Chino City Council
April 5, 2022

Ventura , CA 93004
(805) 559-9913
[email protected]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8140CD45-B86A-4F9B-8292-6B465897FC7C

10.13.a
Approval of Design Fee Advance for Pine Avenue
Packet Pg. 234
George Perez
Construction & Technical
Support - Project Management
Sr. Project Manager
I have read and understood the above letter agreement, and acknowledge and agree to the terms herein as an authorized representative of City of Chino.

By: Date:

Title:

Applicant Signature
Print Name
CC: Tony Torres
I will be managing your project; therefore, if I may be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to telephone me at (805) 559-9913. Please notify me immediately if the project is delayed, cancelled, or if there are changes in building plans, work schedules or completion dates.

Sincerely,
George Perez
Sr. Project Manager
Construction & Technical Support - Project Management

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8140CD45-B86A-4F9B-8292-6B465897FC7C 3/14/2022

10.13.a
Approval of Design Fee Advance for Pine Avenue
Packet Pg. 235
Certificate Of Completion
Envelope Id: 8140CD45B86A4F9B82926B465897FC7C
Status: Completed
Subject: Please DocuSign: 2175RequestForInitialEngineeringAdvanceTSP Inter Set Customer Letter.03.14.202...

Custom Envelope Field: 2175 Engineering Advance Customer Letter Source Envelope:

Document Pages: 2
Signatures: 1
Envelope Originator:

Certificate Pages: 1
Initials: 0
Anthony Torres
AutoNav: Enabled
EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled
Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
P.O. Box 700
Rosemead, CA 91770
[email protected]
IP Address: 163.116.132.115
Record Tracking
Status: Original
3/14/2022 11:55:00 AM
Holder: Anthony Torres
[email protected]
Location: DocuSign
Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
George Perez
[email protected]
Security Level: Email, Account Authentication
(None)
Signature Adoption: Pre-selected Style
Using IP Address: 163.116.138.118
Sent: 3/14/2022 11:58:32 AM
Viewed: 3/14/2022 12:46:22 PM
Signed: 3/14/2022 12:46:38 PM
Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure:

Not Offered via DocuSign
In Person Signer Events
Signature
Timestamp
Editor Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Agent Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Intermediary Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Certified Delivery Events
Status
Timestamp
Carbon Copy Events
Status
Timestamp
Witness Events
Signature
Timestamp
Notary Events
Signature
Timestamp
Envelope Summary Events
Status
Timestamps
Envelope Sent
Hashed/Encrypted
3/14/2022 11:58:32 AM
Certified Delivered
Security Checked
3/14/2022 12:46:22 PM
Signing Complete
Security Checked
3/14/2022 12:46:38 PM
Completed
Security Checked
3/14/2022 12:46:38 PM
Payment Events
Status
Timestamps

10.13.a
Approval of Design Fee Advance for Pine Avenue
Packet Pg. 236

Revenue: Expenditure:

Transfer In: 1001000-50000 Transfer Out:2631000-40001

M E M O R A N D U M

CITY OF CHINO

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022

TO: MATTHEW C. BALLANTYNE, CITY MANAGER

FROM: NICHOLAS S. LIGUORI, AICP, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR

SUBJECT: STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN UPDA TE, SUBAREA NO. 2 – THE PRESERVE.

RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) approve Resolution No. 2022 -019 adopting The Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated wit h the adoption of The Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve . Construction cost estimates for the recommended drainage facilities in the updated Master Plan will be incorporated into the Development Impact Fee Nexus and Calculation Report to ensure the City collects sufficient funds to cover the costs of the required storm drain infrastructure in The Preserve Specific Plan area.

11.14 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 237
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN UPDATE, SUBAREA NO. 2 – THE PRESERVE PAGE 2

BACKGROUND
In 2007, the City’s Master Plan of Drainage was revised to include Subarea No. 2 - The Chino Agricultural Preserve (“MPD-P”), which identified the various recommended backbone drainage facilities required to support build -out of The Preserve. Several unofficial amendments to the MPD-P were also subsequently prepared to consider necessary revisions as development progressed in the area. The MPD -P encompasses a study area of 8.5 square miles, generally bounded by Euclid Avenue to west, Kimball and Merrill Avenue to the north, Hellman Avenue to the east and Riverside County Line through Prado Regional Park to the south.

More recently, City staff proceeded with a comprehensive update to the MPD -P to analyze, compile the hydrologic and hydraulic studies, and recommend future drainage facilities needed to support the impact of development. The update is n eeded by staff to prioritize the construction and estimate the costs associated with the storm drain collection system through the build-out of The Preserve.

Consequently, staff solicited proposals for the preparation of the Master Plan of Drainage Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve (“MPD Update”) and entered into an agreement with Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. dba Q3 Consulting (“Consultant”) on May 5, 2020.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The MPD Update implements hydrologic and hydraulic analyses to reevalu ate the drainage facilities identified in the MPD-P that have not yet been constructed. The MPD Update covers a more focused study area of approximately 4.5 square miles as depicted in Exhibit A. The recommended drainage facilities identified in the MPD -Update are sized to handle 100 -year stormwater flows based on various hydrologic and hydraulic calculations/methods, including the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) computer program. The SWMM computer program provid es dynamic modeling to help yield a true representation of storm water flows. Future drainage facilities in the various subareas (F, G, H and I) were all modeled with the SWMM computer program to provide value engineering storm drain networks.

The MPD Update includes revised construction cost estimates for the future drainage facilities.

These cost estimates have been incorporated into the City’s proposed Development Impact Fee Program to ensure the City collects sufficient funds to cover the costs of the r equired storm drain infrastructure in The Preserve Specific Plan area. The total cost for the remaining facilities is estimated to be approximately $110,726,401.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing and approve Resolution No. 2022 -019 adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve.

The Storm Drain Master Plan Update Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve document is available online at: https://www.cityofchino.org/193/Master-Plan-of-Drainage

11.14 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 238
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN UPDATE, SUBAREA NO. 2 – THE PRESERVE PAGE 3

Attachment: Exhibit A
Resolution No. 2022-019
Master of Plan of Drainage (Draft) 2021 (Appendices available online at https://www.cityofchino.org/193/Master-Plan-of-Drainage)

11.14 PUBLIC HEARING
Packet Pg. 239

GEFJJI C
JDH B

HELLMAN AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVEE PRESERVELOOP

W PRESERVELOOP

RINCONMEADOWS AVECUCAMONGA AVE

MERRILL AVE

STORM DRAINLINE FSTORM DRAINLINE GSTORM DRAINLINE I

STORM DRAINLINE HSTORM DRAINLINE E

STORM DRAINLINE C

STORM DRAINLINE D

STORM DRAINLINE J STORM DRAINLINE B

C I T Y O F E A S T V A L E

C I T Y O F O N T A R I O

FLIGHT AVE

GROVE AVE
LEGEND
NMASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021STUDY AREACURRENT CONDITION C FIGURE1-2

11.14.a
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 240
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-019

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN UPDATE, SUBAREA NO. 2 – THE PRESERVE.

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Master Plan of Drainage in 1993, which has been revised to include Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve; and

WHEREAS, an update to the existing Master Plan of Drainage for Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve is necessary to prioritize the construction and estimate th e costs associated with the storm drain collection system throughout the build -out of The Preserve ; and

WHEREAS, the City Council entered into an agreement with Proactive Engineering Consultants, Inc. dba Q3 Consulting for the preparation of the Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve (“Update”); and

WHEREAS, the Update is not a mandate of required improvements, but a planning tool to be used by the City of Chino in developing budgets to calculate future Development Impact Fees; and

WHEREAS, the Update has been incorporated into the City’s proposed Development Impact Fee Program to ensure the City collects sufficient funds to cover the costs of the required storm drain infrastructure in The Preserve Specific Plan area.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that the City of Chino does hereby determine, find, resolve, and order as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals above are found to be true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council made in support of this resolution.

SECTION 2. The City Council adopts the City of Chino Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2022.

EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR

11.14.b
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 241
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-019

ATTEST:

ANGELA ROBLES, CITY CLERK

State of California )
County of San Bernardino ) ss.

City of Chino )

I, ANGELA ROBLES, City Clerk of the City of Chino, do hereby certify that the forgoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of April 2022, by the following votes:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ANGELA ROBLES, CITY CLERK

11.14.b
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 242

Storm Drain Master Plan Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve

FINAL REPORT

December 2021

Prepared for:

City of Chino
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710

Prepared by:

27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 243

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 244

MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATE
SUBAREA NO. 2

THE PRESERVE

FINAL REPORT
December 21, 2021

Prepared for:

City of Chino
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710

Prepared by:

Q3 Consulting
27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610

Prepared Under the Supervision of:

______________________________
John A. McCarthy, PE
RCE No. 47583

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 245
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 i Q3 Consulting

Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Project Overview .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Previous Studies ........................................................................................................................... 4

1.4 As-Built Plans ............................................................................................................................... 6 2 Hydrology ............................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1 Hydrology Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 8

2.1.1 Land Use ...................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.2 Precipitation ................................................................................................................. 8

2.1.3 Infiltration and Soils ..................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Rational Method ......................................................................................................................... 12

2.3 Small Area Unit Hydrograph (SAUH) ....................................................................................... 12

2.3.1 Tributary Area & Inflow UH Node ............................................................................ 12

2.3.2 Loss rates .................................................................................................................... 12

2.3.3 Time of Concentration................................................................................................ 12

2.4 Offsite Ontario Flows ................................................................................................................. 12

2.5 Hydrology Results ...................................................................................................................... 13 3 Hydraulics ............................................................................................................................................ 22

3.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 22

3.1.1 Roughness Coefficient ............................................................................................... 22

3.1.2 Hydraulic Loss Coefficient ........................................................................................ 22

3.1.3 Tailwater Conditions .................................................................................................. 22

3.2 Storm Drain Main Line Sizing ................................................................................................... 23

3.3 SWMM Profiles .......................................................................................................................... 24

3.4 Flood Protection Goals and Storm Drain Design Criteria .......................................................... 24

3.4.1 Flood Protection Goals ............................................................................................... 24

3.4.2 Hydrologic Criteria..................................................................................................... 24

3.4.3 Hydraulic Criteria ....................................................................................................... 24

3.4.4 HCOC Criteria ............................................................................................................ 26 4 Master Plan Areas ................................................................................................................................ 28

4.1 Drainage Area B ......................................................................................................................... 28

4.2 Drainage Area C ......................................................................................................................... 28

4.3 Drainage Area D ......................................................................................................................... 28

4.4 Drainage Area E ......................................................................................................................... 29

4.5 Drainage Area F .......................................................................................................................... 29

4.6 Drainage Area G ......................................................................................................................... 29

4.7 Drainage Area H ......................................................................................................................... 29

4.8 Drainage Area I .......................................................................................................................... 30

4.9 Drainage Area J .......................................................................................................................... 31 5 Cost Estimates and Drainage Impact Fee Update ................................................................................ 58

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 246
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 ii Q3 Consulting

Figures
Figure 1-1. Location Map ............................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 1-2. Study Area Current Condition .................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2-1. Land Use Map .......................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 2-2. Soil Map ................................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 2-3. Drainage Area C UH Tributary Area ....................................................................................... 14 Figure 2-4. Drainage Area D UH Tributary Area ....................................................................................... 15 Figure 2-5. Drainage Area E UH Tributary Area ....................................................................................... 16 Figure 2-6. Drainage Area F UH Tributary Area ........................................................................................ 17 Figure 2-7. Drainage Area G UH Tributary Area ....................................................................................... 18 Figure 2-8. Drainage Area H UH Tributary Area ....................................................................................... 19 Figure 2-9. Drainage Area I UH Tributary Area......................................................................................... 20 Figure 2-10. Drainage Area J UH Tributary Area ...................................................................................... 21 Figure 4-1. Kimball Basins Overview from Tract 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004) ......................................... 33 Figure 4-2. Master Plan Facilities Line C & Line E ................................................................................... 37 Figure 4-3. Master Plan Facilities Line D & Line J .................................................................................... 38 Figure 4-4. Master Plan Facilities Line F & Line G ................................................................................... 39 Figure 4-5. Master Plan Facilities Line H & Line I .................................................................................... 40 Figure 4-6. Line C Hydraulic Profile .......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 4-7. Line D Hydraulic Profile .......................................................................................................... 43 Figure 4-8. Line E Hydraulic Profile .......................................................................................................... 44 Figure 4-9. Line F Hydraulic Profile .......................................................................................................... 45 Figure 4-10. Line G Hydraulic Profile ........................................................................................................ 47 Figure 4-11. Line H Hydraulic Profile ........................................................................................................ 51 Figure 4-12. Line I Hydraulic Profile ......................................................................................................... 53 Figure 4-13. Line J Hydraulic Profile ......................................................................................................... 55 Tables
Table 2-1. SBCHM NOAA 2 100-year precipitation values used in UH analysis ....................................... 8 Table 2-2. Ultimate Condition 100-Year Hydrology Analysis Results ...................................................... 13 Table 3-1. Manning’s roughness coefficient values ................................................................................... 22 Table 3-2. Hydraulic loss coefficient .......................................................................................................... 22 Table 4-1. Detention Basin Stage-Storage-Discharge from Chino Parcel Delivery Facility Preliminary Hydrology Report (D&D,2020) .................................................................................................. 32 Table 4-2. Kimball Basins Stage-Storage Table from Tr 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004) ............................... 34 Table 4-3. Kimball Basins Outflow Table from Tract 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004) ................................... 35 Table 5-1. Master Planned Facility Total Cost Estimate ............................................................................ 58 Table 5-2. Summary of Cost Estimate Unit Prices ..................................................................................... 59 Table 5-3. Line I Detailed Facility Total Cost ............................................................................................ 60

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 247
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 iii Q3 Consulting

Technical Appendix
A. Hydrology Map

B. SBCHM References
B1 – Isohyetal Maps used for Rational Method Analysis
B2 – Isohyetal Maps and Calculation for UH Analysis
B3 – Soil Map

C. Drainage Area C Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
C1 – Rational Method Analysis
C2 – SAUH Analysis
C3 – SWMM Profile
C4 – Excerpt from Falloncrest H&H Report (Q3, 2020)
C5 – Excerpt from Tr 17055 On-Site H&H Report (RBF, 2006) C6 – Line C As-built Plans

D. Drainage Area D Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
D1 – Rational Method Analysis
D2 – SAUH Analysis
D3 – SWMM Profile
D4 – Excerpt from Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (D&D, 2020) D5 – Line D As-built Plans

E. Drainage Area E Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
E1 – Rational Method Analysis
E2 – SAUH Analysis
E3 – SWMM Profile
E4 – Excerpt from H/H Study for Phase I Tr 16419 Vol I (LDK, 2004) E5 – Line E As-built Plans

F. Drainage Area F Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
F1 – SAUH Analysis
F2 – SWMM Profile
F3 – Excerpt from MPD Amendment Drainage Subarea F (LDK, 2020) F4 – Line F As-built Plans

G. Drainage Area G Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
G1 – Rational Method Analysis
G2 – SAUH Analysis
G3 – SWMM Profile
G4 – Excerpt from Line G H&H Report (PEC, 2020)

H. Drainage Area H Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
H1 – Rational Method Analysis
H2 – Rational Method Analysis for Tr 18858
H3 – SAUH Analysis
H4 – SWMM Profile
H5 – Excerpt from Kimball Basins & Line H (Q3, 2019)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 248
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 iv Q3 Consulting
H6 – Excerpt from Drainage Study for Tract 18816 (PEC, 2015) H7 – Excerpt from TTM 20161 H&H Report (PEC, 2020)
H8 – Line H As-built Plans
H9 – Line H Proposed SD Plans

I. Drainage Area I Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
I1 – Rational Method Analysis
I2 – SAUH Analysis
I3 – SWMM Profile
I4 – Chino Master Plan of Drainage Update-Offsite Ontario Hydrology Analysis (Q3, 2020) I5 – Technical Design Memorandum, Line I Sizing Comparison using WSPG vs. SWMM5

J. Drainage Area H Hydrology & Hydraulic Analysis
J1 – Rational Method Analysis
J2 – SAUH Analysis
J3 – SWMM Profile
J4 – Excerpt from MPD City of Ontario (Hunsaker, 2012)
J5 – Excerpt from Chino Parcel Delivery Facility Preliminary Hydrology (D&D, 2020) J6 – Excerpt from H&H Study Phase I Tract 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004) J7 – Excerpt from Hydrology Study Tract No. 17574 (LDK, 2015) J8 – Excerpt from H&H for Tract No. 16797 (LDK, 2005)
J9 – Excerpt from H&H Study for Tract No. 17635 and 18778 (LDK, 2012) J10 – Excerpt from Hydrology Study Tract No. 17572, PM 19749 and PL 15-0910 (LDK, 2018) J11 – Line J As-built Plans

K. Chino Master Plan of Drainage Update – Coincident Storm Event Analysis Memo

L. HCOC Exemption Criteria

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 249
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 v Q3 Consulting

ABBREVIATIONS
ac acre
ac-ft acre feet
AES Advance Engineering Software
AMC antecedent moisture content
cfs cubic feet per second
CGS California Geological Survey
CY cubic yard
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
fps feet per second
ft feet
GIS Geographical Information Systems
HCOC Hydrologic Conditions of Concern
in/hr inches per hour
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging
LOMR Letter of Map Revision
mi miles
MPD Master Plan of Drainage
NAD North American Datum
NAVD North American Vertical Datum
NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
RCB reinforced concrete box
RCP reinforced concrete pipe
ROW right-of-way
SAUH small area unit hydrograph
SBCHM San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual
SWMM Storm Water Management Model
sq. mi square miles
SR State Route
Tc time of concentration
TGD Technical Guidance Document
UH Unit Hydrograph
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USGS United States Geological Survey
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
WSE Water Surface Elevation
WSPG Water Surface and Pressure Gradient

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 250
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 1 Q3 Consulting
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Overview
The purpose of this project is to prepare an update to the Storm Drain Master Plan Update Report – Subarea 2 Chino Agricultural Preserve Area prepared in December 2007 by Bureau Veritas North America, Inc (BV, 2007). This Master Plan Update will incorporate the updates and amendments that have been completed throughout the development of the Agricultural Preserve for Drainage Areas C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J.

The Chino Agricultural Preserve is located in the City of Chino in San Bernardino County, California (Figure 1-1). It encompasses approximately 8.5 square miles (5,435 acres) of agricultural, open space, residential and commercial land adjacent to Euclid Avenue (SR-83) and upstream of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineer’s Prado Flood Control Basin.

The focus study area, as shown in Figure 1-1, is approximately 4.5 square miles (2,897 acres). It is generally bounded by Merrill Avenue to the north, Euclid Avenue to the west, and Hellman Avenue to the east.

1.2 Purpose
The purpose of the 2021 Master Plan of Drainage (2021 MPD) Update is to analyze, compile and revise the hydrology and hydraulic studies and recommended drainage facilities previously prepared for Drainage Areas C, D, E, F, G, H, I and J of the 2007 MPD. This update to the 2007 MPD will serve as guidance for future development within Drainage Areas C, D, E, F, G, H, I and J which are tributary to storm drain Lines C, D, E, F, G, H, I and J, respectively.

Figure 1-2 shows the current condition of each storm drain line within the master plan area. Existing storm drain alignments and sizes were determined by using as-built plans as listed in Section 1.4.

A hydrologic analysis was not completed for Drainage Area B in this 2021 MPD Update because its master plan facilities have been completely constructed.

This 2021 MPD Update presents preliminary sizes for backbone drainage facilities. Master planned storm drain facilities were sized for the 100-year peak flow rates at concentration nodes along each storm drain line. Recommended sizes for drainage facilities were based on hydrologic calculations using the rational method, unit hydrograph (UH) analysis, and 1-D hydraulic models created using the EPA Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). Further discussion of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis can be found in Section 2 and Section 3, respectively.

An evaluation of the Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) resulting from the proposed storm drain systems and the adjacent associated development areas was included a part of the master plan. The evaluation assessed the potential for causing or contributing to an HCOC and determined if the proposed drainage facilities and associated development projects meet the exemption criteria as outlined in the Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans prepared for The County of San Bernardino Areawide Stormwater Program, effective September 19, 2013.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 251

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

HELLMAN AVE

MERRILL AVEKIMBALL AVE
SR 71
SR 60
I-15
SR 91LEGEND NMASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021LOCATION MAPFIGURE1-1

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 252

GEFJJI C
JDH B

HELLMAN AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVEE PRESERVELOOP

W PRESERVELOOP

RINCONMEADOWS AVECUCAMONGA AVE

MERRILL AVE

STORM DRAINLINE FSTORM DRAINLINE GSTORM DRAINLINE I

STORM DRAINLINE HSTORM DRAINLINE E

STORM DRAINLINE C

STORM DRAINLINE D

STORM DRAINLINE J STORM DRAINLINE B

C I T Y O F E A S T V A L E

C I T Y O F O N T A R I O

FLIGHT AVE

GROVE AVE
LEGEND
NMASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021STUDY AREACURRENT CONDITION C FIGURE1-2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 253
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 4 Q3 Consulting

1.3 Previous Studies
The 2007 MPD covered the area bounded by Euclid Avenue in the City of Chino to the west, Kimball Avenue and Merrill Avenue to the north, Hellman Avenue to the east, and Riverside County Line through Prado Regional Park to the south. The 2007 MPD recommended storm drain backbone facilities in the Agricultural Preserve for development purposes. In the past 10 years about 40% of the land that comprises the Agricultural Preserve has been developed with the construction of numerous storm drain master plan facilities. Currently some of the backbone facilities originally proposed have been constructed following subsequent amendments to the 2007 MPD. These amendments have been approved by the City and some have modified the recommended facilities in the 2007 MPD.

In additional to the amendments to the 2007 MPD, numerous tract and tentative tract hydrology and hydraulic studies have been prepared to support the design of the onsite facilities. These studies were reviewed and incorporated into the 2021 MPD Update where possible.

Previous studies were directly used in the 2021 MPD Update if they utilized the same hydrologic parameters, NOAA 2 rainfall and AMC III condition, as does this MPD Update. If different hydrologic parameters were used, the hydrology calculations in the studies were re-coded to use the hydrologic parameters established for the 2021 MPD Update. Below is a list of the studies that were used for the 2021 MPD update.

City Storm Drain Master Plans
▪ Master Plan of Drainage, Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, by Berryman & Heniger, Final Report, June 2005.
▪ Storm Drain Master Plan Update Report, Subarea 2, Chino Agricultural Preserve, by Bureau Veritas North America, Inc., December 2007.
▪ Master Plan of Drainage City of Ontario, by Hunsaker and Associates for the City of Ontario, March 2012.
o City of Ontario MPD was revised in June 2017 by David Evans and Associates.

Hydrology tributary to Chino was not changed in the 2017 revision and the 2012 version shall henceforth be referenced.

Amendments to Storm Drain Master Plan
▪ Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage, Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area (Areas D, J and B), by L.D. King, July 8, 2004. ▪ Amendment to Drainage Subareas F and G or the Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, by L.D. King, July 31, 2016. ▪ Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (Areas D and J), by D&D Engineering, November 11, 2019.
▪ Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, Drainage Subarea F, by L.D. King, June 18, 2020.

Tract and Tentative Tract Local Hydrology Studies according to Drainage Area ▪ Drainage Area B
A hydrologic analysis was not completed for Drainage Area B in this 2021 MPD Update because its master plan facilities have been constructed. However, the studies listed below were used to determine the drainage area boundary.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 254
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 5 Q3 Consulting
o Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage, Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area (Areas D, J and B), by L.D. King, July 8, 2004. ▪ Drainage Area C
o Falloncrest Phases 2-4 TTM Hydrology & Hydraulics Report by Q3 Consulting, December 18,2019.
o Tentative Tract Map 18910 Preliminary Hydrology Report, by RBF Consulting, September 2013.
o The Preserve Residential Community Tract No. 17055, by RBF Consulting, April 2006. ▪ Drainage Area D
o Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (Areas D and J), by D&D Engineering, November 11, 2019.
▪ Drainage Area E
o Hydrology and Hydraulics Study – Phase I – Tract 16419 - Volume I, by L.D. King, February 2004.
▪ Drainage Area F
o Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, Drainage Subarea F, by L.D. King, June 18, 2020. ▪ Drainage Area G
o Line G Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, July 28, 2020.
▪ Drainage Area H
o Kimball Basins and Line H -Flood Routing Analysis Report, by Q3 Consulting, May 14, 2019.
o Hydrology and Basin Routing – Chino Airport, by Associated Engineers, May 2009. o Drainage Study for Tract 18816, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, December 15, 2015.
o Tentative Tract Map 20161 Hydrology and Hydraulic Report, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, June 2020.
▪ Drainage Area I
o Chino Master Plan of Drainage Update-Offsite Ontario Hydrology Analysis, by Q3 Consutling, December 2020.
▪ Drainage Area J
o Master Plan of Drainage City of Ontario, by Hunsaker and Associates for the City of Ontario, March 2012.
o Chino Parcel Delivery Facility Preliminary Hydrology Report, by D&D Engineering, February 4, 2020.
o Hydrology and Hydraulics Study – Phase I – Tract 16419 - Volume III, by L.D. King, September 2004.
o Hydrology Study Tract No. 17574, by L.D. King, August 18, 2015.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 255
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 6 Q3 Consulting
o Hydrology & Hydraulic for Tract No. 16797, by L.D. King, September 19, 2005. o Hydrology/ Hydraulic Study for Tract No. 17635 and 18778, by L.D. King, July 9, 2012. o Hydrology Study Tract No. 17572, Parcel Map No. 19749 and PL 15-0910, by L.D.

King, May 24, 2018.

1.4 As-Built Plans
The following as-built plans were used to develop the storm drain invert profiles and conduit cross sections in the hydraulic models.
▪
Drainage Area B
A hydrologic analysis was not completed for Drainage Area B in this 2021 MPD Update because master plan facilities have been constructed. However, the as-builts listed below were used to determine Line B alignment.
o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Flight Avenue, Remington Street, and Baker Avenue, by David Evans and Associates, Approved November 29, 2018. o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Hellman Avenue, Remington Avenue, and Carpenter Avenue, by David Evans and Associates, Approved February 8, 2017. o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 16419, by L.D.King, Approved November 4, 2005.
▪ Drainage Area C
o Offsite Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 17055, by RBF Consulting, Approved December 4, 2014.
▪ Drainage Area D
o Storm Drain Improvement Plans and Chino Regional Connection No. C-24 for Tract No. 16419 Kimball Avenue Line “D”, by L.D.King, Approved September 14, 2004. ▪ Drainage Area E
o Phase 1 Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 16419, by L.D.King, Approved June 23, 2004.
▪ Drainage Area F
o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 18480, by L.D.King, Approved February 13, 2015.
o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 16420-1, by L.D.King, Approved September 11, 2014.
o Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 19994, by L.D.King, Approved June 26, 2017.
▪ Drainage Area G
Line G is a proposed alignment and the proposed Public Storm Drain Improvement Plan for City of Chino Master Plan of Drainage Line G, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, dated June 9, 2009 was used in this 2021 MPD Update.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 256
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 7 Q3 Consulting
▪ Drainage Area H
o Public Storm Drain Improvement Plan and Profile for Mayhew Avenue between 900’ S/O Bickmore Ave and Kimball Ave, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Approved April 22, 2020.
▪ Drainage Area I
Line I is a proposed alignment whose design is still currently in progress. The proposed preliminary profile is attached in Appendix I.
▪ Drainage Area J
o Kimball Avenue Box Culvert for Tract No. 16419, by L.D.King, Approved December 21, 2004.
o Kimball & Bickmore Wetlands for Tract No. 16419, by Geosyntec Consultants, Approved January 10, 2006.
o Kimball Channel & Bickmore Basin for Tract No. 16419, by L.D.King, Approved November 9, 2004.

As of January 2021, the proposed RCB crossing under Pine Avenue is not yet constructed but the approved plans used were Pine Avenue Improvement Plan Stage 3 Meadowhouse Avenue to Rincon Meadows Avenue, by Proactive Engineering Consultants, Approved March 19, 2019.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 257
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 8 Q3 Consulting
2 HYDROLOGY
The hydrologic analysis was completed for Chino Subarea 2 – The Preserve Drainage Areas C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J for the 100-year ultimate condition.

2.1 Hydrology Criteria
This study has been prepared in conformance with the hydrologic procedures and standards set forth in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual (SBCHM), dated August 1986. In 2010, the County of San Bernardino, issued an addendum to their hydrology manual that updated rainfall data from NOAA 1973 Atlas 2 to the NOAA 2010 Atlas 14. However, based on discussions, it was determined all of the Master Plan facilities located within the City of Chino Subarea 2 – The Agricultural Preserve will be designed using the NOAA Atlas 2 rainfall depths from the SBCHM consistent with the previously approved 2007 MPD.

Drainage area delineation was performed using the previous studies (Section 1.3), previous MPD and MPD Amendments, topographic contours, aerial imagery from USDA California NAIP 2018, and Google Earth.

2.1.1 Land Use
The Land Use Map is provided on Figure 2-1, and it was prepared in conformance with the land use plan in the City of Chino The Preserve Specific Plan dated September 2016.

More detailed land uses were used when available from individual tract hydrology studies and MPD Amendments.

2.1.2 Precipitation
The precipitation analysis was based upon the rainfall isohyetal maps found in the SBCHM, which are reproduced from NOAA Atlas 2, Volume XI. Point precipitation values for the 10-year 1-hour =0.8 inch and 100 year 1-hour = 1.1 inch used in the rational method analysis were obtained from Figures B-3 and B-4 of the SBCHM (Appendix B).

For the unit hydrograph analysis, precipitation depths for the 100- year 1-hour and 6-hour events were determined from the isohyetal maps (Appendix B). The weighted area average method was used to determine the correct rainfall depths. The precipitation values used are summarized below.

Table 2-1. SBCHM NOAA 2 100-year precipitation values used in UH analysis Time interval Point rainfall (inch)
5 minutes 0.39
30 minutes 0.83
1 hour 1.1
3 hour 2.0
6 hour 3.0
24 hour 6.0

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 258
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 9 Q3 Consulting

2.1.3 Infiltration and Soils
The most significant factor affecting infiltration is the nature of the soil on the watershed. The U.S.

Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) classifies soils according to their infiltration capacity.

Soils in the study area are classified as Soil Type A, B, C and D according to the SBCHM. Soils in Group A have high infiltration rates, soils in Group B have a moderate infiltration rates, soils in Group C have low infiltration rates when thoroughly wet, and soils in Group D have high runoff potential.

Based on the NRCS Web Soil Survey mapping, the Preserve is predominantly Soil Type C. The Falloncrest site was determined to be Soil Type D per the findings from Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Site Investigation Falloncrest Property (GeoKinetics, 2010), which was referenced in the Tentative Tract Map 18910 Preliminary Hydrology Report (RBF, 2014). The soil classification for The Preserve is summarized below in Figure 2-2.

Another important factor in soil infiltration is the Antecedent Moisture Content (AMC). Following the criteria outlined on the SBCHM, AMC III condition was used for the 100-year analysis. The AMC III condition is the City’s new criteria for hydrology studies for the 100-year storm event.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 259
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021LAND USE MAPFIGURE2-1LEGEND

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 260

HELLMAN AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

BICKMORE AVENUE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVE

E PRESERVE LOOP

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVECUCAMONGA AVE

MERRILL AVE
G
EFJJ
JDH
I
B
C
LEGEND
N
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021SOIL MAPC FIGURE2-2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 261
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 12 Q3 Consulting

2.2 Rational Method
A rational method analysis was prepared for each drainage area in order to determine the time of concentration (Tc) needed to develop unit hydrographs. The rational method calculations also provided a “check” against hydrodynamic flood routing prepared in Storm Water Management Model (SWMM).

The SWMM modeling process and results are further discussed in Section 3.

The 100-year ultimate condition rational method was calculated for this study. Rational method calculations were performed in accordance to the methods described in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual (SBCHM). The Rational Method Module of Advanced Engineering Software (AES) Computer Software Version 22.0 was used in performing the runoff calculations. The 100-year design discharges were computed by generating a hydrologic “link-node” model that divides the area into drainage sub-areas, each tributary to a concentration point or hydrologic “node” point.

For the preparation of the 2021 MPD Update hydrology analysis, other studies from individual tracts and previous MPD Amendments were used to verify drainage boundaries, land uses, and rational method parameters such as 100-year peak discharges and time-of-concentrations (Tc). Rational method Tc’s were used to develop single area unit hydrographs (SAUH). For some drainage areas, new rational method calculations had to be performed or a combination of new calculations and referencing previous hydrology studies had to be implemented.

2.3 Small Area Unit Hydrograph (SAUH)
The EPA’s SWMM5 computer program requires unsteady flow inputs, or hydrographs to run the hydrodynamic hydraulic analysis. Small Area Unit Hydrographs (SAUH) were developed based on defined tributary areas as seen in Figures 2-3 to 2-10. SAUH’s were calculated according to SBCHM methodology and were developed using the Computational Hydraulics 1 Module (CH1) of AES.

2.3.1 Tributary Area & Inflow UH Node
Areas tributary to SAUH’s were determined by individual tracts, previous hydrology studies, and grouping watershed subareas together according to drainage patterns.

In SWMM, a SAUH was inputted as inflow at each of the selected nodes as shown in Figures 2-3 to 2-10.

Nodes that received inflow SAUH’s were determined by previous hydrology studies and drainage patterns.

2.3.2 Loss rates
Loss rates for the SAUH method, were calculated using SBCHM methodology and CH1 of AES.

Calculations utilized Land Uses, Soil Type, NOAA Atlas 2 rainfall, and Antecedent Moisture Condition 3 (AMC 3).

2.3.3 Time of Concentration
The time of concentration (Tc) calculated from the rational method was used to develop SAUH’s. For subareas with multiple time of concentrations, the Tc associated with the longest flow path or most effective area was used for the development of the SAUH. In some cases, the Tc used to generate the SAUH was calculated by taking the Tc from the upstream node and adding the travel time to reach the inflow node.

2.4 Offsite Ontario Flows
Stormwater runoff from the City of Ontario enters the Preserve from the north. Two drainage areas that receive Ontario flows have been evaluated for this 2021 MPD Update: Drainage Area I and Drainage Area J.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 262
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 13 Q3 Consulting
Drainage Area I
A separate hydrology study was prepared by Q3 Consulting, attached in Appendix K, for the City of Ontario area that is tributary to Line I. The tributary area from Ontario is 1,758.4 acres and has a 100-year peak flow of 2,171.7 cfs. Further discussion of the offsite hydrology is provided in Section 4.8. The offsite flow will be conveyed via a proposed RCB along Euclid Avenue that will connect to Line I at the intersection of Euclid Avenue and Merrill Avenue.

Drainage Area J
A 120” RCP storm drain along Grove Avenue is proposed to drain to Line J at the intersection of Grove Avenue and Merrill Avenue. The 100-year peak flow from Ontario is 1,213.7 cfs with a tributary area of 942.7 acres, per Master Plan of Drainage City of Ontario (Hunsaker, 2012).

2.5 Hydrology Results
The table below summarizes the outflow at the discharge point of each drainage area for the 100-year ultimate condition.

Table 2-2. Ultimate Condition 100-Year Hydrology Analysis Results Storm
Drain Line
Hydrology
Node
Total Tributary
Area (ac)
Rational Method
Qpeak (cfs)
SWMM
Qpeak (cfs)
C 810 185.9 347.9 262.2
D 107 75.1 121.4 115.5
E 205 274.1 387.2 395.7
F 309 327.4 697.0 527.3
G 439 314.4 497.5 450.1
H 515 1,058.7 802.4 688.5
I 614 1,897.7* 2,354.5 1,730.6
J 734 1,996.9** 1,467.8 1,312.6
* Includes 1,758.4 acres from tributary City of Ontario MPD Drainage Area XIV ** Includes Drainage Areas C, D, and E areas and 942.7 acres from tributary City of Ontario MPD Drainage Area XIII

.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 263

BICKMORE AVE

PINE AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE
E
FG
JJ
H

LOOPE PRESERVE
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 800AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 803AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 806 TR 17055DETAINED AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 808
C
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 801
AREATRIBUTARYTO NODE 802
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 804TR 17055SHALLOW PARKDETENTIONAREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 806 TR 17055UNDETAINED AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 808TR 17055UNDETAINED AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 808 AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 808
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 809
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 805
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE

NLEGENDC
DRAINAGE AREA CUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREAFIGURE2-3

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 264

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVE

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVEE
JJ J H

FLIGHT AVE

REMINGTON AVE

FLIGHT AVE

VAN VLIET AVE
B
LOOPE PRESERVEAREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 103
C
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 105
D

GROVEAVE
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

LEGENDD
N

DRAINAGE AREA DUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREA

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE
FIGURE2-4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 265

PINE AVE

KIMBALL AVE

RINCON MEADOWS AVEFG
JJ
J D
H

WALKER AVE
BC
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 201

W PRESERVE LOOP
LOOPE PRESERVEAREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 200E

BICKMORE AVEMILL CREEK AVE
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

LEGENDE
N

DRAINAGE AREA EUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREA

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE
FIGURE2-5

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 266

HELLMAN AVE

CHINO-CORONA RDPINE AVE
EFG
B

E PRESERVELOOPC
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 300
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 301
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 303
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 302AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 304
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 307
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 306
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 308
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 309

LEGACY PARK
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE

NLEGENDF
DRAINAGE AREA FUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREAFIGURE2-6

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 267

CHINO-CORONA RD

FORMERLYCHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVECUCAMONGA AVE
F
G J
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 404C
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 402
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 430
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 416
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 422
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 432
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 406
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 424
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 413
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 408
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 436
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE
N

LEGENDG
DRAINAGE AREA GUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREAFIGURE2-7

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 268

CHINO-CORONA RD

BICKMORE AVEFORMERLYCHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVEEUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVEW PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVE

EGJJ JH

WALKER AVE

REMINGTON FLIGHT AVEBE PRESERVELOOP
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 503
C D
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 502
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 503AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 506AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 509 AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 509
I
AREA TRIBUTARYTO NODE 512

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

LEGENDH
N

DRAINAGE AREA HUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREA
FIGURE2-8

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 269

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVE

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVE
EGJJ J
HI
C
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 603AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 604AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 608AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 611 MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE

LEGENDI
N

DRAINAGE AREA IUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREA
FIGURE2-9

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 270

HELLMAN AVE BICKMOREAVE

FORMERLYCHINO-CORONA RDPINE AVEMILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVEW PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVEEG
JJ
J
H

REMINGTON AVEFLIGHT AVEBE PRESERVE
AREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 701
C D
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 710AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 713
AREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 723
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 725
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 729
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 728AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 732AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 731 AREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 706

GROVE AVE
LOOP
AREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 700
AREA TRIBUTARY TONODE 716
AREATRIBUTARY TONODE 732

HYDROLOGY SUMMARY TABLE

LEGENDJ
N
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"FIGUREX-XConsulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021DRAINAGE AREA JUNIT HYDROGRAPHTRIBUTARY AREA FIGURE2-10

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 271
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 22 Q3 Consulting
3 HYDRAULICS

3.1 Methodology
The study area was modeled using EPA’s Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) computer program version 5.1. SWMM is a dynamic wave model that solves the full St. Venant Equations. Dynamic modeling allows the effects of storage and backwater in conduits and floodplains and the timing of the hydrographs to yield a true representation of the hydraulic conditions. Individual SWMM models were developed for each of the following storm drain lines: Lines F, G, H, and I. However, since Lines C, D, and E outlet into Line J, one SWMM model was created to model this drainage system.

3.1.1 Roughness Coefficient
Manning’s roughness coefficients were based on the existing materials and proposed materials. The following assumptions shown in Table 3-1 were used in the SWMM model.

Table 3-1. Manning’s roughness coefficient values
Cross section Hydraulic roughness
Reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) 0.013
Reinforced concrete box (RCB) 0.014
Earthen channel 0.030
Concrete channel 0.014

3.1.2 Hydraulic Loss Coefficient
Within the storm drain networks, loss coefficients were added for major expansion or transitions. The loss coefficients were applied on the conduits in the SWMM model. The values shown in Table 3-2 were assumed. Values used are similar to those found in the Los Angeles County’s Water Surface and Pressure Gradient (WSPG) computer program to better compare results with previous studies.

Table 3-2. Hydraulic loss coefficient
Scenario Entrance loss
coefficient
Exit loss
coefficient
Avg loss
coefficient
Cross section transition
(e.g. RCP to RCB) 0.1 0.3 --
Wall exit or entrance 0.3 0.5 --
90º bend -- -- 0.2

3.1.3 Tailwater Conditions
Typical recommendations include using the 100-year water surface elevation in the downstream receiving waters as the hydraulic control for the design of the local drainage system. For this 2021 MPD, this would be the reservoir behind Prado Dam. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Panel 9335H, Map Number 06071C9335H, sets the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE) behind the Prado Dam at 552 feet (NAVD88), which equals to 549.6 feet (NGVD29).

The City currently uses the NGVD29 datum.

The Santa Ana River watershed has a tributary area of approximately 2,255 square miles at the Prado Dam and the 100-year water surface elevation behind the dam is based on a 3-day storm event. Whereas

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 272
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 23 Q3 Consulting
the master planned facilities for the Preserve have tributary watershed areas of less than 3.1 square miles and a much shorter storm duration typically on the order of 1 to 3 hours. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that a 100-year storm event over the local watersheds would coincide with a 100-year water surface elevation behind the Prado Dam.

When evaluating the hydraulic influence a large river or flood control system has on a local tributary, a methodology based on joint probability was considered for the determination of the storm event of the small local drainage (e.g., Line I) that coincides with the threshold event associated with the much larger drainage (or watershed) of the receiving waters (e.g, Santa Ana River/Prado Reservoir). The threshold represents the conditions at and above which the receiving waters influence or impair the hydraulics of the local system. In simple terms, the determination of the local storm event is referred to as the “coincident event.”
If the historical record of flow and/or flood stage is of adequate length and the historical maximum flood stage is below the threshold for the local systems than joint probability analysis is not relevant. The maximum recorded historical flood stage in the Prado Reservoir is 529.35 feet. As this historical maximum event is below other local control elevations, such as the Prado Lakes, it was determined that a detailed joint probability analysis was not necessary, and the 100-Year WSE behind the Prado Dam would not control the design on the master plan drainage facilities. Therefore, individual tailwater conditions were evaluated for each drainage system.

Lines H, I, and J
These three lines drain to the Prado Lakes in Prado Regional Park located south of Pine Avenue. Lines H and I are proposed to discharge directly into the lake. Line J will discharge to an open channel upstream of the lake. The downstream control for these lines was based on the maximum water surface elevation in the lake during a 100-year storm event. The lake maintains a fairly constant water surface elevation and the maximum elevation was determined based on a 100-year flow rate over the lake spillway. Using a combined flow rate of 4,609.4 cfs (Rational Method peak flows from Lines H, I, and J/C) and a spillway width of 100-feet and elevation of 525.9 feet, the maximum water surface elevation is 529.8 feet. This elevation was used as the downstream control for Lines H and I. Since Line J discharges further upstream, a normal depth in the stream channel below the outlet should be used as the downstream control. If that elevation is lower than the maximum lake elevation of 529.8 feet, than the higher elevation should be used as the downstream control.

Line F
Line F tailwater control was set at WSE = 538 ft (NGVD29) based on WSPG calculations from Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, Drainage Subarea F, by L.D. King, June 2020.

Line G
Line G is proposed to discharge to a wide floodplain area within Prado Basin. As the existing condition results in a shallow wide flooding condition, no downstream control is needed.

Lines C, D, and E
A fixed tailwater was not set for Lines C, D, and E because they all outlet into Line J and were modeled as such in SWMM, which would more accurately determine the hydraulic grade line (HGL).

3.2 Storm Drain Main Line Sizing
Only storm drain main lines were modeled and sized using SWMM. Proposed lateral sizes were taken from previously completed hydrology studies. SWMM models were used to optimize the geometry of proposed storm drain lines. They were developed by starting with the previously proposed storm drain sizes and then revising them where possible with the goal of maximizing the hydraulic grade line (HGL)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 273
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 24 Q3 Consulting
in the mainline systems. The maximum HGL was set to not exceed 3 feet below finished ground above the storm drain system.

3.3 SWMM Profiles
The storm drain profiles of the main lines were generated from SWMM. The stationing and inverts of the main lines were taken from as-builts, proposed storm drain plans, and previous hydrology studies. Some main line profiles span across multiple storm drain plans and therefore the station labeling can vary. The maximum 100-year HGL is called out at each node along the main line. The HGL shown along the main line should be used for the design of future storm drain laterals.

Note: unless otherwise stated, all vertical elevations in this report are based on the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. (NGVD29).

3.4 Flood Protection Goals and Storm Drain Design Criteria This section outlines the criteria to be used for the final design of the mainline and storm drain lateral systems within Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve and identifies the flood protection goals.

3.4.1 Flood Protection Goals
For Arterial and Collector Streets:

1. Peak runoff during 25-year return frequency storm events shall be contained within curb-to-curb capacity of the street with one open lane in each direction.

2. Peak runoff during 100-year return frequency storm events shall be contained within the limits of street rights-of-way, and the water surface elevation of the street flows shall be at least one foot lower than the lowest finished floor elevation of adjacent inhabitable structures.

For Local and Residential Streets:

1. Peak runoff during 10- or 25-year return frequency storm events shall be contained within curb- to-curb capacity of the street.

2. Peak runoff during 100-year frequency storm events shall be contained within the limits of street rights-of-way, and the water surface elevation of the street flows shall be at least one foot lower than the lowest finished floor elevation of adjacent habitable structures.

3.4.2 Hydrologic Criteria
The hydrology shall be prepared in conformance with the procedures and standards set forth in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual (SBCHM), 1986 Revision.

Based on the size of the tributary drainage area, the Rational Method or Unit Hydrograph method shall be used to calculate the peak runoff at each concentration point. The Unit Hydrograph method shall be used to determine runoff volumes when required.

Point rainfall data shall be based on the Isohyetal Maps for Valley Areas provided in the SBCHM.

Rainfall shall be the NOAA Atlas 2 point-precipitation values. Hydrologic soil groups shall be based on the most current NRCS Web Soil Survey mapping. Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) II shall be used for 10- and 25-year storm events. AMC III shall be used for 100-year storm events.

3.4.3 Hydraulic Criteria
The hydraulic criteria outlined in this section shall be used as a guide for the final design of the master planned and local storm drain facilities with the Master Plan area.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 274
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 25 Q3 Consulting

1. Hydraulic calculations shall be in accordance with the “Los Angeles County Flood Control District Design Manual, Hydraulic” dated March 1982.

2. Hydraulic grade lines (HGLs) shall be calculated from the downstream control point. Where a local or lateral storm drain system joins a master planned storm drain line, the downstream HGL control shall be taken from the SWMM Profiles (Figures 4-6 through 4-13).

3. Storm drain facilities shall be designed for the following storm events, provided that the 100-year storm is contained within the street right-of-way and meets the Section 3.4.1, Flood Protection Goals.

a. Regional/master planned main line storm drainage facilities; 100-year storm event b. Local storm drains tributary to a sump condition without a secondary outlet; 100-year storm event
c. Local/lateral storm drains tributary to a sump condition with a secondary outlet; 25-year storm event
d. Local/lateral storm drains tributary to a flow by condition; 10-year storm event.

4. Closed conduits may be designed as flowing full and may be allowed to flow under pressure if the hydraulic grade line is sufficiently below the ground surface to intercept flows from the tributary storm drain system.

a. Master Plan facilities shall have a hydraulic grade line (HGL) a minimum of 3-feet below the finished ground above the storm drain system
b. Local/lateral storm drain facilities shall have an HGL sufficiently below the ground surface to intercept flows with a minimum freeboard at each catch basin of six (6) inches below the gutter flow lines.

5. The minimum diameter of storm drain main lines and lateral drains shall be 24 inches and catch basin connector pipe shall be 18 inches.

6. Minimum spacing between manholes shall be as follows:
a
. For conduits thirty (30) inches or smaller in diameter, manholes shall be spaced at intervals of approximately three hundred (300) feet. Where the proposed pipe is less than thirty (30 inches in diameter and the horizontal alignment has numerous bends or angle points), the manhole spacing shall be reduced to approximately two hundred (200) feet. b. For conduits greater than thirty (30) inches in diameter, but smaller than forty-five (45) inches, manholes shall be spaced at intervals of approximately four hundred (400) feet. c. For conduits forty-five (45) inches or greater in diameter, manholes shall be spaced at a maximum interval of five hundred (500) feet.

7. All manholes and catch basin covers located within the impoundment area of the Prado Basin, below the 566 foot elevation, shall be securely fastened to the manhole frame.

8. Pressure manhole shaft and frames shall be used whenever the HGL in the storm drain can potentially exceed one (1) foot above the top of the manhole cover.

9. For storm drains that outlet into earthen channels, outlet structures shall be provided to prevent erosion and property damage. Velocity of flow at the outlet should agree as closely as possible with the existing (pre-project) channel velocities. When the outlet velocity is low or sub-critical, the outlet structure shall consist of a headwall, wing-walls, apron, and rock riprap. When the

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 275
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 26 Q3 Consulting
discharge velocity is high or supercritical, an appropriate energy dissipator structure and bank protection shall be designed for the outlet.

10. If development occurs in the upstream areas prior to the construction of the downstream storm drain facilities, local detention basin shall be implemented to handle the additional flows generated from such development. The detention basin shall be designed to retard the discharge from the developing property to 80% of the peak flows calculated for the pre-project conditions and remain operational until the full construction of the downstream facilities.

3.4.4 HCOC Criteria
The criteria for exemption from the hydromodification requirements are identified in the County of San Bernardino Areawide Stormwater Program’s Technical Guidance Document (TGD) for Water Quality Management Plans, Section 3.4 – Hydrologic Conditions of Concern, effective September 19, 2013. The following exemption criteria are identified:

1. Sump Condition: All downstream conveyance channels to an adequate sump (for example, Prado Dam, Santa Ana River, or other Lake, Reservoir or naturally erosion resistant feature) that will receive runoff from the project are engineered and regularly maintained to ensure design flow capacity; no sensitive stream habitat areas will be adversely affected; or are not identified on the Co-Permittees Hydromodification Sensitivity Maps.

2. Pre = Post: The runoff flow rate, volume and velocity for the post-development condition of the Priority Development Project do not exceed the pre-development (i.e, naturally occurring condition) for the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall event utilizing latest San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual.

3. Diversion to Storage Area / Controlled Release Point: The DMAs drain to water storage areas which are considered as controlled release points and utilized for water conservation.

4. Less than One Acre: The Priority Development Project disturbs less than one acre. The Co- permittee has the discretion to require a Project Specific WQMP to address HCOCs on projects less than one acre on a case by case basis. The project disturbs less than one acre and is not part of a common plan of development.

5. Built Out Area: The contributing watershed area to which the project discharges has an impervious area percentage greater than 90 percent.

Future outlets for Drainage Facility Lines C, F, G H, I, and J discharge outside of the Preserve Master Plan area. Runoff from each of these lines ultimately discharges to the Prado Flood Control Dam basin which is identified as a controlled release point and water conservation area as related to exemption criteria #3.

Lines H and I discharge directly to the Prado Lakes which can be considered as a sump condition (criteria #1) and drain directly to the Prada Flood Control Dam basin below the 10-year ponded water elevation behind the dam (criteria #3). Line F discharges to the Cucamonga Channel which is a large river system and flows directly to the Prado Flood Control Dam basin. Watersheds tributary to Cucamonga Channel have been considered to be exempt from the hydromodification criteria (#3) by both the Counties of San Bernardino and Riverside.

Lines C and J are within the watershed of the Kimball and Bickmore Detention Basins. Those basins were designed and constructed to mitigate the peak flow rates to less than the existing conditions for the 2-year 24-hour storm event for the entire watershed area tributary to Pine Avenue, which includes all of Lines C and J. The basins also act as a sump and discharge to the Prado Flood Control Dam basin, both of these conditions (criteria #1 and #3) have been previously used to exempt watersheds areas tributary to these

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 276
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 27 Q3 Consulting
drainage facilities. The hydrology and summary of existing verses proposed condition runoff for the Line C and J watersheds are included the report titled Hydrology and Hydraulics Study – Phase I – Tract 16419 - Volume III (LDK, 2004).

Line G is tributary to the Prado Flood Control Dam basin and is unique in that it discharges to a shallow wide floodplain area with no defined watercourse. The outlet of the drainage facility is designed to spread the runoff back to its original sheet flow condition and maintain flow velocities less than 5 feet per second. The outlet is a hydromodification control BMP that acts as an in-stream control to reduce the flow depths and velocities to non-erosion conditions. The design and calculations for the outlet are included in the report titled Line G Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, City of Chino, CA, prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants, dated November 6, 2020. The runoff at the outlet from the BMP is

1.1-feet deep and has a flow velocity of less than 3 feet per second. These are non-erosive conditions that meet the intent of the hydromodification control requirements in the County’s Technical Guidance Document (TGD). Runoff from Line G is also tributary to the Prado Flood Control Dam basin which is used for water conservation (criteria #3).

Based on the evaluation of the HCOC requirements, all of the drainage facilities within the Preserve Subarea 2 should be considered as exempt from the hydromodification requirements in the County’s TGD. A copy of the exemption criteria is included in Appendix L.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 277
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 28 Q3 Consulting
4 MASTER PLAN AREAS

4.1 Drainage Area B
A rational method and SAUH analysis were not completed for Drainage Area B because its master plan storm drain facilities have been fully built out.

Per correspondence with the City, master planned Line A was never constructed, and Drainage Area A has been diverted to Drainage Area B.

4.2 Drainage Area C
Drainage Area C covers the area roughly bounded by Bickmore Avenue to the north, Homecoming Drive to the east, Pine Avenue to the south, and Rincon Meadows Avenue to the west. Drainage Area C is 185.9 acres. Line C will be constructed along Pine Ave starting near the intersection with East Preserve Loop and extending west to an outlet into an existing earthen channel west of Rincon Meadows Ave and south of Pine Avenue. The flow from the existing earthen channel ultimately releases into the Prado Lakes within the County’s Prado Regional Park. Line C terminates at the same location as Line J and will use the same outlet structure.

Line C varies in size from an 84” RCP at the outlet structure to a 42” RCP at E Preserve Loop. Line C is comprised of existing and proposed storm drain. There is an approximate 1,629 feet of existing 84” RCP and 30 feet of existing 72” RCP from West Preserve Loop to Mill Creek Avenue.

The previous hydrology studies shown below were utilized for the development of the hydrologic analysis of Drainage Area C:

Falloncrest
The proposed residential development, Falloncrest, is at the upstream end of Drainage Area C. The hydrologic analysis from Falloncrest Phases 2-4 TTM Hydrology & Hydraulics Report (Q3, 2019), which included subarea delineation and rational method calculations, was used in the 2021 MPD Update analysis.

Tract 17055
Tract 17055 is bounded by Mill Creek Avenue, Bickmore Avenue, West Preserve Loop, and Pine Avenue. It is an existing residential and open space site. The rational method and unit hydrograph calculations from The Preserve Residential Community Tract No. 17055 (RBF, 2006) were used in the 2021 MPD Update hydrologic analysis. The site is divided into three watersheds. The first watershed is a

2.59 acres park located at the southeastern corner of the site which is used for shallow detention. The second watershed is 28.05 acres tributary to the onsite detention basin. The third watershed is the 10.13 acres that is undetained and the runoff is collected directly into the storm drain system.

4.3 Drainage Area D
Drainage Area D is 75.1 acres encompassing portions of the area bounded by Remington Avenue, Flight Avenue, and Kimball Avenue. Line D is constructed and is comprised of approximately 3,171 feet of existing 54” RCP along Kimball Avenue. Line D outlets into an existing triple 14’ wide by 8’high RCB, which is part of Line J. The triple RCB conveys runoff into the Kimball Basins and flows ultimately reach the Prado Lakes.

Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (Areas D and J) The subarea delineations for Drainage Area D in the MPD Amendment (D&D, 2019) were used as guidance for the subarea delineation in this 2021 MPD Update. A new rational method analysis, which utilized NOAA 2 and AMC III, had to performed for Drainage Area D.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 278
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 29 Q3 Consulting

4.4 Drainage Area E
Drainage Area E covers the area roughly north of Bickmore Avenue to Kimball Avenue and between Rincon Meadows Avenue and west of Hellman Avenue. The tributary area is 274.13 acres. Line E is fully constructed and is approximately 7,305 feet long comprising of existing 36”, 60”, 72”, and 78” RCP. The upstream end of the existing storm drain line begins at Forest Park Street and Bridle Path Street and runs along Forest Park Street, then to Garden Park Street, down along West Preserve Loop and finally along Bickmore Avenue where it outlets into the Bickmore Basin.

Tract 16419
Tract 16419 is a primarily built out residential area encompassing approximately 269.13 acres of Drainage Area E. Using the Hydrology and Hydraulics Study – Phase I – Tract 16419 - Volume I (LDK, 2004), the rational method results and relevant parameters needed to generate the SAUH were used in the hydrologic analysis for the 2021 MP Update.

Using current topography, new subareas were delineated along Kimball Avenue and Rincon Meadows Avenue which make up the remaining portion of Drainage Area E.

4.5 Drainage Area F
Drainage Area F is approximately 327.41 acres and is located mostly south of Pine Avenue at the eastern edge of Chino Subarea 2. Line F consists of existing and proposed storm drain. The upstream reach of Line F from Pine Avenue along East Preserve Loop to south of Legacy Park Street is built. The proposed reach will extend south from the existing section to Chino-Corona Road then east to tie into an existing downstream culvert in Cucamonga Creek. The pipe size will vary from a 96” RCP to a 9’ wide by 4’high RCB.

Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 Drainage Subarea F
Using Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2, Chino Sphere of Influence, Chino Agricultural Preserve Area, Drainage Subarea F (LDK, 2020), the rational method results and relevant parameters needed to generate SAUH’s were used for the hydrologic analysis of this 2021 MPD Update.

4.6 Drainage Area G
Drainage Area G encompasses approximately 314.4 acres roughly bounded by Pine Avenue, Cucamonga Avenue, and Mill Creek Road (formerly Chino-Corona Road). Line G is a proposed alignment south of Pine Avenue that generally follows along the street formerly known as Chino Corona Road and West Preserve Loop and confluences at the intersection of Cucamonga Avenue and Chino Corona Road. From the confluence point, the proposed storm drain line continues south along Cucamonga Avenue until it discharges into Prado Basin. Line G is approximately 10,236 feet of RCP ranging from 36” to 96” diameter.

The subarea delineations for Drainage Area G were based on the Line G Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, (PEC, 2020). An updated rational method analysis had to be performed in order to better define the inflow unit hydrographs for the SWMM analysis.

4.7 Drainage Area H
Drainage Area H is approximately 1,058.72 acres and is located between Drainage Area I and Drainage Area J. A rational method analysis was calculated for this drainage area. It included updated subareas and rational method/UH results from previous studies.

Line H is comprised of existing and proposed storm drain. The existing storm drain alignment is along future Mayhew Avenue. It extends from the Chino Airport basins to south of Bickmore Avenue, approximately 2,979 feet of RCP ranging from 60” to 96” diameter. The proposed alignment is

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 279
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 30 Q3 Consulting
approximately 4,158 feet of 96” RCP and continues south to Pine Avenue then on to its proposed outlet at Prado Lakes.

Chino Airport
Chino Airport is located at the northern end of Drainage Area H. A previous SWMM analysis was completed for the airport in the Kimball Basins and Line H -Flood Routing Analysis Report (Q3, 2019).

Hydrology calculations from the previous report, Hydrology and Basin Routing – Chino Airport (Associated, 2009), were used to generate flood UH’s in the 2019 Q3 basin routing analysis. The basin routed UH from the 2019 analysis was inputted in the SWMM model for Line H.

Parcel Map 18816 / Tract 18858
PM 18816/ Tr 18858 is located between Kimball Avenue and Bickmore Avenue and is bounded to the west by future Mayhew Avenue. The hydrologic calculations in Drainage Study for Tract 18816 (PEC, 2015) were originally performed using NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall data. Therefore, the rational method calculations were reran using NOAA 2 rainfall as shown in Appendix H. Results from the NOAA 2 rational method were used in this 2021 MPD Update hydrologic analysis.

Tentative Tract Map 20161
TTM 20161 is bounded by Pine Avenue to the south, Bickmore Basin to the east, Bickmore Avenue to the north, and Sultana Avenue to the west. The runoff from the existing Meadow Square Apartment Homes, located adjacent to Pine Avenue and Bickmore Basin, will drain to the proposed detention basin in TTM 20161. The rational method and basin routing results in Tentative Tract Map 20161 Hydrology and Hydraulic Report (PEC, 2020) were used in the hydrologic analysis for this 2021 MPD Update. The basin routed UH from the report was copied and used as the inflow UH in the Line H SWMM model. The peak outflow rate from the Chino Airport basins is 297.6 cfs.

4.8 Drainage Area I
Drainage Area I is located at the westernmost portion of Chino Subarea 2. It is bound by Merrill Avenue to the north, Euclid Avenue to the west, and Pine Avenue to the south. This drainage area receives offsite flows from the City of Ontario through a future storm drain system to be located at the intersection of Euclid Avenue and Merrill Avenue. The total area for Drainage Area I, including offsite and onsite, is approximately 1,897.7 acres.

Line I is approximately 12,900 feet of proposed double 8’ wide by 8’ high RCB along Euclid Avenue from Merrill Avenue to Pine Avenue then south to outlet at the Prado Lakes.

Offsite Ontario Hydrology Analysis
A separate hydrologic analysis, Chino Master Plan of Drainage Update-Offsite Ontario Hydrology Analysis (Q3, 2020) was completed to evaluate the runoff generated from offsite City of Ontario Drainage Area XIV (Ontario MPD). The analysis is included in Appendix I4. The City of Ontario offsite tributary area is 1,758.4 acres in the current study compared to 1,753.7 acres in the City of Ontario’s master plan. rational method and UH calculations were prepared for the watershed area. The 100-year ultimate condition peak flow was determined to be 2,171.7 cfs based on the UH analysis. UH hydrologic parameters, such as Tc, were taken from the rational method analysis for the stream with the largest effective area.

Traditional Hydrology and Hydraulic Analysis
Similar to the hydrology and hydraulic analyses for the other master plan mainline facilities, the EPA’s SWMM program was used to route the flood hydrographs through the proposed system and determine the required facility sizes. SWMM is a dynamic wave model that allows the effects of storage and backwater in conduits and the volume and timing of the hydrographs to yield a true representation of the hydraulic conditions. Traditionally, storm drains have been sized using the peak flow rate determined from the

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 280
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 31 Q3 Consulting
rational method or UH analysis in a steady-state hydraulic analysis using a program such as WSPG.

Since the cost for Line I will be split between the Cities of Chino and Ontario. A traditional analysis for Line I was prepared to compare sizes with the SWMM analysis. Due to the size of the watershed, UH analysis was used to determine the peak flow rates in the storm drain. The rational method results were used to prepare UHs at the concentration points shown on Figure 2-9. The UHs were then routed and combined using flood routing in the AES computer program. The peak flow rates were identified at each concentration point. A hydraulic analysis was then prepared using the WSPG computer program. The channel alignment and vertical profile were taken similar to the SWMM analysis. The results indicated that the conduit size for the traditional (steady-state flow) alternative would need to be a double 10’ wide by 8’ high RCB. A Technical Design Memorandum prepared to document that analysis is included in Appendix I5.

4.9 Drainage Area J
Drainage Area J is generally bounded between Pine Avenue and Merrill Avenue. Lines C, D, and E confluence with Line J and ultimately discharges into an existing drainage ditch south of Pine Avenue and is tributary to the Prado Lakes. Line J begins at the intersection of Grove Avenue and Merrill Avenue. It starts as an existing open channel bringing offsite Ontario flows south into an existing double RCB, then into a proposed earthen channel, and outlets into the Kimball Basins. From the basins, flows are routed through a series of existing open channels and existing RCB until reaching a proposed earthen channel south of Bickmore Basin and then through a proposed double 10’ wide by 4’ high RCB under Pine Avenue and finally discharged into Prado Lakes. The onsite tributary area is 519.06 acres and the total watershed area (including offsite and Drainage Areas C, D, and E) is 1,996.89 acres. Newly delineated subareas and hydrologic information from previous studies were used in the analysis of Drainage Area J.

Offsite Ontario Flow
Line J receives runoff flows from Drainage Area XIII (Ontario MPD) at the intersection of Grove Avenue and Merrill Avenue. Per the Master Plan of Drainage City of Ontario (Hunsaker, 2012) the tributary area is 942.7 acres and generates a 100-year peak flow of 1,213.7 cfs.

Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (Areas D and J) Subarea delineation north of Kimball Avenue were approximated from the Amendment to Master Plan of Drainage Subarea 2 (Areas D and J) (D&D, 2019). Per the 2019 MPD Amendment the Chino Parcel Delivery Facility site (75.8 acres), located at the southwest corner of Merrill Avenue and Flight Avenue, is no longer tributary to Drainage Area D and is now part of Drainage Area J.

Chino Parcel Delivery Facility
As previously discussed in the 2019 Amendment to Areas D and J and the Chino Parcel Delivery Facility Preliminary Hydrology Report (D&D, 2020), the Chino Parcel Delivery Facility is now tributary to Drainage Area J instead of Drainage Area D. A detention basin is proposed at the southwest corner of the site. The 2020 Chino Parcel Delivery Facility report used NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall in the hydrologic analysis. Therefore, the basin routing was recalculated using NOAA 2 Atlas values. The basin stage storage discharge curve from the 2020 hydrology report, as shown below, was used for this 2021 MPD Update hydrologic analysis.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 281
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 32 Q3 Consulting
Table 4-1. Detention Basin Stage-Storage-Discharge from Chino Parcel Delivery Facility Preliminary Hydrology Report (D&D,2020)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 282
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 33 Q3 Consulting

Kimball Basins
The existing Kimball Basins are located on the south side of Kimball Avenue between Rincon Meadows Avenue and Mill Creek Avenue. They are three side-by-side basins that function as both integrated regional flood control and natural treatment water quality basins. Offsite area from the City of Ontario, Drainage Area D, and the upstream portion of Drainage Area J, totaling in 1,422.5 acres, are tributary to the Kimball Basins.

A flood routing analysis of the Kimball Basins was prepared using SWMM. Information from the as-built Kimball & Bickmore Wetlands for Tract No. 16419 (Geosyntec, 2006) and Hydrology and Hydraulics Study – Phase I – Tract 16419 - Volume III (LDK, 2004) were used to define the following drainage system in SWMM:
▪ Flows are conveyed to each basin through two 48” RCP’s and a spillway for high flows ▪ Each basin has an outlet controlled 78” RCP and a spillway for higher storm events that takes flows down to existing Kimball Channel
▪ The stage-storage curve and outflow information from the previous 2004 study were inputted in the SWMM model. The information can be seen in the tables below. Basin 1 refers to the basin on the east, Basin 2 is in the middle, and Basin 3 is on the west.

The SWMM routed peak flow from the Kimball Basins was 874 cfs. The SWMM peak flow result was used as the peak flow input at 2021 MPD Node 724 in the rational method analysis.

Figure 4-1. Kimball Basins Overview from Tract 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 283
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 34 Q3 Consulting

Table 4-2. Kimball Basins Stage-Storage Table from Tr 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 284
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 35 Q3 Consulting

Table 4-3. Kimball Basins Outflow Table from Tract 16419 Vol III (LDK, 2004)

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 285
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 36 Q3 Consulting

Tract 17574
Tr 17574 is located on the southwest corner of Rincon Meadows Avenue and Kimball Avenue. It is an existing residential area with a public park and is about 17.6 acres. The rational method results from Hydrology Study Tract No. 17574 (LDK, 2015) were used in this 2021 MPD Update hydrologic analysis.

Tract 16797
Tr 16797 is an existing residential site located at the northwest corner Bickmore Avenue and Rincon Meadows Avenue. The site area is 20.87 acres. The rational method results from Hydrology & Hydraulic for Tract No. 16797, (LDK, 2005) were used in this 2021 MPD Update rational method and UH analysis.

Tract 17635 & Tract 18778
Tr 17635 and Tr 18778 is just south of Bickmore Avenue between Mill Creek Avenue and Rincon Meadows Avenue. The existing residential site is 22.49 acres. Using Hydrology/ Hydraulic Study for Tract No. 17635 and 18778 (LDK, 2012) the rational method results and relevant parameters needed to generate the SAUH were used in the hydrologic analysis for the 2021 MPD Update.

Tract 17572, Parcel Map 19749, and PL 15-0910
Tr 17572 and PM 19749 is bounded by Pine Avenue to the north, Mill Creek Avenue to the east, and Rincon Meadows Avenue to the west. The proposed site of 17.9 acres will be developed for commercial use. The rational method results from Hydrology Study Tract No. 17572, Parcel Map No. 19749 and PL 15-0910, (LDK, 2018) were used in this 2021 MPD Update hydrologic analysis.

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 286

HELLMAN AVEBICKMORE AVE

FORMERLYCHINO-CORONA RDPINE AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVE

E PRESERVE LOOP

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE
60" RCP35 LF
54" RCP1,168 LF
CE
FG
JJJD
42" RCP1,578 LF48" RCP664 LFHI EX 84" RCP1,629 LF
84" RCP1,688 LF
EX 78" RCP877 LF

WALKER AVE
B
EX 72" RCP4,450 LFEX 60" RCP1,070 LFEX 36" RCP390 LF
EX 36" RCP518 LF LOOPEPRESERVE
3'H X 4'W RCB104 LFEX 72" RCP30 LF
(185.9 AC)(274.1 AC)TR 17055DETENTIONBASINEX 36" RCP660 LF EX 24" RCP871 LFEX 36" RCP666 LF
EX 24" RCP471 LF
EX 48" RCP421 LF
EX 24" RCP642 LFEX 36" RCP609 LF
EX 24" RCP426 LF
EX 30" RCP360 LFEX 36" RCP198 LF
30" RCP330 LF42" RCP1,140 LF36" RCP643 LF
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

FIGUREX-X
LEGEND
C

MASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE C & LINE E
KEY MAPH, *F
--- BEC

MERRILL AVE

PINE AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

HELLMAN AVE

KIMBALL AVE

EUCLID AVE'
N NFIGURE4-2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 287

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLYCHINO-CORONA RDPINE AVEMILL CREEK AVE

KIMBALL AVE

E PRESERVE LOOP

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVE
CEFGJ

HREMINGTONAVE

VAN VLIET AVEBJ

FLIGHT AVED
EX 54" RCP3,171 LF
J EX TRIPLE 14'W X 8'H RCB235 LF

EX DOUBLE 8'W X 6'H RCB315 LFDOUBLE 10'W X 4'H RCB355 LF 48" RCP390 LF42" RCP910 LF
120" RCP960 LFEX DOUBLE 10'W X 6'H RCB1,960 LF20'W X 8'H TEC1,700 LF EX 10'W X 12.5'H TEC1,800 LF
EX 20'W X 11'H TEC1,200 LF

KIMBALL BASINS

17.6 AF DETENTION BASIN

BICKMOREBASIN

GROVE AVE
28'W X 7'H TEC300 LF
(75.1 AC)
(SUBAREA 2 AREA = 519.1 AC)(WATERSHED TOTAL = 1,996.9 AC)

E PRESERVELOOP
24" RCP2,422 LF
10'W X 6'H TEC1,444 LF
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

FIGUREX-X
D

MASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE D & LINE J
N
LEGEND
KEY MAPHI *F
--- BEC

MERRILL AVE

PINE AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

HELLMAN AVE

KIMBALL AVE

EUCLID AVED
N
(75.1 AC)
FIGURE4-3

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 288

HELLMAN AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVEMILL CREEK AVE

E PRESERVE LOOP

W PRESERVE LOOP

CUCAMONGA AVE
CEFGJ

B DWALKER AVE
J
9'W X 4'H RCB800 LF
84" RCP860 LF78" RCP1,552 LF

EX CULVERT

MARKET ST
LEGACY PARK STEX 78" RCP942 LFEX 72" RCP507 LFEX 66" RCP460 LFEX 60" RCP487 LFEX 48" RCP530 LF EX 4'W X 2'H RCB56 LFEX 48" RCP1,062 LF

ACADEMY ST

E PRESERVELOOP

CHINO-CORONARD
48" RCP578 LF60" RCP888 LF66" RCP211 LF
72" RCP341 LF78" RCP1,376 LF84" RCP754 LF
60" RCP659 LF48" RCP1,999 LF36" RCP38 LF96" RCP2,011 LF

CUCAMONGA

CUCAMONGACHANNEL
CREEK
36" RCP762 LF
90" RCP619 LF
(327.4 AC)
(314.4 AC)

MILL CREEKWETLANDS

MAIN ST
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

FIGUREX-XF MASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE F & LINE G
N
LEGEND
KEY MAPH, *F
--- BEC

MERRILL AVE

PINE AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

HELLMAN AVE

KIMBALL AVE

EUCLID AVE'
N
FIGURE4-4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 289

BICKMORE AVE

FORMERLY CHINO-CORONA RD

PINE AVE

EUCLID AVE

MILL CREEK AVE

W PRESERVE LOOP

RINCON MEADOWS AVE

MERRILL AVE

CEGJ HI
JDJ

GROVE AVE
96" RCP4,518 LF

PINE AVE

KIMBALL AVE
MAYHEW AVEEX 60" RCP890 LFEX 84" RCP537 LFEX 90" RCP750 LFEX 96" RCP802 LF DOUBLE 8'W X 8'H RCB7,700 LFDOUBLE 8'W X 8'H RCB5,177 LF 48" RCP817 LF CHINO AIRPORTBASINS
TTM 20161DETENTION BASIN(1,058.7 AC)
(SUBAREA 2 AREA = 139.3 AC)(WATERSHED TOTAL = 1,897.7 AC) EX 60" RCP831 LFEX 48" RCP458 LFEX 36" RCP642 LFEX 24" RCP276 LF

C I T Y O F O N T A R I O
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021

FIGUREX-X
H

MASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE H & LINE I
N

LEGENDKEY MAP
*F
--- BEC

MERRILL AVE

PINE AVE

CHINO-CORONA RD

HELLMAN AVE

KIMBALL AVED
N

H, EUCLID AVE
FIGURE4-5

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 290
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE C HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-6 Water Elevation Profile: Node C_Node806 - J8+84.80_HW
07/09/2020 16:24:00
Distance (ft)
3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1 ,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 C_Node806
C25+34.46
C_Node808
C_Node809
C8+21.82_PROP
J8+84.80_HW
Elevation (ft)
596
595
594
593
592
591
590
589
588
587
586
585
584
583
582
581
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
568
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
STA 40+76.81
NODE 806
575.94'
STA 40+62.81
576.26'
573.57'
STA 25+34.46
STA 24+33.79
NODE 808
STA 14+54.88
NODE 809
STA 8+21.82
STA 7+26.66
572.19'
563.03'
561.57'
560.49'

W PRESERVE LOOP

MILL CREEK AVE

RINCON MEADOWS AVE
Note: Sta 24+33.79 to Sta 40+62.81 stationing and inverts from Offsite Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 17055 (RBF, 5/2015) Sta 8+21.82 to Sta 14+54.88 stationing and inverts from Street Improvement Plan Pine Avenue (Proactive, 1/2020)
Sta 7+26.66 to Sta 8+21.82 stationing and invert from Pine Avenue Stage 3 Improvement Plans (Proactive, 3/2019)
84" RCP
72" RCP
FG
HGL
SHEET 1 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 291
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE C HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-6 SHEET 2 OF 2
Water Elevation Profile: Node C_Node800 - C_Node806
07/09/2020 16:20:00
Distance (ft)
2,700 2,600 2,500 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1 ,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 C_Node800
C_Node801
C_Node802
C_Node803
C_Node804
C_Node805
C42+23.55
C41+52.50
C41+19.57
C40+84.93
Elevation (ft)
603
602
601
600
599
598
597
596
595
594
593
592
591
590
589
588
587
586
585
584
583
582
581
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1

LINE C PROFILE
STA 67+69.93
NODE 800
STA 60+83.86
NODE 801
STA 57+81.44
NODE 802
STA 53+91.84
NODE 803
STA 50+53.62
NODE 804
STA 47+32.75
NODE 805
STA 42+23.55
STA 41+52.50
596.26'
591.44'
590.37'
588.85'
587.43'
586.03'
582.94'
581.32'
STA 41+19.57
577.78'
STA 40+84.93
576.03'
STA 40+76.81
NODE 806
575.94'

W PRESERVE LOOP

E PRESERVE LOOP
Note: Sta 40+76.81 to Sta 67+69.93 stationing and inverts are from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Line "C" (Proactive, 1/2021) 72" RCP
60" RCP
4'W X 3'H
RCB
54" RCP
48" RCP
42" RCP
FG
HGL

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 292
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE D HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-7 Water Elevation Profile: Node D_Node103 - J10+07.21
07/09/2020 16:23:00
Distance (ft)
3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1 ,000 800 600 400 200 0 D_Node103
D199+83.39
D_Node105
D173+36.46
J10+07.21
Elevation (ft)
626
625
624
623
622
621
620
619
618
617
616
615
614
613
612
611
610
609
608
607
606
605
604
603
602
601
600
599
STA 202+79.41
NODE 103
STA 199+83.39
STA 184+82.36
NODE 105
STA 173+36.46
HGL
FG
STA 171+08.24
600.23'
603.57'
608.32'
611.41'
611.61'
Note: Stationing and inverts from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 16419 (LDK, 9/2004)
54" RCP
SHEET 1 OF 1

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 293
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE E HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-8 Water Elevation Profile: Node E_Node200 - E10+42.90
07/09/2020 16:27:00
Distance (ft)
850 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 E_Node200
E_Node201
E102+95.30
E10+42.90
Elevation (ft)
592
591
590
589
588
587
586
585
584
583
582
581
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
STA 110+19.66
NODE 200
STA 103+96.50
NODE 201
STA 102+95.30
STA 101+42.90
573.22'
575.83'
576.34'
580.08'
Note: Stationing and inverts from Phase 1 SD
Improvement for Tr 16419 Plans (LDK, 6/2004)
78" RCP

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 294
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE F HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-9 Water Elevation Profile: Node F_Node136_EX - F_JoinExCulvert 07/09/2020 16:18:00
Distance (ft)
3,200 3,100 3,000 2,900 2,800 2,700 2,600 2,500 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 F_Node136_EX F_Node149
F_Node165
F_Node180
F_XS
F_JoinExCulvert
Elevation (ft)
571
570
569
568
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556
555
554
553
552
551
550
549
548
547
546
545
544
543
542
541
540
539
538
537
536
535
534
533

CHINO CORONA RD
554.26'
NODE 308
NODE 307
STA 38+62.29
NODE 306
563.54'
560.69'
555.55'

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
Note: STA 38+62.29 stationing and invert from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 1994 (LDK, 6/2017)
Node 307 to Node 309 inverts from Chino MPD Subarea 2 Amendment for Drainage Subarea F (LDK, 6/2020)
548.67'
538.00'
NODE 309
F_XS
F_JoinExCulvert
FG
HGL
9'W X 4'H RCB
84" RCP
78" RCP
SHEET 1 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 295
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE F HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-9 Water Elevation Profile: Node F_Node101.1 - F_Node136_EX 07/09/2020 16:18:00
Distance (ft)
3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1 ,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 F_Node101.1
F17+00.53
F16+24.00
F15+79.00
F_Node102
F10+67.50
F62+40.13/10+13.29
F58+03.08
F_Node128
F_Node135
F40+50.00
F39+00.00
F_Node136_EX
Elevation (ft)
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
564
562
560
558
556
554
552
550
548
SWMM 5.1 Page 1

PINE AVE
STA 20+10.00
NODE 300
FG
HGL
588.82'
587.37'
584.97'
583.45'
582.85'
577.51'
576.36'
575.24'
570.85'
569.44'
567.08'
564.24'
563.68'
563.54'

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1
STA 17+00.53
STA 53+26.50
NODE 304
STA 16+24.00
STA 16+14.00
STA 15+79.0
STA 10+67.50
STA 62+40.13/ STA 10+13.29
STA 58+03.08
STA 40+50.00
STA 39+00.00
STA 38+62.29
NODE 306
STA 11+52.24
NODE 301
STA 48+11.53
NODE 305
SHEET 2 OF 2

LINE F PROFILE

MARKET ST

ACADEMY ST

LEGACY PARK ST
Note:STA 38+62.29 to STA 62+40.13 stationing and inverts from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 1994 (LDK, 6/2017)
STA 10+67.50 to STA 20+10.00 stationing and inverts from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Tract No. 16420-1 (LDK, 9/2014)
78" RCP
72" RCP
66" RCP
60" RCP
48" RCP
4'W X 2'H RCB
48" RCP
SHEET 2 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 296
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE G HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-10 Water Elevation Profile: Node G_Node435_PROP - G9+87.75_PROP 07/09/2020 16:23:00
Distance (ft)
2,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1 ,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 G_Node435_PROP
G_Node436
G14+00.00
G9+87.75_PROP
Elevation (ft)
568
567.5
567
566.5
566
565.5
565
564.5
564
563.5
563
562.5
562
561.5
561
560.5
560
559.5
559
558.5
558
557.5
557
556.5
556
555.5
555
554.5
554
553.5
553
552.5
552
551.5
551
550.5
550
549.5
549
HGL
FG
554.48'
STA 9+87.75
STA 14+00.00
556.99'
558.98'
560.54'
STA 22+45.00
NODE 436
STA 29+98.42
NODE 435

CUCAMONGA AVE &

CHINO-CORONA RD

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
See Sheet 4 for
Chino-Corona
E-W profile
96" RCP
Note:STA 9+87.75 to STA 29+98.42 stationing and inverts from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Line G (Proactive, 6/2020) SHEET 1 OF 4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 297
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE G HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-10 Water Elevation Profile: Node G_Node430 - G_Node435_PROP 07/09/2020 16:22:00
Distance (ft)
2,700 2,600 2,500 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1 ,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 G_Node430
G36+47.50
G_Node431
G_Node432
G16+50.00
G11+13.76
G_Node435_PROP
Elevation (ft)
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
568
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556
555
554
553
552
551

LINE G PROFILE
STA 29+98.42
NODE 435

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1
560.54'
560.73'
561.87'
565.58'
566.65'
567.99'
567.73'
STA 11+13.76
STA 16+50.00
STA 22+09.50
NODE 432
STA 29+00.00
NODE 431
STA 36+47.50
STA 36+85.31
NODE 430
See Sheet 4 for
Chino-Corona Rd
E-W Profile
HGL
FG
60" RCP
48" RCP
36" RCP
Note: STA 29+98.42 stationing and invert from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Line G (Cucamonga Ave) (Proactive, 6/2020)
STA 11+13.76 to STA 36+85.31 stationing and invert from Storm Drain Improvement Plan for Line G (Chino Corona Rd N/S) (Proactive, 6/2020) SHEET 2 OF 4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 298
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE G HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-10 Water Elevation Profile: Node G46+24.48 - G_Node435_PROP 07/09/2020 16:22:00
Distance (ft)
1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 4 00 300 200 100 0 G46+24.48
G43+77.00
G36+23.00
G_Node424
G_Node435_PROP
Elevation (ft)
569
568.5
568
567.5
567
566.5
566
565.5
565
564.5
564
563.5
563
562.5
562
561.5
561
560.5
560
559.5
559
558.5
558
557.5
557
556.5
556
555.5
555
554.5
554
553.5
553
552.5
552
551.5
551
STA 29+98.42
NODE 435
STA 30+95.00
NODE 424
STA 36+23.00
STA 43+77.00
STA 46+24.48

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 4

CUCAMONGA AVE

WESTGATE ST
See Sheet 1 for
Cucamonga
Profile
560.54'
560.83'
561.52'
562.98'
563.72'
HGL
FG
90" RCP
84" RCP
68" RCP
Note: STA 29+98.42 to STA 46+24.48 stationing and invert from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Line G (Chino Corona Rd E/W) (Proactive, 6/2020) SHEET 3 OF 4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 299
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE G HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-10 Water Elevation Profile: Node G_Node402 - G46+24.48
07/09/2020 16:17:00
Distance (ft)
3,800 3,600 3,400 3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1 ,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 G_Node402
G_Node404
G_Node406
G_Node408
G_Node413
G_Node416
G_Node420
G_Node422
G46+66.46_PROP
G46+24.48
Elevation (ft)
590
589
588
587
586
585
584
583
582
581
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
568
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556
555
554
553

CHINO-CORONA RD E-W

W PRESERVE LOOP
NODE 422
NODE 420
NODE 416
NODE 413
NODE 408
NODE 406
NODE 404
NODE 402

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 3
STA 46+24.48
STA 46+66.46
563.72'
564.09'
565.75'
566.75'
567.72'
568.29'
570.72'
571.01'
573.46'
577.07'
HGL
FG
78" RCP
72" RCP
66" RCP
60" RCP
48" RCP
36" RCP
Note: STA 46+24.48 to STA 46+66.46 stationing and invert from Storm Drain Improvement Plans for Line G (Chino Corona Rd E/W) (Proactive, 6/2020) Node 422 to Node 402 from Line G H&H Report (Proactive, 7/2020) SHEET 4 OF 4

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 300
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE H HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-11 SHEET 1 OF 2
Water Elevation Profile: Node H_Node509 - H9+45.55_PROP 07/09/2020 16:21:00
Distance (ft)
3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1 ,000 800 600 400 200 0 H_Node509
H36+62.74
H_Node512
H20+00.00
H16+52.42
H14+84.44
H9+45.55_PROP
Elevation (ft)
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556
555
554
553
552
551
550
549
548
547
546
545
544
543
542
541
540
539
538
537
536
535
534
533
532
531
530
529
528
527
STA 25+32.08
NODE 512
STA 9+45.55
533.66'

PINE AVE

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
STA 14+84.44
STA 16+52.42
STA 20+00.00
STA 36+58.08
550.75'
STA 36+62.74
550.77'
STA 39+47.74
NODE 509
538.61'
540.15'
543.01'
546.03'
551.97'
Note: Stationing and inverts are based on Line H plans
(Proactive, 7/2020)
96" RCP
SHEET 1 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 301
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE H HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-11 Water Elevation Profile: Node H_Node502 - H_Node509
07/09/2020 16:17:00
Distance (ft)
3,600 3,400 3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1 ,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 H_Node502
H70+32.67
H67+28.09
H63+69.95
H_Node503
H54+63.80_EX
H_Node506
H43+38.25
H_Node509
Elevation (ft)
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
564
562
560
558
556
554
552
550
548
546
STA 39+47.74
NODE 509
STA 43+38.25
553.63'
STA 49+93.81
NODE 506
STA 54+63.80
STA 62+69.97
NODE 503
STA 63+69.95
STA 67+28.09
STA 70+32.67
STA 75+74.24
NODE 502

PINE AVE
551.97'
555.58'
556.68'
558.74'
558.97'
559.63'
562.09'
568.89'

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1
Note: Stationing and inverts are based on Line H plans
(Proactive, 7/2020)
96" RCP
90" RCP
84" RCP
SHEET 2 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 302
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE I HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-12 Water Elevation Profile: Line I
07/09/2020 16:35:00
5,400 5,200 5,000 4,800 4,600 4,400 4,200 4,000 3,800 3,600 3,400 3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 I_Node603 I86+54.00
I_Node604
I60+47.00
I_Node608
I_Node611
Elevation (ft)
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576
574
572
570
568
566
564
562
560
558
556
554
552
550
548
546
544
542

KIMBALL AVE
FG
HGL
586.39'
584.87'
573.19'
567.55'
559.37'
550.47'

PINE AVE
STA 69+00.00
NODE 604
STA 60+47.00
STA 48+00.00
NODE 608
STA 34+16.42
NODE 611
STA 88+80.44
NODE 603
STA 86+54.00

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
Note: Stationing and inverts are based on Line I
proposed profile exhibit (Proactive, 5/2021)
DOUBLE
8'W X 8'H RCB
SHEET 1 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 303
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE I HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-12 Water Elevation Profile:Line I
07/09/2020 16:35:00
4,800 4,600 4,400 4,200 4,000 3,800 3,600 3,400 3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 Ontario I22
I23
I24
I25
I_Node603
Elevation (ft)
636
634
632
630
628
626
624
622
620
618
616
614
612
610
608
606
604
602
600
598
596
594
592
590
588
586
584
582
580
578
576

MERRILL AVE

KIMBALL AVE
627.58'
614.52'
607.72'
600.20'
593.01'
FG
HGL
STA 118+56.20
STA 108+56.20
STA 98+56.20
586.39'
STA 88+80.44
NODE 603
STA 138+56.20
NODE 600
STA 128+56.20

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1
Note: Stationing and inverts are based on Line I
proposed profile exhibit (Proactive, 5/2021)
DOUBLE
8'W X 8'H RCB
DOUBLE
8'W X 7'H RCB
SHEET 2 OF 2

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 304
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE J HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-13 Water Elevation Profile: Node J_Node729 - J7+70.00_PROP 07/09/2020 16:23:00
Distance (ft)
1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 J_Node729
J_Node730
J_Node731
J15+50.00_PROP
J14+50.00
J13+20.00
J12+39.50
J_Node732
J10+53.58
J10+22.24
J8+84.80_HW
J7+70.00_PROP
Elevation (ft)
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
568
567
566
565
564
563
562
561
560
559
558
557
556
555
SWMM 5.1 Page 1
SHEET 1 OF 3

LINE J PROFILE
STA 97+08.60
Node 729

BICKMORE AVE
572.55'
STA 89+31.59
Node 730
STA 87+28.86
Node 731
571.02'
569.75'
569.32'
568.55'
STA 15+50.00
STA 14+50.00
STA 13+20.00
STA 12+39.50
STA 12+39.50
Node 732
STA 10+53.58
STA 10+22.24
STA 8+84.80
STA 7+70.00
567.28'
567.50'
565.48'
560.49'
558.92'
564.03'
563.35'
Note: Sta 7+70.00 to Sta 15+50.00 stationing and inverts from Pine Avenue Stage 3 Plans (Proactive, 3/2019)
Sta 87+28.86 to Sta 97+08.60 stationing and inverts from Kimball Channel & Bickmore Basin for Tract No. 16419 (LDK, 11/2004) DOUBLE
10'W X 4'H RCB
TEC
32' W X 7'H
TEC
28' W X 7'H
TEC
25' W X 7'H
TEC
20' W X 11'H
TEC
29' W X 4'H

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 2
SHEET 1 OF 3

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 305
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE J HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-13 Water Elevation Profile: Node KimballOutlet - J_Node729 07/09/2020 17:14:00
Distance (ft)
2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 2,000 1,900 1,800 1,700 1,600 1,500 1 ,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 KimballOutlet J_Node724
J118+00.00
J_Node728
J102+15.31
J99+00.00
J_Node729
Elevation (ft)
598
597
596
595
594
593
592
591
590
589
588
587
586
585
584
583
582
581
580
579
578
577
576
575
574
573
572
571
570
569
568
567
566
565

KIMBALL BASIN OUTLET
STA 120+89.12
Node 724
STA 118+00.00
STA 109+00.00
Node 728

LINE J PROFILE

MATCHLINE
SEE SHEET 1
Kimball Outlet
584.52'
583.82'
Note: Sta 97+08.60 to Sta 120+89.12 stationing and inverts from Kimball Channel & Bickmore Basin for Tract No. 16419 (LDK, 11/2004) 583.41'
STA 102+15.31
STA 97+08.60
Node 729
STA 99+00.00
581.74'
576.89'
572.85'
572.55'

BICKMORE AVE
TEC
20'W X 11'H
DOUBLE
8'W X 6'H RCB
TEC
10'W X 12.5'H
TEC
20'W X 5'H
SHEET 2 OF 3

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 306
MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE UPDATESUBAREA NO. 2 "THE PRESERVE"Consulting27042 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 110Foothill Ranch, CA 92610949.259.6770 FOR
THE PRESERVEHYDROLOGY MAPULTIMATE CONDITIONCITY OF CHINODEC 2021 FIGUREX-XMASTER PLAN FACILITIESLINE J HYDRAULIC PROFILEFIGURE4-13 Water Elevation Profile: Node J_Node68 - J6+99.46
07/09/2020 16:41:00
Distance (ft)
6,000 5,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1 ,000 500 0 J_Node68
J_TEC
J_ExRCB
J109
J_Node700
J_Node710
J_Node713
J_Node716
J_Node721
J11+50.10
J10+37.35
J9+15.00
J6+99.46
Elevation (ft)
662
660
658
656
654
652
650
648
646
644
642
640
638
636
634
632
630
628
626
624
622
620
618
616
614
612
610
608
606
604
602
600
598
596
594
SWMM 5.1 Page 1
FG
HGL
STA 34+04.67
NODE 68
STA 24+44.42
STA 10+00.04
J109
NODE 700
NODE 710
NODE 713
NODE 716
NODE 721
STA 11+50.10
647.07'
643.21'
627.57'
626.01'
624.56'
623.87'
622.04'
621.41'
619.16'
603.87'
STA 10+37.35
601.90'
STA 10+07.21
600.23'
STA 9+15.00
597.03'
STA 6+99.46
595.45'

MERRILL AVE
Note: STA 10+00.04 to STA 34+04.67 stationing and inverts from Storm Drain Improvement Plan for Merrill and Grove Avenues (D&D Engineering, 7/2020)
Node 721 to J109 stationing and inverts from LDK MPD Amendment (LDK, 7/2004) STA 6+99.46 to STA 10+37.35 stationing and inverts from Kimball Ave Box Culvert for Tract No. 16419 (LDK, 12/2004)
SHEET 3 OF

LINE J PROFILE
50'W X 6'H

RECT OPEN CHNL
TRIPLE
18'W X 4'H
RCB
TEC
20'W X 5'H
DOUBLE
10'W X 6'H
RCB
TEC
10'W X 6'H
120" RCP

KIMBALL BASIN
SHEET 3 OF 3

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 307
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 58 Q3 Consulting

5 COST ESTIMATES AND DRAINAGE IMPACT FEE UPDATE
Construction cost estimates for the recommended facilities have been updated and incorporated into the City’s Drainage Impact Fee. Facility sizes and lengths have been updated based on the recommended improvements shown on Figures 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-5. Unit costs were updated based on the best available data. A 25 percent contingency is added to the construction cost for engineering, geotechnical, survey, inspection, and administration. An additional 10% contingency was added for the total facility cost.

A summary of the total facility cost for each of the master plan facilities is provided in Table 5-1. Unit prices used in the preparation of the cost estimates are summarized on Table 5-2. A detailed breakdown for the Line I cost is included in Table 5-3.

Table 5-1. Master Planned Facility Total Cost Estimate
Facility Name Projected Total
Kimball Basin SD-110 $2,696,112
Kimball Basin SD-111 $3,560,576
Kimball Basin SD-112 $3,668,634
Line B $22,164,984
Line C $4,181,194
Line D $5,753,156
Line E $4,600,000
Line F $5,533,380
Line G $4,773,753
Line H $7,026,689
Line I $43,194,924
Line J $3,146,750
Line L $426,250
Grand Total $110,726,401

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 308
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 59 Q3 Consulting

Table 5-2. Summary of Cost Estimate Unit Prices
Cost Item Unit Cost
AC R&R (6' wide) LF $33
TRAFFIC CONTROL DAY $5,000
UTILITY CONFLICTS EA $10,000

ENGINEERING, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, STAKING, SURVEYING,
SOILS, MATERIALS TESTING AND INSPECTION % 25%
CONTINGENCY % 10%
18" R.C.P. L.F. $70
24" R.C.P. L.F. $90
30" R.C.P. L.F. $120
36" R.C.P. L.F. $140
42" R.C.P. L.F. $175
48" R.C.P. L.F. $200
54" R.C.P. L.F. $230
60" R.C.P. L.F. $250
66" R.C.P. L.F. $280
72" R.C.P. L.F. $300
78" R.C.P. L.F. $330
84" R.C.P. L.F. $360
90" R.C.P. L.F. $380
96" R.C.P. L.F. $410
102" R.C.P. L.F. $450
Standard Manhole, 33" pipe or less (SPPWC 321-2) Each $8,000 Standard Manhole, Greater than 36" pipe (SPPWC 320-2) Each $9,000 Transition Structure Each $10,000
Junction Structure No. 1 (MH Pipe to Pipe Large Side Inlet (SPPWC 322-2)) Each $8,500 Junction Structure No. 2 Each $4,000
Junction Structure No. 3 (Pipe to RCB (SPPWC 333-2)) Each $10,000 Junction Structure No. 4 (Pipe to Pipe (SPPWC 331-2)) Each $6,000 RCB 3’ high x 5’ wide L.F. $750
RCB 4’ high x 5’ wide L.F. $800
RCB 4’ high x 6’ wide L.F. $850
RCB 4’ high x 7’ wide L.F. $900
RCB 4’ high x 10’ wide L.F. $1,100
RCB 5’ high x 5’ wide L.F. $850
Headwall L.F. $15,000

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 309
Master Plan of Drainage Update
Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve
December 2021 60 Q3 Consulting

Table 5-3. Line I Detailed Facility Total Cost
Quantity Unit Item
Unit
Price
Total Cost
Per Item

STREETS
1808 CY AC Pavement Removal $100 $180,800
1664 TON AC Variable - >300T $120 $199,680
1598 TON CAB Variable - >300T $90 $143,820
2270 LF Sawcut A.C. $3 $6,810
STREET SUBTOTAL $531,110
LS Mobilization (5% of Construction Cost) 5% $26,556
LS Traffic Control (5% of Construction Cost) 5% $26,556 GRAND TOTAL STREETS ONLY $584,221

STORM DRAIN
13 EA Existing Utility Protection $1,500 $19,500
150 LF Relocate 36" Brine Line and 42" Casing $500 $75,000 26 EA Storm Drain Manhole (RCB) $2,500 $65,000
3 EA Junction Structure #2 (24" or larger) $8,850 $26,550 5 EA Junction Structure #4 (24" or smaller) $4,000 $20,000 1 EA Outlet Structure $52,800 $52,800
8 EA Catch Basin 10' Width/L.D. $9,950 $79,600
32 LF
18 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
backfill and pavement restoration $200 $6,400
48 LF
24 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
backfill and pavement restoration $240 $11,520
32 LF
36 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
backfill and pavement restoration $310 $9,920
16 LF
42 inch RCP Installed, including excavation, bedding,
backfill and pavement restoration $330 $5,280
12880 LF
DBL 8' x 8' RCB Installed, including excavation,
bedding, backfill (Not including shoring) $1,700 $21,896,000 7200 LF
DBL 8' x 8' RCB Shoring, 20-feet deep
(Sta 18+00 to Sta 90+00) $800 $5,760,000
STORM DRAIN SUBTOTAL $28,027,570
LS Mobilization (5% of Construction Cost) 5% $1,401,379 LS Traffic Control (5% of Construction Cost) 5% $1,401,379 GRAND TOTAL STORM DRAIN ONLY $30,830,327
DIRECT COSTS GRAND TOTAL STREETS ONLY $584,221

GRAND TOTAL STORM DRAIN ONLY $30,830,327

GRAND TOTAL (FOR PLAN CHECK & INSPECTION
FEE DETERMINATION) $31,414,548

PROJECT
ADDITIVES Project Contingencies 10% $3,141,455

Construction Total + Project Contingencies $34,556,003 Engineering, Project Management, Staking,
Surveying, Soils, Materials Testing and
Inspections 25% $8,639,001
GRAND TOTAL (FOR BOND AMOUNTS) $43,194,924

11.14.c
Resolution 2022-019 Adopting the Storm Drain Master Plan Packet Pg. 310

Revenue: Expenditure: .

Transfer In: Transfer Out:

M E M O R A N D U M

CITY OF CHINO

OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022

TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY OF CHINO

FROM: FRED GALANTE, CITY ATTORNEY

SUBJECT: ADDITION OF INTERIM CITY MANAGER POSITION TO THE CI TY'S CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY SCHEDULE.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 2022-022 amending the City's classification and salary schedule to add the Interim City Manager position.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Interim City Manager position will be funded with salary savings from the vacant City Manager Position.

13.15 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 311
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: ADDITION OF INTERIM CITY MANAGER POSITION TO THE CITY'S

CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY SCHEDULE
PAGE 2

BACKGROUND
With the approaching departure of the current City Manager, the duties of the City Manager position will temporarily be assigned to an appointed Interim City Manager , Anthony Arroyo, current Director of Human Resources/Risk Management and will become effective April 18, 2022. Because the negotiated salary is not assigned to any current job classification, the position of Interim City Manager and salary is required to be added to the City’s Cl assification and Salary Schedule as required by CalPERS rules as well as the City’s Personnel Rules.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The salary that was negotiated between the Interim City Manager and the City Council is not currently included in the City’s Classificatio n and Salary Schedule nor does it meet the requirements as stated in the “Additional Duties” section of the Executive Summary of Benefits.

The Summary of Benefits states in part, “Additional duty pay will be granted as a percentage increase to the employee’s existing base salary only, and will not be less than the amount equal to the entry level salary of the higher level class for which the employee is performing duties, nor exceed the maximum salary at the top of the range of said class.” As such, the City needs to temporarily establish the job title of Interim City Manager with the negotiated salary, which is equal to 15% above the current Department Director ’s salary , or $18,895 . The negotiated salary will be subject to any COLA increases negotiated. Upon the appointment of the permanent City Manager, the Interim City Manager will return to his former position of Director of Human Resources/Risk Management.

Attachment: Resolution No. 2022-022

13.15 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 312
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-022

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHINO,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CERTAIN PORTIONS OF RESOLUTION NO. 2021-047, 2021-071 AND 2021-075 OF THE CITY’S CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY SCHEDULE.

WHEREAS, the City Council o f the City of C hino has the autho rity to create and maintain position classifications; and

WHEREAS, greater flexibility is desired to meet changing conditions and better serve general organizational needs; and

WHEREAS, the need to add the position of Interim City Manager; and

WHEREAS, the need to establish the salary range for the position of Interim City Manager has been identified.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following position and salary schedule changes are established:

Add:
• One (1) Full-time Interim City Manager, Executive Management

Non-Sworn Management Classification (monthly salary amounts) Base
Interim City Manager (new) $18,895

APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th day of April, 2022.

________________________________
EUNICE M. ULLOA, MAYOR

ATTEST:

_____________________________

ANGELA ROBLES, CITY CLERK

CITY OF CHINO

13.15.a
Interim City Manager
Packet Pg. 313
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-022
PAGE 2

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss

CITY OF CHINO )

I, Angela Robles, City Clerk of the City of Chino, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of April, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ANGELA ROBLES, CITY CLERK

13.15.a
Interim City Manager
Packet Pg. 314

Revenue: Expenditure: 3207100-40000-ST223

Transfer In: 3201000-50000 Transfer Out:1001000-40001

M E M O R A N D U M

CITY OF CHINO

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022

TO: MATTHEW C. BALLANTYNE, CITY MANAGER

FROM: AMER JAKHER, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

SUBJECT: MADISON STREET GAP CLOSURE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.

RECOMMENDATION
1) Consider creating Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Project No. ST223; 2) if desirous of proceeding, appropriate $200,000 to the Transportation Fund 320 with a corresponding year end backfill transfer from the General Fund 100 - for the project expenses; and 3) authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the City.

FISCAL IMPACT
Requires an appropriation of $200,000 to Transportation Fund 320, and corresponding year end backfill transfer from the unappropriated reserves of the General Fund 100. There is a sufficient fund balance for this purpose.

13.16 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 315
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: MADISON STREET GAP CLOSURE PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT
PAGE 2

BACKGROUND
The City of Chino staff is currently in the process of obtaining the right -of-way along Madison Street from the property owners at 4956 (APN 1015321150000) and 4968 (APN1015321140000) Walnut Avenue. These two (2) properties extend from Walnut Avenue to Madison Street between Kellogg Avenue and Tebo Avenue. Both property owners have reached out to the Mayor and City Council Members expressing th eir desire to dedicate the extra 20 -foot wide of their property along Madison Street to achieve the 60 -foot right -of-way acquisition required to provide the sidewalk, drainage and street improvements currently missing. Both property owners recognize that t hese dedications are necessary to provide a continuous sidewalk to improve walkability. The improvements will entail curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements to the frontage of Madison Street for both parcels. Improvements will also provide for a continuous path of travel along the current gap in the sidewalk.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Staff assessed the accessibility needs of Madison Street to the Kellogg Avenue intersection and determined that it did not meet the City’s accessibility requirements. The intersection of Kellogg Avenue and Madison Street does not provide pedestrian access because there are no curb ramps. Curb ramps at the northeast and northwest corners will need to be designed and constructed as part of the improvements. Additionally, to provide prop er accessibility access across Madison Street, a curb ramp will also be required along the south side of Madison Street. In addition to the curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements, staff is recommending paving design and construction to achieve full street section improvements to provide for the required accessibility improvements. The accessibility improvements will include curb ramps on the northwest and northeast corners of the intersection, along with the necessary curb ramps along the south side of Mad ison Street. The design for such improvements is estimated to cost approximately $50,000.00, with construction estimated at approximately $150,000.00.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council consider the project and if desirous of proceeding, cr eate CIP Project No. ST223 - Madison Street Gap Closure. Staff also recommends an appropriation of $200,000 to the Transportation Fund and a corresponding year end backfill from the unappropriated reserves of the General Fund to Project No. ST223, for design and construction efforts.

Attachments: GIS Location Map
4956 Walnut Avenue Property Owner Letter
4968 Walnut Avenue Property Owner Letter

13.16 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 316

13.16.a
Establish CIP Project for Madison Street Gap Closure
Packet Pg. 317

13.16.b
Establish CIP Project for Madison Street Gap Closure
Packet Pg. 318
November 10.2021
The Honorable Mayor and Mernbers of the Chino city council Chino City Hall
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
Re: Letter of Intent for public Improvements Along Nladison Avenue.

Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the city council:

This letter of intent is subrnitted to broadly outline a proposition to initiate and cornplete publicimprovements north of my property located at 4968 walnut Avenue. As a brief description andbackground, my parcel's lot size is 23"760 square feet and extends from Walnut Avenue toMadison Street' The portion of my lot extencling to Madison Street lacks public improvements.That is' there is an absence of sidewalk, drainage, and street improvements extending from 4929Madison Street to 4975 Madison Street.

In recognizing the importance of walkability and accessibility in the City of Chino, this letter ofintent stresses my willingness to convey the necessary dedications to the City of Chino to completethe necessary public improvements to ensure an uninterrupted sequence of sidewalk, drainage, andpublic improvements along ll1adison Street. However, this ofler is only extended with thequalification that the City of Chino pay the full construction cost as well as allfees or other relatedcosts to prepare any plans, designs, sun'eying, lot Iine adjustments, and recordation fees or othernecessary documents.

Should the city council wish to move forward with this proposal, please contact me in writingwith a letter made to my attention at the address listed below.

Sincerely.

Enrique Michel / Maria G Michel
4968 Walnut Avenue
Chino. CA 91710

13.16.c
Establish CIP Project for Madison Street Gap Closure
Packet Pg. 319
November 10, Z02l
El Honorable Alcalde y los miembros del Ayuntamiento de chino Ayuntamiento de Chino
13220 Central Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
Re: Re: Carta de intenciones para mejoras priblicas a Io largo de Nladison Avenue.

Estimado Honorable Alcalde y miembros del Ayuntamiento:

Esta carta de intencion se presenta para describir en tdrminos generales una propuesta para iniciar y completar mejoras publicas al norte de rni propiedad ubicada en 4968 Walnut Avenue.

Como breve descripcion y antecedentes, el tamafro del lote de mi parcela es de 23,760 pies cuadrados y se extiende desde Walnut Avenue hasta Madison Street. La parte de rni lote que se extiende hasta Madison Street carece de mejoras pfblicas. Es decir, hay una ausencia de mejoras en las aceras, el drenaje y las calles que se extienden desde 4929 Madison Street hasta 4975 Madison Street.

Al reconocer la importancia de la accesibilidad para peatones y la accesibilidad en la ciudad de Chino, esta carta de intencion enfatiza mi voluntad de transmitir las dedicaciones necesarias a Ia ciudad de Chino para completar las mejoras publicas necesarias para asegurar una secuencia ininterrumpida de aceras, drenaje y mejoras pirblicas. a lo largo de Madison Street. Sin embargo. esta oferta solo se extiende con la calificacion de que la Ciudad de Chino paga el costo total de construccion, asi como todas las tarit'as u otros costos relacionados para preparar los planos, diseiios, topografia, ajustes de linea de lote y tarifas de registro u otros documentos necesarios.

Si el Concejo Municipal desea seguir adelante con esta propuesta, comuniquese conmigo por escrito con una carta dirigida a mi atencion a la direcci6n que se indica a continuacion.

Atentamente,
Enrique Michel lM,aria
4968 Walnut Avenue
Chino, CA 91710
'/* "G Michel

13.16.c
Establish CIP Project for Madison Street Gap Closure
Packet Pg. 320

Revenue: Expenditure: 3207100 - 48004/48007 - ST203 & 3287103 - 48004 ST204.

Transfer In: Transfer Out:

M E M O R A N D U M

CITY OF CHINO

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022

TO: MATTHEW C. BALLANTYNE, CITY MANAGER

FROM: AMER JAKHER, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

SUBJECT: PINE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS.

RECOMMENDATION
1) Approve Amendment No. 5 to the Professional Services Agreement (No. 2020-131) with Proactive Engineering Consulting (PEC) in an amount not-to-exceed $361,250 and approve a contingency of $36,125 for additional professional services, for a potential Amendment No. 5 amount not-to-exceed $397,375. Increase their vendor cap by $397,375, for a total vendor cap amount not-to-exceed $415,275 for FY21-22.
2) Approve Amendment No. 4 to the Professional Services Agreement (No. 2021-053) with EXP U.S. Services, Inc. (EXP) in an amount not-to-exceed $212,910 and approve a contingency of $16,722 for additional professional services, for a potential Amendment No. 4 amount not-to- exceed $229,632. Increase their vendor cap by $229,632 for a total vendor cap amount not-to- exceed $453,512.93 for FY21-22.
3) Approve Amendment No. 5 to the Professional Services Agreement (No. 2021-118) with IDC Consulting Engineers, Inc. (IDC) in an amount not-to-exceed $461,630.40 and approve a contingency of $46,163 for additional professional services, for a potential Amendment No. 5 amount not-to-exceed $507,793.40. Increase their vendor cap by $507,793.40, for a total vendor cap amount not-to-exceed $1,019,272.40 for FY21-22.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are sufficient funds in the project budgets for Project No. ST203 and ST204. Project No.

ST203 is completely funded through the City's Preserve Development Impact Fees and has no impact on the City's General Fund.

13.17 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 321
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: PINE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
PAGE 2

13.17 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 322
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: PINE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
PAGE 3

BACKGROUND
Project ST203 - Pine Avenue, between Euclid and Hellman Avenues (Pine Avenue), i s a master-planned facility included in the City’s Development Impact Nexus and Calculation Report, which will be a six -lane arterial roadway with a raised landscaped median. Improving and widening this section of Pine Avenue, from Euclid Avenue to Johnson Avenue, to six lanes will increase traffic flow, relieve traffic congestion, and improve the quality of life for the residents in the south Chino area. Additionally, raising Pine Avenue from Euclid Avenue to Johnson Avenue approximately 4.5’ above the El Prado Basin’s 100 -year ponding depth, will increase public safety by allowing access during flooding events, and, therefore, faster response times by the Chino Police Department and Chino Valley Fire. The ultimate configuration of Pine Avenue will require additional rights-of-way, relocation of existing utilities, changes in vertical profile, modification of intersections, new pavement and striping, provisions for new sewer, domestic water, recycled water, drainage, and water quality facilities. Construction of these new improvements requires coordination with adjacent property owners and/or review and permits from Army Corps of Engineers, Orange County Flood Control District, Caltrans, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and utility companies.

On September 17, 2019, the City Council approved a contract with Proactive Engineering Consultants (PEC) for the preliminary engineering and design of the Pine Avenue Master Plan in the amount of $380,000. Their consulting services included exploring altern ative street configurations, finalizing a selected design, and preparing a 30% plan, all of which PEC has provided.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
PEC has submitted a proposal to complete the civil portion of Plans, Estimates, and Specifications (PS&E) for this project in the amount of $361,250. Staff recommends amending the contract with PEC in the amount of $361,250 to proceed with the 100% PS&E for the Pine Avenue Widening project. Additionally, staff also recommends approving a contingency of $36,125 for Amendment No . 5 amount not -to-exceed $397,375. This amendment and contingency will revise the total contact amount for a potential not -to-exceed amount of $415,275 for FY21-22.

In addition to civil design services, other professional services are desired by the City t o complete the PS&Es. These services include the design of traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Pine Avenue and Euclid Avenue, right of way acquisition, utility relocation coordination, and preparation of environmental documents.

EXP U.S. Services is presently designing the Pine Avenue at SR 71 Interchange Improvements (ST204) and submitted a proposal for traffic signal improvements and coordination with Caltrans for improvements at Pine/Euclid Avenue in the amount of $212,910. Staff recommends approval of Amendment No. 4 with EXP in the amount of $212,910, along with a contingency of $21,291 for Amendment No. 4 amount not -to-exceed $234,201. This amendment and contingency will revise the total contract amount for a potential not -to-exceed amount of $453,512.93 for FY21 -

22. Staff also solicited a proposal from IDC to provide remaining professional services for ST203, including project management, right -of-way acquisition, utility coordination, environmental compliance, and jurisdictional permit ting to support the project. Staff further recommends that City Council approve Amendment No. 5 to the agreement with IDC Consulting Engineers, in the

13.17 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 323
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 5, 2022
SUBJECT: PINE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
PAGE 4

amount of $461,630.40, along with a contingency of $46,163, for Amendment No. 5 amount not- to-exceed $507,793.40. This amendment and contingency will revise the total contract amount for a potential not-to-exceed amount of $1,019,272.40 for FY21-22.

Attachments: PEC - Amendment No. 5
EXP- Amendment No. 4
IDC- Amendment No. 5

13.17 NEW BUSINESS
Packet Pg. 324
Contract No.: 2020-131 (A5)

Approved: _____________

A
MENDMENT NO. 5

TO AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“Amendment”) by and between the CITY OF CHINO , a California municipal corporation (“City”) and PROACTIVE ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. , (“Consultant”) is effective as of the 5th day of April 2022.

RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement for Contractual Services dated September 17, 2019 ( “Agreement”) whereby Consultant agreed to perform Design Engineering Design Services for the Pine Avenue Project.

B. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to increase compensation and to add to the scope of services.

TERMS

1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. a. The total compensation for Consultant’s services provided for in Section 2.1 of the Agreement is hereby increase by Three Hundred Sixty-One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars and Zero Cents ($361,250), as further described in Exhibit “B” attached to this Amendment, due to an increased need for consultant engineering services. Total contract amount shall not exceed One Million Two Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Eighteen Dollars and Zero Cents ($1,255,618).
b. The term provided for in Section 3.4 of the Agreement is hereby extended from September 17, 2022 to June 30, 2023.
c. The Scope of Services have been amended to include the additional services as described in the attached Exhibit “A”.
d. The Schedule of Compensation has been amended to include the additional compensation as described in the attached Exhibit “B”.

2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Agreement, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect . From and after the date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment to the Agreement.

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 325
- 2 -
01225.0001/458787.1

3. Affirmation of Agreement; Warranty R e Absence of Defaults. City and Consultant each ratify and reaffirm each and every on e of the respective rights and obligations arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no written or oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.

Consultant represents and warrants to City that, as of the date of this Amendment, City is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

City represents and warrants to Consultant that, as of the date of this Amendm ent, Consultant is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipula te and agree that they have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.

5. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on b ehalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the p rovisions of this Agreement, and (iv) the entering into this Agreement does not violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound.

[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 326
- 3 -
01225.0001/458787.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.

CITY:

CITY OF CHINO, a municipal corporation

Matthew C. Ballantyne, City Manager
ATTEST:

Angela Robles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
_____________________________ ____________________________________ Fred Galante, City Attorney Amer Jakher, P.E., Director of Public Works

CONSULTANT:

PROACTIVE ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS ,
INC.:

By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:

Address: ______

Attachments: Exhibit A – Scope of Services
Exhibit B – Compensation

Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one signature required from each of the following groups:
1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT’S SIGNATURES SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS

SHALL BE INCLUDED AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY.

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 327

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2022 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the ba sis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the ins trument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 328

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2022 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/t heir authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of Califo rnia that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 329
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
The scope of services involves the design and preparation of construction documents for roadway improvements to Pine Avenue bounded by Euclid Ave on the west and Johnson Avenue on the east. Pine Avenue is to be designed as a 6 -lane arterial highway consistent with The Preserve Specific Plan. Improvements will include widening of Pine Avenue to the east of Euclid Avenue as well as a new vertical profile. Proactive Engineering Consultants (PEC) agrees to perform the following Scope of Services:

Pine Avenue Improvements and Euclid Ave Support
Task 01 Update 30% Complete Plans
Update and refine previously prepared 30% plans to reflect City requested revisions for the proposed improvements to Pine Avenue from Euclid Ave. to Johnson Ave. This refined plan will help to clearly indicate the scope, limit of improvements and easement requirements that are to occur with Pine Ave. construction. These Pine Ave. improvements are intended to match improvements that are proposed for the Pine/Euclid intersection . Pine Ave. improvements will require City of Chino review and approval.

Task 02 Design Surveys
Perform field surveys as needed to obtain critical horizonta l and vertical data necessary for the design of the proposed improvements to Pine Ave and the Euclid intersection improvements .

The scope of this work is not yet known so an initial fee budget has been established. Services will be billed on an hourly ba sis consistent with the attached rate schedule , not to exceed the established budget. Any additional budget must be approved by the Client in advance of doing the work.

Task 03 100% Pine Avenue Improvement Plans
Prepare 100% plans for the construction of Pine Ave. widening consistent with the 30% plans and the 30% updated plans prepared in Task 01. Proposed roadway improvements extend from Euclid Ave. on the west to Johnson Ave. on the east. Plans will be submitted to the City for review at 65%, 95% and 100% complete. Signing and striping limits may extend easterly of Mayhew Ave.

The plan set will include the following:
• Location and Index Map
• Details
• Typical Cross-Sections
• Contour Grading Plan
• Profile Plan
• Striping Plan
• Storm Drain Plan

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 330
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
Task 04 Water Relocation Plans
Prepare 100% plans for reconstruction of the State’s domestic water line between Euclid Ave and Johnson Ave. Plans may require provisions for a temporary “high line” until space is available for construction of the new water line. Provisions for temporary water highline will be incorporated in the project specifications and bid sheet. Plans will be submitted to the State for review, comment and approval.

Prepare 100% plans for the reconstruction of the IEUA’s recycled water line between Euclid Ave and Johnson Ave. Plans may require provisions for a temporary “high line” until space is available for construction of the new water line. Plans will be submitted to the IEUA for review, comment and approval.

This task includes review of contractor submittals.

Task 05 Demolition Plans
Prepare Demolition Plans for Pine Avenue between Euclid Ave and Johnson Ave . Plans shall clearly delineate the overall limit of work as well as those specific improvements and landscaping to be removed, relocated or protected in place.

Task 06 Structural Plan
The current 30% plan specifies all retaining wall s and barriers to utilize Caltrans standard plans for the details of construction. The 30% plan also assumes the use of precast reinforced concrete box (RCB) or pipes for the culvert crossing un der the Pine Ave. Plans will include critical top of wall and top of footing elevations as well as a profile. No structural calculations are anticipated for the retaining wall or RCB facilities. This scope includes calculations and structural detailing for the upstream and downstream headwalls for the culvert. Plans to be submitted to City of Chino for review, comments and approval. Should it be determined that standard Caltrans retaining walls or precast box sections are not suitable for the bedding or loading conditions, the “Optional Services” section has a line item for the necessary structural calculations and detailing.

Task 07 Utility Relocations
Coordinate with Southern California Edison (SCE), Southern California Gas (SCG), Charter and Frontier for the relocation of their respective existing utilities between Euclid Ave. and Johnson Ave. The relocated SCE, Charter and Frontier facilities are to relocated overhead, within the right- of-way for Pine Ave. as an interim location. At a future date, beyond the scope of this current Pine Ave. widening, these overhead utilities will be placed underground. This scope assumes that SCE, SCG, Charter and Frontier will prepare their own construction plans. The City of Chino shall pay any fees requested by the utility companies.

This scope includes the coordination of dry utility aerial line (SCE, Frontier and Charter) relocations and SCG underground relocations related to the Pine/Euclid to t he Johnson Ave. intersection improvements (Phase 1). The location of utilities will be reflected on the various construction plans to ensure there are no conflicts. The precise scope of this task i s

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 331
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements

indeterminate so a budget of 114 hours has been established. Services will be billed on an hourly basis consistent with the attached rate schedule , not to exceed the e stablished budget. Any additional budget must be approved by the Client in advance of doing the work.

Task 08 Hydrology & Hydraulics
Prepare a Hydrology and Hydraulics Report summarizing the hydrology and hydraulic assumptions and calculations that are the basis of design for the Pine Ave culvert crossing and street catch basins. Hydrology and hydraulic calculations will be consistent with the procedures defined in the most recent version of “Storm Drain Master Plan Update, Subarea No. 2 – The Preserve”. Culvert hydraulics will be confirmed using Water Surface Pressure Gradient (WSPG) software developed by Los Angeles Department of Public Works. The Pine Ave culvert crossing will be investigated fo r the existing condition and u ltimate condition based on the new master plan of drainage. The hydrology and hydraulic calculations will also include an evaluation of the existing storm flows in Euclid Ave as they approa ch the Pine/Euclid intersection from the north.

Recommendations will include routing and sizing for Euclid Ave drainage improvements.

Task 09 Quantities & Cost Estimate
Prepare three (3) quantity estimates as required by the City of Chino. The first estimate shall be prepared with the 65% submittal. The second estimate shall be prepared with the 95% submittal.

The final cost estimate and bid sheet will be submitted upon completion of the 100% plans. Unit pricing estimates will utilize the City’s furnished unit prices.

Task 10 Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Support
The improvements for Pine Avenue infringe on the storage capacity for the reservoir behind Prado Dam. As such, the ACOE must be consulted. The ACOE requires submittal of an application package to decide of the level of permit that may be required. The submit tal package is to include:
• Definition of improvements lying within the ACOE jurisdiction (approximately elevation 566 and below)
• Storage volume impacts and any proposed offsets
• Status of environmental permits
This scope of services is based on the assumption that the ACOE will issue a “No Objection” letter to the City of Chino for the proposed improvements. Should ACOE determine that a Section 408 Permit is required, those services would require approval of additional services.

Task 11 Legal Descriptions
Legal descriptions and plats for several easements over the properties adjacent to Pine Ave between Euclid Ave and Mayhew Ave have been previously prepared . The most recent 30% drawings define different limits for the various easements and will therefore r equire new legal descriptions, plats and title reports. This scope includes preparation of legal descriptions and plats to support the acquisition of right of way , access easements and tempora ry construction

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 332
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
easements. Existing ownership includes Caltrans, Bos Legacy LP, Pine Sterling Properties, Orange County Flood Control District and United States of America. Scope includes title reports for APN 1056-281-02 and 1056-271-02. Other parcels will utilize previously provi ded title reports. City to provide required appraisal reports. This scope assumes that City will apply and process encroachment permit with the County of Orange as well as Out Grant application with USA.

Task 12 Meetings, Consultation and Consultant Support
Meeting attendance, participation in digital meetings , phone calls and support of other consultant team members will be performed on an hourly basis. The precise scope of this task is indeterminate so a budget of 72 hours for Proactive has been established plus an additional $2,000 for the structural subconsultant. Services will be billed on an hourly basis consistent with the attached rate schedule, not to exceed the established budget. Any additional budget must be approved by the City in advance of doing the work.

Task 13 Soils Investigation and Report
Subconsultant (NMG Geotechnical) has previously completed an investigation and submitted a report to the City of Chino for the Pine Ave improvements between Euclid Ave and Johnson Ave.

Utilizing this prior information, NMG will prepare an updated geotechnical analysis for this latest design and provide an amendment to the prior reports. The investigation will include research and review of record documents for Euclid Ave. as well as 2 core samples within existing Euclid Ave pavement, sampling and laboratory testing. A Caltrans encroachment permit will be required to obtain the core samples. This scope includes application for the Caltrans encroachment permit for work within their right-of-way.

Task 14 Transportation WQMP
Prepare WQMP for review, comment and approval by City of Chino. The plan will outline source control, LID and post-construction BMPs applicable to the project to reduce and/or eliminate the discharge of pollutants from the completed project into the receiving waters. This scope is limited to the reach of Pine Ave between Euclid Ave. and Johnson Ave.

Task 15 Construction Support
Preparation of PS&E is included as an optional service in a separate task. This task includes review and comment on contract documents, specifications and bid documents prior to bid advertisement. Respond to bidder questions. Respond to contractor’s Request for Information (RFI) during construction. Attend construction field meetings as di rected by City. Prepare “As- Built” drawings based on markups provided by the contractor and City of Chino. The precise scope of this task is indeterminate so a budget of 48 hours has been established for Proactive plus an additional $2,050 for the structu ral subconsultant. Services will be billed on an hourly basis consistent with the attached rate schedule , not to exceed the established budget. Any additional budget must be approved by the Client in advance of doing the work.

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 333
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
Optional Services
Task 01 Specifications – Pine Ave
Prepare specifications, special provisions and estimates (PS&E) for the construction of Pine Ave. widening, for reconstruction of the State’s domestic water line and IEUA’s recycled water line between Euclid Ave and Johnson Ave. City to provide standard form of agreement and standard provisions.

Task 02 Update 30% Complete Plans for Euclid Ave/Pine Ave Intersection (Phase 1) Update and refine previously prepared 30% plans for the proposed improvements to the Pine/Euclid intersection to reflect revisions requested by the City of Chino. In particular, revisions will be necessary to reflect the improvements currently being designed by the City of Chino between Pine Ave. and Bickmore Ave. This refined plan will help to clearly indicate the scope and limit of improvements that are to occur with the improvements to the intersection and transitions to the north and south. These proposed improvements are intended to accommodate the Phase 2 improvements for Pine Ave. to the east. Phase 1 improvements will require Caltrans review and issuance of an encroachment permit.

Task 03 100% Euclid Ave/Pine Ave Intersection Improvement Plans Prepare 100% plans, specifications, special provisions and estimates (PS&E) of the Euclid/Pine intersection improvements consistent with 30% plans and revisions requested by the City of Chino. Proposed improvements generally extend east and west to the existing Caltrans right of way. Northerly limit is approximately 1,000’ and southerly limit is approximately 500’. The plan set will follow Caltrans encroachment permit guidelines and may include the following:
• Location and Index Map
• Site Plan
• Demolition Plan
• Contour Grading Plan
• Profile Plan
• Striping Plan
• Signal & Lighting Plan (by others)
• Drainage Plan
• Utility Plan (by others)
• Hydrology
• Typical Cross Sections
• Landscape Plan (by others)
• SWPCP
• ADA Certification
The improvement plan set shall be provided to the City’s consultant who will be assigned the responsibility of completing the Caltrans Encroachment Permit application, packaging and

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 334
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
delivery of the documents as well as monitoring of the review process and distribution of review comments.

Task 04 Specifications – Pine/Euclid Intersection
Prepare specifications, special provisions and estimates (PS&E) for the construction of improvements to Pine Ave./Euclid Ave. intersection. City to provide standard form of agreement and standard provisions.

Task 05 Meetings and Consultation – Euclid/Pine Intersection Meeting attendance, participation in digital meetings and phone calls will be performed on an hourly basis. The precise scope of this task is indeterminate so a budget of 40 hours has been established. Services will be billed on an hourly basis consistent with the attached rate schedule, not to exceed the established budget. Any additional budget must be approved by the Client in advance of doing the work.

Task 06 Quantities & Cost Estimate – Euclid/Pine Intersection Prepare three (3) quantity estimates as required by the City of Chino. The first estimate shall be prepared with the 65% submittal. The second estimate shall be prepared with the 95% submittal.

The final cost estimate and bid sheet will be submitted upon completion of the 100% plans. Unit pricing estimates will utilize the City’s furnished unit prices.

Task 07 Construction Support – Euclid/Pine Intersection Preparation of PS&E is included with the respective 100% drawings. This task includes r eview and comment on contract documents, specifications and bid documents prior to advertising for bids. Respond to bidder questions. Respond to contractor’s Request for Information (RFI) during construction. Attend construction field meetings as directed by Client. Prepare “As -Built” drawings based on markups provided by the contractor and City of Chino The precise scope of this task is indeterminate so a budget of 48 hours has been established. Services will be billed on an hourly basis consistent with the attached rate schedule, not to exceed the established budget.

Any additional budget must be approved by the City in advance of doing the work.

Task 08 Staging & Demolition Plans – Pine Ave Widening
The proposed improvements to Pine Ave. may be constructed while maintaining a minimum of one travel lane in each direction. To accomplish this, it is estimated that demolition, new construction and interim striping must be performed in four stages. Stage 1, perform grading and wall construction north of the existing SCE pole line. With Stage 1 complete, it is now possible to relocate the SCE power poles to the north in the newly completed earthen bench. Stage 2 construction can now expand the northerly bench to the south leaving room for one east bound and one west bound lane on the existing pavement. Stage 3 involves construction of the northerly curb and gutter and sufficient pavement to permit one lane of travel in each direction.

Stage 3 is complete when traffic is shifted to the new paveme nt, temporary water lines are

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 335
Exhibit A
Scope of Services
Pine Ave Improvements
installed and the old pavement (existing Pine) is ready for removal. Stage 4 involves the demolition of the previous roadway and completion of the new full width improvements. Each stage of construction will involve demoliti on, utility relocations, grading, construction of improvements and temporary signing and striping. Plans related to dry utility relocations and interim traffic signals will be prepared by others.

Task 09 Retaining Wall and RCB Structural – Pine Ave Widening Should soil parameters and/or loading conditions make it infeasible to use Caltrans standard plans this optional task will be required to perform the structural calculations and detailing for custom retaining walls or box culvert. Plans and calculations to be submitted to City of Chino for review, comments and approval.

Assumptions
• ACOE will not require Section 408 Permit
• Volume offset for Prado Reservoir will not be required • OCFCD will have acquired all adjacent properties, except parcel owned by USA • SCE will allow temporary power pole relocation to area behind proposed northerly curb • Caltrans encroachment permit application and processing by others • OCFCD encroachment permit application and processing by others

Exclusions
• Appraisals
• Erosion Control
• SWPPP
• Traffic Signal Design
• Traffic Studies
• Traffic Control Plans
• Street Light Design
• Dry Utility Design
• Utility company fees
• Relocation of monitoring wells within Pine Ave
• Plans for Line H storm drain
• Plans for Line I storm drain
• Plans for Johnson Ave
• Landscape Plans
• Potholing
• Environmental Studies
• Construction Staking

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 336
Exhibit B
Compensation
Pine Ave Improvements
Client will reimburse PEC monthly on the basis of work completed subject to the following schedule:

P
ine Avenue Improvements and Euclid Support
Task 01 Update 30% Complete Plans (NTE) ---------------------------------------------------$3,000 Task 02 Design Surveys (NTE) --------------------------------------------------------------------$7,500 Task 03 100% Pine Avenue Improvement Plans ------------------------------------------- $33,200 Task 04 Water Relocation Plans --------------------------------------------------------------- $21,000 Task 05 Demolition Plans --------------------------------------------------------------------------$6,500 Task 06 Structural Plan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- $25,500 Task 07 Utility Relocations (NTE) -------------------------------------------------------------- $25,000 Task 08 Hydrology & Hydraulics --------------------------------------------------------------- $14,000 Task 09 Quantities & Cost Estimate -------------------------------------------------------------$6,500 Task 10 Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Support ------------------------------------------$3,500 Task 11 Legal Descriptions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- $13,000 Task 12 Meetings, Consultation and Consultant Support (NTE) ------------------------ $16,300 Task 13 Soils Investigation and Report ------------------------------------------------------- $42,000 Task 14 Transportation WQMP ------------------------------------------------------------------$6,000 Task 15 Construction Support (NTE) ---------------------------------------------------------- $15,300 Subtotal $238,300
Optional Services
Specifications – Pine Ave ---------------------------------------------------------------$7,800 Update 30% Complete Plans for Euclid Ave/Pine Ave Int. (Phase1) (NTE) --$2,000 100% Euclid Ave/Pine Ave Intersection Improvement Plans ----------------- $46,450 Specifications – Pine Ave/Euclid Ave Intersection --------------------------------$7,800 Meetings and Consultation- Euclid/Pine Intersection (NTE) --------------------$8,800 Quantities & Cost Estimate – Euclid/Pine Intersection --------------------------$3,000 Construction Support- Euclid/Pine Intersection (NTE) ---------------------------$8,700 Staging & Demolition Plans – Pine Ave Widening ------------------------------- $29,000 Retaining Wall and RCB Structural – Pine Ave Widening ------------------------$4,400

Reimbursable Costs
Reimbursable Costs ----------------------------------------------------------------------$5,000 Total Amendment No. 5 Amount = $361,250
Subtotal = $117,950

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 337

FEE SCHEDULE
January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022

Compensation for work performed on a time and materials basis will be computed as follows:

MANAGEMENT HOURLY RATE
Principal ........................................................................................................................................... $245.00 Director .............................................................................................................................................. 220.00 Associate ............................................................................................................................................ 214.00 Senior Project Manager, Senior Technical Manager ......................................................................... 214.00 Project Manager ................................................................................................................................ 196.00

CIVIL ENGINEERING SERVICES
Senior Project Engineer.................................................................................................................... $196.00 Project Engineer ................................................................................................................................. 180.00 Senior Designer .................................................................................................................................. 175.00 Designer ............................................................................................................................................. 165.00 Engineer ............................................................................................................................................. 160.00 Design Engineer, Design Technician .................................................................................................. 142.00 CAD Technician, Design Engineer Technician .................................................................................... 118.00 Project Technician/Project Coordinator ............................................................................................ 109.00 Engineering Technician ...................................................................................................................... 103.00 Administration ..................................................................................................................................... 92.00 Engineering Intern ............................................................................................................................... 79.00

SURVEY AND MAPPING SERVICES
Field Supervisor ................................................................................................................................ $190.00 Project Surveyor ................................................................................................................................. 167.00 GIS Specialist ...................................................................................................................................... 153.00 Survey Analyst .................................................................................................................................... 118.00 Three Person Crew ............................................................................................................................. 300.00 Two Person Crew ............................................................................................................................... 256.00 One Person Crew ............................................................................................................................... 185.00 NOTE: FOR SURVEY WORK REQUIRING PREVAILING WAGE
Three Person Crew ........................................................................................................................... $354.00 Two Person Crew ............................................................................................................................... 302.00 One Person Crew ............................................................................................................................... 193.00

SPECIAL SERVICES
Consultation Re: Litigation ............................................................................................................... $465.00

DRY UTILITY SERVICES
Principal ........................................................................................................................................... $225.00 Senior Project Manager, Senior Technical Manager ......................................................................... 185.00 Project Manager ................................................................................................................................ 170.00 Senior Designer .................................................................................................................................. 149.00 Project Coordinator ........................................................................................................................... 103.00 CAD Technician .................................................................................................................................... 93.00 Assistant Project Coordinator .............................................................................................................. 82.00 Administration ..................................................................................................................................... 82.00

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 338

FEE SCHEDULE
January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022

CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT
Principal ........................................................................................................................................... $247.00 Senior Project Manager, Senior Construction Manager .................................................................... 196.00 Project Manager ................................................................................................................................ 180.00 Field Engineer..................................................................................................................................... 175.00 Administration ..................................................................................................................................... 82.00

MISCELLANEOUS FEES
The following services are billed at our cost plus a 15% markup:

Subcontracted services.

Map check fees or filing fees advanced by us.

Transportation, meals and lodging for overnight travel and incidental travel expenses.
Commercial delivery services, including Federal Express, Express Mail, and Messenger Services.
Plotting and blueprint services and printing.
(The client is encouraged to arrange for printing, other than prints or plots on our blueprint machine and plotters, to be contracted directly with an outside blueprint company acceptable to us. Please provide us with your account information to bill directly to the account to save on markup fees).

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 339
TABLE 1

COST BREAKDOWN
Work Category Staff Level Hours/Qty Unit/Rate Cost
TASK 1 - Permit Coordination and Coring Location Marking Caltrans Encroachment Permit Coordination Project 30 $140 4,200$ Marking Coring Locations Senior Staff 4 $110 440$
USA Notification and Field Review Senior Staff 2 $110 220$ Field Coordination and Planning, Pre-Job Meeting Project 6 $140 840$ Principal/Associate 6 $170 1,020$
Subtotal: 6,720$
TASK 2 - Pavement Coring and Sample Collection
Pavement Coring (2 Locations, PW) Rig Rental+Mob $1,380 1,380$ Materials $200 200$
Traffic Control 1 $2,000 2,000$
Field Staff Senior Staff 6 $140 840$
Subtotal: 4,420$
TASK 3 - Laboratory Testing
Grain Size 2 $100 200$
Maximum Density 2 $215 430$
R-value 2 $245 490$
Subtotal: 1,120$
Total, Phase A: 12,260$
TASK 1 - Updated Plan Review
Project 8 $140 1,120$
Principal 16 $170 2,720$
Subtotal: 3,840$
TASK 2 - Updated Geotechnical Analysis
Foundation Design Principal 40 $170 6,800$
Settlement Analysis Principal 6 $170 1,020$
Slope Stability Analysis Project 6 $140 840$
Remedial Grading/Design Project 2 $140 280$
Preparation of Geologic Cross Sections Project 12 $140 1,680$ Principal Review Principal 12 $170 2,040$
Coordination with Structural Engineer Principal 10 $170 1,700$ Subtotal: 14,360$
TASK 3 - Geotechnical Design Report
Project 14 $140 1,960$
Principal/Associate 10 $170 1,700$
Tech Illustrator 4 $92 368$
Word Processor 4 $74 296$
Subtotal: 4,324$
TASK 4 - Project Management, Coordination, and Meetings Principal/Associate 10 $170 1,700$
Subtotal: 1,700$
Total, Phase B: 24,224$
COMBINED TOTAL: 36,484$
Pine Avenue Widening Improvements and Euclid Avenue Pavement Study, City of Chino, California Geotechnical Design Services
PHASE A: Euclid Avenue Pavement Coring Study
PHASE B: Geotechnical Review of the Updated Plan and Retaining Wall Design for Pine Avenue

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 340

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 341

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 342

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 343

13.17.a
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 344
Project Name/No.: Pine Ave. Extension to SR71 Contract No.: 2021-053 (A4) Ramp Widening Design Services (ST204)

Project Manager: M. Fraser/ CIP Approved: _____________

AMENDMENT NO. 4

TO AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“Amendment”) by and between the CITY OF CHINO, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and EXP U.S. SERVICES, INC. , (“Consultant”) is effective as of the 5th day of April, 2022.

RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into that certain Agr eement for Contractual Services dated July 7th, 2020 (“Agreement”) whereby Consultant agreed to perform Design Engineering Design Services for Project ST204.

B. City and Consultant executed a First Amendment to the Agreement on March 16th, 2021, to increase compensation and to add to the scope of services.

C. City and Consultant executed a Second Amendment to the Agreem ent on July 1st, 2021, to extend the term of the Agreement.

D. City and Consultant executed a Third Amendment to the Agreement on October 5th, 2021, to increase compensation and to add to the scope of services.

E. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to increase compensation and to add to the scope of services.

TERMS

1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. (a) Article 2, Compensation, is hereby revised to increase the Contract Sum by Two Hundred Twelve Thousand Nine Hundred Ten Dollars and Zero Cents ($212,910) for the performance of micro-simulation modeling for State Route 71, preparation of traffic signal plans, roadway plans, and street lighting plans for the Intersection of Euclid Avenue and Pine Avenue, and shall read in its entirety as follows:
“Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant the amount s specified in the “Schedule of Compensation” attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference.

The total compensation, including reimbursement for actual expenses, shall not exceed Eight Hundred Thirty-Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Eleven Dollars and Ninety -Three (93/100) Cents ( $837,711.93) (the “Contract

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 345
- 2 -
01225.0001/458787.1
Sum”), unless additional compensation is approved pursuant to Section

1.10”
(b) The scope of services provided in Exhibit “A” of the Agreement is amended to include the additional scope of services and fee schedule described in Exhibit “A-3”, attached hereto.

2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Agreement, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment to the Agreement.

3. Affirmation of Agree ment; Warranty R e Absence of Defaults. City and Consultant each ratify and reaffirm each and every on e of the respective rights and obligations arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no written or oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.

Consultant represents and warrants to City that, as of the date of this Amendment, City is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

City represents and warrants to Consultant that, as of the date of this Amendment, Consultant is not in default of any ma terial term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipula te and agree that they have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.

5. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) the e ntering into this Agreement does not violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound.

[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 346
- 3 -
01225.0001/458787.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.

CITY:

CITY OF CHINO, a municipal corporation

Matthew C. Ballantyne, City Manager
ATTEST:

Angela Robles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
_____________________________ ____________________________________ Fred Galante, City Attorney Amer Jakher, P.E., Director of Public Works

CONSULTANT:

EXP U.S. SERVICES, INC.:

By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:

Address: ______

Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one signature required from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT’S SIGNATURES

SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS

MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY.

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 347

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2021 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfacto ry evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the perso n(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 348

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2021 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 349
Amendment No. 4 Scope and fee
TASK# DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
A-1 Perform traffic micro-simulation modeling for State Route 71 from Euclid Avenue to Central Avenue (ST-204)
$45,690.00
A-2.1 Prepare traffic signal plans for the Intersec tion of Euclid and Pine Avenue (ST-203)

$133,620.00
A-2.2 Prepare roadway plans for the Intersection of Euclid and Pine Avenues (ST -203)

$20 ,400.00
A-2.3 Prepare street lighting plans for Pine Avenue from Euclid to Johnson Avenue (ST -203)

$1 3,2 00.00

Amendment Not-to Exceed Total $212,910.00
EXHIBIT "A-4"
A4-1

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 350

TASK DESCRIPTION
Drainage EngineerJunior Design Engineer
LABOR
COST
Hourly Billing Rates $160.00 $150.00 $120.00 $120.00 $150.00 TASK 1 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Attend Kick-off & PDT Meetings 2 4 6 $920 $920
Prepare/Review PDT Meeting Minutes 2 4 6 $920 $920
Prepare/Review Monthly Progress Reports/Invoices2 2 $320 $320 Quality Control/Quality Assurance 16 16 $2,560 $2,560
SUBTOTAL TASK 122 8 30 $4,720 $4,720
TASK 2 - PREPARE DRAINAGE REPORT AND

STORMWATER DATA REPORT
Data Collection & Review of Existing Project Information 4 4 $480 $480 Field Reviews 4 4 $480 $480
Review drainage analysis performed by others 4 4 $480 $480 Prepare draft Drainage Report and Stormwater Data 1 64 65 $7,840 $7,840 Address City's comments 4 4 $480 $480
Prepare final Drainage Report and Stormwater Data 1 8 9 $1,120 $1,120 SUBTOTAL TASK 22 88 90 $10,880 10,880$ TOTAL

EXP HOURS PER TASK
EXP HOURSElectrical Signal Designer
State Route 83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pine Avenue Segregated Cost Proposal March 4, 2022
City of ChinoProject ManagerHhwy Engineer / Designer
A4-2

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 351

TASK DESCRIPTION
Drainage EngineerJunior Design Engineer
LABOR
COST
Hourly Billing Rates $160.00 $150.00 $120.00 $120.00 $150.00 TOTAL

EXP HOURS PER TASK
EXP HOURSElectrical Signal Designer
State Route 83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pine Avenue Segregated Cost Proposal March 4, 2022
City of ChinoProject ManagerHhwy Engineer / Designer
TASK 3a - Prepare Roadway Plans
Prepare 65% layout plans, profile, typical cross-sections, construction staging, traffic control, drainage, signing and striping plans 120 40 200 360 $46,800 $46,800
Address City's comments on 65% submittal 4 4 8 16 $2,040 $2,040 SUBTOTAL TASK 3a 124 44 208 376 $48,840 $48,840
TASK 3b - Prepare Traffic Signal Plans for
Intersection of Euclid & Pine Ave
Prepare 65% traffic signal and intersection lighting plans 128 128 $19,200 $19,200 Address City's comments on 65% submittal 8 8 $1,200 $1,200 SUBTOTAL TASK 3b 136 136 $20,400 $20,400
TASK 3c - Prepare Pine Ave Street Lighting Plans
from Euclid to Johnson Ave
Prepare 65% traffic signal and intersection lighting plans 80 80 $12,000 $12,000 Address City's comments on 65% submittal 8 8 $1,200 $1,200 SUBTOTAL TASK 3c 88 88 $13,200 $13,200
TASK 3d - Prepare 95% & 100% PS&E Package
including raodway, traffic signal and street lighting
Prepare 95% PS&E package including roadway, traffic
signal and street lighting 40 16 80 40 176 $23,520 $23,520 Prepare construction cost estimate for roadway, traffic signal and street lighting items 4 4 16 8 32 $4,200 $4,200 Prepare technical specifications for radway, traffic signal and street lighting itens 4 8 16 16 44 $5,880 $5,880
A4-3

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 352

TASK DESCRIPTION
Drainage EngineerJunior Design Engineer
LABOR
COST
Hourly Billing Rates $160.00 $150.00 $120.00 $120.00 $150.00 TOTAL

EXP HOURS PER TASK
EXP HOURSElectrical Signal Designer
State Route 83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pine Avenue Segregated Cost Proposal March 4, 2022
City of ChinoProject ManagerHhwy Engineer / Designer
Apply and process Caltrans encroachment permit16 16 32 64 $8,800 $8,800 Address Caltrans, City comments on 95% PS&E submittal 8 8 16 8 40 $5,280 $5,280 Prepare 100% plans, specifications and estimate
Address Caltrans, City comments on 95% PS&E submittal 8 8 16 16 48 $6,480 $6,480 Address Caltrans, City comments on 100% PS&E
submittal 4 4 8 8 24 $3,240 $3,240
SUBTOTAL TASK 3d 16 84 48 184 96 428 $57,400 $57,400
TASK 3e - Prepare Contract Documents, bid support,
design support and as-built plans
Prepare contract documents for the combined roadway,
traffic signal and street lighting project 8 16 24 $3,120 $3,120 Assist City with the bidding process, respond to bidder inquiry, provide clarification and any issue addendum if necessary. 4 8 12 $1,560 $1,560
Provide design support during construction 4 2 8 5 19 $2,550 $2,550 Prepare as-built plans 4 2 8 5 19 $2,550 $2,550
SUBTOTAL TASK 3e 20 4 40 10 74 $9,780 $9,780
TOTAL EXP HOURS 40 236 184 432 330 1,222 $165,220 $165,220 $165,220 $165,220
2,000$ $2,000OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC)

TOTAL LABOR COSTA
4-4

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 353

TASK DESCRIPTION
Drainage EngineerJunior Design Engineer
LABOR
COST
Hourly Billing Rates $160.00 $150.00 $120.00 $120.00 $150.00 TOTAL

EXP HOURS PER TASK
EXP HOURSElectrical Signal Designer
State Route 83 (Euclid Avenue) and Pine Avenue Segregated Cost Proposal March 4, 2022
City of ChinoProject ManagerHhwy Engineer / Designer
$167,220 $167,220TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED COST
A4-5

13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 354
A4-
6 13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 355
A
4-
7 13.17.b
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 356
Project Name/No.: On-Call Engineering Staff Contract No.: 2021-118 (A5) Augmentation Services for
Pine Avenue (Project ST061)

Project Manager: CIP/ M. Fraser Approved: _____________

AMENDMENT NO. 5

TO AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

THIS AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (“Amendment”) by and between the CITY OF CHINO, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and IDC Consulting Engineers, Inc., (“Consultant”) is effective as of the 5th day of April, 2022.

RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into that certain Agr eement for Contractual Services dated September 7th, 2020 (“Agreement”) whereby Consultant agreed to provide On-Call Engineering Staff Augmentation Services for Pine Avenue Project ST061.

B. City and Consultant executed a First Amendment to the Agreement on March 16th, 2021, to increase compensation.

C. City and Consultant executed a Second Amendment to the Agreement on July 1 st, 2021, to increase compensation and extend the term.

D. City and Consultant executed a Third Amendment to the Agreement on January 4th, 2022, to increase compensation and add to the scope of services.

E. City and Consultant executed a Fourth Amendment to the Agreement on March 15th, 202 2, to increase compensation for the performance of additional O n-Call Engineering Staff Augmentation Services.

F. City and Consultant now desire to amend the Agreement to increase compensation and to add to the scope of services.

TERMS

1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. (a) Article 2, Compensation, is hereby revised to increase the Contract Sum by Four Hundred Sixty-One Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Dollars and Forty (40/100) Cents ($461,630.40) for the performance of Right of Way , Utility Coordination , and Environmental Services for the Pine Avenue Widening Project shall read in its entirety as follows:

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 357
- 2 -
01225.0001/458787.1
“Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant at the rates specified in “Exhibit C,” "Exhibit C-2," and the fee schedule listed under "Exhibit A-3." The total compensation, including reimbursement for actual expenses, shall not exceed Nine Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand One Hundred Nine ty-Six Dollars and Forty (40/100) Cents ( $926,196.40) (the “Contract Sum”), unless additional compensation is approved pursuant to Section 1.10”
(b) The scope of services provided in Exhibit “A” of the Agreement is amended to include the additional scope of services and fee schedule described in Exhibit “A-3”, attached hereto.

2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Agreement, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the date of this Amendment, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement, as amended by this Amendment to the Agreement.

3. Affirmation of Agreement; Warranty R e Absence of Defaults. City and Consultant each ratify and reaffirm each and every on e of the respective rights and obligations arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no written or oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.

Consultant represents and warrants to City that, as of the date of this Amendmen t, City is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

City represents and warrants to Consultant that, as of the date of this Amendment, Consultant is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipula te and agree that they have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment.

5. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) the entering into this Agreement does not violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 358
- 3 -
01225.0001/458787.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.

CITY:

CITY OF CHINO, a municipal corporation

Matthew C. Ballantyne, City Manager
ATTEST:

Angela Robles, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
_____________________________ ____________________________________ Fred Galante, City Attorney Amer Jakher, P.E., Director of Public Works

CONSULTANT:

IDC CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.:

By:

Name:

Title:

By:

Name:

Title:

Address: ______

Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one signature required from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT’S SIGNATURES

SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS

MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY.

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 359

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2021 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 360

01225.0001/458787.1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.

COUNTY OF _______________ )

On ___________________, 2021 before me, __________________________________, a notary public, personally appeared ________________________________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

_________________________________________
Notary Public

SEAL:

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document.

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 361

SCOPE OF WORK
PM / ENV / ROW / Civil Services for Various Project
City of Chino

SCOPE OF WORK

In responding City’s needs to deliver various CIP projects, IDC requests contract amendment #4 be granted for the proposed scope provided as the following:

A. Continue to provide project management services for the Pine Avenue project. Service be extend from July 2, 2022 to December 30 2022.

B. Provide Right of Way and Utility Coordination Services for the Pine Avenue Widening project.

C. Provide Enviromental Services for the Pine Avenue Widening project.

PROJECT TEAM

Firm Civil/Structural
Engineering
Geotechnical Project
Mgmt.
and
QA/QC
Survey Right of
Way/Utility
Coordination
Enviromental
IDC (Prime) x x
Monument x
Moffit
Nichol x

FEE

Please refer to the fee schedule attachments.

IDC - PM / QAQC IDC - QA/QC/Coord IDC-CIVIL IDC-GEO Mounument Moffit and Nichol Total A Project Management - Pine Ave $174,007.68 $174,007.68 B Pine Ave ROW $9,474.00 $94,740.00 $104,214.00
C Pine Ave ENV (Widening and Stage 3) $32,492.40 $324,924.00 $357,416.40 Total $635,638.08
EXHIBIT "A-3"
A3-1

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 362
SCOPE OF WORK:

Project Management
Monument will interface with the City and IDC to manage the scope and schedule of the project.

Monument will oversee all activities performed under this Contract which include coordination/preparation of meetings, provide periodic progress reports to the City and maintenance of project files.

ROW Acquisition
Monument will coordinate with the impacted owners between Euclid Ave. and Johnson Ave. to acquire the necessary right of way for the project from OCFCD and Army Corps of Engineers (a total of five parcels) including partial takes, landscape easements and TCEs. Monument will obtain the PTR for the Army Corps of Engineers parcel (APN: 1056-281-01), oversee the appraisal process, prepare the offers and negotiate with the owners as well as coordinate the escrow once an agreement has been reached.

Utility Relocation Coordination
Eight utility owners have been identified by DigAlert as possibly having facilities present in the project area and will have to be addressed:

• City of Chino Public Works
• Frontier
• Inland Empire Utility Agency
• Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority
• San Bernardino County
• Spectrum
• Southern California Edison – Distribution
• Southern California Gas – Distribution

Monument Scope of Work - Pine Avenue ROW

In summary, Monument's Utility Relocation Support includes:
• Monument will act as the primary point of contact with the utility owners identified on the utility plans
• Actively participate in PDT/ utility focus meetings (estimate 15 meetings) • Prepare the Introductory Request for as-builts notices (8 utility owners) • Prepare and issue Notice to Owner for potholing (estimate 8 notices) • Coordinate the potholing efforts with the utility companies, design team and potholing contractor (estimate 16 potholes).
• Assumes an estimate of $1,600 per pothole. Includes permit fees, standard traffic management, mobilization costs and required equipment and crew for pothole subcontractor. Also assumes one mobilization.
• Review and verify with the design team which facilities are considered in conflict based on the potholing report
• Coordinate with the design team with the preparation of the conflict matrix and conflict exhibits needed for each utility company whose facilities are in conflict • Prepare and send the Relocation Claim Letter to utility owner (estimate 5 letters) • Coordinate and plan a meeting amongst the utility owner, design team and the City as needed to discuss the project design, the utility conflict, relocation alternatives, and a plan to resolve the conflict (estimate 10 meetings including filed meetings) A3-2

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 363

• Determine the liability for the conflicts facilities impacting the project (estimate 5 conflicts) • Obtain detailed relocation plans from utility owners
• Draft and issue Notice to Owner to relocate (estimate 5 notices) • Assist the utility owner in obtaining City permits
• Provide final close-out file to the City

FEE SCHEDULE:

Monument is prepared to provide the work described in this document for a not to exceed total of $94,740.

A3-3

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 364

Pine Avenue Stage 3 Project – CEQA and Regulatory Permitting Scope and Fee

SCOPE OF WORK
Approach
CEQA: The level of anticipated environmental documentation is based on previous communications between M&N and the City, and experience with similar road projects. It is understood that the improvements associated with the Project falls within the definition of “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), where “…the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment…” and therefore compliance with CEQA is required. It is assumed that the City of Chino (City) will be the CEQA Lead Agency. The CEQA services are based on M&N knowledge of the Project site and vicinity. Further, this project is within The Preserve Chino Sphere of Influence – Subarea 2 Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2000121036; certified on March 25,2003). We propose to prepare and circulate a Supplemental EIR, as only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed siuation.

M&N retains in-house staff with extensive experience in preparing and processing environmental documents in compliance with CEQA, which are then used by responsible agencies to issue regulatory permits and approvals. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process will be completed by USACE as part of its permit process.

Regulatory Permitting: For the regulatory permitting component, we are proposing a two-phase approach – this first part will include coordination with the regulatory agencies to determine which regulatory permits will be needed. This will include pre-application coordination with the agencies to convey the project’s intended purpose and avoidance measures that have been already crafted to minimize impacts to environmental resources. This will also include the preparation of the following permit applications (USACE 404 Nationwide Permit Program (NWP), RWQCB 401 Certification, and CDFW 1602 Agreement). The second phase (if needed, in a future scope/fee) will include (1) if USACE 404 Individual Permit (IP), and

permitting associated with Federal and/State Endangered Species Act will be needed, and (2) if any USFWS and/CDFW impacts to federal and/or state listed threatened or endangered are anticipated to occur and regulatory permitting will be needed. Both data gaps under (1) and (2) is not currently known, and the information is anticipated during the preparation of the biological studies.

Task 1. CEQA Compliance
Develop Project Description: Prepare the Project Description to identify all project elements, including staging, storage and construction methods, and identify any elements that have changed since the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was certified. This assumes up to two iterations of review comments by City/Team staff. Substantial changes to the Project Description will not occur once approved by City. If substantial changes occur after approvals and initiation of the environmental documentation, additional budget may be required to revise documents for accuracy and consistency. A 3-4

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 365
Prepare Draft Supplemental EIR (Draft SEIR): Prepare a CEQA Draft Supplemental EIR, compliant with CEQA Statutes and Guidelines. Per CEQA Guidelines 15163(a), the Supplement to the EIR contains only the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project as revised. This subtask will finish with a public review Draft Supplemental EIR ready for public circulation.

The following technical studies are anticipated to be needed to support the Supplemental EIR. These technical studies are to be prepared by specialty subconsultants – please see their attached proposals for additional description and assumptions (please note that the identified reports will be done in compliance with federal and state laws; however, they are not consistent with the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference:
• Air Quality/GHG (Entech)
• Biology – Wetland and Waterway Delineation and Report, Burrowing Owl Survey and Report, Riparian Bird Surveys and Report, and overall Biological Technical Report (Noreas, Inc.) • Cultural – Cultural/Paleontology Report (DUKE CRM)
• Noise Report (Entech)
Coordination with City Regarding Public Circulation, including preparing and submitting required Notices (including Notice of Intent): The City is assumed to be the CEQA Lead Agency. M&N will prepare notices for review/approval of City staff and M&N will support City staff in submitting the Notice of Intent (NOI) form to the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse. City will be responsible for circulating the applicable notices to adjacent residents, advertising the project in the newspaper, and or posting the NOI onsite consistent with CEQA requirements. M&N will support the City during the required 30-day circulation period, and it is anticipated that a public meeting will not be required.

Prepare Final Supplemental EIR (Final SEIR): Incorporate public comments obtained during public circulation and update the Draft SEIR to become the Final SEIR. M&N and the City will work together to respond to public comments, and M&N will prepare the Final SEIR for certification.

Attend and Present at up to one City Council Meeting: Attend up to one City Council Meeting (if needed) for document certification (e.g., present the project and findings and address questions.) Prepare and File Notice of Determination: File the Notice of Determination (NOD) with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board and State Clearinghouse after the MND is certified. Is it is assumed that the City will remit the California Department of Fish and Wildlife document filing fee ($2,598) and the County of San Bernardino Document Filing fee ($50).

Further, M&N will prepare
Deliverables:
• Project Description
• CEQA Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) (one admin Draft SEIR, and the one ready for public circulation
• Support City during Public Circulation (notices, etc.) • CEQA Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR • Attend and/or Present at up to one City Council Meeting (or support City Staff)(as needed). • Notice of Determination and other State Clearinghouse Required Transmittal Forms A
3-5

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 366
Task 2. Regulatory Permits
Permit Applications – M&N will prepare applications for a United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 404 NWP, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 401 Water Quality Certification, and a California Fish and Wildlife 1602 Agreement. Pending results of Task 1b (biology reports) and agency input, an additional scope/fee may need to be prepared by M&N Team (if a USACE 404 IP is needed and/or any permitting will be required for impacts to federal and/or state endangered/threatened species.

Agency Coordination and Responses to Agency Comments/Requests for Information – Agency coordination with the USACE, RWQCB, CDFW and USFWS will be prioritized to identify the permitting requirements for 404, 401, 1602. Further, M&N will determine if permitting associated with USFWS Federal Endangered Species Act and/or CDFW California Endangered Species Act will be needed. Results of this coordination effort will inform our regulatory permitting approach, as discussed under Approach.

M&N will coordinate with the agencies and prepare responses to comments to Requests for Information (RFIs). We have assumed time and materials for two rounds of agency RFIs. If additional RFI’s are made, M&N may need additional authority to continue permit application processing.

Deliverables
• Draft and Final 404 Nationwide, 401, and 1602 Permit Applications • Agency Coordination/Responses to Comments and Agency Requests for Information (RFIs).

ASSUMPTIONS

1. The City of Chino is the CEQA Lead Agency.

2. Substantial changes to the Project Description will not occur once approved. If substantial changes occur after approvals and initiation of the environmental documentation or permit applications, additional budget may be required to revise documents for accuracy and consistency.

3. Electronic submittals will be provided to cut down production costs.

4. Meetings will be conducted virtually to save on mileage and travel time costs.

5. Technical studies are not included (except as identified under Task 1). If additional studies are needed, City may provide them to M&N or M&N can prepare a separate scope of work.

6. This scope of work assumes one round of review of draft documents before they are finalized. Client comments are assumed to be fairly straightforward.

7. To reduce costs, M&N assumes that City will cover the public circulation noticing requirements:
posting onsite, newspaper advertisement, and/or mailers to property owners.

8. It is anticipated that responding to agency comments on the Draft SEIR will be minor (e.g., not require redesign of the project, additional technical reports, etc.). M&N assumes up to 20 public comments during the Draft SEIR public circulation period.

9. No significant environment impacts are anticipated from the project, requiring a higher-level environmental document (e.g., Subsequent Environmental Impact Report).

10. No federal funds or Caltrans involvement is required for CEQA or permitting. Any National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) clearances will be covered by the USACE Permit Program.

11. The Project will require permits from USACE (assumes Nationwide 14 linear transportation), RWQCB 401 Certification, and CDFW 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement for impacts to Jurisdictional Waters of the United States and State. City will cover the CDFW and County CEQA SEIR filing fees, which is included as Other Direct Expense in the Cost Proposal Table below.

Permit processing fees are not included in the scope of work and will be paid directly by the client. A 3-6

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 367

12. After biological surveys are completed, a City meeting will be held to determine additional regulatory permitting requirements under these two scenarios (not currently scoped): (1) if USACE NWP needs to be changed to USACE 404 Individual Permit, and/or (2) if USFWS and/or CDFW threatened and/or endangered species will be impacted.

13. This proposal does not include execution of permit conditions required for pre-construction, during construction or post construction. A separate scope of work can be provided upon City request..

Cost Proposal

M&N proposes to complete the work on a Time and Materials basis, not to exceed $149,967. A breakdown of associated costs is shown in the table below.

Task Fee
Task 1. CEQA Compliance $109,130
Project Description $4,044
Prepare Draft EIR Supplemental Document $15,674
Technical Studies (see Subconsultants) – M&N Coordination with Subs $4,448 Task 1a: Air Quality, GHG and Noise Technical Studies (Entech) $25,368 Task 1b: Biological Technical Studies (Noreas, Inc.) $35,000 Task 1c: Cultural and Paleontology Technical Studies (DUKE CRM) $9,400 ….. Coordination during Public Circulation $2,924
Prepare Final EIR Supplemental Document $7,742
Attend/Present at up to 1 City Council Meeting $2,924
NOD and other Final Forms $1,606
Task 2. Regulatory Permits $37,894
Other Direct Expenses (CEQA Filing Fee $50; CDFW Filing Fee $2,598; Hazardous Materials Database $295) $2,943 Total $149,967
A
3-7

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 368
Pine Avenue Widening Project – CEQA and Regulatory Permitting Scope and Fee

SCOPE OF WORK

Approach

CEQA: The level of anticipated environmental documentation is based on previous communications between M&N and the City, and experience with similar road projects. It is understood that the improvements associated with the Project falls within the definition of “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), where “…the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment…” and therefore compliance with CEQA is required. It is assumed that the City of Chino (City) will be the CEQA Lead Agency. The CEQA services are based on M&N knowledge of the Project site and vicinity.

M&N retains in-house staff with extensive experience in preparing and processing environmental documents in compliance with CEQA, which are then used by responsible agencies to issue regulatory permits and approvals. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process will be completed by USACE as part of its permit process.

Regulatory Permitting: For the regulatory permitting component, we are proposing a two-phase approach – this first part will include coordination with the regulatory agencies to determine which regulatory permits will be needed. This will include pre-application coordination with the agencies to convey the project’s intended purpose and avoidance measures that have been already crafted to minimize impacts to environmental resources. This will also include the preparation of the following permit applications (USACE 404 Nationwide Permit Program (NWP), RWQCB 401 Certification, and CDFW 1602 Agreement). The second phase (if needed, in a future scope/fee) will include (1) if USACE 404 Individual Permit (IP), and permitting associated with Federal and/State Endangered Species Act will be needed, and (2) if any USFWS and/CDFW impacts to federal and/or state listed threatened or endangered are anticipated to occur and

regulatory permitting will be needed.. Both data gaps under (1) and (2) is not currently known, and the information is anticipated during the preparation of the biological studies.

Task 1. CEQA Compliance
Develop Project Description: Prepare the Project Description to identify all project elements, including staging, storage and construction methods. This assumes up to two iterations of review comments by City/Team staff. Substantial changes to the Project Description will not occur once approved by City. If substantial changes occur after approvals and initiation of the environmental documentation, additional budget may be required to revise documents for accuracy and consistency. A 3-8

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 369
Prepare Initial Study (IS) under CEQA (“Draft Environmental Document):  Prepare a CEQA IS, compliant with CEQA Statutes and Guideline and focused on CEQA Appendix G. Based on the information we know at this time, the M&N Team is assuming that this project will not have significant impacts to the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report will not need to be prepared. This task assumes that an administrative draft IS will be prepared and a meeting with the city will be held to address any outstanding issues. This subtask will finish with a public review Draft IS/MND ready for public circulation.

The following technical studies are anticipated to be needed. These technical studies are to be prepared by specialty subconsultants – please see their attached proposals for additional description and assumptions (please note that the identified reports will be done in compliance with federal and state laws; however, they are not consistent with the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference:
 Air Quality/GHG (Entech)
 Biology – Wetland and Waterway Delineation and Report, Burrowing Owl Survey and Report, Riparian Bird Surveys and Report, and overall Biological Technical Report (Noreas, Inc.)  Cultural – Archaeology/Historic Resources/Paleontology Report (DUKE CRM)  Noise Report (Entech)
Coordination with City Regarding Public Circulation, including preparing and submitting required Notices (including Notice of Intent): The City is assumed to be the CEQA Lead Agency. M&N will prepare notices for review/approval of City staff and M&N will support City staff in submitting the Notice of Intent (NOI) form to the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse. City will be responsible for circulating the applicable notices to adjacent residents, advertising the project in the newspaper, and or posting the NOI onsite consistent with CEQA requirements. M&N will support the City during the required 30-day circulation period, and it is anticipated that a public meeting will not be required.

Prepare Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) under CEQA (“Final Environmental Document”):

Incorporate public comments obtained during public circulation and required updates as the “Draft Environmental Document” becomes the “Final Environmental Document” M&N and the City will work together to respond to public comments, and M&N will prepare the Final IS/MND for certification.

Attend and Present at up to one City Council Meeting: Attend up to one City Council Meeting (if needed) for document certification and be prepared to present the project and findings, and address questions.

Prepare and File Notice of Determination: File the Notice of Determination (NOD) with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board and State Clearinghouse after the MND is certified. Is it is assumed that the City will remit the California Department of Fish and Wildlife document filing fee ($2,598) and the County of San Bernardino Document Filing fee ($50). Further, M&N will prepare Deliverables:
 Project Description
 CEQA Draft Initial Study (one admin Draft IS/MND, and the one ready for public circulation  Support City during Public Circulation (notices, etc.)  CEQA Final Initial Study with Mitigated Negative Declaration  Attend and/or Present at up to one City Council Meeting (or support City Staff)(as needed).  Notice of Determination and other State Clearinghouse Required Transmittal Forms A 3-9

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 370
Task 2. Regulatory Permits
Permit Applications – M&N will prepare applications for a United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 404 NWP, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 401 Water Quality Certification, and a California Fish and Wildlife 1602 Agreement. Pending results of Task 1b (biology reports) and agency input, an additional scope/fee may need to be prepared by M&N Team (if a USACE 404 IP is needed and/or any permitting will be required for impacts to federal and/or state endangered/threatened species.

Agency Coordination and Responses to Agency Comments/Requests for Information – Agency coordination with the USACE, RWQCB, CDFW and USFWS will be prioritized to identify the permitting requirements for 404, 401, 1602. Further, M&N will determine if permitting associated with USFWS Federal Endangered Species Act and/or CDFW California Endangered Species Act will be needed. Results of this coordination effort will inform our regulatory permitting approach, as discussed under Approach.

M&N will coordinate with the agencies and prepare responses to comments to Requests for Information (RFIs). We have assumed time and materials for two rounds of agency RFIs. If additional RFI’s are made, M&N may need additional authority to continue permit application processing.

Deliverables
 Draft and Final 404 Nationwide, 401, and 1602 Permit Applications  Agency Coordination/Responses to Comments and Agency Requests for Information (RFIs).

ASSUMPTIONS

1. The City of Chino is the CEQA Lead Agency.

2. Substantial changes to the Project Description will not occur once approved. If substantial changes occur after approvals and initiation of the environmental documentation or permit applications, additional budget may be required to revise documents for accuracy and consistency.

3. Electronic submittals will be provided to cut down production costs.

4. Meetings will be conducted virtually to save on mileage and travel time costs.

5. Technical studies are not included (except as identified under Task 1). If additional studies are needed, City may provide them to M&N or M&N can prepare a separate scope of work.

6. This scope of work assumes one round of review of draft documents before they are finalized. Client comments are assumed to be fairly straightforward.

7. It is anticipated that responding to agency comments on the IS/MND will be minor (e.g., not require redesign of the project, additional technical reports, etc.). M&N assumes up to 20 public comments during the Draft IS/MND public circulation period.

8. No significant impacts are anticipated on the environment from the project, requiring a higher-level environmental document (e.g., Environmental Impact Report).

9. No federal funds or Caltrans involvement is required for CEQA or permitting. Any National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) clearances will be covered by the US ACE Permit Program. 10. To reduce costs, M&N assumes that City will cover the public circulation noticing requirements:
posting onsite, newspaper advertisement, and/or mailers to property owners.

11. City will cover the CDFW and County CEQA IS/MND filing fees, which is included as Other Direct Expense in the Cost Proposal Table below.

12. The Project will require permits from USACE (assumes Nationwide 14 linear transportation), RWQCB 401 Certification, and CDFW 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement for impacts to Jurisdictional Waters of the United States and State.

13. Permit processing fees are not included in the scope of work and will be paid directly by the client. A 3-10

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 371

14. After enough biological surveys are completed, a meeting with the City will be held to determine the approach for additional regulatory permitting under these two scenarios (not currently scoped): (1) if USACE NWP needs to be changed to USACE 404 Individual Permit, and/or (2) if USFWS and/or CDFW threatened and/or endangered species will be impacted.

15. This proposal does not include execution of permit conditions required for pre-construction, during construction or post construction. A separate scope of work can be provided upon City request..

Cost Proposal
M&N proposes to complete the work on a Time and Materials basis, not to exceed $174,957. A breakdown of associated costs is shown in the table below.

Task Fee
Task 1. CEQA Compliance $65,166
Project Description $6,658
Prepare Draft Environmental Document $25,372
Technical Studies (see Subconsultants) – M&N Coordination with Subs $4,448 Task 1a: Air Quality and Noise Technical Studies (Entech) $17,020 Task 1b: Biological Technical Studies (Noreas, Inc.) $33,000 Task 1c: Cultural and Paleontology Technical Studies (DUKE CRM) $11,800 ….. Coordination during Public Circulation $4,036
Prepare Final Environmental Document $20,122
Attend/Present at up to 1 City Council Meeting $2,924
NOD and other Final Forms $1,606
Task 2. Regulatory Permits $37,894
Other Direct Expenses (CEQA Filing Fee $50; CDFW Filing Fee $2,598; Hazardous Materials Database $295) $2,943 Total $174,957
Fifth Amendment Not-To-Exceed = $461,630.40
Aggregate Contract Not-To-Exceed = $926,196.40A
3-11

13.17.c
Amendment to Professional Services Agreements with
Packet Pg. 372