time Interval, Δt = 10 minutes Ho = 60.0 inches Final Depth to Water, Df = 153.6 inches Hf = 26.4 inches Test Hole Radius, r = 4 inches ΔH = 33.6 inches Initial Depth to Water, Do = 120.0 inches Havg = 43.2 inches Total Depth of Test Hole, DT = 180.0 inches Infiltration Rate, It = 8.92 inches/hour PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET *If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements, taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre‐soak (fill) overnight. Obtain at least twelve measurements per hole over at least six hours (approximately 30 minute intervals) with a precision of at least 0.25". JS W1450‐06‐0114817 Foothill Blvd Test Hole No: Depth of Test Hole, DT: Test Hole Dimensions (inches) SWUSCS Soil Classification: Diameter (if round) = Sandy Soil Criteria Test* Sides (if rectangular) = Figure 7 Project:Project No:Date:10/18/2021 B4 Tested By: 10 Length Width 8 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Greater than or Equal to 6"? (y/n) 1 2:03 2:28 25 60.0 114.0 54.0 y 2 2:29 2:54 25 60.0 104.4 44.4 y Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Percolation Rate (min/in) 1 2:59 3:09 10 60.0 101.2 41.2 350 2 3:14 3:24 10 60.0 100.8 40.8 353 3 3:29 3:39 10 60.0 99.1 39.1 368 4 3:44 3:54 10 60.0 98.6 38.6 373 5 3:59 4:09 10 60.0 98.2 38.2 377 6 4:14 4:24 10 60.0 98.2 38.2 377 7 8 Infiltration Rate Calculation: Time Interval, Δt = 10 minutes Ho = 60.0 inches Final Depth to Water, Df = 98.2 inches Hf = 21.8 inches Test Hole Radius, r = 4 inches ΔH = 38.2 inches Initial Depth to Water, Do = 60.0 inches Havg = 40.9 inches Total Depth of Test Hole, DT = 120.0 inches Infiltration Rate, It = 10.67 inches/hour PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET *If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements, taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre‐soak (fill) overnight. Obtain at least twelve measurements per hole over at least six hours (approximately 30 minute intervals) with a precision of at least 0.25". JS W1450‐06‐0114817 Foothill Blvd Test Hole No: Depth of Test Hole, DT: Test Hole Dimensions (inches) SWUSCS Soil Classification: Diameter (if round) = Sandy Soil Criteria Test* Sides (if rectangular) = Figure 8 Project:Project No:Date:10/18/2021 B5 Tested By: 50 Length Width 8 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Greater than or Equal to 6"? (y/n) 1 9:34 9:59 25 360.0 495.0 135.0 y 2 10:02 10:27 25 360.0 496.9 136.9 y Trial No. Start Time Stop Time Δt Time Interval (min) D0 Initial Depth to Water (in) Df Final Depth to Water (in) ΔD Change in Water Level (in) Percolation Rate (min/in) 1 10:31 10:41 10 360.0 439.6 79.6 181 2 10:46 10:56 10 360.0 434.4 74.4 194 3 11:01 11:11 10 360.0 414.0 54.0 267 4 11:16 11:26 10 360.0 411.6 51.6 279 5 11:31 11:41 10 360.0 399.5 39.5 365 6 11:46 11:56 10 360.0 398.4 38.4 375 7 8 Infiltration Rate Calculation: Time Interval, Δt = 10 minutes Ho = 240.0 inches Final Depth to Water, Df = 398.4 inches Hf = 201.6 inches Test Hole Radius, r = 4 inches ΔH = 38.4 inches Initial Depth to Water, Do = 360.0 inches Havg = 220.8 inches Total Depth of Test Hole, DT = 600.0 inches Infiltration Rate, It = 2.07 inches/hour SWUSCS Soil Classification: Diameter (if round) = Sandy Soil Criteria Test* Sides (if rectangular) = PERCOLATION TEST DATA SHEET *If two consecutive measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in less than 25 minutes, the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements, taken every 10 minutes. Otherwise, pre‐soak (fill) overnight. Obtain at least twelve measurements per hole over at least six hours (approximately 30 minute intervals) with a precision of at least 0.25". JS W1450‐06‐0114817 Foothill Blvd Test Hole No: Depth of Test Hole, DT: Test Hole Dimensions (inches) Figure 9 APPENDIX A Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The site was explored on October 18, 2021, by excavating five 8-inch diameter borings using a truck-mounted hollow stem auger drilling machine. The borings were excavated to depths of 20½ and 50½ feet below existing ground surface. The site was also explored on October 20, 2021, by excavating nine test pits utilizing a backhoe. The test pits were excavated to depths of 4½ to 7½ feet below existing ground surface. Representative and relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch O. D., California Modified Sampler into the “undisturbed” soil mass with blows from a 140-pound auto-hammer falling 30 inches. The California Modified Sampler was equipped with 1-inch high by 23/8-inch diameter brass sampler rings to facilitate soil removal and testing. Bulk samples were also obtained. The soil conditions encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified and logged in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The logs of the borings and test pits are presented on Figures A1 through A16. The logs depict the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depth at which samples were obtained. The logs also include our interpretation of the conditions between sampling intervals. Therefore, the logs contain both observed and interpreted data. We determined the lines designating the interface between soil materials on the logs using visual observations, penetration rates, excavation characteristics and other factors. The transition between materials may be abrupt or gradual. Where applicable, the logs were revised based on subsequent laboratory testing. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel, trace to some cobbles. Sand with Silt and Gravel, poorly graded, slightly moist, dense, yellowish brown, fine-grained. - increase in gravel and cobbles Gravelly Sand, well-graded, dense, slightly moist, grayish brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to medium gravel. - medium dense, yellowish brown - increase in gravel and cobbles - dense to very dense - mostly gravel and cobble fragments - no recovery Total depth of boring: 20.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. *Penetration resistance for 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches by auto-hammer. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. 1.0 SP SP SW BULK 0-5' B1@3' B1@6' B1@9' B1@12' B1@15' B1@20' 58 77 59 50 (4") 53 50 (3") 123.5 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 1 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A1, Log of Boring 1, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Gravelly Sand with Cobbles, poorly graded, dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine-grained. Sand with Silt and Gravel, poorly graded, dense, moist, yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel. Gravelly Sand with Cobbles, very dense, moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to medium gravel and cobble fragments (to 2"). - minimal recovery Total depth of boring: 20.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. *Penetration resistance for 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches by auto-hammer. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. 0.6SP SP SW BULK 0-5' B2@2.5' B2@5' B2@7.5' B2@10' B2@15' B2@20' 50 (4") 60 50 (4") 50 (5") 50 (5") 50 (3") 102.9 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 2 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A2, Log of Boring 2, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Gravelly Sand, well-graded, dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel, some cobbles. - mostly gravel and cobble fragments (to 3") Sand with Gravel and Cobbles, well-graded, dense, moist, grayish brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel. - no recovery, very dense, mostly gravel - minimal recovery - minimal recovery 0.9 1.3 1.4 SW SW 0-5' B3@2.5' B3@5' B3@7.5' BULK B3@10' B3@15' B3@20' B3@25' 50 (3") 74 72 89 50 (4") 50 (4") 50 (4") 127.0 132.2 139.6 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 3 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A3, Log of Boring 3, Page 1 of 2 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 Total depth of boring: 30.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. *Penetration resistance for 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches by auto-hammer. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. 1.5SWB3@30'50 (2") 133.4 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 30 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 3 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A3, Log of Boring 3, Page 2 of 2 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Gravelly Sand with Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel. Sand with Gravel and Cobbles, well-graded, dense, slightly moist, brown, fine to coarse gravel fragments (to 3"). - very dense Sand with Silt, poorly graded, medium dense, moist, brown, fine-grained. Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, well-graded, dense, slightly moist, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel. - minimal recovery Total depth of boring: 20.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Percolation testing performed. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. *Penetration resistance for 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches by auto-hammer. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. 1.0 1.4 1.3 2.6 10.5 1.8 SW SW SP-SM SW BULK 0-5' B4@3' B4@6' B4@9' B4@12' B4@15' B4@20' 49 50 (6") 50 (4") 70 36 50 (6") 131.3 129.3 135.5 114.6 115.8 128.7 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 4 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A4, Log of Boring 4, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ARTIFICIAL FILL Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to medium gravel. ALLUVIUM Gravelly Sand, well-graded, dense, slightly moist to moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel (to 2"). - cobbly - gravel and cobble fragments (to 3") - no recovery, gravel and cobble fragments only - very dense 1.6 SW B5@5' B5@10' B5@20' 61 72 50 (4") 116.1 SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 5 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A5, Log of Boring 5, Page 1 of 2 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 - minimal recovery - no recovery - minimal recovery - no recovery Total depth of boring: 50.5 feet Fill to 2 feet. No groundwater encountered. Percolation testing performed. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. *Penetration resistance for 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches by auto-hammer. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SW B5@30' B5@40' B5@45' B5@50' 50 (4") 50 (4") 50 (2") 50 (3") SAMPLE NO. HOLLOW STEM AUGER ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT BORING 5 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/18/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 BORING LOGS.GPJFigure A5, Log of Boring 5, Page 2 of 2 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry, brown, fine- to medium-grained, gravel (to 3"), some roots, trace cobbles (to 4"). - increase in gravel and cobbles Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, gravel (to 3"), cobbles (to 8"). - some caving of sidewall Total depth of boring: 7 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SP BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 1 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A6, Log of Test Pit 1, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to medium gravel. Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, poorly graded, medium dense, slighty moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 11"), trace coarse-grained and boulders (to 14"). Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slighty moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to medium gravel, cobbles (to 11"), trace boulders (to 14"). Total depth of boring: 7 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SP SW SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 2 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A7, Log of Test Pit 2, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand, poorly graded, medium dense, dry, brown, fine- to medium-grained. Sand and Gravel and Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 11"). Total depth of boring: 5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 3 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A8, Log of Test Pit 3, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, some roots, trace to some fine gravel. Sand and Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, trace cobbles (to 4"). Sand, poorly graded, medium dense, moist, light brown, fine- to medium-grained. Sand and Gravel, well-graded, medium dense, moist, brown, fine to coarse gravel, some cobbles (to 8"). - 5" thick layer of gravelly sand / sand and gravel Total depth of boring: 6 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SP SP SW BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 4 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A9, Log of Test Pit 4, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Silt and Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel. Sand and Gravel and Cobbles, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 12"). - grades to well-graded sand - yellowish brown, moist Total depth of boring: 6.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP-SM SP BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 5 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A10, Log of Test Pit 5, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel. Sand with Gravel and Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slightly moist to moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine gravel, some medium to coarse gravel, cobbles ( to 10.5"). Total depth of boring: 4.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 6 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A11, Log of Test Pit 6, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel and Cobbles, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 8"). Sand and Gravel and Cobbles, poorly gradded, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 10"). - grades to well-graded sand Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, moist, yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to medium gravel. Total depth of boring: 7 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SP SP SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 7A (WEST FACE) JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A12, Log of Test Pit 7A (WEST FACE), Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine to coarse gravel, trace to some cobbles (to 6"). Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 10"), boulder (to 14"). Sand, poorly graded, medium dense, moist, yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained. - trace to some fine to medium gravel Total depth of boring: 7 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW SP SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 7B (EAST FACE) JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A13, Log of Test Pit 7B (EAST FACE), Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel. Sand and Gravel and Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 11"). Total depth of boring: 6 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 8 JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A14, Log of Test Pit 8, Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, medium dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to mediumgrained, fine gravel, plastic. Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, well-graded, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine gravel, some medium to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 12"). Total depth of boring: 7.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW BULK 0-5' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 9A (WEST FACE) JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A15, Log of Test Pit 9A (WEST FACE), Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 ALLUVIUM Sand with Gravel, poorly graded, meidum dense, dry to slightly moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained, fine gravel. Sand and Gravel with Cobbles, medium dense, slightly moist, brown, fine- to coarse-grained, fine to coarse gravel, cobbles (to 12"). Silty Sand with Gravel, medium dense, moist, yellowish brown, fine-to medium-grained, fine gravel. - decrease in silt - Sandy Clay interbed Total depth of boring: 7.5 feet No fill. No groundwater encountered. Backfilled with soil cuttings and tamped. NOTE: The stratification lines presented herein represent the approximate boundary between earth types; the transitions may be gradual. SP SW SMTP9B@6' SAMPLE NO. BACKHOE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE DEPTH IN FEET ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) GEOCON - - 0 2 4 6 DRY DENSITYEQUIPMENT TEST PIT 9B (EAST FACE) JS MOISTUREBY:(P.C.F.)DATE COMPLETED ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE SOIL CLASS (USCS)GROUNDWATERSAMPLE SYMBOLS CONTENT (%)... CHUNK SAMPLE 10/20/2021ELEV. (MSL.)PENETRATIONRESISTANCE(BLOWS/FT*)MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONLITHOLOGY ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST W1450-06-01 TEST PIT LOGS.GPJFigure A16, Log of Test Pit 9B (EAST FACE), Page 1 of 1 NOTE: PROJECT NO. THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. W1450-06-01 APPENDIX B Geocon Project No. W1450-06-01 November 22, 2021 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), or other suggested procedures. Selected samples were tested for direct shear strength, consolidation and expansion characteristics, corrosivity, in-place dry density and moisture content. The results of the laboratory tests are summarized in Figures B1 through B17. The in-place dry density and moisture content of the samples tested are presented in the boring logs, Appendix A. Project No.: W1450-06-01 3.26 Boring No. B1+B2 Normal Strest (kip/ft2) 1 3 5 Sample No. B1+B2@0-5'Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) 0.77 1.98 0.01 Depth (ft) 0-5'Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0.72 1.97 3.23 Sample Type:Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.01 0.01 Soil Identification:Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Silty Sand (SM), olive brown Ring Inside Diameter (in.) 2.375 2.375 2.375 Initial Moisture Content (%) 11.0 10.4 11.7 Strength Parameters Initial Dry Density (pcf) 111.8 112.4 111.1 56.1 60.9 Peak 132 32.0 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.2 1.2 1.2 C (psf)Initial Degree of Saturation (%) 58.5 Ultimate 91 32.1 Final Moisture Content (%) 15.3 14.7 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 Checked by: MR 15.0 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B1 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Shear Stress (ksf)Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 3.49 Boring No. B-2 Normal Strest (kip/ft2) 1 3 5 Sample No. B2@2.5'Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) 0.76 2.23 0.01 Depth (ft) 2.5'Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0.67 2.16 3.42 Sample Type:Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.)0.01 0.01 Soil Identification:Initial Sample Height (in.)1.0 1.0 1.0 Brown Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP)Ring Inside Diameter (in.)2.375 2.375 2.375 Initial Moisture Content (%)7.9 6.6 5.3 Strength Parameters Initial Dry Density (pcf)100.9 99.3 101.2 25.7 21.3 Peak 107 34.4 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.2 1.2 1.2 C (psf)Initial Degree of Saturation (%) 32.0 Ultimate 23 34.5 Final Moisture Content (%)20.6 20.0 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 Checked by: MR 20.5 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B2 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Shear Stress (ksf)Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 10.0 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 Checked by: MR 9.8 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B3 Ultimate 35 44.1 Final Moisture Content (%) 12.3 54.0 46.6 Peak 75 45.1 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.2 1.2 1.2 C (psf)Initial Degree of Saturation (%) 31.6 Strength Parameters Initial Dry Density (pcf) 114.7 121.3 125.2 Brown Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)Ring Inside Diameter (in.) 2.375 2.375 2.375 Initial Moisture Content (%) 5.5 7.8 6.0 Soil Identification:Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.01 Depth (ft) 2.5'Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0.85 3.25 4.73 Sample Type:Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.01 0.01 5.01 Boring No. B-3 Normal Strest (kip/ft2) 1 3 5 Sample No. B3@2.5'Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) 1.00 3.25 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Shear Stress (ksf)Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 3.35 Boring No. B3+B4 Normal Strest (kip/ft2) 1 3 5 Sample No. B3+B4@0-5'Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) 0.73 2.05 0.01 Depth (ft) 0-5'Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0.73 2.04 3.35 Sample Type:Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.01 0.01 Soil Identification:Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Brown Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)Ring Inside Diameter (in.) 2.375 2.375 2.375 Initial Moisture Content (%) 10.7 11.5 11.3 Strength Parameters Initial Dry Density (pcf) 112.8 111.9 112.2 61.5 60.9 Peak 79 33.2 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.2 1.2 1.2 C (psf)Initial Degree of Saturation (%) 58.4 Ultimate 75 33.2 Final Moisture Content (%) 15.0 14.8 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 Checked by: MR 14.7 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B4 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Shear Stress (ksf)Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 5.88 Boring No. B-4 Normal Strest (kip/ft2) 1 3 5 Sample No. B4@3'Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) 1.27 3.63 0.01 Depth (ft) 3'Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 1.17 3.43 5.69 Sample Type:Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.01 0.01 Soil Identification:Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)Ring Inside Diameter (in.) 2.375 2.375 2.375 Initial Moisture Content (%) 7.7 6.2 6.6 Strength Parameters Initial Dry Density (pcf) 121.7 122.7 122.0 44.7 46.4 Peak 136 49.1 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 1.2 1.2 1.2 C (psf)Initial Degree of Saturation (%) 54.3 Ultimate 40 48.5 Final Moisture Content (%) 10.5 11.5 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335Consolidated Drained ASTM D-3080 Checked by: MR 11.0 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B5 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0Shear Stress (ksf)Normal Stress (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B6 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B3@10' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)117.0 2.4 14.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B3@20' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Grayish Brown Sand with Gravel (SW)121.0 3.0 10.9 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B8 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B4@6' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Well graded Sand with Gravel (SW)121.9 2.7 11.7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B9 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B4@9' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)114.5 3.4 12.3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B10 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B4@12' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)122.2 4.3 12.3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B11 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B4@15' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Sand with Silt (SP-SM)105.6 13.1 20.3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B12 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B5@5' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Well graded Sand with Gravel (SW)121.8 2.7 11.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 Checked by: MR ASTM D-2435 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B13 WATER ADDED AT 2.0 KSF SAMPLE ID. B5@10' SOIL TYPE DRY DENSITY (PCF) INITIAL MOISTURE (%) FINAL MOISTURE (%) Brown Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)126.5 3.0 10.3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.1 1.0 10.0Percent ConsolidationConsolidation Pressure (ksf) Project No.: W1450-06-01 61.0 Specimen Diameter Date Time Non-Expansive Expansive Very Low Low Expansion Index, EI50 CBC CLASSIFICATION * UBC CLASSIFICATION ** 128.2 118.8 0.4 0.3 61.1 (%) (pcf) (pcf) (cc) (gm) (gm) B1+B2@0-5' 1.0 0 10 0.4415 0.4413 Expansion Index ( Report ) = Expansion Index (EI meas) =-0.6 0 1490 0.440711/9/2021 11:00 1.0 14301.0 Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time (min) Dial Readings (in.) 709.7 687.7 409.7 7.9 (gm) 118.7 0.4 0.3 MOLDED SPECIMEN BEFORE TEST AFTER TEST 4.0 1.0 596.5 171.4 2.7 (in.) (in.) (gm) (gm) (Assumed) 4.0 Specimen Height Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold Wt. of Mold Specific Gravity Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. Wt. of Container 91-130 >130 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D-4829 * Reference: 2019 California Building Code, Section 1803.5.3 ** Reference: 1997 Uniform Building Code, Table 18-I-B. Checked by: MR Medium High Very High Expansive Expansive Expansive NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B14 Moisture Content Wet Density Dry Density Void Ratio Total Porosity Pore Volume 51-90 0-20 21-50 Degree of Saturation 610.7 394.0 171.4 11.5 132.3 1.0 610.7 171.4 2.7 0.440710:0011/9/2021 74.451.4(%) [Smeas] Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 11/8/2021 11/8/2021 10:00 10:10 1.0 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. Project No.: W1450-06-01 58.5 Specimen Diameter Date Time Non-Expansive Expansive Very Low Low Expansion Index, EI50 CBC CLASSIFICATION * UBC CLASSIFICATION ** 129.2 120.7 0.4 0.3 58.7 (%) (pcf) (pcf) (cc) (gm) (gm) B3+B4@0-5' 1.0 0 10 0.3889 0.3888 Expansion Index ( Report ) = Expansion Index (EI meas) =-1 0 1490 0.387811/9/2021 11:00 1.0 14301.0 Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time (min) Dial Readings (in.) 707.7 688.1 407.7 7.0 (gm) 120.6 0.4 0.3 MOLDED SPECIMEN BEFORE TEST AFTER TEST 4.0 1.0 598.4 170.1 2.7 (in.) (in.) (gm) (gm) (Assumed) 4.0 Specimen Height Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold Wt. of Mold Specific Gravity Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. Wt. of Container 91-130 >130 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D-4829 * Reference: 2019 California Building Code, Section 1803.5.3 ** Reference: 1997 Uniform Building Code, Table 18-I-B. Checked by: MR Medium High Very High Expansive Expansive Expansive NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B15 Moisture Content Wet Density Dry Density Void Ratio Total Porosity Pore Volume 51-90 0-20 21-50 Degree of Saturation 617.7 400.3 170.1 11.8 134.8 1.0 617.7 170.1 2.7 0.387810:0011/9/2021 80.848.1(%) [Smeas] Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 11/8/2021 11/8/2021 10:00 10:10 1.0 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. Sample No: (g) (g) (g) (g) (g) (g) (%) (pcf) (pcf) Preparation Method: Project No.: W1450-06-01 Well Graded Sand with Gravel (SW)B1+B2@0-5' Checked by: MR COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS USING MODIFIED EFFORT TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335ASTM D-1557 56 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold 6278 6344 6372 6352 TEST NO. 1234 Net Weight of Soil 1986 2052 2080 2060 Weight of Mold 4292 4292 4292 4292 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.2302.6 2298.5 2320.4 2271.3 Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.2397.4 2432.9 2491.5 2474.3 Moisture Content 5.0 7.0 9.0 10.9 Weight of Container 410.2 378.6 408.9 409.9 Dry Density 125.6 127.3 126.8 123.3 Wet Density 131.9 136.3 138.1 136.8 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B16 A Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Bulk Specific Gravity (dry) 8.0 35.0 Corrected Maximum Dry Density (pcf)5.2 Optimum Moisture Content (%) Oversized Fraction (%) Corrected Moisture Content (%) 127.6 2.62 138.2 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 135.0 140.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0Dry Density (pcf)Moisture Content (%) S.G. 2.65 S.G. 2.7 S.G. 2.75 Project No.: W1450-06-01 Sample No. SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 417 Sample No.Water Soluble Sulfate (% SQ4)Sulfate Exposure* Chloride Ion Content (%) 0.036 0.048 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY CHLORIDE CONTENT TEST RESULTS EPA NO. 325.3 B1+B2@0-5' B3+B4@0-5' B1+B2@0-5' 0.007 S0 B3+B4@0-5' 0.003 S0 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY POTENTIAL OF HYDROGEN (pH) AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 643 Sample No. B1+B2@0-5' @ 0-5 B3+B4@0-5' @ 0-5 pH 7.5 7.8 Resistivity (ohm centimeters) 11000 (Mildly Corrosive) 18000 (Mildly Corrosive) Checked by: MR CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS 14817 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD FONTANA CA, 92335 NOVEMBER 2021 Figure B17 APPENDIX D BMP DETAILS, CALCULATIONS, AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FONTANA APARTMENTS 96" PERFORATED CMP WITH GRAVEL INFILTRATION VOLUME CALCULATION DCV = 35,498 cu-ft (Form 4.2-1) Infiltration Rate = 8.92in/hr (Refer to soils report in App. C) Factor of Safety = 3 (Refer to FS form in App. D) Pdesign = 2.97in/hr Vcmp = 29,600cu-ft (Refer to Contech CMP detail in Appendix D) Tfill = 3 hours (default per Table 5-4 in County of San Bernardino TGD) SAinf = (218LF x 21 LF) + 2*(218LF x 9) + 2*(21LF x 9LF) = 8,880 sq. ft Vret = Vcmp + (Pdesign/12 * SAinf * Tfill) Vret = 29,600 + 8,880 = 36,193 cu-ft > DCV Drawdown Time =[(Vret/SAinf) x 12]/Pdesign Drawdown Time = [(39,193/8,880) x 12]/2.97 = 16.5 hours Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 1 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 1 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 1 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p 1.0 B Design Tributary area size 0.25 2 0.5 Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.25 3 0.75 Redundancy 0.25 3 0.75 Compaction during construction 0.25 2 0.50 Design Safety Factor, SB = p 2.50 Combined Safety Factor, STOT= SA x SB USE 3.0 Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, KObserved (corrected for test-specific bias) 8.92in/hr (Test Location #B3 per infiltration test report) Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, KDESIGN = Kobserved/Stot 2.97in/hr Supporting Data Refer to Infiltration Test results in Geotechnical Investigation report prepared by Geocon West, Inc. included in Appendix C. Infiltration system is located in the vicinity of Test Location #B3. City of Fontana WQMP Handbook September 2016 - 7 - Figure 2-2 HCOC Exempt Areas HCOC Exempt Areas City of Fontana WQMP Handbook 0 1 2 •••-====::J Miles N A --Receiving Water -Basin/Dam •••• 1 , • _ City of Fontana HCOC Exempt Areas 1-Sump Conditions 3-Diversion to Storage 1-Sump Conditions, 3-Diversion to Storage City of Fontana WQMP Handbook September 2016 - 6 - Figure 2-1 Hydrologic Soil Group Hydrologic Soil Group City of Fontana WQMP Handbook 0 1 il•••lli:====:J Miles 2 N A --Receiving Water Hydrologic Soil Group Basin/Dam Unknown i~ ~~City of Fontana Type A -TypeB Type C APPENDIX E EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Best Management Practices for Homeowner’s Associations, Property Managers and Property Owners Your Guide To Maintaining Water Friendly Standards In Your Community sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa Table of Contents Commercial Trash Enclosures 1 Hazardous Waste 2 Working Outdoors & Handling Spills 4 Commercial Landscape 5 Sidewalk, Plaza, Entry Monument & Fountain Maintenance 6 Equipment Maintenance & Repair 10 Pool Maintenance 14 Paint 16 Vehicle Maintenance 17 Pet Waste Disposal 18 Get In Touch With Us Online 19 In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 1 COMMERCIAL TRASH ENCLOSURES In San Bernardino County, stormwater pollution is caused by food waste, landscape waste, chemicals and other debris that are washed into storm drains and end up in our waterways - untreated! You can be part of the solution by maintaining a water-friendly trash enclosure. To report illegal dumping (877-WASTE18) or to find a household hazardous waste facility (800-OILY CAT): sbcountystormwater.org TO KEEP OUR WATERWAYS CLEAN FOLLOW THESE REQUIREMENTS Trash enclosures, such as those found in commercial and apartment complexes, typically contain materials that are intended to find their way to a landfill or a recycling facility. These materials are NOT meant to go into our local lakes and rivers. THANK YOU FOR HELPING TO KEEP SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CLEAN AND HEALTHY! PROTECT WATER QUALITY BY FOLLOWING THESE SIMPLE STEPS • Paint • Grease, fats and used oils • Batteries, electronics and fluorescent lights KEEP TOXICS OUTCLOSE THE LID Prevent rain from entering the bin in order to avoid leakage of polluted water runoff PUT TRASH INSIDE Place trash inside the bin (preferably in sealed bags) COMMERCIAL TRASH ENCLOSURES SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES, INCLUDE SWEEP FREQUENTLY Sweep trash enclosure areas frequently, instead of hosing them down, to prevent polluted water from flowing into the streets and storm drains. FIX LEAKS Address trash bin leaks immediately by using dry clean up methods and report to your waste hauler to receive a replacement. CONSTRUCT ROOF Construct a solid cover roof over the existing trash enclosure structure to prevent rainwater from coming into contact with trash and garbage. Check with your local City/County for Building Codes. Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 2 HAZARDOUS WASTE Waste Type and Cost There is a small handling fee involved in the collection of hazardous waste from your business. Disposal costs depend on the type of waste. Aerosols $1.29/lb. Automobile motor oil $.73/gal. Anti-freeze $1.57/gal. Contaminated oil $4.48/gal. Car batteries $.62/ea. Corrosive liquids, solids $2.80/lb. Flammable solids, liquids $1.57/lb. Latex Paint $.73/lb. Mercury $10.08/lb. NiCad/Alkaline Batteries $2.13/lb. Oil Base Paints $1.00/lb. Oil Filters $.56/ea. Oxidizers $9.63/lb. PCB Ballasts $5.94/lb. Pesticides (most) $2.91/lb. Photoxer, developer $4.31/gal. Television & Monitors $11.20/ea. Additional Handling $138.00/hr. *Rates subject to change without notice* WE CANNOT ACCEPT Radioactives Water reactives Explosives Compressed gas cylinders Medical or biohazardous waste Asbestos Remediation wastes CESQG PROGRAM Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator WHAT IS A CESQG? Businesses that generate 27 gallons or 220 lbs. of hazardous waste, or 2.2 lbs. of extremely hazardous waste per month are called “Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators,” or CESQGs. San Bernardino County Household Hazardous Program provides waste management services to CESQG businesses. The most common CESQGs in San Bernardino County are painters, print shops, auto shops, builders, agricultural operators and property managers, but there are many others. When you call, be ready to describe the types and amounts of waste your business generates in a typical month. If you generate hazardous waste on a regular basis, you must: • Register with San Bernardino County Fire Department (909)386-8400 as a hazardous waste generator. • To obtain an EPA ID# and application form from the State visit www.dtsc.ca.gov. • Manage hazardous waste in accordance with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. HOW DO I GET SERVICE? To arrange an appointment for the CESQG Program, call 1-800-OILY CAT or 909-382-5401. Be ready to describe the type and amount of hazardous waste your business is ready to dispose of, and the types and size(s) of containers that the waste is in. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 3 HAZARDOUS WASTE WHY IS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COLLECTING HAZARDOUS WASTE? Small Quantity Generators often have difficulty disposing of small quantities of hazardous waste. Hazardous waste companies usually have a minimum amount of waste that they will pick up, or charge a minimum fee for service. Typically, the minimum fee exceeds the cost of disposal for the hazardous waste. This leaves the small quantity generator in a difficult situation. Some respond by storing hazardous waste until it becomes economical for the hazardous waste transporter to pick it up, putting the business out of compliance by exceeding regulatory accumulation time limits. Other businesses simply store their hazardous wastes indefinitely, creating an unsafe work environment and exceeding accumulation time limits. Yet other businesses attempt to illegally dispose of their waste at household hazardous waste collection facilities. These facilities are not legally permitted to accept commercial wastes, nor are prepared to provide legal documentation for commercial hazardous waste disposal. In answer to the problems identified above, the San Bernardino County Fire Department Household Hazardous Program instituted the Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Program. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES The CESQG Program will prepare an invoice for your business at the time of service. You can pay at the time of service with cash or a check, or you can mail your payment to the Fire Department within 30 days. Please note that we do not accept credit card payments. The preferred method of payment is to handle payment at time of service. Additional charges may apply for accounts not paid within 30 days. ARE THERE ANY OTHER WAYS THAT I CAN SAVE MONEY ON HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL? Yes! First, start by reducing the amount of waste that you produce by changing processes or process chemicals, at your business. Next, examine if there is a way that you can recycle your waste back into your processes. Network with similar businesses or trade associations for waste minimization and pollution prevention solutions. WHAT IF YOUR BUSINESS DOES NOT QUALIFY? Call the San Bernardino County Fire Department Field Services Division for assistance with hazardous waste management at 909-386-8400. If you reduce the amount of waste you generate each month to 27 gallons or less, you may qualify in the future. WHAT HAPPENS TO YOUR HAZARDOUS WASTE? Hazardous waste collected by the CESQG Program is transported to a state permitted processing facility in San Bernardino. The waste is further processed at this point and packaged for off-site recycling (oil filters, oil, latex paint, antifreeze, and batteries) or destructive incineration (pesticides, corrosives, flammables, oil based paint). San Bernardino County Fire Department CESQG Program 2824 East “W” Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0799 Phone: 909-382-5401 Fax: 909-382-5413 www.sbcfire.org/ofm/hhw/HouseholdHazardousWaste.aspx Email: mvangese@sbcfire.org In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho CucamongaRedlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 4 WORKING OUTDOORS & HANDLING SPILLS Clean waterways and the health of your neighborhood is a team effort. Be part of the clean water team, find out more about how to protect water quality in your community at: Las vías fluviales limpias y la salubridad de su barrio se logran gracias al trabajo en equipo. Sea parte del equipo de agua limpia y obtenga más información acerca de cómo proteger la calidad del agua en su comunidad en: sbcountystormwater.org CONTROL | CONTROL Locate the nearest storm drain and ensure nothing can enter or be discharged into it. Ubique el desagüe de aguas pluviales más cercano y asegúrese de que nada pueda ingresar a éste ni descargarse en él. CONTAIN | CONTENER Isolate your area to prevent material from potentially flowing or being blown away. Aísle su área para evitar que el material pueda discurrirse oser llevado por el viento. CAPTURE | CAPTURAR Sweep up debris and place it in the trash. Clean up spills with an absorbent material (e.g. kitty litter) or vacuum with a Wet-Vac and dispose of properly. Recoja los restos y colóquelos en la basura. Limpie los derrames con un material absorbente (como la arena para gatos) o aspírelos con una Wet-Vac (aspiradora de humedad) y deséchelos correctamente. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 5 COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 6 SIDEWALK, PLAZA, ENTRY MONUMENT & FOUNTAIN MAINTENANCE Pollutants on sidewalks and other pedestrian traffic areas and plazas are typically due to littering and vehicle use. Fountain water containing chlorine and copperbased algaecides is toxic to aquatic life. Proper inspection, cleaning, and repair of pedestrian areas and HOA owned surfaces and structures can reduce pollutant runoff from these areas. Maintaining these areas may involve one or more of the following activities: 1. Surface Cleaning 2. Graffiti Cleaning 3. Sidewalk Repair 4. Controlling Litter 5. Fountain Maintenance POLLUTION PREVENTION: Pollution prevention measures have been considered and incorporated in the model procedures. Implementation of these measures may be more effective and reduce or eliminate the need to implement other more complicated or costly procedures. Possible pollution prevention measures for sidewalk, plaza, and fountain maintenance and cleaning include: • Use dry cleaning methods whenever practical for surface cleaning activities. • Use the least toxic materials available (e.g. water based paints, gels or sprays for graffiti removal). • Once per year, educate HOA staff and tenants on pollution prevention measures. MODEL PROCEDURES: 1. Surface Cleaning Discharges of wash water to the storm water drainage system from cleaning or hosing of impervious surfaces is prohibited. Use dry methods (e.g. sweeping, backpack blowers, vacuuming) wheneverpractical to clean sidewalks and plazas rather than hosing, pressure washing, orsteam cleaning. DO NOT sweep or blow material into curb; use devicesthat contain the materials. If water must be used, block storm drain inlets and contain runoff.Discharge wash water to landscaping or contain and dispose of properly. Sidewalks, Plazas In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 7 SIDEWALK, PLAZA, ENTRY MONUMENT & FOUNTAIN MAINTENANCE Parking facilities should be swept/vacuumed on a regular basis.Establish frequency of public parking lot sweeping based on usageand field observations of waste accumulation. If water must be used, block storm drain inlets and contain runoff. Dischargewash water to landscaping or contain and dispose of properly. Sweep all parking lots at least once before the onset of the wet season. Use absorbents to pick up oil; then dry sweep. Appropriately dispose of spilled materials and absorbents. OPTIONAL: • Consider increasing sweeping frequency based on factors such as trafficvolume, land use, field observations of sediment and trash accumulation,proximity to water courses, etc. 2. Graffiti Cleaning Use high-pressure water, no soap. If water must be used, block storm drain inlets and contain runoff. Discharge wash water to landscaping or contain and dispose of properly. If water must be used, block storm drain inlets and contain runoff. Discharge wash water to landscaping or contain and dispose of properly. If using a biodegradable or other cleaning agent to remove deposits contain and dispose of properly. Avoid graffiti abatement activities during rain events. When graffiti is removed by painting over, implement the procedures under Painting and Paint Removal in the Roads, Streets, and Highway Operation and Maintenance procedure sheet. Protect nearby storm drain inlets prior to removing graffiti from walls,signs, sidewalks, or other structures needing graffiti abatement. Clean up afterwards by sweeping or vacuuming thoroughly, and/or by using absorbent and properly disposing of the absorbent. Parking Areas, Driveways, Drive-thru Building Surfaces, Decks, etc., without loose paint Unpainted Building Surfaces, Wood Decks, etc. Graffiti Removal In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 8 SIDEWALK, PLAZA, ENTRY MONUMENT & FOUNTAIN MAINTENANCE Note that care should be taken when disposing of waste since it may need to bedisposed of as hazardous waste. OPTIONAL: • Consider using a waterless and non-toxic chemical cleaning method for graffitiremoval (e.g. gels or spray compounds). 3. Sidewalk Repair Schedule surface removal activities for dry weather if possible. Avoid creating excess dust when breaking asphalt or concrete. Take measures to protect nearby storm drain inlets prior to breaking up asphaltor concrete (e.g. place hay bales or sand bags around inlets). Clean afterwardsby sweeping up material. Designate an area for clean up and proper disposal of excess materials. Remove and recycle as much of the broken pavement as possible. When making saw cuts in pavement, use as little water as possible. Cover eachstorm drain inlet with filter fabric during the sawing operation and contain theslurry by placing straw bales, sandbags, or gravel dams around the inlets. Afterthe liquid drains shovel or vacuum the slurry, remove from site and dispose ofproperly. Always dry sweep first to clean up tracked dirt. Use a street sweeperor vacuum truck. Do not dump vacuumed liquid in storm drains. Once drysweeping is complete, the area may be hosed down if needed. Discharge washwater to landscaping, pump to the sanitary sewer if permitted to doso or contain and dispose of properly. Avoid mixing excess amounts of fresh concrete or cement mortar on-site.Only mix what is needed for the job. Wash concrete trucks off-site or in designated areas on-site, such that thereis no discharge of concrete wash water into storm drain inlets, open ditches,streets, or other storm water conveyance structures. (See Concrete WasteManagement BMP WM – 8) Surface Removal and Repair Concrete Installation and Repair In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 9 SIDEWALK, PLAZA, ENTRY MONUMENT & FOUNTAIN MAINTENANCE Store dry and wet concrete materials under cover, protected from rainfall andrunoff and away from drainage areas. After job is complete remove temporarystockpiles (asphalt materials, sand, etc.) and other materials as soon as possible. Return leftover materials to the transit mixer. Dispose of small amounts ofexcess concrete, grout, and mortar in the trash. When washing concrete to remove fine particles and expose the aggregate,contain the wash water for proper disposal. Do not wash sweepings from exposed aggregate concrete into the streetor storm drain. Collect and return sweepings to aggregate base stock pile,or dispose in the trash. Protect applications of fresh concrete from rainfall and runoff until the materialhas hardened. 4. Litter Control Enforce anti-litter laws. Provide litter receptacles in busy, high pedestrian traffic areas of thecommunity, at recreational facilities, and at community events. Cover litter receptacles and clean out frequently to prevent leaking/spillage oroverflow. OPTIONAL: • Post “No Littering” signs. 5. Fountain Maintenance Do not use copper-based algaecides. Control algae with chlorine or otheralternatives, such as sodium bromide. Allow chlorine to dissipate for a few days and then recycle/reuse water by drainingit gradually onto a landscaped area. Water must be tested prior to discharge toensure that chlorine is not present (concentration must be less than 0.1 ppm). Contact local agency for approval to drain into sewer or storm drain. Avoid mixing excess amounts of fresh concrete or cement mortar on-site.Only mix what is needed for the job. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 10 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR Vehicle or equipment maintenance has the potential to be a significant source of stormwater pollution. Engine repair and service (parts cleaning, spilled fuel, oil, etc.), replacement of fluids, and outdoor equip-ment storage and parking (dripping engines) can all contaminate stormwater. Conducting the following activities in a controlled manner will reduce the potential for stormwater contamination: 1. General Maintenance and Repair 2. Vehicle and Machine Repair 3. Waste Handling/Disposal Related vehicle maintenance activities are covered under the following program headings in this manual: “Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning”, “Vehicle and Equipment Storage”, and “Vehicle Fueling”. POLLUTION PREVENTION: Pollution prevention measures have been considered and incorporated in the model procedures. Implementation of these measures may be more effective and reduce or eliminate the need to implement other more complicated or costly procedures. Possible pollution prevention measures for equipment maintenance and repair include: • Review maintenance activities to verify that they minimize the amount of pollutants discharged toreceiving waters. Keep accurate maintenance logs to evaluate materials removed and improvementsmade. • Switch to non-toxic chemicals for maintenance when possible. • Choose cleaning agents that can be recycled. • Minimize use of solvents. Clean parts without using solvents whenever possible. Recycle used motoroil, diesel oil, and other vehicle fluids and parts whenever possible. • Once per year, educate HOA staff and tenants on pollution prevention measures. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 11 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR MODEL PROCEDURES: 1. General Maintenance and Repair Review maintenance activities to verify that they minimize the amountof pollutants discharged to receiving waters. Keep accurate maintenancelogs to evaluate materials removed and improvements made. Regularly inspect vehicles and equipment for leaks. Move activity indoors or cover repair area with a permanent roof if feasible. Minimize contact of stormwater with outside operations through berming thelocal sewering and drainage routing. Place curbs around the immediate boundaries of the process equipment. Clean yard storm drain inlets regularly and stencil them. Avoid hosing down work areas. If work areas are washed and if discharge to thesanitary sewer is allowed, treat water with an appropriate treatment device (e.g.clarifier) before discharging. If discharge to the sanitary sewer is not permitted,pump water to a tank and dispose of properly. Collect leaking or dripping fluids in drip pans or container. Fluids are easier torecycle or dispose of properly if kept separate. Keep a drip pan under the vehicle while you unclip hoses, unscrew filters, anydischarge of or remove other parts. Place a drip pan under any vehicle thatmight leak while you work on it to keep splatters or drips off the shop floor. Educate employees on proper handling and disposal of engine fluids. Promptly transfer used fluids to the proper waste or recycling drums. Don’tleave full drip pans or other open containers lying around. Do not pour liquid waste to floor drains, sinks, outdoor storm drain inlets, orother storm drains or sewer connections. Post signs at sinks and stencil outdoor storm drain inlets. 2.Vehicle Repair Perform vehicle fluid removal or changing inside of a building or in a containedcovered area, where feasible, to prevent the run-on of stormwater and therunoff of spills. Regularly inspect vehicles and equipment for leaks, and repair as needed. General Guidelines Good Housekeeping General Guidelines Note: Permission must be obtained for any discharge of wash water to the sanitary sewer from the local sewering agency. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 12 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR Use secondary containment, such as a drain pan or drop cloth, to catch spills or leaks when removing or changing fluids. Immediately drain all fluids from wrecked vehicles. Ensure that the drain pan ordrip pan is large enough to contain drained fluids (e.g. larger pans are needed to contain antifreeze, which may gush from some vehicles). Promptly transfer used fluids to the proper waste or recycling drums. Don’tleave full drip pans or other open containers lying around. Recycle used motor oil, diesel oil, and other vehicle fluids and parts whenever possible. Oil filters disposed of in trash cans or dumpsters can leak oil. Place the oilfilter in a funnel over a waste oil recycling drum to drain excess oil before disposal. Oil filters can also be recycled. Ask your oil supplier or recyclerabout recycling oil filters. Store cracked batteries in a non-leaking secondary container and dispose of properly at recycling facilities or at County hazardous waste disposal site. Use absorbent materials on small spills. Remove the absorbent materials promptly and dispose of properly. Place a stockpile of spill cleanup materials where it will be readily accessible. Sweep floor using dry absorbent material. 3. Machine Repair Keep equipment clean; don’t allow excessive build-up of oil or grease. Minimize use of solvents. Use secondary containment, such as a drain pan or drop cloth, to catch spills orleaks when removing or changing fluids. Perform major equipment repairs at the corporation yard, when practical. Following good housekeeping measures in Vehicle Repair section. 4.Waste Handling/Disposal Prevent spills and drips of solvents and cleansers to the shop floor. Do liquid cleaning at a centralized station so the solvents and residues stay in one area. Recycle liquid cleaners when feasible. Vehicle Leak and Spill Control Waste Reduction In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 13 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR Locate drip pans, drain boards, and drying racks to direct drips back into a solvent sink or fluid holding tank for reuse. OPTIONAL: • If possible, eliminate or reduce the amount of hazardous materials and waste by substituting non-hazardous or less hazardous material: -Use non-caustic detergents instead of caustic cleaning for parts cleaning. -Use a water-based cleaning service and have tank cleaned. Use detergent-based or water-based cleaning systems in place of organic solvent degreasers. -Replace chlorinated organic solvents with non-chlorinated solvents. Non-chlorinated solvents like kerosene or mineral spirits are less toxic and less expensive to dispose of properly. Check list of active ingredients to see whether it contains chlorinated solvents. -Choose cleaning agents that can be recycled. OPTIONAL: • Separate wastes for easier recycling. Keep hazardous and non-hazardous wastes separate, do not mix used oil and solvents, and keep chlorinated solvents separate from non-chlorinated solvents. • Label and track the recycling of waste material (e.g. used oil, spent solvents, batteries). • Purchase recycled products to support the market for recycled materials. LIMITATIONS: Space and time limitations may preclude all work being conducted indoors. It may not be possible to contain and clean up spills from vehicles/equipment brought on-site after working hours. Dry floor cleaning methods may not be sufficient for some spills – see spill prevention and control procedures sheet. Identification of engine leaks may require some use of solvents. Recycling In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 14 POOL MAINTENANCE Pool chemicals and filter solids, when discharged to the City streets, gutters or storm drans, DO NOT GET TREATED before reaching the Santa Ana River. Chlorine, acid cleaning chemicals and metal-based algaecides used in pools can kill beneficial organisms in the food chain and pollute our drinking water. When emptying your swimming pool, spa or fountain, please use one of the following best management practices to prevent water pollution: •Reuse the water as landscape irrigation • Empty the water into the sewer between midnight and 6:00 am • Remove solids and floating debris and dispose of in the trash, de-chlorinate the water to a chlorine residual = 0, wait 24 hours, then discharge the water to the street or storm drain •Try not to use metal-based algaecides (i.e. copper sulfate) in your pool or spa. If you have, empty your pool or spa into the sewer. Prior to discharging pool water into the sanitary sewer system, contact your local agency. • If the pool contains algae and mosquito larvae, discharge the water to the sewer When acid cleaning or other chemical cleaning: • Neutralize the pool water to pH of 6.5 to 8.5, then discharge to the sewer For swimming pool and spa filter backwash: • Dispose of solids into trash bag, then wash filter into a landscape area • Settle, dispose of solids in trash and discharge water to the sewer, never to the storm drain For Residents The following is a preview of the information we have available to residents. For more fact sheets, visit sbcountystormwater.org DO YOU HAVE THE FOLLOWINGITEMS IN YOUR HOME? Big Bear Lake Chino Fontana Ontario Rancho Cucamonga Redlands Rialto San Bernardino Upland SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY STORMWATER PROGRAMWHERE WATERMEETS COMMUNITY *No business waste accepted. Must be a San Bernardino County resident. Automotive Fluids Batteries Cooking Oil Fertilizers & Pesticides Fluorescent Bulbs Household Cleaners Medicine Motor Oil & Filters Paint Products Pool Chemicals PROTECT YOUR COMMUNITY! Take your toxic products to a local waste collection center: Find locations and a full list of items, visit tootoxictotrash.com Household Hazardous Waste Center Locations In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 16 PAINT When painting your home, protect your family and community. • • • WEDIDIT OUR SELVES ANDWE DIDIT RIGHT PAINTS that are water-based are less toxic and should be used whenever possible. BRUSHES with water-based paint should be washed in the sink. Those with oil-based paint should be cleaned with paint thinner. SAFELY dispose of unwanted paint and paint thinner. The County of San Bernardino offers 9 HHW Centers that accept paint and other household hazardous waste from residents FREE of charge. For a list of acceptable materials, location information, and hours of operation visit TooToxicToTrash.com. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga Redlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 17 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE Oil, grease, anti-freeze and other toxic automotive fluids often make their way into the San Bernardino County storm drain system, and do not get treated before reaching the Santa Ana River. This pollutes our drinking water and contaminates waterways, making them unsafe for people and wildlife. Follow these best management practices to prevent pollution and protect public health. Cleaning Auto Parts Scrape parts with a wire brush or use a bake oven rather than liquid cleaners. Arrange drip pans, drying racks and drain boards so that fluids are directed back into the parts washer or the fluid holding tank. Do not wash parts or equipment in a sink, parking lot, driveway or street. Storing Hazardous Waste Keep your liquid waste segregated. Many fluids can be recycled via hazardous waste disposal companies if they are not mixed. Store all materials under cover with spill containment or inside to prevent contamination of rainwater runoff. Preventing Leaks and Spills Conduct all vehicle maintenance inside of a garage. Place drip pans underneath vehicle to capture fluids. Use absorbent materials instead of water to clean work areas. Cleaning Spills Use dry methods for spill cleanup (sweeping, absorbent materials). To report accidental spills into the street or storm drain call (877) WASTE18 or 911. Proper Disposal of Hazardous Waste Dispose of household hazardous waste by taking it to your nearest household hazardous waste center. For more information, call 1-800-OILY CAT or check out TooToxicToTrash.com. In the event of a spill or discharge to a storm drain or waterway, contact San Bernardino County Stormwater immediately: (877) WASTE18 | sbcountystormwater.org/report sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho CucamongRedlands • Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa 18 PET WASTE DISPOSAL SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY STORMWATER PROGRAMWHERE WATERMEETS COMMUNITY Thanks for being a responsible pet owner and contributing to a beautiful San Bernardino County. FOR YOU AND YOUR FRIEND FREEGET A DOGGIE WASTE BAG Visit FreeDoggieBags.com Request a FREE canister from us Send a FREE canister to a friend Use your canister to pick up after your dog anytime, anyplace! Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Thanks for being a responsible pet owner and contributing to a beautiful San Bernardino County. FOR YOU AND YOUR FRIENDFREEGET A DOGGIE WASTE BAG Visit FreeDoggieBags.com Request a FREE canister from us Send a FREE canister to a friend Use your canister to pick up after your dog anytime, anyplace! Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY STORMWATER PROGRAMWHERE WATERMEETS COMMUNITY Get In Touch With Us Online! » Website » eUpdates » Facebook » YouTube » Report Pollution Violations » Email sbcountystormwater.org sbcountystormwater.org/newsletter facebook.com/sbcountystormwater youtube.com/sbcountystormwater sbcountystormwater.org/report info@sbcountystormwater.org Big Bear • Chino • Chino Hills • Colton • Fontana • Grand Terrace • Highland • Loma Linda • Montclair • Ontario • Rancho Cucamonga • Redlands Rialto • San Bernardino • San Bernardino County • San Bernardino County Flood Control District • Upland • Yucaipa SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY STORMWATER PROGRAMWHERE WATERMEETS COMMUNITY To report illegal dumping or toxic spills, call (877) WASTE18 or visit tootoxictotrash.com To dispose of hazardous waste, call 1 (800) OILYCAT sbcountystormwater.org DISCHARGE TO THE STORM DRAIN, ACCIDENTAL OR NOT, COULD LEAD TO ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS AND FINES Sustainable Practices for Landscape Maintenance Your contributions make a difference in the way you maintain your yard. Learn how to truly be a “green” thumb and prevent stormwater pollution. Recycle Yard Waste Yard waste, like grass and leaves, can block the storm drain or carry harmful chemicals into it. z Recycle yard waste by placing them into your greenwaste container. z Do not blow, sweep, rake, or hose yard waste into the street or catch basin. z Try grasscycling by leaving clippings on the lawn when mowing. For more information, visit www.calrecycle.ca.gov/ organics/grasscycling. Use Safe Products Fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides are often carried into the storm drain by sprinkler runoff. z Use natural and non-toxic alternatives as often as possible. z Spot-apply, rather than blanketing entire areas. Apply chemicals directly to the area that needs treatment. z Read the product label and use only as directed. z Never apply before a rain. Use Water Wisely Conserving water minimizes the amount of urban runoff going into the street. z Control the amount of water and direction of sprinklers. The average lawn only needs about an inch of water a week or 10 to 20 minutes of watering. z Periodically inspect and fix sprinklers for leaks. Realign sprinkler heads to make sure water is distributed onto the lawn and not onto the sidewalk. z Plant native vegetation to reduce the need of water. Leftover pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides contaminate landfills and should be disposed of through a Household Hazardous Waste Center*. For more information on proper disposal, call 1 (800) OILYCAT or visit tootoxictotrash.com. *FREE for San Bernardino County residents. Businesses can call for cost inquiries and to schedule an appointment. HOMEOWNERS Keep these tips in mind when hiring professional landscapers and remind them as necessary. *No business waste accepted. Must be a San Bernardino County resident. Recycle your leftover liquid cooking oil to avoid the hassle of dealing with clogged pipes and other sewer problems. Cool oil to a safe temperature & filter to remove food particles. Pour oil into a jar or plastic container with a tight fitting lid. Take the oil to your nearest toxic waste collection center. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY STORMWATER PROGRAMWHERE WATERMEETS COMMUNITY For a list of collection centers near you, visit TooToxicToTrash.com RECYCLE IT!GOT COOKING OIL? APPENDIX F OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL(S) Underground Infiltration Chamber Underground infiltration chambers often include a vault or chamber with an open bottom that is used to store and infiltrate runoff. Alternatively, perforated pipes can also be used. Durable prefabricated structures are offered by a number of vendors. Retention volume provided by underground infiltration chambers is a function of the infiltrating surface area. Underground infiltration chambers remove pollutants infiltrated through the system, as infiltration is a volume reduction which results in a 100% pollutant load reduction. Design Criteria and Constraints Design Parameter Design Criteria Maximum drawdown time 48 hours Maximum drainage area 50 acres Maximum distance between cleanouts 50 feet Minimum diameter of access entry covers 36 inches Historic high groundwater mark setback > 10 feet below invert of system Bedrock/impermeable layer setback > 5 feet below invert of system Well/tank/spring setback > 100 feet horizontally from system Note: Sizing for an underground infiltration chamber is similar to that of infiltration basins Material Specifications Design Parameter Design Criteria Chamber Structure Concrete, steel, plastics, and other stable materials Operation 1. Siting consideration: underground infiltration chamber are not permitted near steep slopes or existing soil contamination areas 2. Pretreatment: pretreatment should be provided upstream of the infiltration chamber to mitigate the risk of groundwater contamination 3. Overflow system: an overflow route is needed to redirect excessive flows to a downstream conveyance system in case of clogging or a large storm event Maintenance Maintenance Activities Suggested Frequency Remove sediment, trash, and debris from pretreatment facilities and storage chambers Ongoing standard maintenance as needed Check inlets/outlets and clean as needed Ongoing standard maintenance as needed Check access points and maintain Annually before the wet season Note: Maintenance specifications from vendors for proprietary systems must be considered CDS® Inspection and Maintenance Guide ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS Maintenance The CDS system should be inspected at regular intervals and maintained when necessary to ensure optimum performance. The rate at which the system collects pollutants will depend more heavily on site activities than the size of the unit. For example, unstable soils or heavy winter sanding will cause the grit chamber to fill more quickly but regular sweeping of paved surfaces will slow accumulation. Inspection Inspection is the key to effective maintenance and is easily performed. Pollutant transport and deposition may vary from year to year and regular inspections will help ensure that the system is cleaned out at the appropriate time. At a minimum, inspections should be performed twice per year (e.g. spring and fall) however more frequent inspections may be necessary in climates where winter sanding operations may lead to rapid accumulations, or in equipment washdown areas. Installations should also be inspected more frequently where excessive amounts of trash are expected. The visual inspection should ascertain that the system components are in working order and that there are no blockages or obstructions in the inlet and separation screen. The inspection should also quantify the accumulation of hydrocarbons, trash, and sediment in the system. Measuring pollutant accumulation can be done with a calibrated dipstick, tape measure or other measuring instrument. If absorbent material is used for enhanced removal of hydrocarbons, the level of discoloration of the sorbent material should also be identified during inspection. It is useful and often required as part of an operating permit to keep a record of each inspection. A simple form for doing so is provided. Access to the CDS unit is typically achieved through two manhole access covers. One opening allows for inspection and cleanout of the separation chamber (cylinder and screen) and isolated sump. The other allows for inspection and cleanout of sediment captured and retained outside the screen. For deep units, a single manhole access point would allows both sump cleanout and access outside the screen. The CDS system should be cleaned when the level of sediment has reached 75% of capacity in the isolated sump or when an appreciable level of hydrocarbons and trash has accumulated. If absorbent material is used, it should be replaced when significant discoloration has occurred. Performance will not be impacted until 100% of the sump capacity is exceeded however it is recommended that the system be cleaned prior to that for easier removal of sediment. The level of sediment is easily determined by measuring from finished grade down to the top of the sediment pile. To avoid underestimating the level of sediment in the chamber, the measuring device must be lowered to the top of the sediment pile carefully. Particles at the top of the pile typically offer less resistance to the end of the rod than consolidated particles toward the bottom of the pile. Once this measurement is recorded, it should be compared to the as-built drawing for the unit to determine weather the height of the sediment pile off the bottom of the sump floor exceeds 75% of the total height of isolated sump. Cleaning Cleaning of a CDS systems should be done during dry weather conditions when no flow is entering the system. The use of a vacuum truck is generally the most effective and convenient method of removing pollutants from the system. Simply remove the manhole covers and insert the vacuum hose into the sump. The system should be completely drained down and the sump fully evacuated of sediment. The area outside the screen should also be cleaned out if pollutant build-up exists in this area. In installations where the risk of petroleum spills is small, liquid contaminants may not accumulate as quickly as sediment. However, the system should be cleaned out immediately in the event of an oil or gasoline spill should be cleaned out immediately. Motor oil and other hydrocarbons that accumulate on a more routine basis should be removed when an appreciable layer has been captured. To remove these pollutants, it may be preferable to use absorbent pads since they are usually less expensive to dispose than the oil/water emulsion that may be created by vacuuming the oily layer. Trash and debris can be netted out to separate it from the other pollutants. The screen should be power washed to ensure it is free of trash and debris. Manhole covers should be securely seated following cleaning activities to prevent leakage of runoff into the system from above and also to ensure that proper safety precautions have been followed. Confined space entry procedures need to be followed if physical access is required. Disposal of all material removed from the CDS system should be done in accordance with local regulations. In many jurisdictions, disposal of the sediments may be handled in the same manner as the disposal of sediments removed from catch basins or deep sump manholes. Table 1: CDS Maintenance Indicators and Sediment Storage Capacities 800.925.5240www.ContechES.com Support• Drawings and specifications are available at www.contechstormwater.com. • Site-specific design support is available from our engineers. ©2017 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC, a QUIKRETE Company Contech Engineered Solutions LLC provides site solutions for the civil engineering industry. Contech’s portfolio includes bridges, drainage, sanitary sewer, stormwater, earth stabilization and wastewater treament products. For information, visit www.ContechES.com or call 800.338.1122 NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS AN EXPRESSED WARRANTY OR AN IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. SEE THE CONTECH STANDARD CONDITION OF SALES (VIEWABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM/COS) FOR MORE INFORMATION. The product(s) described may be protected by one or more of the following US patents: 5,322,629; 5,624,576; 5,707,527; 5,759,415; 5,788,848; 5,985,157; 6,027,639; 6,350,374; 6,406,218; 6,641,720; 6,511,595; 6,649,048; 6,991,114; 6,998,038; 7,186,058; 7,296,692; 7,297,266; 7,517,450 related foreign patents or other patents pending. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS CDS Model Diameter Distance from Water Surface to Top of Sediment Pile Sediment Storage Capacity ft m ft m y3 m3 CDS1515 3 0.9 3.0 0.9 0.5 0.4 CDS2015 4 1.2 3.0 0.9 0.9 0.7 CDS2015 5 1.3 3.0 0.9 1.3 1.0 CDS2020 5 1.3 3.5 1.1 1.3 1.0 CDS2025 5 1.3 4.0 1.2 1.3 1.0 CDS3020 6 1.8 4.0 1.2 2.1 1.6 CDS3025 6 1.8 4.0 1.2 2.1 1.6 CDS3030 6 1.8 4.6 1.4 2.1 1.6 CDS3035 6 1.8 5.0 1.5 2.1 1.6 CDS4030 8 2.4 4.6 1.4 5.6 4.3 CDS4040 8 2.4 5.7 1.7 5.6 4.3 CDS4045 8 2.4 6.2 1.9 5.6 4.3 CDS5640 10 3.0 6.3 1.9 8.7 6.7 CDS5653 10 3.0 7.7 2.3 8.7 6.7 CDS5668 10 3.0 9.3 2.8 8.7 6.7 CDS5678 10 3.0 10.3 3.1 8.7 6.7 CDS Inspection & Maintenance Log CDS Model: Location: Water Floatable Describe Maintenance Date depth to Layer Maintenance Personnel Comments sediment1 Thickness2 Performed —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 1. The water depth to sediment is determined by taking two measurements with a stadia rod: one measurement from the manhole opening to the top of the sediment pile and the other from the manhole opening to the water surface. If the difference between these measurements is less than the values listed in table 1 the system should be cleaned out. Note: to avoid underestimating the volume of sediment in the chamber, the measuring device must be carefully lowered to the top of the sediment pile. 2. For optimum performance, the system should be cleaned out when the floating hydrocarbon layer accumulates to an appreciable thickness. In the event of an oil spill, the system should be cleaned immediately.CDS Maintenance Guide - 7/18 (PDF)