Agenda — Roseville City Council, January 19, 2022 (part 8 of 9)

modeled in the existing conditions. In that same area, a 36-inch pipe is proposed to pickup the discharges from the offsite shed EX05 which were previously split between the existing 18-inch pipe and an existing ditch that flowed north through the project. The proposed 36-inch pipe is intended to convey flows that previously were conveyed in the existing ditch. These flows, as in the existing conditions, will be conveyed north through the project. The length and slope are the total pipe run length proposed with a composite slope determined by the outfall invert downstream, the most upstream invert and the total length of pipe.

Proposed Project Detention Mitigation
With the addition of impervious area and infrastructure to a site without mitigation measures in place, peak flows, volumes, and velocities are anticipated to increase. While the proposed project would add impervious area and would use conveyance systems that concentrate flows, it would also utilize features to mitigate the predicted increases in flows, volumes, and velocities. Increases in peak flows and volumes would be mitigated by detention basins for the 10-year and 100-year 24-hour events. Increases in velocities may be mitigated with rock outfall protection or other dissipation features suitable to site conditions. The conversion of sheet flows to concentrated flows can also reduce the natural infiltration of runoff into the soil. Adding landscaped areas and storm water quality measures, discussed later in this TM, can increase infiltration of a developed site. The rates used in Placer County per the County’s Stormwater Management Manual show that the infiltration rates for landscaping such as lawns and shrubs is higher than that of open space for all soil types. This includes areas such as parks and planted roadsides. Although the total area available for infiltration would decrease due to the addition of impervious cover, these landscaped areas can assist, along with the addition of storm water quality measures, in balancing the overall infiltration for a developed site. The criteria used for the development of detention within this study are summarized below. • Detention facilities shall be used to control the post-development 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year 24-hour event peak flow.
• All storage facilities shall drawdown within 72-hours. • Basins shall have a minimum of 1-foot of freeboard above the high water level on the emergency spillway or 2- feet of freeboard above the 100-year high water level in the basin, whichever is more stringent.

To attenuate the proposed conditions peak flow rates to be less than existing conditions peak flow rates, detention for the 2-year 24-hour, 10-year 24-hour, and 100-year 24-hour events is needed. One basin is necessary to mitigate the flood control events for the proposed project. Basin DBC located in the central portion of the project detains flows by way of a road crossing and a discharge culvert. The discharge culvert is sized to detain sufficient flows to mitigate for flood control for the proposed site.

Detention is also occurring due to the proposed road crossing of the floodplain in the northern part of the proposed site. To not create a backwater effect on the existing outfall pipes from sheds EX02 and EX03, the culverts crossing under the roadway in the northern part of the site are sized to minimize the amount of water detained, however, some detention does occur. Grading upstream of these culverts is proposed to provide volume due to the reduction of the floodplain from the road crossing. The preliminary results of these areas are shown below in Table 1.

Table 1: Preliminary Detention Facility Results
Detention Facility DBC DBN
10-Yr Peak Inflow (cfs) 56 200
100-Yr Peak Inflow (cfs) 120 347
10-Yr Peak Outflow (cfs) 29 171
100-Yr Peak Outflow (cfs) 46 294
10-Yr Water Surface Elev. (ft) 162.6 158.7
100-Yr Water Surface Elev. (ft) 163.9 159.3

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Sierra View

Page 10 of 13 ends

Storm Water Quality & Hydromodification
Storm water is a valuable resource and it is the intention of the proposed project to maintain storm water quality using source controls and Low Impact Development (LID) measures. These measures, through structures and operations, infiltration, evapotranspiration, and biotreatment can provide water quality treatment and recharge groundwater supplies, protect and enhance natural habitat and biodiversity, and add aesthetic value to new development.

The proposed project would create more than one acre of impervious surface. Due to this, it is considered a Hydromodification Management Project per the Phase II MS4 Permit and is required to provide storm water treatment for the 85th percentile event and hydromodification for the 2-year event. A multi-layered approach is taken to ensure that these requirements are met per the SWQDM. The discussion below outlines the types of measures that could be incorporated into the project to meet the requirements of the SWQDM.

To evaluate the storm water quality provisions and hydromodification management for the development, the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual (SWQDM) was referenced and utilized in this analysis. While the storm water quality calculations follow the procedures outlined within that manual by utilizing the provided templates, hydromodification compliance was proven by comparing the existing conditions to the proposed conditions peak flows at the project boundary as determined in the HEC-RAS model for the 2-year 24-hour event.

The first line of defense in maintaining storm water quality is to keep urban runoff from commingling with clean water through the use of Source Controls. This can be done using structural and operational measures at the pollutant source.

At this level of analysis, source control measures are not included however, measures may be specified at the improvement plan level of design and implemented with construction.

Potential structural measures may include covering of trash receptacles and using efficient irrigation to reduce overspray. Operational measures may include using good housekeeping measures to minimize the generation of pollutants, make stormwater pollution prevention measures a part of standard operating procedures, and employee training programs.

Storm water runoff into local creeks could introduce pollutants and could cause hydromodification, which would be mitigated by implementing various LID features including trees, soil amendments, disconnected impervious areas, vegetated swales, and bioretention. These LID measures not only treat runoff through natural physical and biological treatment processes but also reduce the amount of runoff through infiltration and evapotranspiration. This will keep developed flows from degrading downstream creek systems due to erosion; while, at the same time, capture and remove urban pollutants from runoff flows from the developed areas prior to discharging the treated flows from the site.

The proposed project would also incorporate tree plantings throughout the site. Trees, at a minimum, decrease storm water runoff volume, reduce amount of pollutants to reach downstream, are aesthetically pleasing, as well as have a cooling effect through shade and evapotranspiration.

Soil quality amendments would also be added at a rate of 9 square-feet of 1-foot deep soil amendment per each tree planting, thus assisting the trees in becoming established as well as improving the soil. Additional soil amendments of 200 square-feet at 1-foot deep per rear draining lot is also proposed. Soil quality amendments improve soil infiltration rates, reduce surface runoff quantities and erosion, improve soil filtration capabilities and pollutant removal, enhance plant survival rates and health, and decrease the need for landscape irrigation and fertilization.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Sierra View

Page 11 of 13 ends

have the following benefits of decreasing runoff volume, reducing peak flow rates, and encouraging groundwater recharge.

A vegetated swale would also be implemented with this project. Vegetated swales are known to reduce peak flows, decrease total runoff volume, and trap, filter and infiltrate particulates and associated pollutants. Figure 4 shows a typical vegetated swale cross-section.

Figure 4. Typical Vegetated Swale Cross-Section
Bioretention facilities would also be constructed to protect and improve water quality by removing pollutants from stormwater runoff, reduce surface runoff volume, attenuate peak flows, improve air quality and reduce heat island effects, increase groundwater recharge, and increase biodiversity. The key design parameters for the bioretention facilities proposed herein are a 3.5-foot bottom layer of coarse gravel, covered by 3-inches of pea gravel which is then topped with 1.5-feet of bioretention soil mix. Plants are an integral part of a bioretention facility. A list of plants appropriate for planting within a bioretention facility are listed within the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual in Fact Sheet TR-1. The bioretention facilities require irrigation to establish the plantings and may require irrigation to maintain the health of the plantings during the dry season.

Figure 5. Typical Bioretention Cross-Section
The SWQDM Template was completed using the preliminary shed information presented herein and is included with this assessment in Appendix E. The SWQ sheds correspond to the sheds depicted on Exhibit 3. Storm water quality compliance is demonstrated on Form 3-5 with having zero water quality volume and flow in Items 5 and 6 or on Form 3-6 with having zero untreated volume in Item 14.

Hydromodification for the 2-year 24-hour event was analyzed with the inclusion of Low Impact Development (LID) measures. To meet stormwater quality requirements outlined within the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual, a sufficient amount of LID features and facilities must be incorporated into a proposed site to bring the 85th percentile and 2-year event to at or below that of existing conditions. Therefore, to assess this event with LID measures applied, the percent imperviousness for proposed development within the Sierra View boundaries were reduced to

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Sierra View

Page 12 of 13 ends

that of existing conditions. Hydrographs for the 2-year event showing compliance with hydromodification are included in Appendix C.

Existing and Proposed Project Analysis
In addition to stormwater quality and hydromodification compliance requirements, the traditional requirement for no adverse downstream impacts due to increasing peak storm drainage flows from a development must be met. Two points of discharge are identified to aid in the comparison of the existing site to the proposed site conditions. These two comparison points are at locations close to the property boundary and allow for the assessment of the mitigation measures needed to assuage the potential impacts of the proposed project on the downstream properties. Exhibits 1 and 2 show the locations of the comparison points. The comparison point locations in the proposed project conditions are in the same location as identified for the existing project conditions. This was done for ease in identifying the proposed project’s potential impacts on the downstream conveyance systems.

Compliance Point 1 (CP1) is located at the southeast corner of the project and Compliance Point 2 (CP2) is located just downstream of the confluence of the major conveyance systems in the existing conditions (Exhibits 1 and 2). At these locations, the existing and proposed site conditions’ peak flow rates and water surface elevations are compared. Shown in Figure 6 are the flow hydrographs for the existing and proposed conditions at the downstream limit of the model for the 100-year 24-hour event.

Figure 6. Flow at Downstream Limit of Model
Tables 2 and 3 summarize the comparative results for the 2-year 24-hour, 10-year 24-hour, and 100-year 24-hour events at the compliance points. As can be observed below, the post-development peak flow rates and water surface

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Sierra View

Page 13 of 13 ends

elevations are lower than the existing conditions. Inundation boundaries for the 100-year 24-hour event for both the existing conditions and proposed conditions are shown on Exhibits 1 and 2, respectively (Appendix A). Stage and flow hydrographs for each compliance point are in Appendix C.

Table 2: Existing vs. Proposed Project Peak Flows at Comparison Points Comparison
Point
Existing Condition Proposed Project
2-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
10-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
100-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
2-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
10-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
100-Year
24-Hour
(cfs)
CP1 6 13 11 4 6 8
CP2 112 227 532 101 210 502
Table 3: Existing vs. Proposed Project Water Surface Elevations at Comparison Points Comparison
Point
Existing Condition Proposed Project
2-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
10-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
100-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
2-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
10-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
100-Year
24-Hour
(ft)
CP1 163.8 165.0 165.9 162.3 163.0 164.4
CP2 149.7 150.1 151.0 149.6 150.1 150.9
Conclusion
This TM provides a preliminary assessment for the proposed project to identify potential mitigation measures for storm water quality, hydromodification, and flood control. The drainage solutions for the site include a combination of LID, bioretention, and detention basins which treat and mitigate the small increase in impervious area with the proposed project. The LID measures and bioretention facilities provide storm water quality treatment and hydromodification for the 85th percentile event and the 2-year 24-hour event, respectively. The detention basins are sized to mitigate for the peak flow increases as a result of the minimal amount of increased runoff from the proposed project.

This technical memorandum establishes the existing conditions model and floodplain as well as demonstrates a developed conditions solution at a tentative map level for storm water quality, hydromodification, and flood control.

Modeling of the existing conditions floodplain through the Sierra View project area results in a narrow floodplain through most of the development. Only the southernmost and northernmost portions of the property contain widened floodplain conditions. For the southern portion of the development, the proposed drainage solution includes a combination of LID, storm water quality features, and detention pond, DBC, which could treat and mitigate the proposed contributory area. At the northern end of the project the post-development drainage solutions propose LID and storm water quality measures distributed throughout the project to provide treatment prior to discharge into the open space elements of the project. For flood control and peak flow attenuation in the northern part of the project, volume created via grading adjacent to the creek system is utilized to mitigate for peak flow increases as a result of the increased runoff from development as well as reduced natural floodplain storage as a result of the development.

The analyses presented in this TM shows that the proposed site can be sufficiently conveyed, treated, and mitigated without adverse impacts upstream or downstream. It adequately details the development’s drainage characteristics and is suitable for submittal to the City of Roseville.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Assessment
Sierra View
August 2021
Appendix A
Exhibits
Storm Drainage
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, ©
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
City of Roseville
Placer Parcel
<all other values>
Roseville
Low Impact Dev Feature
No
Yes
Channel
<all other values>
No
Yes
Main
No
Yes
Proprietary Device
No
Yes
Outfall
No
Yes
Fitting
No
Yes
Manhole
No
Yes
Drainage Inlet
No
Yes
8/13/2020, 6:38:23 AM
0 0.04 0.07 0.15mi
0 0.05 0.1 0.2km
1:4,514
Copyright: City of Roseville
California
July 2021
Hydrology & 100-Year Floodplain
City of Roseville
Scale: 1"=160'
1025 Creekside Ridge Drive, Suite 150, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1189 18512.000 Sierra View
Existing Conditions
EXHIBIT 1
EX01

10.4± ac.

Datum: NAVD88

PROJECT BOUNDARY

SHED BOUNDARY
EXISTING 100-YEAR INUNDATION

SUBSHED NAME & AREA

WATER COURSE LENGTH & SLOPE
CP2 COMPLIANCE POINT (FUTURE)
L=170'
S=0.020
CP2
CP1

PROJECT BOUNDARY

PROJECT

BOUNDARY
EX01

7.2± ac.

EX02

55.1± ac.

EX03

63.4± ac.

EX04

13.8± ac.

EX05

10.4± ac.

SIERRA VIEW COUNTRY
CLUB GOLF COURSE L=85' S=0.020
L=1200'
S=0.004
L=300' S=0.020
L=1280'
S=0.006
L=1050' S=0.014
L=115' S=0.020
S=0.030 L=235'
L=435'
S=0.025
L=560' S=0.016
L=188'S=0.032
L=300' S=0.053
L=930'
S=0.011
L=1585' S=0.009
L=150' S=0.020
L=300' S=0.005
L=2575'
S=0.010
L=1170' S=0.005 L=800' S=0.009
L=300' S=0.023
L=620' S=0.002
L=1895' S=0.005
L=100' S=0.020
EX09

5.0± ac.

EX07

14.2± ac.

EX10

27.7± ac.

EX08

39.0± ac.

EX06

19.4± ac.

PLEASANT GROVE CREEK

SOUTH BRANCH SIERRA VIEW

TRIBUTARY
California
July 2021
Hydrology & 100-Year Floodplain
City of Roseville
Scale: 1"=160'
1025 Creekside Ridge Drive, Suite 150, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1189 18512.000 Sierra View
Proposed Conditions
EXHIBIT 2
EX01

10.4± ac.

Datum: NAVD88

PROJECT BOUNDARY

SHED BOUNDARY
PROPOSED 100-YEAR INUNDATION

SUBSHED NAME & AREA

WATER COURSE LENGTH & SLOPE
CP2 COMPLIANCE POINT
L=170'
S=0.020
PROJECT BOUNDARY L=85' S=0.020
L=1200'
S=0.004
L=300' S=0.020
L=1280'
S=0.006
L=1050' S=0.014
L=115' S=0.020
S=0.030 L=235'
L=435'
S=0.025
L=1585' S=0.009
L=150' S=0.020
L=300' S=0.005
L=2575'
S=0.010
L=1170' S=0.005 L=800' S=0.009
L=300' S=0.023
L=620' S=0.002
L=1895' S=0.005
L=100' S=0.020
P=172.8
P=173.2
P=173.4
P=172.9
P=172.6
P=172.4
P=171.6
P=171.3
P=172.3
P=172.0
P=166.9
P=168.0
P=169.0
P=170.1
P=171.1
P=171.5
P=171.1 P=171.3
P=171.0
P=170.6
P=170.4
P=170.1
P=169.9
P=169.8
P=169.8
P=166.6
P=166.6
P=169.4
P=166.7
P=170.6
P=170.1
P=169.9
P=169.7
P=169.3
P=174.5
P=174.1
P=174.6
P=174.1
P=173.8
P=173.0
P=173.3
P=172.1
P=171.2
P=170.3
P=169.5
P=168.0
P=167.1
P=166.1
P=165.6
P=165.1
P=164.8
P=164.5
P=164.5
P=164.8
P=165.2
P=164.9
P=165.1 P=160.8
P=161.3 P=161.8 P=162.0 P=162.2 P=162.4
P=164.8
P=160.4 P=163.7
P=160.9 P=160.9
P=163.7
P=158.5
P=158.8
P=159.1
P=159.6 P=161.0
P=161.3
L=1245' S=0.001
L=705' S=0.014
CP2
CP1

PLEASANT GROVE CREEK

SOUTH BRANCH SIERRA VIEW

TRIBUTARY
EX01

7.2± ac.

EX02

55.1± ac.

EX03

65.9± ac.

EX04

13.8± ac.

EX05
EX07 10.4± ac.

14.2± ac.

EX08

39.0± ac.

EX06

19.4± ac.

EX10

10.4± ac.

DEV09

9.8± ac.

DEV05

4.4± ac.

DEV06

0.8± ac.

DEV07

0.9± ac.

DEV04

1.1± ac.

DEV02

0.8± ac.

DEV10

0.5± ac.

DEV08

3.1± ac.

DEV01

0.6± ac.

DEV03

0.3± ac.

SIERRA VIEW COUNTRY

CLUB GOLF COURSE
L=35'
S=0.33
L=215'
S=0.004
L=100'
S=0.02
L=200'
S=0.05
L=497'
S=0.027
L=125'
S=0.005
L=105'
S=0.01
L=16'
S=0.02 L=333'
S=0.012
L=850'
S=0.005
L=110'
S=0.010
L=54'
S=0.01
L=198'
S=0.040
L=347'
S=0.018
L=32'
S=0.02
L=32'
S=0.02
L=121' S=0.007
L=80'
S=0.01
California
July 2021
On-Site Proposed Conditions
City of Roseville
Scale: 1"=100'
1025 Creekside Ridge Drive, Suite 150, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1189 18512.000 Sierra View
EXHIBIT 3
Datum: NAVD88

SHED BOUNDARY

EXISTING STORM DRAIN

SUBSHED NAME & AREA

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE,

MANHOLE, AND DRAIN INLET

PROJECT BOUNDARY

NODE SEQUENCE
DESIGN HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE, 10-YEAR (FEET) DESIGN HYDRAULIC GRADE LINE, 100-YEAR (FEET) 10-YEAR DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 100-YEAR DESIGN FLOW (CFS) CUM. AREA TRIBUTARY TO THIS NODE (ACRES) AREA TRIBUTARY TO THIS NODE (ACRES) R20

1.0 ac
P=172.8
P=173.2
P=173.4
P=172.9
P=172.6
P=172.4
P=171.6
P=171.3
P=172.3
P=172.0
P=166.9
P=168.0
P=169.0
P=170.1
P=171.1
P=171.5
P=171.1 P=171.3
P=171.0
P=170.6
P=170.4
P=170.1
P=169.9
P=169.8
P=169.8
P=166.6
P=166.6
P=169.4
P=166.7
P=170.6
P=170.1
P=169.9
P=169.7
P=169.3
P=174.5
P=174.1
P=174.6
P=174.1
P=173.8
P=173.0
P=173.3
P=172.1
P=171.2
P=170.3
P=169.5
P=168.0
P=167.1
P=166.1
P=165.6
P=165.1
P=164.8
P=164.5
P=164.5
P=164.8
P=165.2
P=164.9
P=165.1 P=160.8
P=161.3 P=161.8 P=162.0 P=162.2 P=162.4
P=164.8
P=160.4 P=163.7
P=160.9 P=160.9
P=163.7
P=158.5
P=158.8
P=159.1
P=159.6 P=161.0
P=161.3
2:1
2:1
3:1
2:1 2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
3:1
3:1 3:1
3:1
3:13:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
3:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
3:1
2:1 2:1 2:1
3:1
3:1
2:1
3:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
2:1
3:1 3:1 3:1
3:1
MAX
3:1
EX01

7.2± ac. EX02

55.1± ac.

EX03

65.9± ac.

EX04

13.8± ac.

EX05

10.4± ac.

EX07

14.2± ac.

EX08

39.0± ac.

EX06

19.4± ac.

EX10

10.4± ac.

C03

0.8 ac
C04

3.0 ac
C05

1.3 ac
C06

0.6 ac
C09

1.7 ac
C11

1.3 ac
C02

0.9 ac
C12

0.3 ac
N201

0.3 ac
N301

0.9 ac
N302

1.83 ac
DEV06

0.8 ac
N303

1.2 ac
C13

0.2 ac
N402

0.9 ac
N401

0.3 ac
DEV02

0.8 ac
DEV01

0.6 ac
DEV07

0.9 ac
CP1

SIERRA VIEW COUNTRY

CLUB GOLF COURSE

VEGETATED
SWALE

BIORETENTION

FACILITY

BIORETENTION

FACILITY

PROJECT BOUNDARY

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Assessment
Sierra View
August 2021
Appendix B
HEC-1
Existing Conditions

IDSIERRA VIEW WATERSHED MODEL
IDSIERRA VIEW HYDROLOGICAL STUDY MAY 2021
IDModel created by MacKay & Somps
IDfor City of Roseville
IDMuskingum-Cunge hydrograph method used
IDMuskingum-Cunge routing
IDNo storm centering applied

IDEXISTING CONDITIONS - TRIB TO SOUTH BRANCH PGC SIERRA VIEW TRIB *DIAGRAM
IT 1 30DEC05 0 1440
IO 1
KK EX02
KMSubshed EX02
* 55.13 Ac
BA0.0861
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0861 0 0
LU 0 0.07 27
UK 100 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1895 0.0047 0.015 1 CIRC 2.5 0
RD 620 0.0016 0.045 2 TRAP 10 10
RD 1170 0.0034 0.015 3 CIRC 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX02 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX03
KMSubshed EX03
* 63.44 Ac
BA0.0991
PB
* pi e=174.5
BF0.0991 0 0
LU 0 0.07 26.04
UK 300 0.01 0.11 100
RD 1936 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 1631 0.001 0.015 CIRC 3.33
Existing Conditions
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX03 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK JCN23
KMCOMBINE EX02-03
HC 2
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=JCN23 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX04
KMSubshed EX04
* 13.76 Ac
BA0.0215
PB
* pi e=176.5
BF0.0215 0 0
LU 0 0.07 40
UK 150 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1585 0.008 0.015 CIRC 1.75 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX04 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX10
KMSubshed EX10
* 27.69 Ac
BA0.0433
PB
* pi e=168
BF0.0433 0 0
LU 0 0.07 3.14
UK 300 0.05 0.11 100
RD 927 0.011 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX10 C=FLOW F=0YR
Existing Conditions
*

KK JEXN
KMCOMBINE EX02-04, 10
HC 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=JEXN C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX05
KMSubshed EX05
* 10.39 Ac
BA0.0162
PB
* pi e=175
BF0.0162 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 235 0.03 0.11 100
RD 435 0.009 0.015 CIRC 2 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX05 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX09
KMSubshed EX09
* 5.03 Ac
BA0.0079
PB
* pi e=169.5
BF0.0079 0 0
LU 0 0.07 6.77
UK 188 0.03 0.025 100
RD 560 0.016 0.08 TRAP 15 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX09 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK JCN59
KMCOMBINE EX05 AND EX09
Existing Conditions
HC 2
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=JCN59 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX06
KMSubshed EX06
* 19.41 Ac
BA0.0303
PB
* pi e=161
BF0.0303 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 85 0.02 0.025 100
RD 1200 0.004 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
RD 730 0.015 0.015 CIRC 3.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX06 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX07
KMSubshed EX07
* 14.17 Ac
BA0.0221
PB
* pi e=158
BF0.0221 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 115 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1050 0.014 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX07 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX08
KMSubshed EX08
* 38.97 Ac
BA0.0609
Existing Conditions
PB
* pi e=154
BF0.0609 0 0
LU 0 0.07 5
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1280 0.006 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX08 C=FLOW F=0YR
*

KKJCNOFF
KMCOMBINE EX06-08
HC 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=JCNOFF C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX01
KMSubshed EX01
* 7.2 Ac
BA0.0113
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0113 0 0
LU 0 0.07 25.66
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 330 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 470 0.0055 0.015 CIRC 1.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX01 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK CP2
KMCOMBINE EX06-08
HC 4
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=CP2 C=FLOW F=0YR
Existing Conditions
*
ZZ
Proposed Conditions

IDSIERRA VIEW WATERSHED MODEL
IDSIERRA VIEW HYDROLOGICAL STUDY MARCH 2021
IDModel created by MacKay & Somps
IDfor City of Roseville
IDMuskingum-Cunge hydrograph method used
IDMuskingum-Cunge routing
IDNo storm centering applied

IDDEVELOPED CONDITIONS - TRIB TO SOUTH BRANCH PGC SIERRA VIEW TRIB *DIAGRAM
IT 1 30DEC05 0 1440
IO 1
KK EX01
KMSubshed EX01
* 7.2 Ac
BA0.0113
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0113 0 0
LU 0 0.07 25.66
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 330 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 470 0.0055 0.015 CIRC 1.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX01 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX02
KMSubshed EX02
* 55.13 Ac
BA0.0861
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0861 0 0
LU 0 0.07 27
UK 100 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1895 0.0047 0.015 1 CIRC 2.5 0
RD 620 0.0016 0.045 2 TRAP 10 10
RD 1170 0.0034 0.015 3 CIRC 3
Proposed Conditions
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX02 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX03
KMSubshed EX03
* 63.44 Ac
BA0.0991
PB
* pi e=174.5
BF0.0991 0 0
LU 0 0.07 26.04
UK 300 0.01 0.11 100
RD 1936 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 1631 0.001 0.015 CIRC 3.33
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX03 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX05
KMSubshed EX05
* 10.39 Ac
BA0.0162
PB
* pi e=175
BF0.0162 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 235 0.03 0.11 100
RD 435 0.009 0.015 CIRC 2 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX05 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX06
KMSubshed EX06
* 19.41 Ac
BA0.0303
PB
Proposed Conditions
* pi e=161
BF0.0303 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 85 0.02 0.025 100
RD 1200 0.004 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
RD 730 0.015 0.015 CIRC 3.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX06 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX07
KMSubshed EX07
* 14.17 Ac
BA0.0221
PB
* pi e=158
BF0.0221 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 115 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1050 0.014 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX07 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX08
KMSubshed EX08
* 39.01 Ac
BA 0.061
PB
* pi e=154
BF 0.061 0 0
LU 0 0.07 5
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1280 0.006 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX08 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
Proposed Conditions
KK EX10
KMSubshed EX10
* 10.42 Ac
BA0.0163
PB
* pi e=163.5
BF0.0163 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2.32
UK 200 0.05 0.11 100
RD 705 0.014 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX10 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK JEX
KMCombine Ex
HC 8
*
KK DEV01
KMSubshed DEV01
* 0.55 Ac
BA0.0009
PB
* pi e=160.5
BF0.0009 0 0
LU 0 0.07 55.91
UK 32 0.02 0.11 100
RD 347 0.018 0.015 TRAP 3 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV01 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV02
KMSubshed DEV02
* 0.84 Ac
BA0.0013
PB
* pi e=161
Proposed Conditions
BF0.0013 0 0
LU 0 0.07 40
UK 90 0.01 0.24 100
RD 20 0.01 0.04 TRAP 3 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV02 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV03
KMSubshed DEV03
* 0.3 Ac
BA0.0005
PB
* pi e=163.6
BF0.0005 0 0
LU 0 0.07 77
UK 32 0.02 0.11 100
RD 121 0.007 0.015 TRAP 0 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV03 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV04
KMSubshed DEV04
* 1.12 Ac
BA0.0018
PB
* pi e=161
BF0.0018 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2.75
UK 54 0.01 0.4 100
RD 198 0.04 0.06 TRAP 20 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV04 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV05
KMSubshed DEV05
Proposed Conditions
* 4.36 Ac
BA0.0068
PB
* pi e=164.75
BF0.0068 0 0
LU 0 0.07 45.37
UK 80 0.01 0.24 100
RD 850 0.005 0.015 CIRC 1.5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV05 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV06
KMSubshed DEV06
* 0.76 Ac
BA0.0012
PB
* pi e=160.35
BF0.0012 0 0
LU 0 0.07 57.17
UK 16 0.02 0.11 100
RD 333 0.012 0.015 TRAP 0 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV06 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV07
KMSubshed DEV07
* 0.85 Ac
BA0.0013
PB
* pi e=162.2
BF0.0013 0 0
LU 0 0.07 40
UK 85 0.01 0.24 100
RD 20 0.01 0.04 TRAP 3 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
Proposed Conditions
ZW B=DEV07 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV08
KMSubshed DEV08
* 3.14 Ac
BA0.0049
PB
* pi e=166
BF0.0049 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2.63
UK 125 0.05 0.4 100
RD 497 0.027 0.04 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV08 C=FLOW F=0YR
*

KK JDEV
KMCombine Dev
HC 9
*
KK DEV10
KMSubshed DEV10
* 0.51 Ac
BA0.0008
PB
* pi e=164.5
BF0.0008 0 0
LU 0 0.07 5
UK 35 0.33 0.4 100
RD 215 0.004 0.04 TRAP 3 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV10 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX04
KMSubshed EX04
* 13.76 Ac
BA0.0215
Proposed Conditions
PB
* pi e=176.5
BF0.0215 0 0
LU 0 0.07 40
UK 150 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1585 0.008 0.015 CIRC 1.75 0
*
KK REX04
KMRoute EX04 thru DEV09
RD 952 0.0004 0.015 CIRC 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=REX04 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV09
KMSubshed DEV09
* 9.83 Ac
BA0.0154
PB
* pi e=170.3
BF0.0154 0 0
LU 0 0.07 42.16
UK 100 0.02 0.24 100
RD 1245 0.001 0.015 CIRC 5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV09 C=FLOW F=0YR
*

KK JCNC
KMEX04 and DEV09
HC 2
*

KK RJCNC
KMRoute EX04 and DEV09
RD 113 0.0208 0.015 CIRC 5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=RJCNC C=FLOW F=0YR
Proposed Conditions
*
ZZ
Proposed Conditions LID

IDDEVELOPED CONDITIONS - TRIB TO SOUTH BRANCH PGC SIERRA VIEW TRIB *DIAGRAM
IT 1 30DEC05 0 1440
IO 1
KK EX01
KMSubshed EX01
* 7.2 Ac
BA0.0113
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0113 0 0
LU 0 0.07 25.66
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 330 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 470 0.0055 0.015 CIRC 1.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX01 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX02
KMSubshed EX02
* 55.13 Ac
BA0.0861
PB
* pi e=167
BF0.0861 0 0
LU 0 0.07 27
UK 100 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1895 0.0047 0.015 1 CIRC 2.5 0
RD 620 0.0016 0.045 2 TRAP 10 10
RD 1170 0.0034 0.015 3 CIRC 3
Proposed Conditions LID
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX02 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX03
KMSubshed EX03
* 63.44 Ac
BA0.0991
PB
* pi e=174.5
BF0.0991 0 0
LU 0 0.07 26.04
UK 300 0.01 0.11 100
RD 1936 0.009 0.06 TRAP 10 10
RD 1631 0.001 0.015 CIRC 3.33
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX03 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX05
KMSubshed EX05
* 10.39 Ac
BA0.0162
PB
* pi e=175
BF0.0162 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 235 0.03 0.11 100
RD 435 0.009 0.015 CIRC 2 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX05 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX06
KMSubshed EX06
* 19.41 Ac
BA0.0303
PB
Proposed Conditions LID
* pi e=161
BF0.0303 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 85 0.02 0.025 100
RD 1200 0.004 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
RD 730 0.015 0.015 CIRC 3.5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX06 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX07
KMSubshed EX07
* 14.17 Ac
BA0.0221
PB
* pi e=158
BF0.0221 0 0
LU 0 0.07 50
UK 115 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1050 0.014 0.015 CIRC 3.5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX07 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX08
KMSubshed EX08
* 39.01 Ac
BA 0.061
PB
* pi e=154
BF 0.061 0 0
LU 0 0.07 5
UK 300 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1280 0.006 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX08 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
Proposed Conditions LID
KK EX10
KMSubshed EX10
* 10.42 Ac
BA0.0163
PB
* pi e=163.5
BF0.0163 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2.32
UK 200 0.05 0.11 100
RD 705 0.014 0.08 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=EX10 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK JEX
KMCombine Ex
HC 8
*
KK DEV01
KMSubshed DEV01
* 0.55 Ac
BA0.0009
PB
* pi e=160.5
BF0.0009 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 32 0.02 0.11 100
RD 347 0.018 0.015 TRAP 3 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV01 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV02
KMSubshed DEV02
* 0.84 Ac
BA0.0013
PB
* pi e=161
Proposed Conditions LID
BF0.0013 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 90 0.01 0.24 100
RD 20 0.01 0.04 TRAP 3 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV02 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV03
KMSubshed DEV03
* 0.3 Ac
BA0.0005
PB
* pi e=163.6
BF0.0005 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 32 0.02 0.11 100
RD 121 0.007 0.015 TRAP 0 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV03 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV04
KMSubshed DEV04
* 1.12 Ac
BA0.0018
PB
* pi e=161
BF0.0018 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 54 0.01 0.4 100
RD 198 0.04 0.06 TRAP 20 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV04 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV05
KMSubshed DEV05
Proposed Conditions LID
* 4.36 Ac
BA0.0068
PB
* pi e=164.75
BF0.0068 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 80 0.01 0.24 100
RD 850 0.005 0.015 CIRC 1.5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV05 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV06
KMSubshed DEV06
* 0.76 Ac
BA0.0012
PB
* pi e=160.35
BF0.0012 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 16 0.02 0.11 100
RD 333 0.012 0.015 TRAP 0 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV06 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV07
KMSubshed DEV07
* 0.85 Ac
BA0.0013
PB
* pi e=162.2
BF0.0013 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 85 0.01 0.24 100
RD 20 0.01 0.04 TRAP 3 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
Proposed Conditions LID
ZW B=DEV07 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV08
KMSubshed DEV08
* 3.14 Ac
BA0.0049
PB
* pi e=166
BF0.0049 0 0
LU 0 0.07 2
UK 125 0.05 0.4 100
RD 497 0.027 0.04 TRAP 10 10
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV08 C=FLOW F=0YR
*

KK JDEV
KMCombine Dev
HC 9
*
KK DEV10
KMSubshed DEV10
* 0.51 Ac
BA0.0008
PB
* pi e=164.5
BF0.0008 0 0
LU 0 0.07 5
UK 15 0.33 0.4 100
RD 215 0.004 0.04 TRAP 3 20
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV10 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK EX04
KMSubshed EX04
* 13.76 Ac
BA0.0215
Proposed Conditions LID
PB
* pi e=176.5
BF0.0215 0 0
LU 0 0.07 40
UK 150 0.02 0.11 100
RD 1585 0.008 0.015 CIRC 1.75 0
*
KK REX04
KMRoute EX04 thru DEV09
RD 952 0.0004 0.015 CIRC 3
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=REX04 C=FLOW F=0YR
*
KK DEV09
KMSubshed DEV09
* 9.83 Ac
BA0.0154
PB
* pi e=170.3
BF0.0154 0 0
LU 0 0.07 8.64
UK 100 0.02 0.24 100
RD 1245 0.001 0.015 CIRC 5 0
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=DEV09 C=FLOW F=0YR
*

KK JCNC
KMEX04 and DEV09
HC 2
*

KK RJCNC
KMRoute EX04 and DEV09
RD 113 0.0208 0.015 CIRC 5
*
* WRITE AS HYDROGRAPH TO DSS
ZW B=RJCNC C=FLOW F=0YR
Proposed Conditions LID
*
ZZ

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Assessment
Sierra View
August 2021
Appendix C

HEC-RAS
Flow along 'CPI'
18-
16-
14 -
12-
8 -
6-
4 -
2-
0-
I SODecI 905I 30Dec1905 0200I 30Dec 1905 0400I SODecI 905 0600I 30Dec1 905 0800I 30Dec1905 1000I SODecI 905 1400I 30Dec1905 1600I 30Dec1905 1800I SODecI 905 2000I SODecI 905 2200I 31Dec1905I SODecI 905 1200 Time (12/30/1905) — EXSV1 00 [Post Processed] — EXSVOlO(PostProcessed) — EXSV002 [Post Processed] — SLTMSV1 00 [Post Processed] SLTMSV010 [Post Processed — SLTMSV002 [Post Processed
10-
&
Water Surface Elevation on 'CPT
171 -
170-
169 -
168-
167 -
165 -
164 -
163-
162 -
-L -L
“1“
10 n15 —r
40 n45T
5 _I20
~T~
25 _r
35 n50
T
55 T
60 161 -I
r
0 “1 ' 1 30
Station [feet]
<x? -
166 -
— EXSVlOO'Max' / — EXSVOIO'Ma/ • — EXSV002'mZ' — SLTMSVIOO'Max' SLTMSVflnO’Max' — SLTMS/OO2 'Max' — 'ExCond' Profile — 'De^8July' Profile Flow along 'CP2'
500-
450-
400-
350-
300-
200-
150 -
100-
50-
1 30Dec1905 0200
1 30Dec1905 04001 30Dec1905 06001 30Dec1905 08001 3ODec19O5 10001 30Dec1905 14001 30Dec1905 16001 30Dec1905 18001 30Dec1 905 2000 1 30Dec1905 2200r
31Dec1905
1 3ODec19O5 1200 Time (12/30/1905)
— EXSV1 00 [Post Processed] — EXSV010[Post Processed] — EXSV002 [Post Processed] — SLTMSV100 [Post Processed] SLTMSV010(PostProcessed] — SLTMSV002 [Post Processed]
0-—I 30Dec1905
(77 -
LA.
s . o= 250-
Water Surface Elevation on 'CP2'
153-
152.5 -
152-
151.5
151
150.5-
150
149.5
x: 149 -
T
0 “T
10 I 20—r
40 ~r
50 70
—r
80 I 100I
110
—1 120—I 130—I 140I 150—I 160I 170—I 180
nj
T
30 —r60
' I 1 1 90 Station [feet]
.<M
— EXSVIOO'MX — Exsvoio^ax' — EXSvpC2'Max' — SLJMSVIOO'Max' SVTMSVOIO'Max' y* SLTMSV002 'Max' — 'ExCond' Profile — 'Dev28July' Profile Existing Conditions HEC-RAS Model

Existing Conditions HEC-RAS Model
A
X02
£
^:*:*:*:*:

T«*
KeX04
ILA
M
k Mi
M*
£ ss
>IK< >M
-
list
X*?AtAAA
L
i
><*5
>ji
BOffcu .ejjl I
&*<
Jam
MW: PH^^H I ~
I
I
,r ... . A
r- -AMKd
:>SsmR
8K<'
Kv
CmS
vMra
4$*«
fc ?
MH
; as*?
S*l Khr S&
*^8
B|:|k
1-XOcM RF
MOK
K»y
I
M
y /**^
5 rS*t*t*S* *z:^x*t<*v<
km;
J
BL*
^»*t*x*;w<v
w^SMo »v >*ti*^*?i ®L
tlwWlIF
^4
\x
L
$ *5I
g<
S w%
s». <
v*
M»
S&V
‘>*t*t*X*?^™
wr wS*^ ****>1
J X^'^K*********^ I
***W^wWw/<l
ww1 ZmTmJwmh
. wwwjBo
***<*>*<*^ ** I
Sv< XmXmI
™W:M
khMAM M*M*M
/:Ww
/'Ifc
J &-. zz WW:i
999&9W&1*'
MlKl. ;^’W
k«:\
til: III sW
XXxxxx;
1-
•••
aMMaa—ar
rw|w&.^x
w;*- * *x*x*x*** < i
v< Wm^*»*»> .M»MSK8SBgSXsBm> X*X*X<4& >4 *** KBwK'
WMjWW
i sa*^ wtWffigfe
F
ft
ufe -'**’
w:*x
ww
mWwr r^BW’
. »*Xoi*a/K*aSMB
txWWWWW
Existing Conditions 100-Year Floodplain

Existing Conditions 100-Year Floodplain
Proposed Conditions HEC-RAS Model Proposed Conditions HEC-RAS Model it
DEV07
EX10a
EVOS
&
>1•A
Fvnfi orc
> ****
5 rx> .
rOUTFLOWf
1 V
1 1
....
18~_gfiFviR
' . ' . ‘ . ’7^
KC*Z’ <
tSle rraView^M
<><
»’ 1
>X*A*A*X*,
& ^1
w
" - s rw
I 4
JBBBW
>T*T*3k
gggg
M
!5SS
xxxW^oo?$>>yVS^^8 >222295S.:...: .
gWgMMMK^
$££
R?txoi
(EX07
Proposed Conditions 100-Year Floodplain
t’ r
/
l
t
1*1
t
L
9 Proposed Conditions 100-Year Floodplain
1 J
/
F
, i
7 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Assessment
Sierra View
August 2021
Appendix D
Pipe Analysis
Land Use
Highway,
Street,
Parking
Resdntl.
6-8 du/ac,
MDR,
School,
PQP
Resdntl.
4-6 du/ac,
LDR
Resdntl. <0.2
du/ac,
Recreation,
Landscape,
Park
Open space
Grassland, Ag
AC D Soils % 85% 50% 40% 5% 2%
EX04 13.76 Residential 100% 40.0% 13.76EX05 10.39 Residential, School 100% 50.0% 10.39 C03 0.79 Existing Residential (4.5 lots) 100% 50% 0.79C06 0.57 Existing Residential (2.5 lots) 100% 50% 0.57 Total Offsite 25.51 Composite % Imperv.: 45% 0.00 11.75 13.76 0.00 0.00 C02 0.94 Proposed Residential 100% 40% 0.94
C04 2.96 Proposed Residential 100% 40% 2.96C05 1.59 Proposed Residential 100% 40% 1.59C09 1.73 Proposed Residential 100% 40% 1.73C11 1.25 Proposed Residential 100% 46% 0.17 1.08C12 0.30 graded area 100% 5% 0.30 C13 0.21 graded area 100% 5% 0.21
Total C Sheds 8.98 Composite % Imperv.: 39% 0.17 0.00 8.30 0.51 0.00 N201 0.30 Roadway and overbank 100% 77% 0.27 0.03
Total N2 Sheds 0.30 Composite % Imperv.: 77% 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 N301 0.85 Proposed Residential, roadway, and landscape 100% 51.6% 0.22 0.63 N302 1.76 Proposed Residential 100% 40.0% 1.76N303 1.19 Proposed Residential, roadway, and landscape 100% 51.3% 0.30 0.89 Total N3 Sheds 3.80 Composite % Imperv.: 46% 0.52 0.00 3.28 0.00 0.00 Area
Shed/ SubShed
Pipe Subsheds (Ultimate built-out conditions)
Percent Impervious Calculator Percent Impervious Values Land Use Description
Composite
%
Imperv.

Soils Group
Peak Discharge and Pipe Calculations
10-Year
U/S Node
Name
D/S Node
Name Area (ac) Cumul. Area (ac)
10-yr
Adjusted
'Qp'
(Eqn 10-5)
(cfs)
Composite
% Imperv.

Cumul.

Composite
%
Imperv.
10-yr
Unit Peak
Runoff 'q'
(Eqn 10-3)
(cfs/ac)
10-yr
Cumul.

Response
Time
'tr'
(min)
10-yr
Response
Time
'tr
'
(min)
Surface
Collector
Response
Time 'trc'
(Eqn 5-4)
(min)
Manning's
'V'
(ft/s)
(Eqn 7-35a
Brater &
King)
Surface
Collector
Flow Length
(ft)
Surface
Collector
Slope 's'
(ft/ft)
Surface
Collector
Roughness
Factor
(n value)
10-yr
Overland
Response
Time 'tro'
(Eqn 10-2)
(min)
Average
Overland
Flow Length
(ft)
Overland
Slope 's'
(ft/ft)
Overland
Roughness
Factor (n
value)
Total
Infiltration
(cfs)
Pipe Length
(ft)
Calculated
Pipe
Diameter (ft)
(Eqn 6-26e
Brater &
King)
Design Pipe
Diameter (ft)
Pipe Slope
(ft/ft)
Design Pipe
Capacity
(cfs)
(Eqn 6-26b
Brater &
King)
Design
Velocity
(ft/s)
(Eqn 6-26a
Brater &
King)
Pipe
Response
Time1
(L/V/60s)
(min)
10-yr
HGL Slope
(ft/ft)
(Eqn 6-26d
Brater &
King)
Calc'd U/S
HGL (ft)
HGL10
U/S
Rim/Grate
Elevation
(ft)
U/S Pipe
Invert
Elevation
(ft)
D/S Pipe
Invert
Elevation
(ft)
Freeboard
(ft)
10-Year
Depth in
Pipe
(ft)
C01 C00 0.00 34.49 23.35 0% 48% 0.79 36.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.74 65 3.90 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.3 0.47 0.0001 162.64 162.99 168.1 159.03 159.00 5.11 3.96 C02 C01 0.94 34.49 24.18 40% 48% 0.81 34.88 10.14 2.89 2.02 350 0.019 0.015 7.25 90 0.020 0.240 3.74 171 3.96 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.3 1.24 0.0001 163.00 163.09 168.8 159.10 159.03 5.71 3.99 C03 C02 0.79 0.79 1.64 50% 50% 2.18 7.08 7.08 0.80 2.93 140 0.040 0.015 6.28 100 0.020 0.170 0.08 312 1.02 1.00 0.0026 1.57 2.0 2.59 0.0028 163.97 163.97 173.4 159.92 159.10 9.43 1.02 C04 C02 2.96 32.76 23.68 40% 48% 0.83 33.86 11.21 3.71 2.02 450 0.019 0.015 7.49 95 0.020 0.240 3.54 141 3.93 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.3 1.02 0.0001 163.11 163.13 168.1 159.16 159.10 4.97 3.97 C05 C04 1.59 29.80 23.09 40% 49% 0.88 31.64 13.88 6.15 0.87 320 0.004 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 3.17 285 3.89 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.1 2.22 0.0002 163.18 163.18 169.2 159.28 159.16 6.02 3.84 C06 C05 0.57 28.21 22.65 50% 50% 0.91 30.57 8.96 2.31 0.87 120 0.004 0.024 6.65 110 0.020 0.170 2.97 138 3.86 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.1 1.07 0.0002 163.21 163.21 169.8 159.34 159.28 6.59 3.82 C07 C06 0.00 27.64 22.14 0% 43% 0.92 30.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.29 58 3.83 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.1 0.45 0.0002 163.22 163.22 171.0 159.37 159.34 7.78 3.79 C08 C07 0.00 13.76 11.22 0% 40% 0.94 29.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.73 93 2.75 3.00 0.0006 14.15 2.0 0.77 0.0004 163.25 163.25 170.0 159.43 159.37 6.75 2.69 EX04 C08 13.76 13.76 11.41 40% 40% 0.95 28.86 28.86 19.00 1.39 1585 0.009 0.015 9.86 150 0.020 0.240 1.73 146 1.72 1.75 0.0076 11.97 5.0 0.49 0.0069 164.26 166.39 168.20 164.72 163.61 1.81 1.67 C09 C07 1.73 13.88 17.92 40% 47% 1.40 17.08 12.63 4.91 1.04 305 0.005 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 1.55 147 3.39 4.00 0.0005 27.83 2.2 1.11 0.0002 163.25 163.25 170.4 159.45 159.37 7.15 3.36 C10 C09 0.00 12.15 16.59 0% 48% 1.48 15.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.34 199 3.29 3.50 0.0005 19.49 2.0 1.64 0.0004 163.32 163.32 167.4 159.55 159.45 4.08 3.21 C11 C10 1.25 12.15 17.02 46% 48% 1.51 14.74 10.44 2.71 1.97 320 0.018 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 1.34 85 3.21 3.00 0.0006 14.15 2.0 0.71 0.0009 163.39 163.39 165.7 159.61 159.55 2.31 3.21 C12 C11 0.30 10.90 7.32 5% 48% 1.51 14.68 2.77 1.61 1.04 100 0.005 0.024 1.16 15 0.250 0.240 1.19 49 1.11 3.00 0.0324 104.09 14.7 0.06 0.0002 163.40 163.40 164.5 161.20 159.61 1.10 1.46 C12 Ex18in 0.30 10.90 7.98 5% 48% 1.51 14.68 2.77 1.61 1.04 100 0.005 0.024 1.16 15 0.250 0.240 1.19 675 1.34 1.50 0.0141 10.80 6.1 1.84 0.0077 163.40 163.40 164.5 161.2 151.7 1.10 1.31 C13 C12 0.21 10.60 14.96 5% 49% 1.52 14.60 2.77 1.61 1.04 100 0.005 0.024 1.16 15 0.250 0.240 1.13 48 1.64 2.50 0.0167 45.88 9.4 0.09 0.0018 163.49 163.75 166.2 162.00 161.20 2.45 1.75 EX05 C13 10.39 10.39 14.71 50% 50% 1.52 14.55 14.55 3.13 2.32 435 0.025 0.015 11.43 235 0.030 0.240 1.09 15 1.84 2.00 0.0087 18.25 5.8 0.04 0.0056 163.84 165.89 167.52 164.09 163.96 1.63 1.80 N201 N200 0.30 0.30 0.48 77% 77% 1.65 12.38 12.38 4.65 0.87 242 0.004 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 0.01 31 0.70 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.1 0.25 0.0000 158.40 160.00 163.50 159.15 159.10 3.50 0.85 N301 N300 0.85 3.80 5.62 52% 46% 1.59 13.26 12.01 4.28 1.04 266 0.005 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 0.43 73 1.77 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.1 0.59 0.0038 157.43 159.69 162.80 157.92 157.80 3.11 1.77 N302 N301 1.76 2.95 4.49 40% 45% 1.64 12.54 12.52 4.79 1.05 301 0.005 0.015 7.73 100 0.020 0.240 0.34 89 1.62 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.1 0.72 0.0024 159.90 159.90 163.10 158.07 157.92 3.20 1.62 N303 N302 1.19 1.19 2.05 51% 51% 1.83 10.09 10.09 5.94 1.23 437 0.007 0.015 4.15 50 0.020 0.170 0.12 300 1.16 1.25 0.0020 2.50 2.0 2.45 0.0013 160.30 160.30 164.90 158.92 158.32 4.60 1.13 Tailwater: Source:

C00 162.63 162.63 168.10 HEC-RAS WSE in basin
Ex18in 158.21 158.21 164.50 HEC-RAS Results
N200 158.40 158.40 163.50 HEC-RAS Results
N300 157.15 157.15 162.80 HEC-RAS Results
Notes: Constants used in calculations:

1. Collector Response time for the pipes is based upon a pipe flowing full.

Infiltration Rate for D soils: 0.12
Infiltration Factor 'Fi' (cfs/acre) 0.21
Average Elevation: 167
Nodes Hydrologic Data & Results Hydraulic Data & Results Peak Discharge and Pipe Calculations
100-Year
U/S Node
Name
D/S Node
Name Area (ac) Cumul. Area (ac)
100-yr
Adjusted
'Qp'
(Eqn 10-5)
(cfs)
Composite
% Imperv.

Cumul.

Composite
%
Imperv.
100-yr
Unit Peak
Runoff 'q'
(Eqn 10-3)
(cfs/ac)
100-yr
Cumul.

Response
Time
'tr'
(min)
100-yr
Response
Time
'tr
'
(min)
Surface
Collector
Response
Time 'trc'
(Eqn 5-4)
(min)
Manning's
'V'
(ft/s)
(Eqn 7-35a
Brater &
King)
Surface
Collector
Flow Length
(ft)
Surface
Collector
Slope 's'
(ft/ft)
Surface
Collector
Roughness
Factor
(n value)
100-yr
Overland
Response
Time 'tro'
(Eqn 10-2)
(min)
Average
Overland
Flow Length
(ft)
Overland
Slope 's'
(ft/ft)
Overland
Roughness
Factor (n
value)
Total
Infiltration
(cfs)
Pipe Length
(ft)
Calculated
Pipe
Diameter (ft)
(Eqn 6-26e
Brater &
King)
Design Pipe
Diameter (ft)
Pipe Slope
(ft/ft)
Design Pipe
Capacity
(cfs)
(Eqn 6-26b
Brater &
King)
Design
Velocity
(ft/s)
(Eqn 6-26a
Brater &
King)
Pipe
Response
Time1
(L/V/60s)
(min)
100-yr
HGL Slope
(ft/ft)
(Eqn 6-26d
Brater &
King)
Calc'd U/S
HGL (ft)
HGL100
U/S
Rim/Grate
Elevation
(ft)
U/S Pipe
Invert
Elevation
(ft)
D/S Pipe
Invert
Elevation
(ft)
Freeboard
(ft)
100-Year
Depth in
Pipe
(ft)
C01 C00 0 34.49 42.95 0% 48% 1.35 33.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.0000 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 3.74 65 4.91 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.30 0.47 0.0004 163.89 163.89 168.1 159.03 159.00 4.21 4.78 C02 C01 0.94 34.49 44.52 40% 48% 1.40 31.92 7.97 2.89 2.0 350 0.0190 0.015 5.08 90 0.02 0.24 3.74 171 4.97 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.30 1.24 0.0004 163.96 163.96 168.8 159.10 159.03 4.84 4.86 C03 C02 0.79 0.79 3.13 50% 50% 4.07 5.19 5.19 0.80 2.9 140 0.0400 0.015 4.40 100 0.02 0.17 0.08 312 1.29 1.00 0.0026 1.57 2.01 2.59 0.0103 167.17 167.17 173.4 159.92 159.10 6.23 1.29 C04 C02 2.96 32.76 43.62 40% 48% 1.44 30.90 8.96 3.71 2.0 450 0.0190 0.015 5.25 95 0.02 0.24 3.54 141 4.94 5.00 0.0004 45.13 2.30 1.02 0.0004 164.01 164.01 168.1 159.16 159.10 4.09 4.81 C05 C04 1.59 29.8 42.60 40% 49% 1.54 28.69 11.56 6.15 0.9 320 0.0035 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 3.17 285 4.89 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.14 2.22 0.0006 164.19 164.19 169.2 159.28 159.16 5.01 4.89 C06 C05 0.57 28.21 41.82 50% 50% 1.59 27.62 6.96 2.31 0.9 120 0.0035 0.024 4.66 110 0.02 0.17 2.97 138 4.86 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.14 1.07 0.0006 164.27 164.27 169.8 159.34 159.28 5.53 4.86 C07 C06 0 27.64 41.23 0% 43% 1.61 27.16 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.0000 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 3.29 58 4.83 4.50 0.0004 34.07 2.14 0.45 0.0006 164.31 164.31 171.0 159.37 159.34 6.69 4.83 C08 C07 0 13.76 20.99 0% 40% 1.65 26.39 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.0000 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 1.73 93 3.48 3.00 0.0006 14.15 2.00 0.77 0.0013 164.43 164.43 170.0 159.43 159.37 5.57 3.48 EX04 C08 13.76 13.76 21.36 40% 40% 1.68 25.90 25.90 19.00 1.4 1585 0.0090 0.015 6.90 150 0.02 0.24 1.73 146 2.17 1.75 0.0076 11.97 4.98 0.49 0.0242 167.96 167.96 168.2 164.72 163.61 0.24 2.17 C09 C07 1.73 13.88 33.30 40% 47% 2.51 13.65 10.32 4.91 1.0 305 0.0050 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 1.55 147 4.28 4.00 0.0005 27.83 2.22 1.11 0.0007 164.41 164.41 170.4 159.45 159.37 5.99 4.28 C10 C09 0 12.15 31.19 0% 48% 2.68 12.02 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.0000 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 1.34 199 4.17 3.50 0.0005 19.49 2.03 1.64 0.0013 164.67 164.67 167.4 159.55 159.45 2.73 4.17 C11 C10 1.25 12.15 32.19 46% 48% 2.76 11.31 8.12 2.71 2.0 320 0.0180 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 1.34 85 4.08 3.00 0.0006 14.15 2.00 0.71 0.0031 164.93 164.93 165.7 159.61 159.55 0.77 4.08 C12 C11 0.3 10.9 20.09 5% 48% 2.77 11.26 2.42 1.61 1.0 100 0.0050 0.024 0.81 15 0.25 0.24 1.19 49 1.62 3.00 0.0324 104.09 14.74 0.06 0.0012 164.99 164.99 164.5 161.20 159.61 0.00 1.85 C12 Ex18in 0.3 10.9 8.87 5% 48% 2.77 11.26 2.42 1.61 1.0 100 0.0050 0.024 0.81 15 0.25 0.24 1.19 675 1.39 1.50 0.0141 10.80 6.11 1.84 0.0095 164.99 164.99 164.5 161.20 151.70 0.00 1.36 C13 C12 0.21 10.6 28.30 5% 49% 2.78 11.17 2.42 1.61 1.0 100 0.0050 0.024 0.81 15 0.25 0.24 1.13 48 2.09 2.50 0.0167 45.88 9.35 0.09 0.0063 165.29 165.29 166.2 162.00 161.20 0.91 2.08 EX05 C13 10.39 10.39 27.81 50% 50% 2.78 11.13 11.13 3.13 2.3 435 0.0250 0.015 8.00 235 0.03 0.24 1.09 15 2.34 2.00 0.0087 18.25 5.81 0.04 0.0201 165.60 166.43 167.5 164.09 163.96 1.09 2.34 N201 N200 0.3 0.3 0.86 77% 77% 2.93 10.06 10.06 4.65 0.9 242 0.0035 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 0.01 31 0.87 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.06 0.25 0.0001 158.50 160.12 163.5 159.15 159.10 3.38 0.97 N301 N300 0.85 3.8 9.75 52% 46% 2.68 12.01 9.69 4.28 1.0 266 0.0050 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 0.43 73 2.17 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.06 0.59 0.0115 158.35 160.09 162.8 157.92 157.80 2.71 2.17 N302 N301 1.76 2.95 7.80 40% 45% 2.76 11.29 10.20 4.79 1.0 301 0.0051 0.015 5.41 100 0.02 0.24 0.34 89 2.00 1.50 0.0016 3.64 2.06 0.72 0.0073 160.74 160.74 163.1 158.07 157.92 2.36 2.00 N303 N302 1.19 1.19 3.59 51% 51% 3.12 8.84 8.84 5.94 1.2 437 0.0070 0.015 2.90 50 0.02 0.17 0.12 300 1.43 1.25 0.0020 2.50 2.04 2.45 0.0041 161.98 161.98 164.9 158.92 158.32 2.92 1.43

75.70% Tailwater Tailwater: Source:

C00 163.87 163.87 168.10 HEC-RAS WSE in basin
Ex18in 158.59 158.59 164.50 HEC-RAS Results
N200 158.50 158.50 163.50 HEC-RAS Results
N300 157.51 157.51 162.80 HEC-RAS Results
Notes: Constants used in calculations:

1. Collector Response time for the pipes is based upon a pipe flowing full.

Infiltration Rate for D soils: 0.12
Infiltration Factor 'Fi' (cfs/acre) 0.21
Average Elevation: 167
Nodes Hydrologic Data & Results Hydraulic Data & Results

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Assessment
Sierra View
August 2021
Appendix E
Storm Water Quality Template
Post-Construction
Storm Water Quality Plan
For:

Sierra View Small Lot Tentative Map
City of Roseville
Prepared by:

MacKay & Somps Civil Engineering, Inc.
1025 Creekside Ridge Dr., Ste 150
Roseville, CA 95678
916-773-1189
Preparation Date: July 2021
Approval Date:_____________________
Project Site Address:

Owner Name:

Title
Company
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Email
Telephone #
Signature Date
Engineer:*
PE Stamp*
Title
Company
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Email
Telephone #
Signature
Brief Description of Project:
(Attach additional sheets as
necessary)
[email protected]
360 Diamond Oaks Road
WP Sierra View, LLC
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 265
Ryan O'Keefe
Roseville, CA 95661
Roseville, CA 95678
Steve Smith
Section 1 General Project Information
* Not required for Small Projects as determined in Form 1-2 below. Project owners are responsible for ensuring that all storm water facilities are designed by an appropriately licensed and qualified professional. +/- 23.1 acre project

Project Manager
(Required for all Regulated Projects)
MacKay & Somps Civil Engineering, Inc.
1025 Creekside Ridge Dr., Ste 150
[email protected]
916-773-1189

916-990-1071
The undersigned owner of the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan, including ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M), consistent with the requirements of the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual and the State of California Phase II Small MS4 General Permit (Order No: 2013-0001-DWQ). If the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors-in-interest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement the SWQP.

For all Regulated Projects (As identified in Form 1-2 below), the undersigned owner hereby grants access to all representatives of the Jurisdictional Agency for the sole purpose of performing O&M inspections of the installed treatment system(s) and hydromodification control(s) if any.

A copy of the final signed and fully approved SWQP shall be available on the subject site for the duration of construction and then stored with the project approval documentation and improvement plans in perpetuity.

Form 1-1 Project Identification and Owner’s Certification 1 Small Project – All projects, except LUPs, that create and/or replace between 2,500-5,000 ft2 of impervious surface or detached single family homes that create and/or replace 2,500 ft2 or more of impervious surface and are not part of a larger plan of development.
2 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 3 Regulated Project – All projects that create and/or replace 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface. X
4 Regulated Redevelopment Project with equal to, or greater than 50 percent increase in impervious area X
5 Regulated Redevelopment Project with less than 50 percent increase in impervious area
6 Enter total pre-project impervious surface (ft2) 0
7 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 310,252 8 Regulated Road or linear underground/overhead project (LUP) creating 5,000 ft2 or more of newly constructed contiguous impervious surface. 9 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 10Regulated Hydromodification Management Project – Regulated projects that create and/or replace 1 acre or more of impervious surface. A project that does not increase impervious surface area over the pre-project condition is not a hydromodification management project.

X
11Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2 ) 310,252
Form 1-2 Project Category
Development Category (Select all that apply)
3 Elevation
(ft. above sea level)
4 85th Percentile, 24 Hour Design Storm
Depth (in):

No
7 Is Project going to be phased?
If yes, ensure that the SWQP evaluates each phase with distinct DMAs, requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion.
www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_qualit y_assessment/#impaired
Pleasant Grove Creek South Branch Sierra View Tributary Refer to State Water Resources Control Board website Bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, toxicity Example only
Modify for project specific SWQP
Use separate sheet if necessary
See Exhibit
Section 3 Regulated Projects
Section 3 forms are to be completed for all Regulated Projects.

Site coordinates:

Take GPS measurement at
approximate center of site
Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features
38°45'51"N
2 Longitude
121°16'58"W
1 Latitude
167 0.9
5 Receiving waters
Name of stream, lake or other downstream waterbody to
which the site runoff eventually drains
6 303(d) listed pollutants of concern
8 Use this form to show a conceptual schematic depicting DMAs and conveyance features connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s). An example is provided below that can be modified for the proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMAs and flow routing may be attached.

Yes
Not Applicable
(Include brief explanation)
Define the development envelope and protected areas, identifying areas that are most suitable for development areas to be left undisturbed. X Concentrate development on portions of the site with less permeable soils and preserve areas that can promote infiltration. N/A, all of the site is on Type D soils Limit overall impervious coverage of the site with paving and roofs. N/A, conforming to local impervious coverage ordinances
Set back development from creeks, wetlands, and riparian habitats. X Preserve significant trees. X
Conform site layout along natural landforms. X
Avoid excessive grading and disturbance of vegetation and soils. N/A, site has previously been disturbed Replicate the site's natural drainage patterns. X
Detain and retain runoff throughout the site. X
Proposed locations and footprints of treatment and hydromodification management facilities Design features for managing authorized non-stormwater discharges Areas of soil and/or groundwater contamination
Existing utilities and easements
Maintenance areas
Proposed locations and footprints of improvements creating new, or replaced, impervious surfaces Potential pollutant sources and locations
Entire site divided into separate DMAs with unique identifiers Existing and proposed site drainage network with flow directions and site run-on and discharge locations Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness and reduce runoff Form 3-2 Site Assessment and Layout Documentation
Topographic data with 1 ft. contours
Existing natural hydrologic features (depressions, watercourses, wetlands, riparian corridors) Environmentally sensitive areas and areas to be preserved.

Site Boundary
Soil types and areal extents, test pit and infiltration test locations Attach a Site Plan that incorporates the applicable considerations above. Ensure that the following items are included in the Site Plan:

Has this Item been considered in the Site Layout and
depicted in the Site Plan?
Present
Not
Applicable
Accidental spills or leaks
Interior floor drains
Parking/storage areas and maintenance
Indoor and structural pest control
Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains,
and other water features
Landscape/outdoor pesticide use
All manufacturer recommendations and regulations will be followed.

Minimum amounts will be used.

Restaurants, grocery stores, and other food
service operations
Refuse areas
Industrial Processes
Outdoor storage of equipment or materials
Vehicle and equipment cleaning
Vehicle and equipment repair and
maintenance
Fuel dispensing areas
Loading docks
Fire sprinkler test water
Drain or wash water from boiler drain lines,
condensate drain lines, rooftop equipment,
drainage sumps, and other sources
Unauthorized non-storm water discharges
Building and grounds maintenance
The source control measures identified in this table shall be designed consistent with recommendations from the CASQA Stormwater BMP Handbook for New Development and Redevelopment1, or from another equivalent manual.

Describe the source control measures to be implemented for each potential pollutant generating activity or source present on the project as listed in Appendix C and in the CASQA Fact Sheets. Include any special features, materials, or methods of construction that will be used.
[1] California Stormwater BMP Handbook New Development and Redevelopment. California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA).

January 2003.

Form 3-3 Source Control Measures
Check One Potential Pollutant Generating Activity or
Source
Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects Site Design Measure
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area - - -
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm 0.81 0.8 0.8
Apond (ft2) ponding area 0 0 0
Dpond (ft) ponding depth
Asa (ft2) soil amendment area 0 1065 0
Dsa (ft) depth of amended soil 1.0 1.0 1.0
n porosity of amended soil 0.35 0.35 0.35
ne number of new evergreen trees 0 5 0
nd number of new deciduous trees 0 5 0
Atc (ft2)
canopy area of existing trees to remain
on the property
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm 0.8 0.8 0.8
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area - 7,500 -
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm 0.8 0.8 0.8
Ares (ft2) area of gravel storage layer 0
Dres (ft)
depth of gravel storage layer
nagg porosity of aggregate
C efficiency factor
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm 0.8 0.8 0.8
N number of rain barrels and/or cisterns
0 0
Va (ft3)
volume of each rain barrel and/or cistern
9 Do all Site Design Measures meet the design requirements outlined in the Fact Sheets? Yes X No Runoff Reduction Parameters
DEV01 DEV02 N201 1
DMA ID No.
4 Tree Planting and
Preservation
-
8 Rain Barrels and Cisterns
372.8
2 Adjacent/On-Site Stream
Setbacks and Buffers
- - -
- -
- -
-
7 Vegetated Swales
-
3 Soil Quality Improvement
and Maintenance
- -
14,657 -
989 -
110.4 -
506.3
-
-
6 Porous Pavement -
5 Rooftop and Impervious
Area Disconnection
- - -
10 Total Volume Reduction (ft3
) -
11 Effective Treated Impervious Area (ft2
)
Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects Site Design Measure
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Apond (ft2) ponding area
Dpond (ft) ponding depth
Asa (ft2) soil amendment area
Dsa (ft) depth of amended soil
n porosity of amended soil
ne number of new evergreen trees
nd number of new deciduous trees
Atc (ft2)
canopy area of existing trees to remain
on the property
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Ares (ft2) area of gravel storage layer
Dres (ft)
depth of gravel storage layer
nagg porosity of aggregate
C efficiency factor
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
N number of rain barrels and/or cisterns
Va (ft3)
volume of each rain barrel and/or cistern
9 Do all Site Design Measures meet the design requirements outlined in the Fact Sheets? Runoff Reduction Parameters
1 DMA ID No.
4 Tree Planting and
Preservation
8 Rain Barrels and Cisterns
2 Adjacent/On-Site Stream
Setbacks and Buffers
7 Vegetated Swales
3 Soil Quality Improvement
and Maintenance
6 Porous Pavement
5 Rooftop and Impervious
Area Disconnection
10 Total Volume Reduction (ft3
)
11 Effective Treated Impervious Area (ft2
)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)

0.8 0.8 0.8
306 492 27

1.0 1.0 1.0

0.35 0.35 0.35
17 4 2
17 4 2

0.8 0.8 0.8
25,500 6,000 2,250

0.8 0.8 0.8

0.8 0.8 0.8
N4 Sheds DEV06
- -
N3 Sheds
-
107.1
-
1,721.3
-
-
32,646
2,204
375.2
172 9
88 33
405 152
- -
194
2,881
665
9,859
- -
- -
Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects Site Design Measure
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Apond (ft2) ponding area
Dpond (ft) ponding depth
Asa (ft2) soil amendment area
Dsa (ft) depth of amended soil
n porosity of amended soil
ne number of new evergreen trees
nd number of new deciduous trees
Atc (ft2)
canopy area of existing trees to remain
on the property
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
Ares (ft2) area of gravel storage layer
Dres (ft)
depth of gravel storage layer
nagg porosity of aggregate
C efficiency factor
Aimp (ft2) impervious drainage area
V85 (in) runoff volume from 85th percentile,
24-hour storm
N number of rain barrels and/or cisterns
Va (ft3)
volume of each rain barrel and/or cistern
9 Do all Site Design Measures meet the design requirements outlined in the Fact Sheets? Runoff Reduction Parameters
1 DMA ID No.
4 Tree Planting and
Preservation
8 Rain Barrels and Cisterns
2 Adjacent/On-Site Stream
Setbacks and Buffers
7 Vegetated Swales
3 Soil Quality Improvement
and Maintenance
6 Porous Pavement
5 Rooftop and Impervious
Area Disconnection
10 Total Volume Reduction (ft3
)
11 Effective Treated Impervious Area (ft2
)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)

0.8 0.8
873 873

1.0 1.0

0.35 0.35
48 48
49 49

0.8 0.8
72,750 72,750

0.8 0.8
167,366

0.8 0.8
DEV07 + C Sheds w/o Swale DEV07 + C Sheds w/ Swale
- -
-
306 306
1,067 1,067
4,911 4,911
-
6,283 17,580
93,082 260,448
- 11,297
- -
DMA ID No. DEV01 DEV02 N201 N3 Sheds N4 Sheds DEV06 DEV07 + C Sheds w/o Swale
DEV07 + C Sheds
w/ Swale
1 Total impervious area requiring treatment 13,416 14,636 10,062 76,143 9,757 18,870 167,366 167,366 2 Impervious area untreated by Site Design
Measures (ft2)
Item 1 – Form 3-4 Item 11
13,416 - 10,062 43,497 - 15,990 74,285 -
3 Additional pervious area draining to BMP (ft2) 10,542 21,954 3,006 89,385 14,636 14,235 260,829 260,829 4 Composite DMA Runoff Coefficient (Rc)
Enter area weighted composite runoff
coefficient representing entire DMA

0.34 0.00 0.53 0.17 0.00 0.29 0.12 0.00
5 Water Quality Volume (WQV) (ft3
)
WQV = 1/12 * [Item 2 + Item 3) *Item 4] *
Unit WQV
441 - 372 1,188 - 472 2,093 -
6 Water Quality Flow (WQF) (cfs)
WQF = 1/43,200 * [0.2* (Item 2 + Item 3) *
Item4]

0.038 0.000 0.032 0.102 0.000 0.040 0.179 0.000
Form 3-5 Computation of Water Quality Design Criteria for Stormwater Treatment and Baseline Hydromodification Measures
1 DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter a new
unique DMA ID No.

N201 N3 Sheds DEV06
2WQV (ft3
) Item 5 in Form 3-5
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter the sum of their respective WQVs.
372 1188 472
3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr 5 5 5
4 BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Top of BMP
258 950 347
5 Infiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 6Maximum ponding depth (ft)
BMP specific, see BMP design details

0.5 0.5 0.5
7 Ponding Depth (ft)
d BMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 * 48 hrs) or Item 6 0.28 0.28 0.28 8 Infiltrating surface area, SA BMP (ft2)
Bottom of BMP
215 792 289
9 Planting media depth, d media (ft) 1.5 1.5 1.5
10Planting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35
11Gravel depth, d media (ft)
Only included in certain BMP types

3.5 3.5 3.5
12Gravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30
13Retention Volume (ft3
)
V retention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) + (1.5* (Item 5 / 12))]
401 1,476 539
14Untreated Volume (ft3
)
V untreated = Item 2 – Item 13
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and recompute retention volume 0 0 0
15 Treated Flow Rate (ft3
/s)
Qtreated = 1/43,200*(Item 3 * Item 4) 0.0299 0.1100 0.0401 16Total Treated Flow Rate for Project (ft3
/s)
Q total = Sum of Item 15 for all DMAs
17Is WQV for each DMA treated on-site? X No

0.217
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures BMP Inspection Point and Frequency Maintenance Activity Required Embankments and channel/Twice a year
or as needed
Repair erosion problems, remove debris
and sediment
Channel/Annual or as needed Mow grass to no shorter than 6-inches, reseed to maintain dense turf
Inlets and outlets/ Twice a year Remove debris, sediment, and litter Plants/Monthly or as needed Irrigate, weed control, replace dead plants
Standing water in excess of 72-
hours/Annual or as needed
Remove accumulated sediment and
flush drainage including underdrain
Erosion, holes or voids/Annual or as
needed
Repair erosion and stabilize, inspect
underdrain and replace soil if needed
At each tree/as necessary Irrigate to establish and maintain At each tree/annually Remove fallen leaves and debris
At each tree/regularly Prune dead vegetation from trees At each tree/as needed Minimize the use of chemical fertilizers At each tree/as necessary Maintain lawn and turf at least 24- inches from trunk of tree
At each tree/as necessary Remove and replace dead trees Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance
Bioretention
Facilities
Veg Swale
Trees
Soil Amended
Areas
Inspect for loss of vegetative cover and
erosion. Repair eroded areas and
replant vegetation as needed.

Inspect for signs of compaction,
waterlogging. Add soil amendments or
mechanically aerate as needed.

At each amended soil area/annually
At each amended soil area/annually
Plan Sheet
Number(s)

Stream Setbacks and Buffers
Soil Quality Improvement and Maintenance Sierra View SLTM Tree Planting and Preservation Sierra View SLTM
Rooftop and Impervious Area Disconnection Sierra View SLTM Porous Pavement
Vegetated Swales Sierra View SLTM
Rain Barrels and Cisterns
Bioretention with Infiltration Sierra View SLTM
Flow-Through Planters, Tree Box Filters and Media
Filters
Hydromodification
Management
Measures
Supplemental Detention Sierra View SLTM
Structural Source
Controls (list BMPs)
Stormwater Treatment
and Baseline
Hydromodification
Measures
Form 6-1 Post-Construction Stormwater BMPs
Following is a summary of all BMPs included in the Project design. This checklist must be included on the cover sheet of the Improvement Plans for all Regulated Projects.

BMP
Site Design Measures
Vegetated Swale
Data and Results
Swale Name
Contributing
Area (ac)
SWQ Flow1
(cfs)
Slope
(ft/ft)
Manning's
'n'
Maximum
Depth (ft)
Side
Slope
(ft:ft)
Minimum
Bottom
Width of
each bay
(ft)
No. of
Bays
Minimum
Length (ft)
Area per
Bay (ft2)
Wetted
Perimeter
per Bay (ft)
Hydraulic
Radius per
Bay (ft)
Velocity
(fps)
Contact
Time
(min)
Overall
Bottom
Width
(ft)
DEV07 + C Sheds 9.83 0.179 0.005 0.25 0.33 3 3 1 104 1.33 5.05 0.26 0.17 10.05 3.0 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: September 7, 2021
To: Jack Varozza, PE – City of Roseville
From: John Gard, PE – Fehr & Peers
Subject: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project RS21-4081
This memorandum analyzes the transportation impacts associated with construction of the Sierra View Residential Project, which would be situated west of Shasta Street and south of Diamond Oaks Road in Roseville, CA. Refer to Figure 1 for project location and Figure 2 for project site plan. This memorandum consists of the following sections:
• Existing Conditions
• Existing Plus Project Conditions
• Cumulative Conditions
• Vehicle Miles Traveled
• Review of Project Access
Existing Conditions
The project site would be served by the following roadways:
• Diamond Oaks Road – is an east-west, two-lane residential street with a posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour (mph) that extends 1.8 miles from Washington Boulevard to Reserve Drive.

Single-family residences front the vast majority of this street. It is used to access local residences, the Diamond Oaks Golf Course, and is also used by some motorists as a cut-through route to access various destinations including Roseville High School. A motorist traveling the entirety of this roadway would encounter three all-way stop-controlled intersections, including at Diamond Oaks Road/Shasta Street.
• Shasta Street – is a north-south two-lane residential street with a posted speed limit of 25 mph that extends 1.0 miles from Diamond Oaks Road to Sierra Drive, which provides access to the “crooked bridge” connecting to Old Town Roseville. It also connects to Yosemite Avenue, which provides access to Atlantic Street and downtown Roseville and Interstate 80. Land uses along this segment include single-family (front-on) dwelling units, multi-family units, Ferris Spanger Elementary School, and Diamond Oaks Park. Similar to Diamond Oaks Road, Shasta Street is used for a variety of trip purposes.

CC EXHIBIT N
MND ATTACHMENT 12
September 7, 2021

Page 2 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting changes to travel patterns due to the statewide stayat- home directive implemented in March 2020, existing traffic counts were not collected. Instead, traffic count data was obtained from a “Big Data” vendor, StreetLight Data, Inc. StreetLight Data captures anonymized location records from smart phones and navigation devices in connected cars and trucks. Because StreetLight Data collects location records at all times of the day and year, providing for a much larger data set when compared to a traditional data collection effort on a single day.

Table 1 displays the resulting Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on the study roadways. This data is also shown geographically on Figure 3. Mid-week (Tuesday through Thursday) traffic data was obtained from September and October 2019 to establish existing conditions. Data was collected for all movements at the Diamond Oaks Road/Shasta Street intersection for a typical 24-hour mid-week period. From this data, it was possible to identify both the amount of daily traffic on each roadway segment and the amount of AM and PM peak hour traffic at the intersection by turning movement.

For quality control purposes, pre-COVID traffic data was obtained at the Diamond Oaks Road/Washington Boulevard signalized intersection using the City’s Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) count database to confirm that the volume of traffic on Diamond Oaks Road between Washington Boulevard and Shasta Street was similar for each source. This was found to be the case.

Table 1: Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Study Roadways – Existing Conditions Segment ADT 1
Diamond Oaks Road west of Shasta Street 5,200
Diamond Oaks Road east of Shasta Street 4,300
Shasta Street south of Diamond Oaks Road 4,200
Shasta Street south of Ferris Spanger Elementary School 2 4,500 Notes:

1. Data represents pre-COVID conditions (i.e., September/October 2019).

2. Estimated based on directionality of trips in/out of Ferris Spanger Elementary School and known usage of the Diamond Bar Lane-Manzanita Avenue route by Roseville High School students.

Values rounded to the nearest one hundred.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2021.

September 7, 2021

Page 3 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Project Description
According to the project site plan (Sierra View Tentative Subdivision Map, MacKay & Somps, April 2021), the project would consist of 75 single-family dwelling units in a gated community. All streets within the community would be private.

Vehicular access would be provided by a private street (shown as Whistling Straits Drive on the site plan) situated on the south side of Diamond Oaks Road about 550 feet west of Shasta Street. This access would have a turn-around area for vehicles that are turned away at the gate. An emergency vehicle access (EVA) would be provided on Shasta Street opposite Ferris Spanger Elementary School.

Sidewalks would be provided on one side of each access street to connect the neighborhood to the adjacent public street.

Preliminary analyses of the project focused on the benefits and drawbacks of four distinct scenarios consisting of full, partial, and no vehicular access from the Diamond Oaks Road and Shasta Street access points. Below is a summary of how these options were evaluated (Appendix A provides additional details regarding site constraints and evaluation of the options):
• Two of the four options consisted of full access onto Shasta Street with varying levels of access on Diamond Oaks Road. These two options were removed from further consideration because they would have substantially increased vehicular conflicts with Ferris Spanger Elementary School and would have introduced a sight distance constraint (i.e., horizontal curvature of Shasta Street) that may have proven difficult to solve. • A third option consisting of full access on Diamond Oaks Road and partial access on Shasta Street, allowing for exiting movements only (along with an EVA) was also considered. This was also rejected because of the potential for wrong-way travel as well as continued conflicts with school traffic.
• The fourth option is the proposed project.

Trip Generation
The project’s trip generation was calculated based on trip rates and methodologies published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). Because the project consists of single-family detached units, the “Single-Family Detached Housing” land use category was used to estimate daily and peak hour trips generated by the project.

September 7, 2021

Page 4 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Table 2 shows the project’s trip generation on a daily basis and during the AM and PM peak hours. As shown, the project would generate approximately 710 daily trips, with 56 occurring during the AM peak hour and 75 occurring during the PM peak hour.

Table 2: Project Trip Generation
Land Use2 Quantity Units1 Daily
Total
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing
(Code 210) 75 du 708 14 42 56 47 28 75
Notes:

1. “du” represents dwelling units

2. Based on trip rates from Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2017).

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2021.

Trip Distribution and Trip Assignment
Streetlight Data, Inc. offers another innovative data product consisting of quantification of the spatial distribution of trips generated by a given neighborhood. This data was obtained for this study, focusing on the neighborhood immediately north of the northerly terminus of Shasta Street (i.e., Nicklaus Circle).

Because the project would be situated in close proximity to this neighborhood, it would presumably have similar trip distribution characteristics. Figure 4 displays the expected daily distribution of project trips based on the characteristics of these neighborhoods. This figure shows that the majority of trips (75 percent) are expected to be distributed to/from the east or west on Diamond Oaks Road. This makes sense because these routes provide access to a variety of retail destinations and employment centers.

Project trips were added to existing volumes to yield the Existing Plus Project roadway segment daily volumes shown on Figure 5. Key findings from this figure are:

1. The largest increase in project trips would occur on the segment of Diamond Oaks Road between Shasta Street and the project access. The volume on this segment would increase from 5,200 to 5,670 vehicles, a nine percent increase.1 During the PM peak hour, the volume on this segment would increase by about 50 vehicles, or one additional vehicle per minute. 1 To put this increase in perspective, it is typical to see fluctuations of five to ten percent in traffic from one weekday to the next.

September 7, 2021

Page 5 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com

2. The daily traffic volume on Diamond Oaks Road east of Shasta Street would increase from 4,300 to 4,590 vehicles, a seven percent increase.

3. Project-related traffic volumes on Shasta Street south of Diamond Oaks Road would be modest at about 200 vehicles per day.

The City of Roseville does not use roadway ADT values to analyze project impacts. This information has been prepared for informational purposes so that reviewers of the project understand how traffic volumes on surrounding roadways would change if the project was constructed.

Given the project’s size and expected travel characteristics, it was deemed unnecessary to study any nearby intersections. During the PM peak hour, the project would add 26 trips to the Washington Boulevard/Diamond Oaks Road intersection, which is a small percentage of the current volume at the intersection. The intersection is in the midst of being widened to provide more capacity along Washington Boulevard. Analysis of that intersection would not have yielded the need for any additional improvements. The project would add 30 PM peak hour trips to Reserve Drive, which would be distributed either to the north toward Roseville Parkway or the south toward Berry Street. Again, this modest level of traffic increase would not materially affect operations at those locations.

Instruction at Ferris Spanger Elementary School begins at 8:15 AM and ends at 2:35 PM. During the schools’ two peak hours (i.e., 8-9 AM and 2-3 PM), the project would add 11 and 12 trips, respectively, along the school frontage. This would represent about a three percent increase over the existing volumes during each school peak hour. This level of increase is less than the daily fluctuation in traffic on streets such has this, and thus would not be noticeable to most drivers.

Cumulative Conditions
Traffic forecasts were developed for cumulative conditions using the City of Roseville 2035 travel demand model. This model considers reasonably foreseeable land uses and roadway network improvements throughout the City as well as adjacent cities. Noteworthy improvements include the widening of Washington Boulevard from two to four lanes from south of Pleasant Grove Boulevard to Sawtell Road. This is an important alternate route to Shasta Street and Diamond Oaks Road.

Figure 6 shows the Cumulative No Project ADT volumes on the study roadways. A comparison of these volumes to existing conditions shows the greatest growth in background traffic (about 800 ADT) would occur on Diamond Oaks Road west of Shasta Street.

September 7, 2021

Page 6 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Project trips were added to those volumes to yield the Cumulative Plus Project daily volumes also shown on that figure. Consistent with the earlier findings, project trips would be distributed in a fairly even manner on all three routes, with the most project trips (470 ADT) added to the short segment of Diamond Oaks Road between the project access and Shasta Street.

Evaluation of Project Access
Vehicular Access on Diamond Oaks Road
Shown below is the weekday AM (without parentheses) and PM (with parentheses) peak hour traffic volumes at the Diamond Oaks/Project Access intersection under Existing Plus Project conditions.

The following is recommended based on the traffic volumes shown above:
• Operate the Diamond Oaks/Project Access intersection with side-street stop-control.

A review of sight distance was conducted for motorists desiring to turn left from westbound Diamond Oaks Road into the project site. To the west of the access, Diamond Oaks Road features a gradual horizontal curve. Field observations indicate that motorists operating their vehicles at normal operating speeds would be visible for in excess of 7.5-seconds before passing the project access. This sight value, often referred to as the 7.5-second rule, is associated with adequate sight distance.

Adequate sight distance would also be provided for motorists exiting the project site (provided that no shrubs or monuments or placed within the intersection sight triangle).

September 7, 2021

Page 7 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
It is also noted that the project access intersection has been positioned such that the beam of a vehicle’s headlights exiting the project would not be directed towards residents’ windows on the north side of the street.

Emergency Vehicle Access on Shasta Street
A gate would be constructed at this access to prohibit travel by all motorists except emergency vehicles. Pedestrians and bicyclists would be able to access the project through a gated walkway. The project site plan shows the placement of landscaping and a detention basin along the project frontage of Shasta Street. This would effectively preclude the undesired current practice whereby parents park on the west side of the street and walk across Shasta Street to pick-up or drop-off their student. The following is recommended:
• Post “No Stopping” signs within the short EVA driveway apron.

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)

Page 4 ends

statements regarding VMT analysis:
“Quantitative analysis would not be required if it can be demonstrated that a project is consistent with the General Plan and would generate VMT which is equivalent to or less than what was assumed in this General Plan EIR.”
Page TI 16-22 of the January 2021 Amendments to the City of Roseville Design and Constructions Standards contains the following statements regarding VMT analysis:
“A project may be screened from additional VMT analysis if it meets one or more of the following criteria. These criteria are based on the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018).”

1. Within Scope of Prior CEQA Analysis – The VMT generated by the project is within the scope of a prior CEQA analysis, and is therefore covered by a prior analysis, Prior analysis includes analysis performed for the General Plan.

The project site would be situated within infill zone 100, which has an R3 zoning and Medium Density Residential land use designation. According to data from the City, there are 170 remaining units among the 223 units (i.e., 32.98 acres at 6.8 units per acre) that were allocated. Since the proposed project, which would include a rezone from Medium to Low Density Residential, proposes only 75 September 7, 2021

Page 8 ends

We hope this information is helpful. Please with any questions or comments.

September 7, 2021

Page 9 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Appendix A – Vehicular Access Options for Sierra View Residential Project Part 1 – Summary of Issues at Shasta Street Access
Proximity of the Ferris Spanger Elementary School
This school is situated directly across Shasta Street from the project site. Field observations during school hours revealed the following:
• Moderate queuing and congestion were observed along Shasta Street. • Some parents/guardians were observed to park on the opposite side of Shasta Street from the school to pick-up students. This resulted in moderate numbers of pedestrian crossings.

The photos below illustrate existing conditions.

Image 1: Photo of pedestrians crossing Shasta Street during student pick-up.

September 7, 2021

Page 10 ends

Horizontal Curvature of Shasta Street
The project’s southerly access point would be directly south of a portion of Shasta Street that features a horizontal curve. Additionally, shrubs and tree branches and fencing also limit the line of sight. Refer to photo below for current line of sight.

Image 3: View of southbound Shasta Street from approximate location of southerly project access.

September 7, 2021

Page 11 ends

Tech Memo: Transportation Impact Study for Sierra View Residential Project 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
Part 2 – Evaluation of Four Access Scenarios
Table: Study Recommendations
Scenario Recommendation
Scenario 1: Full Access on Diamond Oaks Road and
Shasta Street
Remove from further consideration because it would
introduce substantially increased vehicular conflicts
with Ferris Spanger Elementary School.

Scenario 2: Full access on Shasta Street and emergency
vehicle access (EVA) on Diamond Oaks Road
Remove from further consideration because it would
introduce substantially increased conflicts with access to Ferris Spanger Elementary School and cause
unnecessary traffic volume increases on Shasta Street
Scenario 3: Full access on Diamond Oaks Road and
partial access on Shasta Street, allowing for exiting
movements only
Less desirable than Scenario 4 because the two issues
raised in Part 1 would be difficult to address1
.

Scenario 4: Full access on Diamond Oaks Road and
emergency vehicle access (EVA) on Shasta Street . Proposed Project Note:
1 Allowing outbound (exiting) movements would have less interference with school-related trips (versus full access). However, conflicts would nevertheless increase due to the frequency of activity along the street (turning vehicles, queued vehicles, parked vehicles, pedestrian crossings, etc.) in the immediate driveway vicinity.

ShastaSt
Diamond Oaks Rd
Alta Vista Ave
Grider Dr
Manzanita Ave
Sierra Blvd
Hanisch Dr
Heritage Dr
Bel AirLn
SequoiaSt
CampoS
E
t
ncinal Ave
MariposaSt
NicklausCir
AstillWay
YosemiteSt
BerrySt
TigerWay
Carmel Ave
TreeseWay
Washington Blvd
Coronado Ave
El Dorado Ave
WaltonWay
PeridotSt
MurrayWay
LasFloresSt
Lincoln St
Mart haWay
San Juan Ave
All AmericaCity Blvd
Diamond BarLn
VictoriaCt
Niles Ave
Cortez Ave
IronwoodCir
Sierra View
Country Club
Diamond Oaks
Golf Course
Diamond Oaks Park
Woodbridge
Park
City Park
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Fig01_StudyArea.mxd Study Area
Project Site
Park/Open Space
Figure 1
1 2
3 4
5 7 6
8 9
10 11
12 13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
41 40
42 43
44 45
46 47
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63
64 65
66 67
68 69
70 71
72 73
74 75 Torrey Pines Drive Bethpage
Southern Hills Court
Bay Hill
Sawgrass Court
LOT A
LOT B
LOT H
LOT F
LOT G
LOT I
LOT J

LOT C LOT D
LOT E
Shasta Street
Diamond Oaks Road
Court
Whistling Straits DriveBandon Dunes Drive Bandon Dunes Court Torrey Pines Court Court
LOT K
R=45'
R=43'
TO R/W
OFFSET

CUL-DE-SACS
ARE

PERMITTED
R=39'
TO R/W
R=49'
DIAMOND OAKS ROAD 54' ROW n.t.s.

MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREET
n.t.s.

C (MODIFIED CITY OF ROSEVILLE STD. DWG S

MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREE
n.t.s.

E (NO PARKING WEST SIDE)
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\AI\Fig0x_projectSitePlan.ai Project Site Plan
Figure 2
-
-
-
-
ShastaSt
Diamond Oaks Rd
Alta Vista Ave
Grider Dr
Manzanita Ave
Sierra Blvd
Hanisch Dr
Heritage Dr
Bel AirLn
SequoiaSt
CampoS
E
t
ncinal Ave
MariposaSt
NicklausCir
AstillWay
YosemiteSt
BerrySt
TigerWay
Carmel Ave
TreeseWay
Washington Blvd
Coronado Ave
El Dorado Ave
WaltonWay
PeridotSt
MurrayWay
LasFloresSt
Lincoln St
Mart haWay
San Juan Ave
All AmericaCity Blvd
Diamond BarLn
VictoriaCt
Niles Ave
Cortez Ave
IronwoodCir
Sierra View
Country Club
Diamond Oaks
Golf Course
Diamond Oaks Park
Woodbridge
Park
City Park
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Fig03_EX_ADT.mxd Average Daily Traffic Volumes -
Existing Conditions
- Average Daily Traffic Volume
Project Site
Park/Open Space
Figure 3
4,200
4,300
5,200
4,500
; ; ;;
;
;
ShastaSt
Diamond Oaks Rd
Alta Vista Ave
Grider Dr
Manzanita Ave
Sierra Blvd
Hanisch Dr
Heritage Dr
Bel AirLn
SequoiaSt
CampoS
E
t
ncinal Ave
MariposaSt
NicklausCir
AstillWay
YosemiteSt
BerrySt
TigerWay
Carmel Ave
TreeseWay
Washington Blvd
Coronado Ave
El Dorado Ave
WaltonWay
PeridotSt
MurrayWay
LasFloresSt
Lincoln St
Mart haWay
San Juan Ave
All AmericaCity Blvd
Diamond BarLn
VictoriaCt
Niles Ave
Cortez Ave
IronwoodCir
Sierra View
Country Club
Diamond Oaks
Golf Course
Diamond Oaks Park
Woodbridge
Park
City Park
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Fig04_ProjectTripDist.mxd Project Trip Distribution
Figure 4
35% 40%
25%
xx% Project Site
; Park/Open Space
Project Trip Distribution Percentage
Emergency Vehicle
Access Only
?
-
-
-
-
-
-
ShastaSt
Diamond Oaks Rd
Alta Vista Ave
Grider Dr
Manzanita Ave
Sierra Blvd
Hanisch Dr
Heritage Dr
Bel AirLn
SequoiaSt
CampoS
E
t
ncinal Ave
MariposaSt
NicklausCir
AstillWay
YosemiteSt
BerrySt
TigerWay
Carmel Ave
TreeseWay
Washington Blvd
Coronado Ave
El Dorado Ave
WaltonWay
PeridotSt
MurrayWay
LasFloresSt
Lincoln St
Mart haWay
San Juan Ave
All AmericaCity Blvd
Diamond BarLn
VictoriaCt
Niles Ave
Cortez Ave
IronwoodCir
Sierra View
Country Club
Diamond Oaks
Golf Course
Diamond Oaks Park
Woodbridge
Park
City Park
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Fig05_EPP_ADT2.mxd Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT) -
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Figure 5
4,200
4,380
4,300
4,590
5,200
5,450
4,500
4,680
--
720
x,xxx
x,xxx
Project Site
-
Park/Open Space
Exisitng ADT
Existing Plus Project ADT
5,200
5,670
-
-
-
-
-
-
ShastaSt
Diamond Oaks Rd
Alta Vista Ave
Grider Dr
Manzanita Ave
Sierra Blvd
Hanisch Dr
Heritage Dr
Bel AirLn
SequoiaSt
CampoS
E
t
ncinal Ave
MariposaSt
NicklausCir
AstillWay
YosemiteSt
BerrySt
TigerWay
Carmel Ave
TreeseWay
Washington Blvd
Coronado Ave
El Dorado Ave
WaltonWay
PeridotSt
MurrayWay
LasFloresSt
Lincoln St
Mart haWay
San Juan Ave
All AmericaCity Blvd
Diamond BarLn
VictoriaCt
Niles Ave
Cortez Ave
IronwoodCir
Sierra View
Country Club
Diamond Oaks
Golf Course
Diamond Oaks Park
Woodbridge
Park
City Park
N:\2021 Projects\4081.00_Sierra_View_Residential_TIS\Graphics\GIS\MXD\Fig06_CU_ADT.mxd Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT) -
Cumulative Conditions
Figure 6
4,480
4,660
4,410
4,700
5,980
6,230
4,780
4,960
--
720
x,xxx
x,xxx
Project Site
-
Park/Open Space
Cumulative No Project ADT
Cumulative Plus Project ADT
5,980
6,450
CEQA AB52
Tribal Consultation Notice
Date: August 4, 2021
To: Anna Starkey, Cultural Regulatory Specialist Don Ryberg, Chairperson United Auburn Indian Community Tsi Akim Maidu
10720 Indian Hill Road PO Box 510
Auburn, CA 95603 Browns Valley, CA 95918
Sara D. Setshwaelo, Cultural Committee Chair Nicholas Fonseca, Chairperson Ione Band of Miwok Indians Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians P.O. Box 699 P.O. Box 1340
Plymouth, CA 95669 Shingle Springs, CA 95682
RE: Notice of Opportunity to Consult Under AB52 for the INFILL PCL 3 & 100 – Sierra View Subdivision Project (File #PL21-0162) in the City of Roseville The City of Roseville will soon be initiating environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the above referenced project. A project location map and preliminary project description are enclosed for your information.

In accordance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) and Section 21080.3.1(d) of the California Public Resources Code (PRC), we are responding to your Tribe’s request to be notified of projects in our jurisdiction that will be reviewed under CEQA. The above names were provided to the City of Roseville as the point of contact for your tribe. We are hereby notifying you of an opportunity to consult with us regarding the potential for this project to impact Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined in Section 21074 of the PRC. The purposes of tribal consultation under AB 52 are to determine, as part of the CEQA review process, whether or not Tribal Cultural Resources are present within the project area, and if so, whether or not those resources will be significantly impacted by the project. If Tribal Cultural Resources may be significantly impacted, then consultation will also help to determine the most appropriate way to avoid or mitigate those impacts.

Mackenzie Harrison is the City’s Lead Agency Contact to receive replies in response to this notice. In accordance with Section 21080.3.1(d) of the PRC, you have 30 days from the receipt of this notice to either request or decline AB52 consultation in writing for this project from the City’s Lead Agency Contact.

Please send your written response by letter or by email to:

Mackenzie Harrison
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
[email protected]
Cc: Jason Camp, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
MND ATTACHMENT 13A
Project Description:

The project site is located at 360 Diamond Oaks Road, within the City’s infill area. The site is approximately 23 acres and has a land use designation of Medium Density Residential (MDR) and a zoning designation of Multi-Family Residential (R3). The parcel has frontage on Diamond Oaks to the north and Shasta Street to the south and is adjacent to existing Low Density Residential (LDR) uses to the east and the Sierra View Country Club golf course and Medium Density Residential uses to the west.

The project includes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from MDR to LDR, a Rezone to change the zoning designation from R3 to Small Lot Residential with modified Development Standards (RS/DS), and a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the 23 acres into 75 MDR lots. A Tree Permit is also requested to remove 158 native oak trees. As part of the project, 95 units will be transferred from Infill Parcels 3 and 100 to Sierra Vista Specific Plan Parcels WB-31 (+32 units) and WB-41 (+63 units).

Aerial View of Project Site
Project Site
Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map ll-NIAIIVF MAP INFORMATION
.... 1
r

TENTATIVE MAP NOTES
L
44 tS-
<A>
J J

EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS
N

SIERRA VIEW
Ah' ’
i I - i I
• . vic 5
FFt:
.LWIE! 11=LOU.”

PARCEL SUMMARY TABLE
II
MODIFEd'CUL-DE-SAC
4F 7
4 e>
as fsfi 11
.Oc
css c« ass =was -<4 :<• k
.'-X “«-crr 0*
RF$ID-NTIAI FNTRY
IW»VIL=SID.J»
DIAMOND QAK$ ROAD OF"

SAWGRASS COURT
hr Ui
“""j _r“7;
--- „,, --x.w
-FifeJ I L *
=T. TUltlJT S' "
?ri
L"’
fe'-.TT.4l jUS
' Z-pa-icoccI;!

COVER SHEET TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
0• m z "°IW ’ ,:|*' 1 V'7 ifflESTPARK ]=>
<sht
~UL
S^X, MINOR RESIDENTIAL S'REET
VC./ |VOS tj C If OH yA=VL±S j. Li1,VC S.I-2J
jl J;.

Z\ . T^__/-r-'KjL’l- :D Cl
u u
y
Y--~ / 6 ' i1 a.
...r
A T f Jul(.::«
•A L<
i ' -4- i
i r .
7v
>,- -< Fj_g^
II
j
’E
& o
Tj|z -.. Ft
^-4;
fc-i. Fi Y--i <7 I-- -<j X~".& 1JL
4: ---Ji j
: :v“ .i.i.

Fl.?’; 7,' T-.',' ' '
i kj. 4* >..,> \ Hjlh . JLU J.t Ti.uwl 5=':iWj.n 4“=ll.ll.. .. I> oIBfFhF’f.".... r , ‘ _
>h
/ 4’
414
•v ' r X F ’ 44417-4
ocylkn I ' .' I" 'n >.i 1 14• 'I p • •-
>- '," '= '. '' '. _
/ , '. ' \ V ! ’ niH1^H.r'n44..ntr ', xAA
- I >.^=s7 \ «*>.

T'T
w
X~T- M. NOR RESIDENTIAL STREET
“FakETTf.'KI S Chi
SB18
Tribal Consultation Notice
August 4, 2021
To: Anna Starkey, Cultural Regulatory Specialist Don Ryberg, Chairperson United Auburn Indian Community Tsi Akim Maidu
10720 Indian Hill Road P.O. Box 510
Auburn, CA 95603 Browns Valley, CA 95918
Grayson Coney, Cultural Director Regina Cuellar, Chairperson Tsi Akim Maidu Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians
P.O. Box 510 P.O. Box 1340
Browns Valley, CA 95918 Shingle Springs, CA 95682
Pamela Cubbler, Treasurer Clyde Prout, Chairman
Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe P.O. Box 4884 P.O. Box 4884
Auburn, CA 95604 Auburn, CA 95604
Darrel Cruz, Cultural Resources Department, THPO
Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California
919 Hwy 395 South
Gardnerville, NV 89410
Subject: Tribal Consultation Pursuant to SB 18 for Project #PL21-0162: INFILL PCL 3 & 100 – Sierra View Subdivision in the City of Roseville
The City of Roseville is processing an application for the above-referenced project, located in the northwestern portion of the City of Roseville. Recognizing the importance of tribal participation in the local planning process, the City is requesting your review of the project to determine if formal consultation is appropriate pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB 18). Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3(a)(2) you have 90 days from receipt of this letter to respond.

The project description is attached to this letter.

The City looks forward to hearing from you. Should you have any questions, please send your written response by letter or by email to:

Mackenzie Harrison
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
[email protected]
MND ATTACHMENT 13B
Project Description:

Aerial View of Project Site
Project Site
Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map

TENTATIVE WAP INFORMATION
To-”; TENTATIVE MAP NOTES
' M
CE3GH«‘E? SWHCR
<A>
£ £
X
! :
tc
J f
X
iMERGENICY VEHICLE ACCESS
I
Shus Mr? ~
_

SIERRA VIEW
" ISSestpaWS
i i i
4 PARCE. SUMMARY TABLE
1 . X"*,
1 L
-i i MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREET SAWGRASS COURT
Ann- - tjcw or sns "vii - srn . dwgst -j;

DIAMOND OAKS RQAD
'iiii
>C«LC: I"- IM* COVER SHEET TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
x
U3:

XW~T T
rH ll- t
O
_,.• \ i i i
/ \ \-
.. / I 1 >•.<> 4 | rr.< ,
'•.../ ; -H IM®
Stel-C'-ti Ochs RWJI |
n
MX
*1 I S '3J. lXl± bljj I-.-U . J-I >-i u J.1 Kx r_- h
~“'Trp;rvE
l-(.--Sn>liifciil "Kv Miv.rJ'iki. l.SO'i.i vi W ZhU Fh%-> J-.. ;:.r- ,
t*.'.' Jv >11 >iy h.^1 1 1‘ h.1 . J rj.J_mV. JI -! .
it : x. -.:! 3< 1> )x*IJ j'hrc 4 ly. jl'sjjs*
lllMtiEsCF .r;;>.4EEE^.

IX
T
T '
I -iii
0 A
B

7..
l! = B
o
"l

STANDARD CUL-DE-SAC
riTi’ or P'isr-.-' • <rr; rwo $r ' 4. *. i.t;
ii ; z 1
x'-T
- 1 /z ; Xi x/X
t-'—tXi-'- -rr> -.=-•
radii
/S. MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREET
XJ ! vo pak xg wst sinn
XXj; VX Xi
ZX VxJXi .
u-l-a '1;]; .. X f"-
XX™ X
xp..-^
: F =
X\ RESIDENTIAL ENTRV XVT-13- " :D '- 'T C-ROS:VIL.= SIC. CWG Sl-2il L
"'SfX .
cphsrc --.IS" s- c<
SB18
Tribal Consultation Notice
August 17, 2021
To: Anna Starkey, Cultural Regulatory Specialist Don Ryberg, Chairperson United Auburn Indian Community Tsi Akim Maidu
10720 Indian Hill Road P.O. Box 510
Auburn, CA 95603 Browns Valley, CA 95918
Grayson Coney, Cultural Director Regina Cuellar, Chairperson Tsi Akim Maidu Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians
P.O. Box 510 P.O. Box 1340
Browns Valley, CA 95918 Shingle Springs, CA 95682
Pamela Cubbler, Treasurer Clyde Prout, Chairman
Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe P.O. Box 4884 P.O. Box 4884
Auburn, CA 95604 Auburn, CA 95604
Jesus Tarango, Chairperson Steven Hutchason, THPO
Wilton Rancheria Wilton Rancheria
9728 Ken Street 9728 Kent Street
Elk Grove, CA 95624 Elk Grove, CA 95624
Darrel Cruz, Cultural Resources Department, THPO Dahlton Brown, Director of Admin.

Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California 9728 Kent Street
919 Hwy 395 South Elk Grove, CA 95624
Gardnerville, NV 89410
Subject: Tribal Consultation Pursuant to SB 18 for Project #PL21-0162: INFILL PCL 3 & 100 – Sierra View Subdivision in the City of Roseville
The City of Roseville is processing an application for the above-referenced project, located in the northwestern portion of the City of Roseville. Recognizing the importance of tribal participation in the local planning process, the City is requesting your review of the project to determine if formal consultation is appropriate pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB 18). Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3(a)(2) you have 90 days from receipt of this letter to respond.

The project description is attached to this letter.

The City looks forward to hearing from you. Should you have any questions, please send your written response by letter or by email to:

Mackenzie Harrison
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
[email protected]
MND ATTACHMENT 13C
Project Description:

Aerial View of Project Site
Project Site
Proposed Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map Tentative Subdivision Map

TENTATIVE WAP INFORMATION
To-”; TENTATIVE MAP NOTES
' M
CE3GH«‘E? SWHCR
<A>
£ £
X
! :
tc
J f
X
iMERGENICY VEHICLE ACCESS
I
Shus Mr? ~
_

SIERRA VIEW
" ISSestpaWS
i i i
4 PARCE. SUMMARY TABLE
1 . X"*,
1 L
-i i MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREET SAWGRASS COURT
Ann- - tjcw or sns "vii - srn . dwgst -j;

DIAMOND OAKS RQAD
'iiii
>C«LC: I"- IM* COVER SHEET TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
x
U3:

IX
T
T '
I -iii
0 A
B

7..
l! = B
o
"l

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Allison Wathen, Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc.

PREPARED BY: Laney Nelson, Woodard & Curran
REVIEWED BY: Chris van Lienden, PE, Woodard & Curran
DATE: April 21, 2021
RE: Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation

1. BACKGROUND
Woodard & Curran was asked to analyze the impacts of the proposed Sierra View Country Club proposed development on the City of Roseville’s sewer system. The location of the proposed site is shown in Figure 1. The proposed development includes 77 single family units on parcel 015-011-029 (21.2 acres) in Roseville on previously undeveloped land. The development would discharge sewer flows into City-owned sewers to the north on Diamond Oaks Road and to the south on Shasta Street. A conceptual site plan is included in Appendix A.

Woodard & Curran recently updated the City of Roseville’s sewer system model as part of the City’s June 2017 Sewer Model Update 1(2017 Model Update). For the model update, the model was converted to the InfoWorks ICM software, which provides a fully-dynamic solution for modeling sanitary sewer systems. Pipeline information for all trunk sewers (pipes > 10-inches) was validated through review of record drawings while smaller diameter sewers were modeled based on pipe diameter and slope information in the City’s GIS database. Recalibration was performed based on flow meter data collected during the 2015/2016 wet weather season, and future flows were estimated for 2050 and buildout land use conditions. Future flows did not include any flows from the location of the proposed development. Capacity improvements were not identified in the model update, though capacity limitations under the 10-year 24-hour design storm scenario were identified in the Church Street and Cedar Street areas as well as downstream of the SMD-2 meter on Old Auburn Road.

Subsequently, flows in the South Placer Wastewater Authority (SPWA) sewers were updated as part of the 2020 SPWA Systems Evaluation Update.

The purpose of this TM is to document whether the updated sewer model predicts that City and SPWA sewers will have capacity for the proposed development.

2. MODEL RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS
Wastewater flow projections for the proposed development were estimated based on the Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) unit flow factor of 190 gallons per day per dwelling unit (gpd/DU), resulting in an ADWF of 14,630 gpd. The flows were split into two subcatchments for the north development and the south development. The north development loads to the 12-inch sewer on Diamond Oaks Road and the south development loads to the 8-inch sewer on Shasta Street (Figure 1). For this analysis, a diurnal pattern was applied to the ADWF, as well as projected rainfall-dependent 1 June 2017, City of Roseville Sewer Model Update Final Report, Woodard & Curran MND ATTACHMENT 14
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 2 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 infiltration and inflow (RDI/I) based on the City’s standard 10-year 24-hour design event. Modeled flows from the proposed development are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Modeled Sierra View Country Club Sewer Loads
Development Site Loading Manhole
(Roseville Model/
SPWA Model)
Equivalent
Dwelling Units
(EDUs)
Average Dry
Weather Flow
(gpd)
Peak Wet
Weather Flow
(mgd)
North Development SMH D05-013 72 13,680 0.0258
South Development SMH D05-082/
SMH C05-055 5 950 0.0018
Total - 77 14,630 0.0276
For this evaluation, simulations for four model scenarios have been run. A profile indicating model results under buildout conditions with the development are indicated in Figures 2 through 5. The hydraulic profile for the sewers downstream of the portion of the development loading to the north are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 includes the City sewers from the development loading point at SMH D05-013 to the SPWA trunk connection at SMH F02-055, and Figure 3 shows the SPWA trunk sewers from SMH F02-055 to the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant. Figures 4 and 5 show the hydraulic profile for the sewers downstream of the portion of the development loading to the south. Figure 4 includes the City sewers from the development loading point at SMH D05-082 to the SPWA trunk connection at SMH B04-131 and Figure 5 shows the SPWA trunk sewers from SMH B04-131 to the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Model results indicating d/D performance for each pipe segment for all scenarios is included in Appendix B.

City of Roseville design standards specify that pipes 10-inch diameter or less should have maximum depth of flow under design conditions of 0.7 times the diameter (d/D < 0.7). Pipes larger than 10-inches should have a d/D < 1.0. As indicated in Figure 4 and Appendix B, there are some City pipe segments in the sewers south of the development that the model predicts will be flowing full under buildout conditions (d/D = 1). This is due to 4 pipe segments where the full pipe capacity is less than the predicted peak wet weather flow (d/D indicated as “2” in the table, and are highlighted yellow). The model predicts no surcharge in the sewers north of the proposed development.

City design standards are typically applied to the design of new sewers. For existing sewers, it may be appropriate to use a less strict criteria, such as a minimum depth of freeboard, particularly when using a relatively conservative 10- year design event. However, the sewers projected to be surcharging are relatively shallow, resulting in freeboard of less than 2 feet in some locations. This surcharge occurs only under the buildout scenarios; under existing scenarios, no surcharge is predicted with or without the proposed development. To relieve the surcharge, pipe upsizes of approximately 2,300 feet may be needed (including about 500 feet of 12-inch upsized to 15-inch, and 1,800 feet of 10- inch upsized to 12-inch). Surcharge is not predicted under the existing scenario even with the proposed development; therefore, upsizing sewers is not needed at this time.

SPWA design standards from the Systems Evaluation indicate that surcharging up to within 5 feet of the manhole rims (ground surface) is considered acceptable under 10-year design storm PWWF, as long as the surcharge (flow height in the manhole) does not exceed 4 feet from the top of the pipe up the manhole. Based on this criteria, the modeled results of buildout conditions indicates no capacity issues from the proposed development in downstream SPWA sewers.

L
e
g
e
n
d
±
Figure 1
Fig ure Exporte d:4/21/2021By:dne ls on Us ing :\\wooda rdcurra n.ne t\s ha re d\P roje cts \0011966.00Ma cka y&Som ps Sie rra Vie wCountryClubSe we r\wip\C.GIS\MXDs \Site Ove rvie w.m xd P roje ct#:1234567
Ma pCre a te d:April2021
0 0.3 0.6 1.2
Mile s
Proposed
Development Location
ThirdP a rtyGISDis cla im e r:This m a pis forre fe re nce a ndg ra phica lpurpos e s onlya nds houldnotbe re lie dupon bythirdpa rtie s fora nyle g a lde cis ions .

Anyre lia nce upon the m a porda ta conta ine dhe re in s ha llbe a tthe us e rs ’s ole ris k.Data Sources:

XW Mode le dP um p
Sta tion
%, W W TP
P ipe s Downs tre a m of
De ve lopm e nt
Se we r
Se we rTrunk Ne twork
SP W ATrunk (Outs ide
Ros e ville )
Sie rra Vie wCountry
ClubDe ve lopm e nt
Ros e ville City
Bounda ry
72Units Loa dNorth
to Dia m ondOa ks Rd
5Units Loa d
South to Sha s ta St
SP W ATrunk Conne ction
a tSMHF02-055
SP W ATrunk Conne ction
a tSMHB04-131
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 4 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 Figure 2 –Hydraulic Profile (North City Sewers from SMH D05-013 to SMH F02-055) Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 5 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 Figure 3 –Hydraulic Profile (North SPWA Sewers from SMH F02-055 to Pleasant Grove WWTP) Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 6 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 Figure 4 –Hydraulic Profile (South City Sewers from SMH D05-090 to SMH B04-131) Pink color indicates d/D = 1
due to throttle conditions
Purple Color indicates d/D = 1
due to backwater conditions
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 7 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 Figure 5 –Hydraulic Profile (South SPWA Sewers from SMH B04-131 to Dry Creek WWTP) Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 8 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 APPENDIX A – SEWER FACILITY MAP

DIAMOND OAKS ROAD

SHASTA STREET

DIAMOND BAR LANE

SHASTA STREET

WALTON WAY

SIERRA OAKS COURT
APN: 015-011-029
Typical Lot Size: 60' x 80'
77 Units
Proposed Zoning : RS/DS
N
Roseville, CA March 23, 2021

EXISTING UTILITIES MAP

SIERRA VIEW
Introducing approximately
68 lots into the existing
sewer system
Introducing approximately 9 lots
into the existing sewer system
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 9 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 APPENDIX B – MODEL RESULTS
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 10 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 Model Results (Pipes with insufficient capacity highlighted yellow) From MH ID To MH ID
Pipe
Dia.
(in)
Pipe
Length
(ft)
Pipe
Slope
(%)
Pipe Load: d/D (1 indicates backwater surcharge, 2
indicates insufficient pipe capacity)

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
City Sewers
SMH D05-014 SMH D05-013 12 331 0.2 0.55 0.57 0.62 0.64
SMH D05-013 SMH D05-011 12 398 0.1 0.55 0.57 0.62 0.64
SMH D05-011 SMH D05-007 12 211 0.4 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.4
SMH D05-007 SMH D05-006 12 384 0.4 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.4
SMH D05-006 SMH D04-088 12 378 1.5 0.34 0.35 0.37 0.38
SMH D04-088 SMH D04-081 12 233 0.5 0.36 0.37 0.4 0.41
SMH D04-081 SMH D04-080 12 204 0.4 0.36 0.37 0.4 0.41
SMH D04-080 SMH D04-087 12 249 0.4 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.42
SMH D04-087 SMH D04-086 12 206 0.4 0.37 0.38 0.42 0.42
SMH D04-086 SMH D04-085 12 159 0.4 0.37 0.38 0.42 0.42
SMH D04-085 SMH D04-084 12 177 0.5 0.39 0.4 0.43 0.44
SMH D04-084 SMH D04-083 12 263 0.4 0.39 0.4 0.43 0.44
SMH D04-083 SMH D04-078 12 100 1.0 0.32 0.32 0.35 0.35
SMH D04-078 SMH D04-077 15 106 1.6 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.43
SMH D04-077 SMH D04-089 15 198 0.2 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.43
SMH D04-089 SMH D04-426 15 50 0.2 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.43
SMH D04-426 SMH D04-082 15 298 0.2 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.44
SMH D04-082 SMH D04-075 15 400 0.2 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.44
SMH D04-075 SMH D04-070 15 353 0.2 0.39 0.4 0.44 0.44
SMH D04-070 SMH D04-062 15 421 0.2 0.39 0.4 0.44 0.44
SMH D04-062 SMH D04-052 15 146 0.2 0.37 0.38 0.42 0.42
SMH D04-052 SMH D04-045 15 268 4.9 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.21
SMH D04-045 SMH D04-036 15 64 4.9 0.29 0.29 0.32 0.32
SMH D04-036 SMH D04-044 18 64 0.7 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.29
SMH D04-044 SMH D04-043 18 176 0.5 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.29
SMH D04-043 SMH D04-042 18 164 0.5 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.29
SMH D04-042 SMH D04-227 18 150 0.5 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.29
SMH D04-227 SMH D04-226 18 10 6.9 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18
SMH D04-226 SMH D04-199 24 110 0.1 0.29 0.3 0.34 0.34
SMH D04-199 SMH D04-200 24 170 0.1 0.42 0.42 0.47 0.47
SMH D04-200 SMH D04-201 24 87 0.1 0.42 0.42 0.47 0.47
SMH D04-201 SMH D04-408 24 33 0.1 0.38 0.38 0.43 0.43
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 11 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Sierra View Country Club Sewer Capacity Evaluation April 2021 From MH ID To MH ID
Pipe
Dia.
(in)
Pipe
Length
(ft)
Pipe
Slope
(%)
Pipe Load: d/D (1 indicates backwater surcharge, 2
indicates insufficient pipe capacity)

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH D04-408 SMH D04-196 30 251 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.4
SMH D04-196 SMH D04-241 30 53 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.4
SMH D04-241 SMH D04-197 30 108 0.1 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.39
SMH D04-197 SMH D04-222 30 292 0.1 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH D04-222 SMH D04-223 30 112 0.0 0.41 0.41 0.45 0.46
SMH D04-223 SMH D04-224 30 241 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH D04-224 SMH D03-200 30 225 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH D03-200 SMH D03-201 30 158 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH D03-201 SMH D03-202 30 251 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-202 SMH D03-203 30 308 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-203 SMH D03-204 30 89 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.38
SMH D03-204 SMH D03-205 30 99 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.38 0.38
SMH D03-205 SMH D03-210 30 193 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.41
SMH D03-210 SMH D03-211 30 203 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.4
SMH D03-211 SMH D03-212 30 297 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.4
SMH D03-212 SMH D03-213 30 238 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-213 SMH D03-225 30 136 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-225 SMH D03-226 30 119 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-226 SMH D03-227 30 103 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-227 SMH D03-325 30 207 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-325 SMH D03-228 30 188 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.41
SMH D03-228 SMH D03-229 30 231 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH D03-229 SMH D03-257 30 335 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH D03-257 SMH D03-258 30 94 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.4 0.4
SMH D03-258 SMH D03-259 30 386 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH D03-259 SMH D03-260 30 234 0.2 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.39
SMH D03-260 SMH D03-261 30 189 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.37
SMH D03-261 SMH D03-262 30 21 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.33 0.33
SMH D03-262 SMH D03-263 30 71 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.37
SMH D03-263 SMH E03-094 30 247 0.2 0.35 0.35 0.39 0.39
SMH E03-094 SMH E03-093 30 55 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.38 0.38
SMH E03-093 SMH E03-096 30 88 0.1 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH E03-096 SMH E03-097 30 201 0.1 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH E03-097 SMH E03-098 30 96 0.1 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.42
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 12 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH E03-098 SMH E03-099 30 311 0.1 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.43
SMH E03-099 SMH E03-079 30 72 0.1 0.38 0.38 0.42 0.43
SMH E03-079 SMH E03-101 30 136 0.1 0.38 0.38 0.43 0.43
SMH E03-101 SMH E03-067 30 325 0.1 0.39 0.39 0.43 0.43
SMH E03-067 SMH E03-058 30 257 0.1 0.39 0.39 0.43 0.43
SMH E03-058 SMH E03-104 30 191 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.44 0.44
SMH E03-104 SMH E03-050 30 130 0.1 0.37 0.38 0.42 0.42
SMH E03-050 SMH E03-038 30 398 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH E03-038 SMH E03-107 30 209 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH E03-107 SMH E02-009 30 166 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.41 0.41
SMH E02-009 SMH E02-008 30 182 0.1 0.35 0.36 0.39 0.39
SMH E02-008 SMH E02-007 30 331 0.2 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH E02-007 SMH E02-006 30 207 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH E02-006 SMH E02-115 30 366 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.41 0.41
SMH E02-115 SMH E02-114 30 10 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.33 0.33
SMH E02-114 SMH E02-011 30 63 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.35 0.35
SMH E02-011 SMH E02-252 36 15 1.4 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.21
SMH E02-252 SMH E02-329 36 9 9.3 0.31 0.32 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-329 SMH E02-251 36 31 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-251 SMH E02-250 36 317 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-250 SMH E02-249 36 384 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-249 SMH E02-248 36 497 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-248 SMH E02-247 36 250 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-247 SMH E02-246 36 225 0.2 0.31 0.31 0.4 0.4
SMH E02-246 SMH E02-245 36 466 0.2 0.32 0.32 0.41 0.41
SMH E02-245 SMH E02-244 36 535 0.2 0.37 0.37 0.49 0.49
SMH E02-244 SMH F02-025 36 960 0.1 0.44 0.44 0.56 0.56
SMH F02-025 SMH F02-026 36 243 0.0 0.37 0.37 0.46 0.46
SMH F02-026 SMH F02-027 36 499 0.4 0.27 0.27 0.34 0.34
SMH F02-027 SMH F02-028 36 332 0.8 0.22 0.22 0.33 0.33
SMH F02-028 SMH F02-029 42 487 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.46 0.46
SMH F02-029 SMH F02-030 42 430 0.0 0.37 0.37 0.46 0.46
SMH F02-030 SMH F02-031 42 232 0.1 0.34 0.34 0.44 0.44
SMH F02-031 SMH F02-069 42 318 0.1 0.41 0.41 0.51 0.51
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 13 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH F02-069 SMH F02-070 42 349 0.0 0.41 0.41 0.51 0.51
SMH F02-070 SMH F02-071 42 163 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5
SMH F02-071 SMH F02-072 42 223 0.0 0.39 0.39 0.49 0.49
SMH F02-072 SMH F02-073 42 323 0.0 0.39 0.39 0.48 0.48
SMH F02-073 SMH F02-074 42 391 0.0 0.38 0.38 0.46 0.46
SMH F02-074 SMH F02-075 42 372 0.1 0.33 0.33 0.41 0.41
SMH F02-075 SMH F02-077 42 267 0.1 0.31 0.31 0.38 0.38
SMH F02-077 SMH F02-055 42 99 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.24 0.24
City Sewers (South)
SMH D05-090 SMH D05-082 8 95 0.4 0.29 0.29 0.3 0.3
SMH D05-082 SMH D05-089 8 309 0.4 0.29 0.3 0.3 0.3
SMH D05-089 SMH D05-256 8 159 0.4 0.3 0.31 0.33 0.33
SMH D05-256 SMH D05-094 8 236 0.4 0.3 0.31 0.33 0.34
SMH D05-094 SMH C05-411 8 338 0.4 0.31 0.31 0.34 0.34
SMH C05-411 SMH C05-287 10 10 0.3 0.29 0.29 0.31 0.31
TEE C05-428 SMH C05-021 6 493 -4.9 1 1 1 1
SMH C05-021 SMH C05-020 8 10 0.5 0.64 0.65 0.65 0.56
SMH C05-020 SMH C05-028 8 192 0.2 0.78 0.79 0.8 0.7
SMH C05-028 SMH C05-041 8 383 0.1 0.84 0.88 0.89 0.84
SMH C05-041 SMH C05-055 10 419 0.2 0.57 0.6 0.61 0.6
SMH C05-055 SMH C05-069 10 391 0.3 0.66 0.68 0.72 0.72
SMH C05-069 SMH C05-076 10 191 0.2 0.65 0.68 0.71 0.71
SMH C05-076 SMH C05-090 10 401 0.3 0.72 0.74 0.79 0.79
SMH C05-090 SMH C05-089 10 60 0.2 0.7 0.72 0.76 0.76
SMH C05-089 SMH C05-107 10 505 0.2 0.7 0.71 0.75 0.75
SMH C05-107 SMH C05-124 10 336 0.2 0.68 0.7 0.73 0.74
SMH C05-124 SMH C05-147 10 640 0.3 0.65 0.65 0.71 0.71
SMH C05-147 SMH C05-178 10 440 0.3 0.71 0.73 0.78 0.78
SMH C05-178 SMH C05-191 10 355 0.2 0.69 0.7 0.74 0.75
SMH C05-191 SMH C05-205 10 177 0.4 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.73
SMH C05-205 SMH C05-206 10 135 0.3 0.64 0.65 0.72 0.72
SMH C05-206 SMH C05-405 16 132 0.2 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.39
SMH C05-405 SMH C05-404 15 179 0.2 0.41 0.41 0.44 0.44
SMH C05-404 SMH C05-403 15 101 0.1 0.39 0.4 0.43 0.43
Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 14 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH C05-403 SMH C05-409 15 175 0.2 0.41 0.41 0.61 0.62
SMH C05-409 SMH C05-385 15 63 0.2 0.44 0.45 0.75 0.77
SMH C05-385 SMH C05-426 15 173 0.1 0.44 0.45 0.88 0.9
SMH C05-426 SMH C05-253 15 236 0.1 0.44 0.44 1 1
SMH C05-253 SMH C05-264 10 471 0.4 0.78 0.79 1 1
SMH C05-264 SMH C04-234 10 470 0.2 0.77 0.78 2 2
SMH C04-234 SMH B04-303 10 137 0.3 0.71 0.71 1 1
SMH B04-303 SMH B04-010 10 197 0.3 0.74 0.75 1 1
SMH B04-010 SMH B04-016 10 656 0.3 0.73 0.73 2 2
SMH B04-016 SMH B04-023 10 658 0.3 0.75 0.75 2 2
SMH B04-023 SMH B04-022 12 8 0.0 0.61 0.61 0.68 0.69
SMH B04-022 SMH B04-021 12 370 0.3 0.58 0.58 0.73 0.73
SMH B04-021 SMH B04-020 12 194 0.3 0.64 0.64 0.95 0.96
SMH B04-020 SMH B04-029 12 61 0.2 0.62 0.63 0.95 0.96
SMH B04-029 SMH B04-028 12 190 0.3 0.67 0.68 1 1
SMH B04-028 SMH B04-027 12 378 0.2 0.7 0.7 1 1
SMH B04-027 SMH B04-308 12 193 0.2 0.7 0.7 1 1
SMH B04-308 SMH B04-026 12 190 0.2 0.72 0.73 1 1
SMH B04-026 SMH B04-043 12 712 0.2 0.7 0.7 1 1
SMH B04-043 SMH B04-042 12 386 0.3 0.74 0.76 1 1
SMH B04-042 SMH B04-041 12 342 0.2 0.98 0.99 1 1
SMH B04-041 SMH B04-040 12 489 0.1 0.98 0.99 2 2
SMH B04-040 SMH B04-047 12 426 0.4 0.73 0.73 0.85 0.85
SMH B04-047 SMH B04-061 12 286 0.2 0.72 0.72 0.84 0.84
SMH B04-061 SMH B04-082 12 328 1.8 0.42 0.42 0.45 0.45
SMH B04-082 SMH B04-131 12 408 1.8 0.42 0.42 0.45 0.45
SPWA Sewers (North)
SMH F02-055 SMH F02-056 72 120 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-056 SMH F02-057 72 329 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-057 SMH G02-001 72 292 0.0 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH G02-001 SMH G02-002 72 269 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH G02-002 SMH F02-058 72 499 0.1 0.350 0.35 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-058 SMH F02-059 72 280 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-059 SMH F02-060 72 240 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 15 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH F02-060 SMH F02-061 72 349 0.0 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-061 SMH F02-062 72 329 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-062 SMH F02-063 72 329 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-063 SMH F02-049 72 175 0.0 0.360 0.36 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-049 SMH F02-064 72 190 0.1 0.350 0.35 0.42 0.42 SMH F02-064 SMH F02-065 72 290 0.0 0.340 0.35 0.42 0.42 SMH F02-065 SMH F02-066 72 129 0.1 0.340 0.34 0.41 0.41 SMH F02-066 SMH F02-067 72 189 0.0 0.330 0.33 0.41 0.41 SMH F02-067 SMH F02-068 72 70 0.2 0.350 0.35 0.43 0.43
SMH F02-068 SMH F02-253 72 208 0.0 0.350 0.35 0.43 0.43 SMH F02-253 SMH F02-254 72 393 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.45 0.45 SMH F02-254 SMH F02-255 72 177 0.1 0.380 0.38 0.48 0.48 SMH F02-255 SMH F01-130 72 418 0.0 0.380 0.38 0.48 0.48 SMH F01-130 SMH F01-131 72 381 0.1 0.350 0.35 0.45 0.45 SMH F01-131 SMH F01-117 72 467 0.1 0.380 0.38 0.51 0.51 SMH F01-117 SMH F01-132 72 493 0.0 0.380 0.38 0.51 0.51 SMH F01-132 SMH F01-133 72 487 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.53 0.53 SMH F01-133 SMH F01-134 72 379 0.1 0.390 0.39 0.56 0.56 SMH F01-134 SMH F01-135 72 232 0.0 0.390 0.39 0.56 0.56 SMH F01-135 SMH F01-136 72 400 0.1 0.390 0.39 0.55 0.55 SMH F01-136 SMH F01-137 72 378 0.0 0.390 0.39 0.55 0.55 SMH F01-137 SMH F01-138 72 326 0.0 0.370 0.37 0.53 0.53 SMH F01-138 SMH F01-139 72 326 0.0 0.370 0.37 0.53 0.53 SMH F01-139 SMH F01-140 72 404 0.0 0.370 0.37 0.52 0.52 SMH F01-140 SMH F01-141 72 158 0.0 0.370 0.37 0.52 0.52 SMH F01-141 SMH F01-142 72 367 0.0 0.360 0.36 0.51 0.51 SMH F01-142 SMH F01-143 72 384 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.5 0.5
SMH F01-143 SMH F01-144 72 375 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.5 0.5
SMH F01-144 SMH F01-145 78 421 0.1 0.410 0.41 0.55 0.55 SMH F01-145 SMH F99-001 78 370 0.0 0.410 0.41 0.55 0.55 SMH F99-001 SMH F99-002 78 242 0.0 0.410 0.41 0.54 0.54 SMH F99-002 SMH F99-004 78 294 0.1 0.410 0.41 0.54 0.54 SMH F99-004 SMH F99-006 78 536 0.0 0.410 0.41 0.54 0.54 SMH F99-006 SMH F99-007 78 522 0.0 0.390 0.39 0.52 0.52 Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc. 16 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

1. Existing

2. Existing +
Proposed
Development

3. Buildout

4. Buildout +
Proposed
Development
SMH F99-007 SMH F99-008 78 382 0.0 0.390 0.39 0.51 0.51 SMH F99-008 SMH F99-009 78 382 0.0 0.390 0.39 0.51 0.51 SMH F99-009 SMH F99-010 78 392 0.1 0.380 0.38 0.5 0.5
SMH F99-010 SMH F99-011 78 556 0.0 0.380 0.38 0.5 0.5
SMH F99-011 SMH F99-012 78 342 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.48 0.48 SMH F99-012 SMH F99-079 78 475 0.1 0.360 0.36 0.47 0.47 SMH F99-079 SMH F99-013 78 464 0.1 0.350 0.35 0.45 0.45 SMH F99-013 SMH F99-016 78 504 0.0 0.330 0.33 0.42 0.42 SMH F99-016 F99-016D1 84 20 2.4 0.160 0.16 0.22 0.22
SPWA Sewers (South)
SMH B04-162 SMH B04-161 30 40 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.42 0.42
SMH B04-161 SMH B04-160 30 15 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.42 0.42
SMH B04-160 SMH B04-157 30 378 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.42 0.42
SMH B04-157 SMH B04-156 30 425 0.1 0.36 0.36 0.42 0.42
SMH B04-156 SMH B04-155 30 426 0.1 0.37 0.37 0.42 0.42
SMH B04-155 SMH B04-154 30 422 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.44 0.44
SMH B04-154 SMH B04-135 30 143 0.1 0.42 0.42 0.46 0.46
SMH B04-135 SMH B04-152 30 282 0.1 0.43 0.43 0.46 0.46
SMH B04-152 SMH B04-131 30 504 0.1 0.43 0.43 0.46 0.46
SMH B04-131 SMH B04-128 33 451 0.1 0.47 0.47 0.49 0.49
SMH B04-128 SMH B04-111 33 320 0.1 0.47 0.47 0.49 0.49
SMH B04-111 SMH B04-110 33 256 0.1 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.48
SMH B04-110 SMH B04-108 33 502 0.1 0.46 0.46 0.48 0.48
SMH B04-108 SMH B03-066 33 413 0.1 0.49 0.49 0.51 0.51
SMH B03-066 SMH B03-065 33 369 0.1 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.48
SMH B03-065 SMH B03-053 33 13 3.8 0.64 0.64 0.65 0.65
SMH B03-053 SMH B03-064 33 405 0.1 0.63 0.63 0.65 0.65
SMH B03-064 SMH B03-063 33 520 0.1 0.62 0.62 0.64 0.64
SMH B03-063 SMH B03-061 33 371 0.1 0.62 0.62 0.64 0.64
SMH B03-061 SMH B03-067 33 300 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.62 0.62
SMH B03-067 SMH B03-040 33 592 0.1 0.58 0.58 0.6 0.6
SMH B03-040 CAP B03-
DCWWTP
39 152 1.5 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.26
CAP B03-
DCWWTP
B03-
DCWWTPD1
84 714.3 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.16
MND ATTACHMENT 15
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT–PLANNING DIVISION
311 Vernon St, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 774-5276

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code requires public agencies to “adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.” This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been adopted for the purpose of avoiding environmental impacts.

MONITORING PROCESS: Existing monitoring mechanisms are in place that assist the City of Roseville in meeting the intent of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These existing monitoring mechanisms eliminate the need to develop new monitoring processes for each mitigation measure. These mechanisms include grading plan review and approval, improvement/building plan review and approval and on-site inspections by City Departments. Given that these monitoring processes are requirements of the project, they are not included in the mitigation monitoring program.

It shall be the responsibility of the project applicant/owner to provide written notification to the City using the Mitigation Verification Cover Sheet and Forms, in a timely manner, of the completion of each Mitigation Measure as identified on the following pages. The City will verify that the project is in compliance with the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Any non-compliance will be reported by the City to the applicant/owner, and it shall be the project applicant’s/owner’s responsibility to rectify the situation by bringing the project into compliance. The purpose of this program is to ensure diligent and good faith compliance with the Mitigation Measures which have been adopted as part of the project.

Project Title/File Number: Sierra View (SV) Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Project Location: 360 Diamond Oaks Road, Roseville, CA 95678 (APN 015-011-029-000) Project Description: The SV project consists of amending the General Plan designation and modifying the zoning for a portion of Infill Planning Parcel 100 (northern part) from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential and from R3 to RS/DS and modifying the zoning for a portion of Infill Planning Parcel 3 (southern part) from R1 to RS/DS.

Other approvals and entitlements from the City include a Tentative Subdivision Map for 75 residential units that reduces the number of residential units approved for the project site from 223 to 130 and a tree permit.

Environmental Document: Mitigated Negative Declaration
Project Applicant: WP Sierra View, LLC
Contact: John Tallman
Property Owner: SVLC 23, LLC
Lead Agency Contact: Kinarik Shallow, Associate Planner, (916) 746-1309

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
MM BIO 1: Conduct Pond Turtle Pre-Construction
Survey: A western pond turtle survey shall be
conducted in all areas within 150 feet of the
intermittent drainage in within 48 hours prior to
construction in that area. If no western pond turtles or nests are found, no further mitigation is necessary. If a western pond turtle is observed within the proposed
impact area, a qualified biologist shall relocate the
individual to suitable habitat outside of the proposed
impact area prior to construction. If a western pond
turtle nest is observed within the proposed impact
area, the nest shall be fenced off and avoided until the eggs hatch. The exclusion fencing shall be placed no
less than 25 feet from the nest. A qualified biologist
shall monitor the nest daily during construction to
ensure that hatchlings do not disperse into the
construction area. Relocation of hatchlings will occur
as stipulated above, if necessary.

Results of the preconstruction
survey and other mitigation
implementation (if needed)
shall be submitted prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.

The applicant or developer
shall coordinate with USFWS
and/or CDFG to modify as
necessary any mitigation plans
in an effort to attain mitigation
success.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Survey required
prior to
construction. If
survey is positive
for the specie,
then remainder
of mitigation
steps are
required prior to
construction.

Engineering Copy of preconstruction
survey
MM BIO-2: Protect Special Status Birds, Including
Migratory Birds. For all construction-related activities that take place within the nesting season, between
February 15 through August 31st, a preconstruction
nesting-bird survey for special-status specie birds and migratory birds shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist no more than two weeks prior to project
initiation within the area of construction and a 300-foot buffer. If active nests are found, a no-disturbance
buffer zone shall be established, the size of which will be determined in consultation with the City. Within this buffer zone, no construction shall take place until
August 31st or the biologist determines that the nest is no longer active.

Results of the preconstruction
survey and other mitigation
implementation (if needed)
shall be submitted prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.

The applicant or developer
shall coordinate with USFWS
and/or CDFG to modify as
necessary any mitigation plans
in an effort to attain mitigation
success.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Survey required
prior to
construction. If
the survey is
positive for the
species, then
remainder of
mitigation steps
are required prior
to construction.

Engineering Copy of preconstruction
survey
MM BIO-3: Obtain a Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement. For any construction that will occur on the
bed and bank of a stream or other water body,
including drainage canals, a Lake and Streambed
Results of implementation of
conditions of approval and/or
mitigation (if required) included
as part of the agreement shall
Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Executed
Engineering Copy of
executed Lake
and Streambed

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
Alteration Agreement shall be obtained that complies
with Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game
Code. The Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
will contain conditions of approval and/or mitigation
measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for
adverse effects to riparian habitat within the bed and
bank of a stream or other water body that must be
implemented as a condition of the agreement that
ensures no net loss of riparian acreage. Obtaining this Agreement and adhering to its requirements ensures
that performance standards sufficient to meet CEQA
mitigation standards are satisfied.
be submitted prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
agreement
required prior to
construction and
any agreement
conditions of
approval and/or
mitigation
measures are
required prior to
construction.

Alteration
Agreement
MM BIO-4: No Net Loss of Wetlands by Obtaining
Requisite Federal and State Permits. For all wetlands
and other Waters of the U.S. or State that are
removed or disturbed by project construction, all
requisite federal and State permits shall be obtained,
including, at least, a discharge permit from the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, and possibly State-issued Waste
Discharge Requirements pursuant to Division 7,
Chapter 4, Article 4 of the Water Code established by
the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. These
federal and State permits will contain conditions of
approval and/or mitigation measures that will ensure a
net zero loss of wetlands and other waters. Obtaining
these permits and adhering to their requirements
ensures that performance standards sufficient to meet
CEQA mitigation standards are satisfied.

Results of implementation of
conditions of approval and/or
mitigation (if required) included
as part of the permits shall be
submitted prior to the issuance
of a grading permit.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Permits must be
obtained prior to
construction and
any permit
conditions of
approval and/or
mitigation
measures are
required prior to
construction.

Engineering Copy of issued
permits
MM BIO-5: Obtain Tree Permit and Adhere to Permit
Conditions. For all native oaks trees protected by the
City Code that shall be removed or encroached upon
as a result of the project, a Tree Permit shall be
obtained that includes payment of in-lieu mitigation
fees to compensate for oak tree encroachment and
removal and/or onsite replacement plantings
consisting of both native and nonnative tree species
as well as protection measures for the trees that will
Results of implementation of
conditions of mitigation (if
needed) included as part of
the permit shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of a
grading permit.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Permit must be
obtained prior to
construction and
any permit
mitigation is
Engineering Copy of issued
permit

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
remain onsite. Obtaining a Tree Permit and adhering
to its requirements ensures that CEQA performance
standards are satisfied.
required prior to
construction.

MM CUL-1: Inadvertent Discovery. If subsurface
deposits believed to be cultural (historical,
archeological, paleontological, or tribal) or human in
origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 50-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for precontact and historic archaeologist shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find (i.e., whether the subsurface deposits could qualify as an historical
resource, a unique archaeological resource, or a tribal cultural resource) and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional
judgment. The following notifications and mitigation
requirements shall apply, depending on the nature of
the find:

1. If the professional archaeologist determines that
the find does not represent an historical resource,
a unique archaeological resources, or a tribal
cultural resource, work may resume immediately,
and no agency notifications are required.

2. If the professional archaeologist determines that
the find represents a potential historical resource,
unique archaeological resource, or tribal cultural
resource, the archaeologist shall immediately
notify the City and the applicable landowner and/or
Applicant. The City shall work with the
archaeologist and, if necessary, with other experts
or expert agencies (e.g., the State Historic
Preservation Officeror, in the case of a potential
tribal cultural resource, the relevant Native
American organization) to determine whether,
based on statutory criteria, the find qualifies as an
historical resource, a unique archaeological
This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site workers shall
be advised by the site
manager of this measure.

Construction:

Measure applies
if resources are
discovered
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Copies of
construction and
building plans
containing this
measure

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
resource, or a tribal cultural resource. If a
determination is made in the affirmative,
appropriate mitigation or treatment measures shall
be taken, consistent with those set forth in Public
Resources Code Section 21083.2, subdivisions (b)
through (e), and CEQA Guidelines Sections
15126.4, subdivision (b)(3). Preservation in place
is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to
archaeological sites, but data recovery may be
permitted where preservation would be
inconsistent with project design, logistics, and cost
considerations. Work may not resume within the
no-work radius until the City determines that the
site either: 1) is not an historical resources, a
unique archaeological resources, or a tribal
cultural; or 2) that the mitigation or treatment
measures have been completed to the City’s
satisfaction.

3. If the find includes human remains, or remains that
are potentially human, the City and/or the
landowner or Applicant shall ensure that
reasonable protection measures are taken to
protect the discovery from disturbance (A.B. 2641
[Stats. 2006, ch. 863]). The archaeologist shall
notify the Placer County Coroner (per Section
7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The
provisions of Section 7050.5 of the California
Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the
Public Resources Code, and A.B. 2641 will be
implemented. If the Coroner determines the
remains are Native American and not the result of
a crime scene, the Coroner is required by statute
to notify the California Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which then will designate a
Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD)
for the Project (Public Resources Code Section
5097.98). The designated MLD will have 48 hours
from the time access to the property is granted to

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
make recommendations concerning treatment of
the remains. If the landowner does not agree with
the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can
mediate (Public Resources Code Section
5097.94). If no agreement is reached, the
landowner must rebury the remains where they will
not be further disturbed (Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98). This reburial will also include
either recording the site with the NAHC or the
appropriate Information Center; using an open
space or conservation zoning designation or
easement; or recording a reinternment document
with the county in which the property is located
(A.B. 2641). Work may not resume within the nowork radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the treatment
measures have been completed to its satisfaction.

MM GEO-1: If paleontological resources are
discovered during the course of construction, work
shall be halted immediately within 50 meters (165 feet) of the discovery, the City of Roseville shall be notified, and a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to
determine the significance of the discovery. If the
paleontological resource is considered significant, it
should be excavated by a qualified paleontologist and
given to a local agency, State University, or other
institution with expertise in paleontology, where the
resource could be curated and displayed for public
education purposes.

This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site workers shall
be advised by the site
manager of this measure.

Construction:

Measure applies
if resources are
discovered
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Copies of
construction and
building plans
containing this
measure
MM NOISE-1: Limits Hours of Construction and
Muffle/Maintain Construction Equipment. Project
construction shall occur only between the hours of 7
a.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.
on weekends to limit construction noise. All
construction equipment shall be fitted with factory
installed muffling devices and maintained in good
This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site workers shall
be advised by the site
manager of this measure.

Construction:

Measure applies
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Copies of
construction and
building plans
containing this
measure

MM TCR-1: Unpaid Tribal Observation. A minimum of
seven days prior to beginning earthwork or other soil
disturbance activities, the Construction Manager shall
notify the City of the proposed earthwork start-date, in order to provide the City representative sufficient time to contact the consulting tribe(s). A single tribal
representative shall be invited to, at its discretion,
voluntarily observe any or all ground-disturbing
activities during construction. The tribe shall be
provided 72 hours to accept or decline observation. The single tribal observer shall be required to comply with all job site safety requirements and shall sign a waiver of liability prior to entering the job site. Should the tribe choose not to observe any or all of the activity, the City shall deem the mitigation measure completed in good
faith without tribal observation as long as the
notification was made and documented.

This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site managers
shall be advised by the
applicant or developer of this
measure.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Measure applies
just prior to and
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Documentation
of tribal
notification
MM TCR-2: Contractor Awareness Training. The
Construction Manager shall ensure that a Contractor
Awareness Training Program is delivered to train
equipment operators about cultural resources and tribal cultural resources. The program shall be designed to
inform construction personnel about: federal and state
regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources; the subsurface indicators of
resources that shall require a work stoppage;
procedures for notifying the City of any occurrences;
and project-specific requirements; and enforcement of
penalties and repercussions for non-compliance with
the program.

The training shall be prepared by a qualified
professional archaeologist and reviewed by City for
approval, and may be provided in an audio-visual
format, such as a DVD. The Construction Manager shall
provide culturally affiliated tribes that consulted on the This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site managers
shall be advised by the
applicant or developer of this
measure.

Pre-Construction
and
Construction:

Measure applies
just prior to and
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Copy of signed
training roster

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
project the option of attending the initial training in person and/or providing additional materials germane
to the unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural
resources for incorporation into the training.

The training program shall be required for all
construction supervisors, forepersons, and operators of ground-disturbing equipment and all personnel shall be
required to sign a training roster and display a hardhat sticker that is visible to City inspectors. The construction manager is responsible for ensuring that all required
personnel receive the training. The Construction
Manager shall provide a copy of the signed training
roster to the City as proof of compliance.

MM TCR-3: Post-Review Discovery Procedures. If
subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin, or tribal cultural resources, are discovered during construction, all work shall halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery, and the Construction Manager shall
immediately notify the City of Roseville Development
Services Director by phone. The Construction Manager
shall also immediately coordinate with the monitoring
archeologist or project archaeologist and (if present)
tribal monitor, or, in the absence of either, contact the consulting tribe(s) and a qualified professional
archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology
and subject to approval by the City, to evaluate the
significance of the find and develop appropriate
management recommendations in coordination with the
consulting tribe(s) if the find is a tribal cultural resource.

All management recommendations shall be provided to
the City in writing for the City’s review and approval. If recommended by the qualified professional and
consulting tribes and approved by the City, this may
include modification of the no-work radius.

This measure shall be
reflected in all construction
and building plans, and
construction site workers shall
be advised by the site
manager of this measure.

Construction:

Measure applies
if resources are
discovered
during
construction.

Engineering
and Building
Copies of
construction and
building plans
containing this
measure

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
The professional archaeologist must make a
determination, based on professional judgement and
supported by substantial evidence, within one business
day of being notified, as to whether or not the find
represents a cultural or tribal resource or has the
potential to be a cultural or tribal cultural resource. The consulting tribe shall also be given the opportunity to provide, within one business day of being notified, a
determination as to whether or not the find represents
a tribal cultural resource or has the potential to be a tribal cultural resource.

The type of discovery, as described below will
determine the subsequent actions. These include: 1) a
work pause that, upon further investigation, is not
actually a discovery and the work pause was simply
needed in order to allow for closer examination of soil (a “false alarm”); 2) a work pause and subsequent
action for discoveries that are clearly not related to tribal resources, such as can and bottle dumps, artifacts of
European origin, and remnants of built environment
features; and 3) a work pause and subsequent action
for discoveries that are likely related to tribal resources, such as midden soil, bedrock mortars, groundstone, or
other similar expressions.

Whenever there is question as to whether or not the
discovery represents a tribal resource, culturally
affiliated tribes shall be consulted in making the
determination. Whenever a tribal monitor is present, the monitor shall be consulted.

The following processes shall apply, depending on the
nature of the find, subject to the review and approval of the City:
• Response to False Alarms: If the
professional archaeologist determines that
the find is negative for any cultural
indicators, and tribal representatives have

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
not indicated the find is a tribal cultural
resource, then work may resume
immediately upon notice to proceed from
the City’s representative. No further
notifications or archaeological consultation
is necessary if it is determined that the
discovery is not a cultural or tribal cultural
resource of any kind. The professional
archaeologist shall provide written
documentation of this finding to the City,
which shall include as an attachment any
written documentation provided by tribal
representatives or monitors.
• Response to Non-Tribal Discoveries: If a
tribal monitor is not present at the time of
discovery and a professional archaeologist
determines that the find represents a nontribal cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the City shall be
notified immediately, to consult on a finding
of eligibility and implementation of
appropriate treatment measures, if the find
is determined to be a Historical Resource
under CEQA, as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. The
professional archaeologist shall provide a
photograph of the find and a written
description to the City of Roseville. The
City of Roseville will notify any [tribe(s)]
who, in writing, requested notice of
unanticipated discovery of non-tribal
resources. Notice shall include the
photograph and description of the find, and

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
a tribal representative shall have the
opportunity to determine whether the find
represents a tribal cultural resource. If a
response is not received within 24 hours of
notification (none of which time period may
fall on weekends or City holidays), the City
will deem this portion of the measure
completed in good faith as long as the
notification was made and documented. If
requested by a [tribe(s)], the City may
extend this timeframe, which shall be
documented in writing (electronic
communication may be used to satisfy this
measure). If a notified tribe responds within
24 hours to indicate that the find represents
a tribal cultural resource, then the
Response to Tribal Discoveries portion of
this measure applies. If the tribe does not
respond or concurs that the discovery is
non-tribal, work shall not resume within the
no-work radius until the City, through
consultation as appropriate, determines
that the site either: 1) is not a Historical
Resource under CEQA, as defined in
Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA
Guidelines; or 2) that the treatment
measures have been completed to its
satisfaction.
• Response to Tribal Discoveries: If the find
represents a tribal or potentially tribal
cultural resource that does not include
human remains, the consulting tribe(s) and
City shall be notified. The City will consult

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
with the tribe(s) on a finding of eligibility
and implement appropriate treatment
measures, if the find is determined to be
either a Historical Resource under CEQA,
as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the
CEQA Guidelines, or a Tribal Cultural
Resource, as defined in Section 21074 of
the Public Resources Code. Preservation
in place is the preferred treatment, if
feasible. Work shall not resume within the
no-work radius until the City, through
consultation as appropriate, determines
that the site either: 1) is not a Historical
Resource under CEQA, as defined in
Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA
Guidelines; or 2) not a Tribal Cultural
Resource, as defined in Section 21074 of
the Public Resources Code; or 3) that the
treatment measures have been completed
to its satisfaction.
• Response to Human Remains: If the find
includes human remains, or remains that
are potentially human, the construction
supervisor or on-site archaeologist and (if
present) tribal monitor shall ensure
reasonable protection measures are taken
to protect the discovery from disturbance
(AB 2641) and shall notify the City and
Placer County Coroner (per § 7050.5 of the
Health and Safety Code). The provisions of
§ 7050.5 of the California Health and
Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California
Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
for Sierra View Redesignation and Rezoning Project / File No. PL21-0162 Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing
Reviewing
Party
Documents to
be Submitted
to the City
Staff Use
Only
2641 shall be implemented. If the Coroner
determines the remains are Native
American and not the result of a crime
scene, the Coroner will notify the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which then will designate a Native
American Most Likely Descendant (MLD)
for the project (§ 5097.98 of the Public
Resources Code). The designated MLD
will have 48 hours from the time access to
the property is granted to make
recommendations concerning treatment of
the remains. Public Resources Code §
5097.94 provides structure for mediation
through the NAHC if necessary. If the
landowner does not agree with the
recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC
can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the Public
Resources Code).

If no agreement is reached, the landowner
must rebury the remains in a respectful
manner where they will not be further
disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the Public
Resources Code). This will also include
either recording the site with the NAHC or
the appropriate Information Center; using
an open space or conservation zoning
designation or easement; or recording a
reinternment document with the county in
which the property is located (AB 2641).

Work shall not resume within the no-work
radius until the City, through consultation as
appropriate, determines that the treatment
measures have been completed to its
satisfaction.
1 3
2 4
8 6 5 15 14 12 11 10 9 7
16 18
17 13
25 19
22 21
20 28
23 24
26 27 29 30 31 32 35
39 33 36 37
42 38
34 41
40 44 43
48 45 49 47
52 46 51
53 50
60 61 54 56 62 55 57 58 59 63
Star Trail Way
Pleasant Grove Boulevard
Daylight Drive
"A" Drive
"B" Way
"C" Way
LC-1 LS-1 LS-2 LS-3 Santucci Boulevard
WB-30
496-100-027-000 WB-31
496-100-029-000
WB-82
496-100-032-000
WESTBROOK VILLAGE 20
EE MAPS 83
WESTBROOK PHASE 2 - VILLAGE 2A / 3A EE MAPS 49

SANTUCCI BOULEVARD
6-LANE ARTERIAL
n.t.s.

WEST SIDE EAST SIDE
61'
3'
cg
36'
median
18'
12'
travel lane
11'
travel lane
6'
bike
61'
3'
cg
12'
travel lane
11'
travel lane
6'
bike
8'
walk
40' LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR
PUE/LSE (by others)
8'
landscape
type 2 c&g
40' LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR

PUE/LSE

ROW ROW
CL
8'
landscape
10'
walk
18'
122'
masonry wall
11'
travel lane
11'
travel lane
type 1 barrier curb
PL PL

INCLUDES FUTURE BRT LANES

EXISTING PLEASANT GROVE BOULEVARD
4-LANE ARTERIAL
n.t.s.

SOUTH SIDE NORTH SIDE
38'
3'
cg
14'
median
7'
12'
travel lane
11'
travel lane
5'
bike
38'
3'
cg
12'
travel lane
11'
travel lane
5'
bike
8'
walk
35' LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR
PUE/LSE (by others)
8'
landscape
type 2 c&g
35'/50' LANDSCAPE CORRIDOR

PUE/LSE

ROW ROW
CL
8'
landscape
8'
walk
7'
76'
masonry wall
type 2 barrier curb
PL PL
21'
3'
cg
14'
travel lane
14'
travel lane
3'
cg
4'
walk
ROW

MINOR RESIDENTIAL STREET
42' ROW
n.t.s.

C
CL
21'
42'
ROW
4'
walk

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL ENTRY D
type 1 c&g

12.5'
PUE

12.5'
PUE
15'
median
3'
cg
17'
travel lane
5'
walk
17'
travel lane
3'
cg
5'
walk

ROW ROW

27.5'
CL

27.5'
55'
24'
(PUE/LSE)
24'
(PUE/LSE)

LANDSCAPE

CORRIDOR

LANDSCAPE

CORRIDOR
PL PL
type 2 c&g
type 2 barrier curb
8'
min. ls
8'
min. ls
WB-41
n.t.s.
24'
3'
cg
16'
travel lane
16'
travel lane
3'
cg
ROW

EXISTING DAYLIGHT DRIVE

PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL STREET
n.t.s.

E
CL
19'
33'
ROW
5'
ls

WEST SIDE EAST SIDE
type 1 c&g
20' to 25'

LSE / PUE
VARIES - 15' MIN.

LSE / PUE
5'
walk
8'
walk
masonry wall
masonry wall
42' R/W
4' WALK
3' C&G
R=32'
TO R/W
R=22'
85° - 105°
R=52'

STANDARD ELBOW
(CITY OF ROSEVILLE STD. DWG ST-16)
n.t.s.

Sheet 1 of 2
July 16, 2021
of the Sierra Vista Specifc Plan
Roseville, CA

COVER SHEET

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
PARCEL WB-41
N

TENTATIVE MAP INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Westpark SV 400, LLC
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 265
Roseville, CA 95661
ENGINEER: MacKay & Somps Civil Engineers, Inc.
1025 Creekside Ridge Drive, Suite 150
Roseville, CA 95678
916-773-1189
SITE ADDRESS: 3301 Pleasant Grove Boulevard
Roseville, CA 95661
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 496-100-030
SITE AREA 10.11 ± AC.

GENERAL PLAN LAND USE:

Existing: CC
Proposed: MDR
ZONING:

Existing: CC
Proposed: RS/DS
NUMBER OF LOTS/PARCELS: 67 TOTAL LOTS
63 MDR Lots
1 ROW/Landscape Corridor Lot
3 Landscape Lots
SERVICE PROVIDERS:

Parks & Recreation: City of Roseville
Police & Fire Protection: City of Roseville
Sanitary Sewer: City of Roseville
Domestic & Recycled Water: City of Roseville
Electricity: City of Roseville
Telephone: AT&T & Consolidated Communications
Gas: PG&E
Cable: Comcast/Consolidated Communications

1. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 4 in Book DD of Maps at Page 79, Placer County Records.

2. Lot dimensions and acreages are approximate and are subject to change.

3. Lot lines and lot areas may be adjusted at the time of Final Map(s) preparation provided no additional lots are created, subject to approval by the City of Roseville.

4. The Final Mapping and subsequent development of parcels and streets may be phased.

Project improvements are deferred to individual Small Lot Final Maps or project development plans.

5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66463.1, the subdivider may file multiple Final Maps based upon this Tentative Subdivision Map. The filing of a Final Map on a portion of this Tentative Subdivision Map shall not invalidate any part of this Tentative Subdivision Map.

6. The Final Mapping and subsequent development of parcels and streets may be phased.

Phasing is to be consistent with the performance criteria in the Development Agreement and applicable infrastructure phasing matrix.

7. Additional easements to accommodate new public utility improvements, access required for parcel development, rights to construct, or other similar mapping requirements needed to accomplish the final design may be added prior to each Small Lot Final Map based on this Tentative Subdivision Map.

8. Street sections are per the Sierra Vista Specific Plan (Chapter 6) and the Sierra Vista Design Guidelines (Appendix B), except as modified hereon.

9. A minimum 12.5' Public Utility Public Easement (PUE) will be located adjacent to all rights-of-way unless otherwise noted.

10. Landscape corridor widths may be reduced for ancillary right-turn lanes, auxiliary lanes, bus turn-outs, standard tapers, and the like per the provisions in the Sierra Vista Specific Plan.

11. Paseo lots are to be dedicated as street rights-of-way (ROW).

12. The following lots are to be offered to the City of Roseville with the corresponding phase at the time of each Final Map: ROW Lots LC-1 and Landscape Lots LS-1 through LS-3.

13. Landscape corridor lots, paseo lots, and landscape lots are not to be counted as "lots" towards any future boundary line adjustment.

14. Design and placement of entry signage and masonry walls to be consistent with previous phases of the Solaire project.

15. City gateway signage will be incorporated at the corner of Santucci Boulevard and Pleasant Grove Boulevard in conformance with the Sierra Vista Specific Plan Guidelines Figure B-2, Entry Feature Locations.

TENTATIVE MAP NOTES

VICINITY MAP
BLVD

BASELINE ROAD

PLACER COUNTY

SACRAMENTO COUNTY FOOTHILLS BLVD

DOUGLAS
BLVD

ATLANTIC
ST

CIRBY WAY
E.ROSEVIL EUREKA
RD

HARDINGBLVD GALLERIA BLVD

ROSEVILLE

PKWY RIVERSIDE FIDDYMENT ROAD INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SUNSET
BLVD

STANFORD

RANCH RD COOK-RIOLO ROAD
U. P. R. R.

U. P. R. R.

PLEASANT

PFE ROAD
city limits, typ.

PKWY WATT AVENUE

BLVD WOODCREEK OAKS
West Roseville Specific Plan Area
city limits, typ.

GROVE

SIERRA VISTA

SPECIFIC PLAN

BOUNDARY
BLUE
OAKS

ROSEVILLE

CITY OF
COUNTY
PLACER

ROCKLIN

CITY OF
80 65 BLVD
LE WESTBROOK BLVD SANTUCCI BLVD 58'
SITE

PARCEL SUMMARY TABLE

CC EXHIBIT O
ADDENDUM ATTACHMENT 1
P=93.3 P=93.4 P=93.4 P=93.2 P=93.0 P=92.7 P=92.7 P=92.8 P=93.0 P=93.2 P=93.2 P=93.0 P=92.9
P=92.8
P=93.5
P=92.9 P=93.3 P=93.4 P=93.4 P=93.2 P=93.0 P=92.7 P=92.7 P=92.8 P=93.0 P=93.1 P=92.9 P=93.2 P=93.4 P=93.2 P=93.0 P=92.9 P=92.7 P=92.6 P=92.5 P=92.7 P=92.8 P=93.0 P=92.9 P=93.5 P=93.3 P=93.2 P=93.0 P=92.9 P=92.7 P=92.5 P=92.5 P=92.7 P=92.9 P=93.0 P=93.0 P=93.0 P=93.0
P=92.9
P=94.5
P=94.0
P=93.6
P=93.3
P=93.1
P=93.0
P=93.1
P=93.2
P=93.4
1 3
2 4
8 6 5 15 14 12 11 10 9 7
16 18
17 13
25 19
22 21
20 28
23 24
26 27 29 30 31 32 35
39 33 36 37
42 38
34 41
40 44 43
48 45
49 47
52 46 51
53 50
60 61 54 56 62 55 57 58 59 63
85'
85'
87'
90'
92'
93'
94'
85'
91' 85' 90' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 73' 78'
21'
45' 45' 72' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 58' 30' 45' 51'
47' 54' 49' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 52' 381'
99'
701'
60' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 59' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 88' 45' 45' 59' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 58' 45' 45' 46' 88' 88' 64' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 59' 88' 88' 63' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 93' 57' 11' 84' 74' 21'
81' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 95' 85'
110'
69' 49' 45'
45' 45' 45' 45'
45'
34'
35'
30'
45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 45' 46' 34' 95' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 46' 58' 46' 47' 34'
33'
55' 159' N00°22'01"E 105.83' N04°10'33"E 120.42' N00°35'16"W 220.00' R=50.00' Δ=089°43'00" L=78.29'
R=31.00' Δ=090°00'00" L=48.69'
N89°07'43"E 5.00'
N89°07'43"E 905.43'
N81°24'32"W 60.83' S89°07'43"W 120.00' N79°39'59"E 60.83' N87°38'04"E 230.08' N89°07'43"E 70.46' N86°06'27"W 120.42' N89°07'43"E 150.00' N00°52'17"W 220.00'
N02°46'49"W 150.08' N00°52'17"W 90.50'
R=52' R=32'
R=
3 2' R
=
2 0
0 0' R
=
2 0
0 0' R=22'
R=22'
R=32'
R=52'
R
=22' R=22' R=2 ' R=22'
R=52'
R=32'
R=22'
40'
Star Trail Way
Pleasant Grove Boulevard
Daylight Drive
"A' Drive
"B" Way
"C" Way
LC-1

1.35± AC.

LS-1 - 4,125± sq. ft.

LS-2 - 4,967± sq.ft. LS-3 2,589 ± sq. ft.

Santucci Boulevard
WB-30
496-100-027-000
WB-31
496-100-029-000
WB-82
WESTBROOK PHASE 3 - VILLAGE 20
496-100-032-000
EE MAPS 83
WESTBROOK PHASE 2 - VILLAGE 2A / 3A
EE MAPS 49

12.5' PUE, typ. 12.5' PUE, typ.

12.5' PUE, typ.

12.5' PUE, typ.
20'
76'
27'
103'
19' 36'
32'
88'
89'
34'
54'
20' x20' BUS SHELTER
EASEMENT PER DD MAPS 79
Sheet 2 of 2
July 16, 2021
of the Sierra Vista Specifc Plan
Roseville, CA

GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
PARCEL WB-41
N

DESCRIPTION

SANITARY SEWER PIPE

PROPOSED EXISTING
LEGEND

SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE

WATER LINE

GATE VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

BLOW-OFF VALVE

STORM DRAIN MANHOLE

DROP INLET

PAD GRADE

STORM DRAIN PIPE

OVERLAND RELEASE

FOR DRAINAGE
P=XXX.X

RECYCLED WATER LINE

STORMWATER FACILITY
P=XXX.X

1. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE.

2. UTILITIES MAY BE PHASED DEPENDING UPON THE DEVELOPMENT SEQUENCE OF THE PROJECT, SUBJECT TO THE REVIEW OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE.

3. THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF PROPOSED WATER, RECYCLED WATER, SEWER, AND STORM

DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE DURING FINAL DESIGN, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE WITH IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

4. ANY OFFSITE GRADING SHALL REQUIRE RIGHT OF ENTRY FROM ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS. IF A RIGHT OF ENTRY CANNOT BE OBTAINED, RETAINING WALLS ALONG PROPERTY LINES ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN HEREON.

UTILITY NOTES

MASONRY WALL WITH PILASTERS

CONCEPTUAL

ESTIMATED
CUT: 12,000± c.y.

FILL: 12,000± c.y.

NET: 0± c.y.

EARTHWORK

SUMMARY

PROPERTY LINE

SECTION A-A
P/L

PROPOSED PAD
2:1
N.T.S.

EXISTING

MASONRY
WALL
WB-20
5'
2%
LS-3

SECTION B-B
N.T.S.

P/L
3:1
P/L
3:1
2'
2' 2' 26'

PROPOSED PAD PROPOSED PAD
WB-41
CC

10.11± AC
WB-30
HDR
WB-31
HDR
WB-20
MDR
WB-62
PQP
WB-3A
LDR
WB-3B
LDR
PLEASANT GROVE BLVD. SANTUCCI BLVD.

WB-41
MDR

10.11± AC
WB-30
HDR
WB-31
HDR
WB-20
MDR
WB-62
PQP
WB-3A
LDR
WB-3B
LDR
PLEASANT GROVE BLVD. SANTUCCI BLVD.

ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
N

EXISTING LAND USE PROPOSED LAND USE

SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT EXHIBIT

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT &
July 15, 2021
of the Sierra Vista Specific Plan
Roseville, CA
PARCEL WB-41

VICINITY MAP
BLVD

BASELINE ROAD

PLACER COUNTY

SACRAMENTO COUNTY FOOTHILLS BLVD

DOUGLAS
BLVD

ATLANTIC ST

CIRBY WAY
E.ROSEVIL EUREKA RD

HARDINGBLVD GALLERIA BLVD

ROSEVILLE

PKWY RIVERSIDE FIDDYMENT ROAD INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SUNSET

BLVD STANFORD

RANCH RD COOK-RIOLO ROAD
U. P. R. R.

U. P. R. R.

PLEASANT

PFE ROAD
city limits, typ.

PKWY WATT AVENUE

BLVD WOODCREEK OAKS
West Roseville Specific Plan Area
city limits, typ.

GROVE SIERRA VISTA

SPECIFIC PLAN

BOUNDARY

BLUE OAKS ROSEVILLE

CITY OF
COUNTY

PLACER ROCKLIN

CITY OF
80 65 BLVD

LE WESTBROOK BLVD SANTUCCI BLVD
58' SITE
WB-41
CC

10.11± AC
WB-30
HDR
WB-31
HDR
WB-20
MDR
WB-62
PQP
WB-3A
LDR
WB-3B
LDR
PLEASANT GROVE BLVD. SANTUCCI BLVD.

WB-41
RS/DS

10.11± AC
WB-30
HDR
WB-31
HDR
WB-20
MDR
WB-62
PQP
WB-3A
LDR
WB-3B
LDR
PLEASANT GROVE BLVD. SANTUCCI BLVD.

ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
N

EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING

REZONE EXHIBIT
July 15, 2021
of the Sierra Vista Specific Plan
Roseville, CA
PARCEL WB-41

VICINITY MAP
BLVD

BASELINE ROAD

PLACER COUNTY

SACRAMENTO COUNTY FOOTHILLS BLVD

DOUGLAS
BLVD

ATLANTIC ST

CIRBY WAY
E.ROSEVIL EUREKA RD

HARDINGBLVD GALLERIA BLVD

ROSEVILLE

PKWY RIVERSIDE FIDDYMENT ROAD INDUSTRIAL BLVD
SUNSET

BLVD STANFORD

RANCH RD COOK-RIOLO ROAD
U. P. R. R.

U. P. R. R.

PLEASANT

PFE ROAD
city limits, typ.

PKWY WATT AVENUE

BLVD WOODCREEK OAKS
West Roseville Specific Plan Area
city limits, typ.

GROVE SIERRA VISTA

SPECIFIC PLAN

BOUNDARY

BLUE OAKS ROSEVILLE

CITY OF
COUNTY

PLACER ROCKLIN

CITY OF
80 65 BLVD

LE WESTBROOK BLVD SANTUCCI BLVD
58' SITE
4-2 City of Roseville
Table 4-1: Plan Area Land Use Summary
Land Use Designation
Applied
Zoning
Districts
Acres % of Total
Acres Units % of Total Units
Residential Neighborhoods
LDR Low Density Residential RS/DS 614.7 29.7% 3,169 36.5% LDR LDR – Age Restricted RS/DS 94.3 4.6% 493 5.7%
MDR Medium Density Residential RS/DS 324.1 14.7% 2,431 28.0% HDR High Density Residential R3 92.0 4.4% 2,337 26.9%
Sub-totals 1,125.1 54.3% 8,430 97.1%
Commercial and Employment
CC Community Commercial
(Commercial Mixed Use) CMU/SA 29.1 1.4% 249 2.9%
CC/BP Community Commercial/
Business Professional (Mixed
Use)
CC/SA 25.4 1.2% -- --
CC Community Commercial CC & GC 177.5 8.6% -- --
Sub-totals 232.0 11.2% 249 2.9%
Open Space/Public
P/QP Public/Quasi-Public P/QP 64.7 3.1% -- --
PR Parks & Recreation PR 104.6 5.0% -- --
OS Open Space OS 302.0 14.6% -- --
OS Paseo (60’-wide) OS 13.4 0.6% -- --
UR Urban Reserve UR 38.7 1.9% -- --
Sub-totals 523.4 25.3% -- --
Right of Way/ Landscape Corridor 191.7 9.2% -- --
TOTAL 2072.2 ac 100% 8,679 du 100%
Note: See Table 7-4 for net Paseo total acres
Last Updated April 2021
ADDENDUM ATTACHMENT 2
City of Roseville 4-3LAND USE PLAN
Figure 4-1: Land Use Map
City of Roseville 4-7LAND USE PLAN
Table 4-2: Land Use, Zoning, & Acreage by Parcel (cont.)

PARCEL GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
(Specific Plan Land Use) ZONING ACRES ALLOCATEDUNITS DENSITY UR-92 Urban Reserve UR 38.72
Sub-totals (Urban Reserve) 38.72 0
WB-1A LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 30.30 126 4.2 WB-1B LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 22.20 133 6.0 WB-2A LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 11.81 58 4.9 WB-2B LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 7.67 39 5.1 WB-3A LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 11.10 66 5.9 WB-3B LDR (Residential – Age-Restricted) RS/DS 11.23 71 6.3 WB-4 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 16.50 100 6.1
WB-5 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 30.50 157 5.1
WB-6 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 21.70 103 4.7
WB-7 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 25.14 145 5.8
WB-20 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 8.88 66 7.9
WB-21 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 11.80 81 6.9
WB-22 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 4.80 32 6.7
WB-23 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 9.88 71 7.3
WB-24 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 7.50 53 7.1
WB-25 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 14.30 100 7.0
WB-30 HDR (Residential) R3 8.06 237 29.4
WB-31 HDR (Residential) R3 11.10 263 23.7
WB-32 HDR (Residential) R3 5.11 128 25.0
WB-41 CC (Commercial) CC 10.11
WB-42 CC (Commercial) CC 14.55
WB-50 PR (Park) PR 8.74
WB-51 PR (Park) PR 4.47
WB-52 PR (Park) PR 1.50
WB-60 Public/Quasi-Public (Elementary School) P/QP 10.00 WB-61 Public/Quasi-Public (Well) P/QP 0.31
WB-62 Public/Quasi-Public (Lift Station) P/QP 0.80
WB-80 OS (Open Space) OS 36.58
Sub-totals (Westbrook) 365.64 2,029
ROW Right of Way/Landscape Corridors 191.60
Sub-totals (ROW) 191.60 0
Total 2,072.16 8,679
Table Updated April 2021
(GIS acreages revised January 2021)

City of Roseville 6-5
CIR
C
U
L
A
T IO
N
P
L
A
N
Figure 6-1: Roadway System

City of Roseville 6-9
CIR
C
U
L
A
T IO
N
P
L
A
N
Figure 6-6: Arterial Roadway Traffic Signals and Median Breaks

City of Roseville 6-27
CIR
C
U
L
A
T IO
N
P
L
A
N
Figure 6-24: Bus Pull-Out and Shelter Locations
6-28 City of Roseville

6.5 Park and Ride Facilities
Park and ride lots provide parking for commuters to leave their vehicles to meet carpools, vanpools or access transit. In the SVSP, a total of 3 park and ride lots are dispersed throughout the Plan Area near major roadway intersections on the Baseline Road, Fiddyment Road, and Santucci Blvd. corridors. The park and ride locations shown on SVSP Parcels DF-40 and KT-41A shall provide for 50 park and ride spaces each. The park and ride location in SVSP Parcel WB-41 shall provide for 35 park and ride spaces.

Sites designated to provide park and ride facilities are identified on Figure 6-25.

Park and Ride spaces are in addition to the minimum required parking spaces for each project. These spaces will be installed with project development and maintained by the project developer, with all designated spaces signed in accordance with City standards. Park and Ride lots are intended to be made available to commuters during normal commute hours on a daily basis. Additional details regarding the obligations for the construction of park and ride lots, including related facilities, is included in the project development agreements.

6.6 Transportation Systems
Management
Transportation System Management (TSM) measures are designed to reduce the number and length of home-to-work commute trips through actions such as ridesharing, flexible work hours, and support of public transportation. Any project site, common work location, or employer with 50 or more employees is required to comply with the City of Roseville TSM Ordinance and shall incorporate TSM measures to the degree required by the Ordinance.

City of Roseville 6-29
CIR
C
U
L
A
T IO
N
P
L
A
N
Figure 6-25: Park & Ride Facilities
City of Roseville B-11
D
E
SIG
N
G
UID
E
L IN
E
S
Figure B-2: Entry Feature Locations
City of Roseville B-15
D
E
SIG
N
G
UID
E
L IN
E
S
Figure B-3: Wall and Fence Locations
City of Roseville B-23
D
E
SIG
N
G
UID
E
L IN
E
S
Note: Bikeway alignments in open space areas are conceptual and may be refined as detention facilities are designed.

Figure B-5: Paseo Plan
City of Roseville B-41
D
E
SIG
N
G
UID
E
L IN
E
S
Figure B-22: Village Node District
Figure B-25: Neighborhood Connectivity and Gated Subdivisions - updated April 2021 City of Roseville B-47
G
G G
B-56 City of Roseville
B.12 Commercial Center
for Parcels WB-41
Overview
Parcel WB-41 is a neighborhood-serving retail center that supports planned transit systems and facilitates pedestrian walkability. At 10 acres, development of approximately 175,000 sq. ft. of commercial and/or office space can be supported. This site is adjacent to a planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route along Santucci Blvd. and as such, the site design concept accommodates a transit hub that supports both regional and local transit systems. In addition, the layout of retail buildings allows a point of connection to the adjacent residential neighborhoods, intended to facilitate pedestrian walkability to both this retail center and transit hub.

The mix of uses and layout of buildings will be determined as subsequent entitlements are processed with the City per the guidelines below.

Guidelines
The design concept in Figure B-30 should be used to help direct the final layout of the commercial site. Design consideration should be given to the site’s visibility at a major street intersection and western entry into the City. The concepts and guidelines in this illustrative are intended to augment the City’s adopted Community Design Guidelines for commercial centers.

City of Roseville B-57
D
E
SIG
N
G
UID
E
L IN
E
S
Figure B-30: Concept Plan for Parcel WB-41
Page II-9

LAND USE
Roseville General Plan
Figure II-2 | Land Use Map
— SINCE 1953 —
1025 CREEKSIDE RIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 150, ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95678 PHONE (916) 773-1189 FAX (916) 773-2595 OFFICES: ROSEVILLE PLEASANTON
www.msce.com

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 16, 2021
TO: City of Roseville
FROM: Cindy Gwaltney
CC: Ryan O’Keefe, Westpark SV, LLC.; Allison Wathen, Eric Crow SUBJECT: Preliminary Storm Water Quality Evaluation for Parcel WB-41 Introduction & Overview
This Technical Memorandum (TM) is a technical storm water quality assessment for the proposed development project on Parcel WB-41 in the Sierra Vista Specific Plan area. The proposed project consists of a Small Lot Tentative Map for 63 medium-density residential lots and adjacent landscape on a ±10.1-acre area. This TM includes the appropriate level of analysis for the proposed storm water quality facilities serving the project.

The contributary area analyzed for Parcel WB-41 is comprised of 8.7-acres of medium density residential. The adjacent landscape was accounted for and analyzed in the Storm Drainage Evaluation for Westbrook Phase 3:

Santucci Boulevard, Pleasant Grove Boulevard, and Solaire Drive dated April 30, 2019. The site is located within the Sierra Vista Specific Plan Area and is east of Santucci Boulevard, west of Westbrook Boulevard, south of Pleasant Grove Boulevard, and north of Baseline (Figure 1). The site discharges to existing storm drainage infrastructure in Pleasant Grove Boulevard which ultimately discharges to an existing bioretention facility located in the open space alongside a tributary of Curry Creek.

Purpose
This TM is a drainage evaluation that supports the project entitlements for Parcel WB-41. This TM provides a preliminary assessment of the Low Impact Development measures needed and confirms the outfall bioretention facility has capacity to mitigate for the proposed site.

Previous Studies
The Storm Drainage Evaluation for Westbrook Phase 3: Santucci Boulevard, Pleasant Grove Boulevard, and Solaire Drive (Westbrook SDTM) dated April 30, 2019 by MacKay & Somps was referenced. No other studies were utilized in the preparation of this report.

Storm Water Quality & Hydromodification
To evaluate the storm water quality provisions and hydromodification management for the development, the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual (SWQDM) was referenced and utilized in this analysis. Storm Water Quality (SWQ) is assessed for the fully-built out contributing area that includes Parcel WB-41 in the Westbrook SDTM. The previous SWQ analysis includes Parcel WB-41 as having a commercial land use which for this watershed is considered self-treating. The Westbrook SDTM analysis is updated to reflect Parcel WB-41 as medium density residential and the revised SWQ calculations are included in Appendix A.

ADDENDUM ATTACHMENT 3A

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Parcel WB-41

Page 2 of 3 ends

Figure 1. Project Location Map
The revised calculations resultant bioretention facility size needed for the updated contributary drainage area was compared to the size of the constructed bioretention facility. It is determined that the existing bioretention facility is adequately sized to include Parcel WB-41 as medium density residential with the application of the below described Low Impact Development measures for Parcel WB-41.

The proposed project creates more than one acre of impervious surface. Due to this, it is considered a Hydromodification Management Project per the Phase II MS4 Permit and is required to provide storm water treatment for the 85th percentile event and hydromodification for the 2-year event. Hydromodification requirements are demonstrated to be met in the Westbrook SDTM using the SWQPDM Templates. These templates are updated with this TM and are included in Appendix A.

At this level of analysis, source control measures are not included however, measures may be specified at the improvement plan level of design and implemented with construction.

Several Low Impact Development strategies would be implemented with development of the project in order to reduce the post-development flows. The proposed LID measures include tree planting, soil quality improvement, disconnected impervious areas, and the existing bioretention facility at the outfall of the Westbrook Phase 3 drainage system. These strategies would remove pollutants from runoff, attenuate peak flows, and reduce runoff volume.

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Drainage Evaluation
Parcel WB-41

Page 3 of 3 ends

Planting trees is proposed at a rate of two trees per lot. Trees, at a minimum, decrease storm water runoff volume, reduce the amount of pollutants to reach downstream, are aesthetically pleasing, have a cooling effect through shade and evapotranspiration, and provide habitat for birds and insects Soil quality amendments would also be added at a rate of 9 square-feet of 1-foot deep soil amendment per each tree planting, thus assisting the trees in becoming established as well as improving the soil. Soil quality amendments improve soil infiltration rates, reduce surface runoff quantities and erosion, improve soil filtration capabilities and pollutant removal, enhance plant survival rates and health, and decrease the need for landscape irrigation and fertilization.

Disconnecting impervious areas is another technique that would be implemented with the project. This includes rooftops or other hard surfaces such as streets/parking lots or sidewalks that drain directly to pervious areas such as landscape. The rooftop disconnection is achieved through disconnected roof drains that route the rooftop flows into pervious areas. The design parameter of twice the area of impervious to pervious area is used. Due to this design constraint, the average size of a lot for each parcel was analyzed for probable pervious area. Once this pervious area was determined, the amount of rooftop draining to the pervious area was calculated per each lot. For the proposed project, an estimated amount of 1300 square-feet of rooftop per lot. Disconnected impervious areas have the following benefits of decreasing runoff volume, reducing peak flow rates, and encouraging groundwater recharge.

All proposed measures were designed to the specifications outlined in the SWQDM and implemented to mitigate the 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event for storm water quality and the 2-year 24-hour event for hydromodification.

The SWQDM Template was completed using the shed information presented in the Westbrook SDTM with Parcel WB-41 updated to medium density residential land use and is included in Appendix A. Storm water quality compliance is demonstrated on Form 3-6 with having zero untreated volume in Item 14 and hydromodification compliance is demonstrated on Form 4-3, Item 16.

Conclusion
The results of the analysis performed for this Technical Memorandum demonstrate that the proposed development of Parcel WB-41 in Sierra Vista Specific Plan can be satisfactorily treated with the Low Impact Development measures as described and analyzed herein and the existing bioretention facility at the outfall of the Westbrook Phase 3. It adequately details the development’s drainage characteristics and is suitable for submittal to the City of Roseville.

STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP
STOP

STOP LANE BIKE BIKE LANE BIKE LANE BIKE LANE STOP
W30.1x

10.4±ac
W31x

3.1±ac
W41x

8.7±ac
W20x

11.0±ac
W21x

7.5±ac
W2223x

17.0±ac
A02L

0.9±ac
A02R

0.9±ac
A04L

1.5±ac A04R

1.2±ac
A06L

0.7±ac
A06R

1.2±ac
A07L

1.0±ac
A09L

0.9±ac
A09R

0.9±ac
A07R

1.3±ac
A11R

1.0±ac A11L

0.9±ac
A13L

0.9±ac
A13R

0.9±ac
A14L

1.0±ac
A14R

0.9±ac
A15L

1.5±ac A15R

1.2±ac
A20L

0.4±ac
A20R

1.5±ac A18L

0.9±ac
A22R

0.3±ac
W32x

4.2±ac
W30.2x

2.3±ac
California
April 2021
Parcel WB-41 SWQ Sheds
City of Roseville
Scale 1"=100'
1552 Eureka Road, Suite 100, Roseville, CA 95661(916) 773-1189 18437.PH3 Westbrook Phase 3
Exhibit 1

OVERLAND RELEASE DIRECTION

EXISTING STORM DRAIN

SUBSHED NAME & AREA

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN
A05L

0.9±ac

BIORETENTION FACILITY

SHED BOUNDARY

FUTURE STORM DRAIN
NGVD 29

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Preliminary Storm Water Quality Evaluation
Parcel WB-41
April 2021
Appendix A
Storm Water Quality Template
Post-Construction
Storm Water Quality Plan
For:

Westbrook Phase 3 updated with Parcel WB-41
City of Roseville
Prepared by:

MacKay & Somps Civil Engineering, Inc.
1025 Creekside Ridge Dr., Ste 150
Roseville, CA 95678
916-773-1189
Preparation Date: March 2021
Approval Date:_____________________
Project Site Address:

Owner Name:

Title
Company
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Email
Telephone #
Signature Date
Engineer:*
PE Stamp*
Title
Company
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Email
Telephone #
Signature
Brief Description of Project:
(Attach additional sheets as
necessary)
Roseville, CA 95678
Steve Smith
Section 1 General Project Information
* Not required for Small Projects as determined in Form 1-2 below. Project owners are responsible for ensuring that all storm water facilities are designed by an appropriately licensed and qualified professional.

86.0 Acre Development

(Required for all Regulated Projects)
MacKay & Somps Civil Engineering, Inc.
1025 Creekside Ridge Dr., Ste 150
[email protected]
916-773-1189

Form 1-1 Project Identification and Owner’s Certification [email protected]
3301 Pleasant Grove Boulevard, Roseville, CA 95661
Westpark SV 400, LLC
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 265
Ryan O'Keefe
Roseville, CA 95661
1 Small Project – All projects, except LUPs, that create and/or replace between 2,500-5,000 ft2
of impervious surface or detached single family homes that create and/or replace 2,500 ft2 or more of impervious surface and are not part of a larger plan of development.
2 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 3 Regulated Project – All projects that create and/or replace 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface. X
4 Regulated Redevelopment Project with equal to, or greater than 50 percent increase in impervious area X
5 Regulated Redevelopment Project with less than 50 percent increase in impervious area
6 Enter total pre-project impervious surface (ft2) 0
7 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 2,557,277 8 Regulated Road or linear underground/overhead project (LUP) creating 5,000 ft2 or more of newly constructed contiguous impervious surface. 9 Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2) 10Regulated Hydromodification Management Project – Regulated projects that create and/or replace 1 acre or more of impervious surface. A project that does not increase impervious surface area over the pre-project condition is not a hydromodification management project.

X
11Enter total new and/or replaced impervious surface (ft2 ) 2,557,277
Form 1-2 Project Category
Development Category (Select all that apply)
3 Elevation
(ft. above sea level)
4 85th Percentile, 24 Hour Design Storm
Depth (in):

Yes
7 Is Project going to be phased?
If yes, ensure that the SWQP evaluates each phase with distinct DMAs, requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion.
www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_qualit y_assessment/#impaired
Sacramento River via Pleasant Grove Creek South Branch and tributary Refer to State Water Resources Control Board website Curry Creek is listed for: Pyrethroids and Toxicity Example only
Modify for project specific SWQP
Use separate sheet if necessary
See Exhibit
Section 3 Regulated Projects
Section 3 forms are to be completed for all Regulated Projects.

Site coordinates:

Take GPS measurement at
approximate center of site
Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features
38°46'28.12"N
2 Longitude
121°23'34.76"W
1 Latitude
90 0.9
5 Receiving waters
Name of stream, lake or other downstream waterbody to
which the site runoff eventually drains
6 303(d) listed pollutants of concern
8 Use this form to show a conceptual schematic depicting DMAs and conveyance features connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s). An example is provided below that can be modified for the proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMAs and flow routing may be attached.

Yes
Not Applicable
(Include brief explanation)
Define the development envelope and protected areas, identifying areas that are most suitable for development areas to be left undisturbed.

N/A, site has been previously graded, all areas are
similar
Concentrate development on portions of the site with less permeable soils and preserve areas that can promote infiltration. N/A, all of the site is on Type C soils Limit overall impervious coverage of the site with paving and roofs. N/A, conforming to local impervious coverage ordinances
Set back development from creeks, wetlands, and riparian habitats. N/A, existing draw is too close to provide 500ft setback
Preserve significant trees. N/A, site is graded from previous use Conform site layout along natural landforms. X
Avoid excessive grading and disturbance of vegetation and soils. N/A, site has previously been disturbed Replicate the site's natural drainage patterns. X
Detain and retain runoff throughout the site. X
Proposed locations and footprints of treatment and hydromodification management facilities Design features for managing authorized non-stormwater discharges Areas of soil and/or groundwater contamination
Existing utilities and easements
Maintenance areas
Proposed locations and footprints of improvements creating new, or replaced, impervious surfaces Potential pollutant sources and locations
Entire site divided into separate DMAs with unique identifiers Existing and proposed site drainage network with flow directions and site run-on and discharge locations Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness and reduce runoff Form 3-2 Site Assessment and Layout Documentation
Topographic data with 1 ft. contours
Existing natural hydrologic features (depressions, watercourses, wetlands, riparian corridors) Environmentally sensitive areas and areas to be preserved.

Minimum amounts will be used.

January 2003.

DMA ID No. A
1Total impervious area requiring treatment 2,557,277
2 Impervious area untreated by Site Design Measures (ft2)Item 1 – Form 3-4 Item 11 954,108 -
3Additional pervious area draining to BMP (ft2) 1,190,190 4 Composite DMA Runoff Coefficient (Rc) Enter area weighted composite runoff coefficient representing entire DMA

0.201 0
5 Water Quality Volume (WQV) (ft3)
WQV = 1/12 * [Item 2 + Item 3) *Item 4] *
Unit WQV
23,307 -
6 Water Quality Flow (WQF) (cfs)
WQF = 1/43,200 * [0.2* (Item 2 + Item 3) * Item4]

1.992 0.000
Form 3-5 Computation of Water Quality Design Criteria
for Stormwater Treatment and Baseline
Hydromodification Measures
1 DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter a new
unique DMA ID No.

A
2WQV (ft3
) Item 5 in Form 3-5
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter the sum of their respective WQVs.
23307
3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr 5
4 BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Top of BMP
17473
5 Infiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) 0.07
6Maximum ponding depth (ft)
BMP specific, see BMP design details

0.5 7
Ponding Depth (ft)
d BMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 * 48 hrs) or Item 6 0.8 - - - 8 Infiltrating surface area, SA BMP (ft2)
Bottom of BMP
14561
9 Planting media depth, d media (ft) 1.5
10Planting media porosity 0.35
11Gravel depth, d media (ft)
Only included in certain BMP types

3.5 12Gravel porosity 0.30
13Retention Volume (ft3
)
V retention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) + (1.5* (Item 5 / 12))]
34,582 - - -
14Untreated Volume (ft3
)
V untreated = Item 2 – Item 13
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and recompute retention volume 0 0 0 0
15 Treated Flow Rate (ft3
/s)
Qtreated = 1/43,200*(Item 3 * Item 4) 2.0224 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 16Total Treated Flow Rate for Project (ft3
/s)
Q total = Sum of Item 15 for all DMAs
17Is WQV for each DMA treated on-site? Yes X No

2.022
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures A A
1 Length of longest overland flow path
Not to exceed 100 ft
100 100
2 Slope of overland flow path (ft/ft) 0.0080 0.0200
3Manning’s roughness coefficient for overland
flow surface
See Table 5-5 of the Placer County SWMM

0.4000 0.1100
4Overland flow response time (min)
(0.355*(Item 1*Item 3)0.6)/(Item 20.3)
14 - - - 5 - - -
5 Hydrologic Soil Group Refer to Section 3.1.1. or
NRCS Web Soil Survey
D D
6 Current Land Cover Type(s) Select from
categories shown in Table 5-3 of the SWMM
Grass Residen
tial
7 Pervious Area Condition:

Based on the extent of vegetated cover
Good >75%; Fair 50-75%; Poor <50%
Attach photos of site to support rating
Fair Good
8 Infiltration Rate (in/hr)
Refer to Table 5-3 of the SWMM using Items 3, 4,
and 5 above or obtain site specific field
measurements (See Section 3.1.1)

0.08 0.12
9 Length of collector flow (ft) 4,036 3,363
10Cross-sectional area of collector flow facility
(ft2)
7 20
11Wetted perimeter of collector flow facility (ft) 14 16 12Manning’s roughness of collector flow facility 0.0400 0.0150 13Slope of collector flow facility (ft/ft) 0.0051 0.0017 14Channel flow velocity (ft/sec)
V = (1.49 / Item 12) * (Item 10/Item 11) ^0.67 *
(Item 13) ^0.5

1.7 - - - 4.8 - - -
15Collector flow facility response time (min)
T c = Item 9 /(Item 14 * 60) 40.1 - - - 11.8 - - -
16Total runoff response time or Tt
(min)
T t = Item 4 + Item 15

54.0 - - - 16.6 - - -
Section 4
Regulated Hydromodification Management Projects
Variables
Form 4-1 Peak Runoff Response Time
(Complete Section 4 forms for Regulated Hydromodification Projects only) Pre-construction DMAs to
Project Outlet
Post-construction DMAs to
Project Outlet
Determine total runoff response time for pre- and post-construction conditions at each project outlet. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
3,747,467 3,747,467
74,949 2,557,277

0.44 0.24

0.49 - - - 0.87 - - -

0.14 - - - 0.21 - - -

30.58 - - - 69.34 - - -
Form 4-2 Hydromodification Target for Peak Runoff
Pre-construction DMAs to Project Outlet Post-construction DMAs to Project Outlet 5 Infiltration factor (cfs/acre)
F i = Form 4-1 Item 8 * (1 + 1 /(1.3 + 0.0005
* Form 3-1 Item 3))
Variables
1 Drainage Area (ft2
)
Sum of all outlet level DMAs should equal
total project area.
2 Impervious Area (ft2
)
Sum of all outlet level DMAs should equal
total project impervious area.
3 Rainfall depth for 2yr storm with duration
equal to response time (in)
See Placer County SWMM Table 5-A-1 for
elevation of site and duration equal to
response time
4 Unit peak runoff (cfs/acre)
q = 60/Form 4-1 Item 16 * Item 3
7 Total Pre-Project Peak Runof (ft3/s)
Q total = Sum of Item 6 for all Preconstruction DMAs 30.58 8 Is the total post-project peak runoff equal
to or less than the total pre-project peak
runoff?
Yes, if Item 7 is greater than or equal to the
sum of the Total Treated Flow Rates from
Form 3-6 Item 16 and 3-7 Item 12.

YES
6 Peak runoff from DMAs (cfs)
Q p
= Item 1 * Item 4 – Item 5 * (Item 1 -
Item 2)
A 2 3 4
1 Land cover and hydrologic condition
See NRCD TR-55 Manual Table 2-2 for types
Residential
2 Hydrologic Soil Group
Refer to Section 3.1.1. or NRCS Web Soil Survey

D - - -
3 Drainage Area (A) (ft2
) 3,747,467 - - -
4 Curve Number (CN) Use Items 1 and 2 to select curve number from NRCS TR-55 Manual Table 2-2
92 5 Post-development soil storage capacity, S (in): S = (1000 / Item 4) – 10 0.9 - - - 6 Precipitation for 2-yr, 24-hr storm (in)
See Placer County SWMM Table 5-A-1 for elevation of site and 24-hr duration depths

1.90 7 Post-developed runoff volume for 2-yr – 24-hour storm, Vrunoff (ft3 ):

V runoff = Item 3 * (1 / 12) * [(Item 6 – 0.2 * Item 5)^2 / (Item 6 + 0.8 * Item 5)]
358,456 - - -
8 Attenuation Factor, qout/in (ratio of target outflow rate to peak inflow rate):
q out/in = Form 4-2 Item 6 Pre-Construction / Form 4-2 Item 6 PostConstruction

0.44 - - -
9 Equalization Factor, Vs/Vr (ratio of storage capacity to runoff volume)
Vs/Vr obtained using Item 8 and nomograph in Figure 6-1 of NRCS TR55 Manual for Rainfall Type IA

0.19 10 Runoff detention capacity to achieve hydromodification management criteria (ft3) D hydromod = Item 7 * Item 9
68107 - - -
11 Site Design Measure (SDM) Volume (ft3
): Sum of Item 10 in Form 3-4
for all SDMs in this DMA.
120,238
12 Bioretention Volume (ft3): Sum of Item 14 in Form 3-6 for all bioretention measures in this DMA.
34582
13 Flow-Through Detention Volume (ft3): Sum of Item 10 in Form 3-7 for all flow-through facilities in this DMA.
0 14 Supplemental Detention Volume (ft3
):
15 Combined Detention Volume in this DMA(ft3
): Sum of Items 11
through 14
154,820 - - -
16 Is detention capacity to achieve hydromodification management criteria achieved at all project outlets?
Yes, if Item 10 is less than or equal to Item 15. If not provide additional storage capacity
Yes X No
Form 4-3 Detention Volumes for Hydromodification Management Post-construction DMAs to Project Outlet
BMP Inspection Point and Frequency Maintenance Activity Required Inlets and outlets/ Twice a year Remove debris, sediment, and litter Plants/Monthly or as needed Irrigate, weed control, replace dead plants
Standing water in excess of 72-
hours/Annual or as needed
Remove accumulated sediment and
flush drainage including underdrain
Erosion, holes or voids/Annual or as
needed
Repair erosion and stabilize, inspect
underdrain and replace soil if needed
At each tree/as necessary Irrigate to establish and maintain At each tree/annually Remove fallen leaves and debris
At each tree/regularly Prune dead vegetation from trees At each tree/as needed Minimize the use of chemical fertilizers At each tree/as necessary Maintain lawn and turf at least 24- inches from trunk of tree
At each tree/as necessary Remove and replace dead trees Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance
Bioretention
Facilities
Trees
At each amended soil area/annually Inspect for loss of vegetative cover and erosion. Repair eroded areas and
replant vegetation as needed.

Inspect for signs of compaction,
waterlogging. Add soil amendments or
mechanically aerate as needed.

Soil Amended At each amended soil area/annually
Areas
Highway,
Street,
Parking
Comm.,
Office
Aptmnts,
HDR,
Comm.

Office
Condo's,
MDR
Resdntl.
<0.2 du/ac,
Recreation
AC AC D Soils % 95% 90% 80% 70% 5%
Ultimate Condition Subsheds
A02L 0.92 0.92 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 50% 0.46 0.46 A02R 0.88 0.88 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 55% 0.49 0.39 A04L 1.46 1.46 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 70% 1.05 0.41 A04R 1.17 1.17 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 65% 0.78 0.39 A06L 0.66 0.66 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 65% 0.44 0.22 A06R 1.22 1.22 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 70% 0.88 0.34 A07L 1.01 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 61% 0.63 0.38 A07R 1.25 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 63% 0.80 0.45 A09L 0.89 0.89 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 44% 0.39 0.50 A09R 0.89 0.89 Pleasant Grove Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 48% 0.43 0.46 A11L 0.93 0.93 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 52% 0.49 0.44 A11R 0.96 0.96 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 51% 0.49 0.47 A13L 0.94 0.94 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 51% 0.48 0.46 A13R 0.91 0.91 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 51% 0.47 0.44 A14L 0.95 0.95 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 49% 0.46 0.49 A14R 0.90 0.90 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 53% 0.48 0.42 A15L 1.47 1.47 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 53% 0.79 0.68 A15R 1.23 1.23 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 72% 0.91 0.32 A18L 0.92 0.92 Santucci Blvd Ultimate Conditions 100 70% 0.66 0.26A20L 0.43 Solaire Dr Ultimate Conditions 100 70% 0.31 0.12 A20R 1.48 Solaire/Santucci Ultimate Conditions 100 65% 0.99 0.49A22R 0.31 Solaire Dr Ultimate Conditions 100 54% 0.17 0.14 W20x 11.04 WB-20 MDR 100 70% 11.04W21x 7.45 WB-21 MDR 100 70% 7.45 W2223x 17.03 WB-22 and WB-23 MDR 100 64% 15.33 1.70
W30.1x 10.44 10.44 WB30 HDR 100 80% 10.44W30.2x 2.33 2.33 WB30 HDR 100 80% 2.33 W31x 3.06 3.06 WB31 HDR 100 80% 3.06W32x 4.20 4.20 WB32 HDR 100 80% 4.20W41x 8.70 WB41 MDR 100 70% 8.70 Total 86.03 37.33 68% 13.05 0.00 20.03 42.52 10.43
Percent Impervious Values
Land Use Description Soils Group Composite %
Imperv.

Shed/ SubShed Area
Selftreating
Area
Percent Impervious Calculator
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 1 of 42 Amendment to the
Sierra Vista Specific Plan

MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN
For:

STORMWATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN
February 20, 2018
Prepared By:

Civil Engineering Solutions, Inc
590 E Street
Lincoln, CA 95648
(916) 645-5700
ADDENDUM ATTACHMENT 3B
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 2 of 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS:

PURPOSE........................................................................................................................... 3 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES: ....................................................................................... 3 Low Impact Development Measures: ............................................................................. 3 End of Pipe Treatment: ................................................................................................... 6 APPENDIX A – West Placer Template Part 1 ................................................................. 10 APPENDIX B – Vegetated Swale Fact Sheets and SpecificationsAPPENDIX C – Bioretention Fact Sheets and SpecificationsAPPENDIX D – Oversized Exhibit SWQ-140 APPENDIX C – Bioretention Fact Sheets and SpecificationsAPPENDIX D – Oversized Exhibit SWQ-1.................................................................................................................. 41 APPENDIX D – Oversized Exhibit SWQ-1..................................................................... 42 LIST OF FIGURES:

Figure 1 : Roadway Bioretention Detail ............................................................................. 5 Figure 2 : Vegetated Swale Outfall with Bypass Detail ..................................................... 8 Figure 3 : Bioretention Outfall with Bypass Detail ............................................................ 9 LIST OF TABLES:

TABLE 1 – LID PLANNED USAGE for SIERRA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN................. 4 TABLE 2 – Roadway Bioretention Sizing Criteria ............................................................ 5 TABLE 3 – Pipe Outfall BMP Sizing per West Placer Templates..................................... 7 Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 3 of 42

PURPOSE
The purpose of this document is to update the Stormwater Quality Management Plan for the Sierra Vista Specific Plan for updated project information, and to provide an update to the stormwater Management Plan criteria outlined in the Master Drainage Study.

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:

Low Impact Development Measures:

The Master Plan outlined the use of Low Impact Development (LID) Measures in the form of RSV’s, which acted like a quota system. In order to meet the requirements of the updated MS4 permit, the project will update the LID calculation methodology and system to meet the requirements of the “West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual” (Final Draft), which includes a spreadsheet – Template system for calculation.

LID minimum use thresholds are based on the expected amount of usage for LID measures for each land use type contributing to each outfall location. Table 1 identifies the expected LID usage for each development land use type within the specific plan:

The land uses highlighted in green will do their Low Impact Development Measures and stormwater quality treatment to satisfy 100% of the requirements within their development area such that additional end of pipe treatment and additional Low Impact Development Measures will not be necessary for these land uses. These Land uses include: Parks, Open Space, Roadways and Commercial. For the purpose of the “Template Calculations” performed to demonstrate compliance with the West Placer Manual, the land uses in green are assumed to provide LID measures to mitigate 100% of their new impervious surfaces, as shown in Table 1.

Commercial projects go through a separate plan check process that will require they meet the requirements of the permit at their project boundary points of discharge. The Roadway land use designation within the project occurs at Arterial and some Major Collector roadways. The City proposes that a specialized Bioretention inlet design be used at these locations to perform Low Impact Development benefits and stormwater quality treatment to meet the requirements of the MS4 permit and the West Placer Manual’s requirements. A detail of the proposed roadway bioretention inlet features is provided in Figure 1. Table 2 outlines the sizing criteria for the roadway biorentention inlets based on calculations put through the West Placer Templates.

The remaining Residential Development types are not expected to be able to provide 100% onsite LID measures to satisfy the West Placer Manual requirements, due space and setback constraints with foundations, joint utility trenches and roadway features. The estimated amount of these measures that will be provided are listed in TABLE 1. The remaining LID mitigation will be needed at the end of pipe. The amounts of remaining treatment needed is detailed in the included “Template Calculations”, and summary shown in Table 3.

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 4 of 42 TABLE 1 – LID PLANNED USAGE for SIERRA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 5 of 42 Figure 1 : Roadway Bioretention Detail
TABLE 2 – Roadway Bioretention Sizing Criteria
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 6 of 42 End of Pipe Treatment:

The West Placer Manual stipulates that all treatment and Low Impact Development mitigation that cannot be accomplished within the development areas needs to be performed at an end of pipe Best Management Practice. The Master Drainage Plan Anticipated the use of Vegetated Swales for the end of pipe treatment. While some vegetated swales will be utilized within the project due to grade limitations, the preferred method of end of pipe treatment will be Bioretention per the West Placer Manual. Bio retention includes a sub-drain infiltration and collection system and a minimum depth of fall to the sub-drain pipe invert of 18 inches. In some areas where this additional grade is not achievable, vegetated swales treatment will be allowed, per the specifications outlined in this document (see appendix B). An example detail for the Vegetated Swale Outfall configuration is shown in Figure 2. The example shown in Figure 2, includes bypass flow. Bypass flow would be required if flood velocities through the grassy swale would exceed 1 feet per second.

Where Bioretention is proposed, the sizing of the bioretntion is performed per the West Placer Templates (included in appendix A). An example detail for the bioretention concept is included in Figure 3. This detail includes a Bypass Flow configuration which would be required where flood velocities through the treatment area would exceed 1 fps without bypass flow. Bioretention would be constructed per the specifications outlined in this document (see appendix C).

Table 3 provides sizing per the West Placer Templates for the pipe outfall locations of the Master Plan.

Oversized Exhibit SWQ-1 outlines the proposed storm drainage system alignments, and discharge locations, as well as the land use and watershed areas.

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 7 of 42 TABLE 3 – Pipe Outfall BMP Sizing per West Placer Templates Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 8 of 42 Figure 2 : Vegetated Swale Outfall with Bypass Detail
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 9 of 42 Figure 3 : Bioretention Outfall with Bypass Detail

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 10 of 42 APPENDIX A – West Placer Template Part 1
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 11 of 42 Management Plan Page 11 of 42 Post-Construction
Storm Water Quality Plan
For:

Modified for City of Lincoln - January 23, 2017
Sierra Vista Specific Plan (Part 1)
Placer County
Where applicable, insert Planning Permit No., Improvement Plan No., Grading Permit No., Building Permit Nov Subdivision Number
Specify Lot Numbers if site is a portion of a Land Division (Subdivision or Parcel Map) Prepared bv:

Civil Engineering Solutions, Inc.
530 E Street
Lincoln, CA95648
916 645 5700
Prepared for:

Sierra Vista Specific Plan
Sierra Vista Owners Group
Insert Company Name
Insert Address
Insert City, State, ZIP
InsertTelephone No.
20-Feb-18
Approval Date:

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 12 of 42 Management Plan Page 12 of 42 STREAM Setbacks (Aimp) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
IMP A DISCONNECT Area (ft2) 25160 17000 6000 7200 0 0 35065

POROUS PAVEMENT
Vegetated Swales Aimp (ft2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rain Barrels-Storage Va(ft3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Area
Depth
Porosity
TREES # Evergreen
#Diciduous
0 0
0 0
2055.2
30492
YES
0 6
6 0
0 0
0 1235.8
18308
YES
528
£
4 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
953.7
14128
YES
222
9 9
684.7
10143
YES
785
0 0
0 0
0 9
9 0
0 0
0 0.0
0 YES
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
p
5 -1.01
120%
2178
2616
147

0.900

0.810
176.6
2616
YES
-30
0 0
0 0
0 8
8 0
0 0
0 2499.3
37027
YES
0 0
0 0
0 0
6 6
0 0
0 0
coni
70 0
100%
30492
30492
2058

0.900

0.810
0 0
650
1 0.35
lidr
60 17.97
70%
26136
18308
1764

0.900

0.810
Idr
40 7.57
81%
17424
14128
1176

0.900

0.810
0 0
1000
1 0.35
mdr
50 26.71
47%
21780
10143
1470

0.900

0.810
OS
0 0
0%
0 0
0 0.900

0.810
LID QUOTA ASSUMPTIONS ( Values below are per acre of Gross Total Development Type)

FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA REDUCTIONS VIA LID

LANDUSE
EST Impervious % without LID
MAX IMPERVIOUS % AFTER LID
EST IMP % REDUCTION
Impervious Area per Acre
=*Required Imp A Reduction /Acre
Est. Added Volume / Acre (ft3)
Precip (inches)
SWQ Vol per Acre : C * I (inches)
Soil Quality Apond (ft2)
Dpond (ft)
Asa (ft2)
Dsa (ft)
n
road
85 0
100%
37026
37027
2499

0.900

0.810
Ares (ft2)
Pres (ft)
nagg
C
Estimated Vol Reduction (ft3)
Est. Imp A Reduction (ft2)
Area Red Criteria Met?
RemainingVol Red. Regional:

Italicized/underline are modified to represent in system treatment Green are self mitigating or onsite mitigating land use per this plan ** Impervious Reduction Required to hit LID quotas established here - Additional LID could be performed to reduce end of pipe treatment.

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 13 of 42 Management Plan Page 13 of 42 Hydgrp=D Hydgrp com hdr Idr mdr 05 P road
Infilt=> 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.07
Imperv=> 70 60 40 50 0 5 85
Imp LID=> 0 17.97 7.57 26.71 0 -1.01 0
shed Shed Ac
W1 74.74 64.7 10 1 U1 9.32 9.3 M1I 16.26 16.3 MFOUT 61.27 16.7 28.4 6.6 8.6 3.1 AAOUT 67.93 62.9 5.0 N3C1 4.86 2.1 0.0 1.7 1.0 Z1 20 19 19.9 0 0 0 3 X1 46.52 46.5
V1 0.6 0 6 TT1 16.19 12.1 0.2 0 9 3 0 T1A 37.57 19.6 12.2 0 0 3.2 2.5 T1C 7.86 6.6 0 5 0 8 T1B 3.29 3.2 0 1 0.0
SS1 0.08 0 1
31 17.26 11.1 1.7 4.5 R1 14.34 9.4 5 0 QQ1 33.85 0.1 32.3 0 0 1.5 Q1 17.44 13.1 1.2 3.2 PP1 19.85 18.6 0.2 1 1 P1 20 98 16 1 0.2 3.8 1.9
001 6.91 6.8 0 1 0.0 NN1 6.12 5.2 0.0 0.9 N1k 62.79 62.8 N1J 2.8 2.8 N1I 2.1 2.1 N1H 7.3 7.3 NIG 4 5 4 6 N1F 5.5 5.6 N1E 1.36 0 9 04 N1C 9.9 7.8 2.1
N1A 24 03 8.3 7.3 0 0 0 0 2.6 5.8 MM1 4.22 0 0 0 0 4.2 M1H 0 13 0 1 M1E 58.48 66.6 0 1 0 8 1 1 MID 12.07 10 6 0 0 0 8 0.7 M1C 3.67 3.4 0.0 0 3 M1B 63.21 10 5 16.3 19 0 0.0 10.7 6.7 M1A 24.56 19.3 4.0 1.3 LL1 120 07 23 0 71 7 3.7 8 0 13.7
L1 61.63 44.2 0 0 1.3 16.2
JJ1 221.13 73.1 134.9 0 0 13.1 H1B 102.41 7.7 66.1 21.9 0 0 7.4 10 3 H1A 28.91 28.8 0 1 0 0 GG1 1 57 0.7 04 0 6 DD1 3.8 3.7 0.1 CC1 42.42 24.0 15 0 1.8 1.6 BB1 17.81 16.5 1.3 B1 19.36 0.1 18.5 0 1 0 6
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 14 of 42 Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 15 of 42 Management Plan Page 15 of 42 Section 3 Regulated Projects
Section 3 forms are to be completed for all Regulated Projects.

Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features
3 Elevation Site coordinates: 1 Latitude 2 Longitude
level)

38.74324 -120.55662 60 0.9
5 Receiving waters
Sacramento River, NEMDC (Steelhead Creek)
Mercury
SEE SWQ-1 EXHIBIT
Take GPS measurement at
approximate center of site
4 85th Percentile, 24 Hour Design Storm Depth (in):

Yes - This is for Sierra Vista Specific Plan Level Analysis with Revisions for Some project Tentative Maps
Name of stream, lake or other downstream
waterbody to which the site runoff eventually
drains
6303(d) listed pollutants of concern
Refer to State Water Resources Control Board www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/ water quality assessment/^imoaired
71s Project going to be phased?
If yes, ensure that the SWQP evaluates each phase with distinct DMAs, requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion.
8Use this form to show a conceptual schematic depicting DMAs and conveyance features connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s). An example is provided below that can be modifiedfor the proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMAs and This is the Site Layout for ULTIMATE PVSP CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE P19A SWQ ELEMENTS (D2C and DIM are solely for future offsite items, but need to be constructed with channel improvements) (ft. above sea
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 16 of 42 Management Plan Page 16 of 42 Form 3-2 Site Assessment and Layout Documentation
Yes
X
X
Limit overall impervious coverage of the site with paving and roofs. X Set back development from creeks, wetlands, and riparian habitats. x Preserve significant trees. X
Conform site layout along natural landforms. X
Avoid excessive grading and disturbance of vegetation and soils. X Replicate the site's natural drainage patterns. X
Detain and retain runoff throughout the site. X
Define the development envelope and protected areas, identifying areas that are most suitable for development areas to be left undisturbed.

Concentrate development on portions of the site with less permeable soils and preserve areas that can promote infiltration.

Attach a Site Plan that incorporates the applicable considerations above. Ensure that the following items are included in the Site Plan:

Has this Item been considered in the Site
Layout and depicted in the Site Plan?
Not Applicable
{Include brief explanation)
Site Boundary Soil types and areal extents, test pit and infiltration test locations Topographic data with 1 ft. contours Existing natural hydrologic features (depressions, watercourses, wetlands, riparian corridors) Environmentally sensitive areas and areas to be preserved. Proposed locations and footprints of improvements creating new, or replaced, impervious surfaces Potential pollutant sources and locations Entire site divided into separate DMAs with unique identifiers Existing and proposed site drainage network with flow directions and site run-on and discharge locations Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness and reduce runoff Proposed locations and footprints of treatment and hydromodification management facilities Design features for managing authorized non-stormwater discharges Areas of soil and/or groundwater contamination Existing utilities and easements Maintenance areas Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 17 of 42 Management Plan Page 17 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects 1DMA ID No. 1 2 3 4
Site Design Measure Runoff Reduction Parameters
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0
2 Adjacent/On-Site Stream
0 0 0 0
Setbacks and Buffers

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0
3 Soil Quality Improvement and
22631 0 0 13495 Maintenance

1.000 1 1 1
n
642 56 146 418
Ate (ft2) 4 Tree PI anti ng a nd Preservation 14180 1234 3228 9232

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
5 Rooftop and Impervious Area Aimp 741415 326806 117000 712333 50046 22059 7898 48082 Disconnection 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 Ares area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0
6 Porous Pavement Dres (ft) 0.0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

0.0 0 0 0

0.0 0 0 0
Aimp 0 0 0 0
7 Vegetated Swales 0 0 0 0 V85 (in) 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0 0 N number ofrain barrels and/or cistei 8 Rain Barrels and Cisterns 0 0 0 0 Va (ft3) 0 0 0 0
volume of each rain barrel and/or c
9 Do all Site Design Measures meet the design requirements outlined in the Fact Sheets? Yes X No 10 Total Volume Reduction (ft3) 86856 23294 11126 70810 11 Effective Treated Impervious Area (ft2 • 1286761 345092 164824 1049037 Aimp
(ft2)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(H3)

0.0 64660

0.350
642

0.350
56 0
0 0.350
146
0 0
0 38559

0.350
418
Apond
Dpond
Asa Dsa (ft)
ne
nd
depth ofgravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
runoff volume from 85th V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24 hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity of amended soil
number ofnew evergreen trees
number ofnew deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24 hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
tunujj volume jrom mu)
V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24-
nagg C
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 18 of 42 Management Plan Page 18 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 5 6 8 9 10 11 12
Runoff Reduction Parameters
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
62940 22029 2100 735 12942 4530 30238 10583 0 0 12080 4228 19630 6871 6530 2286 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
596 39 122 279 4 134 327 68
13164 858 2684 6161 79 2960 7226 1495

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
552614 48016 500936 1170443 21039 178376 291817 67583
37301 3241 33813 79005 1420 12040 19698 4562

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 72495 4834 41027 95749 1500 19229 33794 8342 1073993 71618 607809 1418505 22216 284871 500652 123583 volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Effective Treated Impervious Area
number of rain barrels and/or
cisterns
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
depth ofgravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
0 596
0 39
0 122
0 279
0 0
327
0 68
0 134
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity ofamended soil
number of new evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C *i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
runojj volumefrom ootn
percentile impervious areas, 24-
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 19 of 42 Management Plan Page 19 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Runoff Reduction Parameters
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3210 1124 0 0 0 0 9370 3280 32309 11308 13080 4578 12045 4216 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 0 140 124 300 146 118 178
29 0 140 124 300 146 118 178
639 0 3094 2739 6617 3229 2602 3929

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
19260 0 235815 56220 247727 188935 505488 174436
1300 0 15918 3795 16722 12753 34120 11774

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
area ofgravel storage layer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 3063 0 19012 9813 34647 20560 40938 15704 45378 0 281654 145383 513287 304597 606494 232648
number of rain barrels and/or
cisterns
Effective Treated Impervious
Area
volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
{H3J
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
{ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
depth of gravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiencyfactor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9j
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity of amended soil
number ofnew evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area ofexisting trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
runujj volumejtum oom
percentile impervious areas, 24-
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 20 of 42 Management Plan Page 20 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Runoff Reduction Parameters
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
2387 1176 21977 980 735 2555 1575 1925
3072 807 12473 556 417 1450 894 1093

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
40920 162337 376740 16800 12600 43800 27000 33000
2762 10958 25430 1134 851 2957 1823 2228

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 8221 12940 59880 2670 2003 6962 4291 5245 121799 191710 887109 39559 29669 103136 63577 77705
volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Effective Treated Impervious
Area
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2800
1 0
25 25
0 0
7300
1 0
66 66
0 0
5500
1 0
50 50
0 0
6820
1 0
178
62 0
0 3361
1 0
37 37
0 0
62790
1 0
565
565
0 0
2100
1 0
19 19
0 0
4500
1 0
41 41
depth of gravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
number of rain barrels and/or
cisterns
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C*i)(C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity of amended soil
number of new evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9J
impervious drainage area
runojj votumejrom sorn
percentile impervious areas, 24-
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 21 of 42 Management Plan Page 21 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Runoff Reduction Parameters
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
940 329 0 0 7770 2720 0 0 7270 2545 0 0 0 0 56550 19793 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 0 83 0 155 33 0 522
11 0 83 0 155 33 0 522
242 0 1826 0 3413 738 0 11518

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
20367 0 121308 0 388180 340 0 377170
1375 0 8188 0 26202 23 0 25459 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 1946 0 12733 0 32159 761 0 56770 28832 0 188644 0 476437 11275 0 841031
number ofrain barrels and/or
cisterns
volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Effective Treated Impervious
Area
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ftS)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
depth of gravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
;e area
i sotn
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity of amended soil
number ofnew evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C *I) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage
runoff vorumefrom
percentile impervious areas, 24-
area ofgravel storage layer
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 22 of 42 Management Plan Page 22 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
Runoff Reduction Parameters
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
3693 1183 2384 6738 30311 15453 63844 21043
2328 721 9377 4703 20512 11141 38219 18987

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
88897 20280 ##### 161085 ft##### 832602 ###### ######
6001 1369 61691 10873 100402 56201 209851 70346

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 12022 3273 73452 22313 151225 82794 311914 110375 178096 48486 1088179 330567 2240375 1226575 4620951 1635189 volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Effective Treated Impervious
Area
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3380
1 0
33 33
D
0 10550
1 0
105
105
0 0
6812
1 0
425
425
0 0
19250
1 0
213
213
0 0
86604
1 0
929
929
0 c
44150
1 0
505
505
0 0
182412
1 0
1732
1732
0 0
60122
1 0
860
860
depth of gravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
number of rain barrels and/or
cisterns
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C*i)(C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity ofamended soil
number of new evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
runojj votumejrom soin
percentile impervious areas, 24-
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 23 of 42 Management Plan Page 23 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects 1DMA ID No. 1 2 3 4
Site Design Measure
impervious drainage area 0 0 0 0
2 Adjacent/On-Site Stream
0 0 0 0
Setbacks and Buffers

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
3 Soil Quality Improvement and
10073 0 1295 0 Maintenance
Ate (ft2) 4 Tree PI anti ng a nd Preservation 5742 137 748 5633

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
5 Rooftop and Impervious Area Aimp 173895 16130 25707 570907 11738 1089 1735 38536 Disconnection 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 Ares area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0
6 Porous Pavement Dres (ft) 0.0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7 Vegetated Swales 0 0 0 0 V85 (in) 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0 0 N number ofrain barrels and/or cistei 8 Rain Barrels and Cisterns 0 0 0 0 Va (ft3) 0 0 0 0
Yes X No
10 Total Volume Reduction (ft3) 27553 1226 3778 44169
11 Effective Treated Impervious Area (ft2) 367377 16342 50379 588924 Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
Runoff Reduction (ft3) Parameters
Aimp
(ft2)
volume of each rain barrel and/or c
9 Do all Site Design Measures meet the design requirements outlined in the Fact Sheets? 0 0.0
28780

1.000

0.350
260
260

0.0 0.0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 0.350
255
255
0 0
0 ne
nd
depth ofgravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
0 0
0 1

0.350
6 6
0 0
3700
1 0.350
34 34
Apond
Dpond
Asa Dsa (ft)
n
runoff volume from 85th V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24 hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity of amended soil
number ofnew evergreen trees
number ofnew deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24 hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
runujj volume jtorn min
V85 (in) percentile impervious areas, 24-
nagg C
Aimp
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 24 of 42 Management Plan Page 24 of 42 Form 3-4 Runoff Reduction Calculator for Site Design Measures on Regulated Projects DMA ID No. 5 6 8 9 10 11 12
Runoff Reduction Parameters
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10725 3754 120 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
107 172 0 0 0 0 0 0
2359 3802 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
461075 155660 0 0 0 0 0 0
31123 10507 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810
area of gravel storage layer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0.810 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Volume Reduction 37235 14351 0 0 0 0 0 0
496467 191350 0 0 0 0 0 0
volume of each rain barrel
and/or cistern
Effective Treated Impervious Area
number of rain barrels and/or
cisterns
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
Runoff
Reduction
(ft3)
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
depth ofgravel storage layer
porosity of aggregate
efficiency factor
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24-
0 107
0 172
impervious drainage area
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C * i) (C=0.9)
ponding area
ponding depth
soil amendment area
depth of amended soil
porosity ofamended soil
number of new evergreen trees
number of new deciduous trees
canopy area of existing trees to
remain on the property
runoff volume from 85th
percentile impervious areas, 24
hour storm (C *i) (C=0.9)
impervious drainage area
runojj volumefrom ootn
percentile impervious areas, 24-
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 25 of 42 Management Plan Page 25 of 42 Form 3-5 Computation of Water Quality Design Criteria for Stormwater Treatment and Baseline Hydromodification Measures DMA ID No. 5 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1499858 145082 353925 1207897 1281426 77776 607684 1418488 22216 324282 706369 5595 J 0 •MN •••• •NN MM MM mi •MN an w1 . lam M M* n 213097 0 189101 158860 207434 6158 0 0 0 39412 205717 21297 10575 0 28705 MM 42576 0 MU> 0 0 1755816 60897 353925 1461024 1677605 133925 271793 607923 3920 380954 930180 «• 8/360 3485 •« •MM MM MH MMI •«• 74880 lMW ana UMMM caWknM 0088 0 040 0.207 0083 0.091 0.062 0040 0040 0 040 0 081 0.127 0085 0.093 0040 0154 0074 0092 0081 0040 0.165 OOM 0.040 J «m* is Mi vmm n*ov> ri>
9338 132 6102 7326 9263 470 S87 1317 1844 7794 4*M 8 3908 1921 4795 1999 559 6095 925 162 « mm a mi m Mumu

0.792 0011 0.517 0.621 0.785 0040 0.050 0.112 0 001 0.156 0.661 0.042 0001 0J31 0.163 0406 0.169 0.047 0.517 0 078 0014 • HUM• Br Man 1 . M • «an«|
DMA ID No. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1094053 48787.2 36590.4 127195 78408 95832 31929.5 0 214250 0 564167 9605 0 1E«O6 2E»O5 59503 IE.06 4£.O5 2E.O6 IE.06 5E.O6 2E.06 1 nvnaana MMtMav Ma Oa^i Maawn r)
•an I -l*n M aan II 206944 9228 6921 24059 14831 18127 3098 0 25606 0 87731 0 0 •MM 34433 11017 •MM 61691 •MM MM M«N » HMa .» iaa araa *aan| •« SM» |W) 1094053 48787 36590 127195 78408 95832 31929 0 214250 0 564167 9605 0 • MM 59503 MM Ml M«a 009 009 009 009 009 0 09 008 MXV/01 008 MXV/01 010 003 004 009 009 0.09 0.13 008 0.07 008 007 0.11 nfmanatanaaMM
6657 297 223 774 477 583 149 mxv/oi 1083 CMV/01 3527 17 0 6091 1172 343 12136 2022 10694 6542 22131 14719 MOV • VU * mm I• laa. I <1 * ua< MOV

0.564 0.025 0019 0.066 0.040 0.049 0.013 MMV/01 0.092 DIV/OI 0.299 0.001 0000 0516 0 099 0.029 1.029 0.171 0.906 0.555 1.876 1248 «qr • Lal W0 • ®1* man ;• nan * nan<|
Form 3-5 Computation of Water Quality Design Criteria for Stormwater Treatment and Baseline Hydromodification Measures DMA ID No. 5 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 504447 17968.5 68171.4 1016494 551622 428238 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I waamM ana V’.iiaMy 1
nan 1 Inn >4 nan n 137070 1627 17792 427570 55156 236888 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 liaainw aa-i'n.a vaa •ana( ta MM Ml 754873 50421 97357 831321 224182 415083 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 < Connctf. anal frd
Mnana ia»Wn« ta.ynn •<*uMini 0095 0038 0093 0.168 0040 0201 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/0! MXV/01 MXV/01 MM MM MM MM MM mm« nmam(OTnMU
iwwmni.'wxinii
4589 107 581 11469 60S 7107 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/01 MM MM MM MM MM MM MM »« •O . vu• man I. nan I) *nan 4| • uaa MX
• Manteam Rao men MM
•or • U*lWO'B?*(nan)*nanli**taMl 0389 0.009 0.049 0.972 0.051 0602 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/01 MXV/01 MM MM MM MM MM M«« Mf Ml•• ( 1 Total impervious area requiring
treatment
1Total impervious area requiring
treatment
1 Total impervious area requiring
treatment
I 0 086
•DIV/01 « »
••
1010
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 26 of 42 Management Plan Page 26 of 42 wi Ul Mil MFOUT
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter the sum of their 9338 132 6102 7326 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
6715 95 4390 5270
Top of BMP
5lnfiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 BMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
7Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280
dBMP« Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6
Slnfiltrating surface area, SABMP [ft2)
5036 71 3293 3953
Bottom of BMP
SPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
UGravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
ISRetention Volume |ft3)
'/retention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 • Item 12) 9,342.3 132.2 6,107.6 7,331.9 + (1.5* (Item 5/12))]
14Untreated Volume IftB)
Vuntreated = Item 2 -Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greaterthan zero, adjust BMP sizingvariables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Rate |ft3/s)

0.7708 0.0109 0.5039 0.6049 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4)/43,56O 15A)Time to Empty in hours: (Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3670 3.3668 3.3668 IGTota I Treated Flow Rate for Project (ftB/s)
Qtotal =Sum of Item 15 for all DMAs
171s WQV for each DMA treated on-site? Yes No Regional
3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate;
4BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ftB) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 27 of 42 Management Plan Page 27 of 42 AAOUT N3C1 Z1 XI
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 9263 470 587 1317 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
6660 340 425 950
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
4995 255 319 713
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 9,265.7 473.0 591.3 1,321.7 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.7645 0.0390 0.0488 0.1090 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3669 3.3669 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 28 of 42 Management Plan Page 28 of 42 vi TT1 T1A TIC
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 8 1844 7794 1010 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
7 1325 5605 726
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
5 994 4204 545
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 9.7 1,843.4 7,798.0 1,010.1 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.0008 0.1521 0.6434 0.0833 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3699 3.3672 3.3668 3.3669 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 29 of 42 Management Plan Page 29 of 42 TIB SSI SI R1
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 494 8 3908 1921 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
360 7 2810 1385
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
270 5 2108 1039
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 500.9 9.7 3,909.4 1,926.9 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.0413 0.0008 0.3225 0.1590 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3669 3.3699 3.3668 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 30 of 42 Management Plan Page 30 of 42 QQ1 Qi PPI Pl
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 4795 1999 559 6095 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
3450 1440 405 4400
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
2588 1080 304 3300
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 4,799.8 2,003.4 563.5 6,121.5 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.3960 0.1653 0.0465 0.5051 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3668 3.3669 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 31 of 42 Management Plan Page 31 of 42 001 NN1 Nik N1J
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 925 162 6657 297 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
665 120 4800 215
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
499 90 3600 161
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.3C
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 925.2 167.0 6,678.0 299.1 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.0763 0.0138 0.5510 0.0247 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3670 3.3670 3.3668 3.3669 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 32 of 42 Management Plan Page 32 of 42 Nil N1H NIG N1F
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 223 774 477 583 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
160 560 350 420
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
120 420 263 315
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.3C
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 222.6 779.1 486.9 584.3 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.0184 0.0643 0.0402 0.0482 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3676 3.3669 3.3669 3.3669 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 33 of 42 Management Plan Page 33 of 42 N1E 0 NIC 0
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 149 #DIV/O! 1083 #DIV/O! respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
110 0 780 0
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Pending Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
83 0 585 0
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
ISRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 153.0 0.0 1,085.2 0.0 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 #div/o: 0 WDIV/O! If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ft3/s)

0.0126 0.0000 0.0895 0.0000 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4)/43,560 15A)Time to Empty in hours: (Must be lessthan 48 hours) 3.3670 #DIV/0! 3.3669 WDIV/0! 3 Surface LoadingRate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hronly when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate/
4BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 34 of 42 Management Plan Page 34 of 42 N1A MM1 M1H MIE
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 3527 17 0 6091 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2540 12 1 4400
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
1905 9 1 3300
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 3,533.8 16.7 1.4 6,121.5 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.2916 0.0014 0.0001 0.5051 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.4523 3.3880 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 35 of 42 Management Plan Page 35 of 42 MID MIC M1B MIA
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 1172 343 12136 2022 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
850 250 8725 1455
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
638 188 6544 1091
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 1,182.6 347.8 12,138.7 2,024.3 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.0976 0.0287 1.0015 0.1670 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3669 3.3668 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 36 of 42 Management Plan Page 36 of 42 LL1 Li JJ1 H1B
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 10694 6542 22131 14719 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
7700 4705 15910 10600
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
5775 3529 11933 7950
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
IBRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 10,712.6 6,545.8 22,134.8 14,747.3 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ftB/s)

0.8838 0.5401 1.8262 1.2167 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4J/43.56O ISA) Time to Empty in hours: [Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3668 3.3668 3.3668 3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate)
4BMP3irface Area Ift2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 37 of 42 Management Plan Page 37 of 42 H1A GG1 DD1 CC1
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enter the sum of their 4589 107 581 11469 respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
330C 77 420 8244
Top of BMP
5lnfiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 BMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
7Ponding Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280
dBMP« Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6
Slnfiltrating surface area, SABMP [ft2)
2475 58 315 6183
Bottom of BMP
SPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
UGravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
ISRetention Volume |ft3)
'/retention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 • Item 12) 4,591.1 107.1 584.3 11,469.5 + (1.5* (Item 5/12))]
14Untreated Volume IftB)
Vuntreated = Item 2 -Item 13
0 0 0 0
If greaterthan zero, adjust BMP sizingvariables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Rate |ft3/s)
C.3788 0.0088 0.0482 0.9463 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4)/43,56O 15A)Time to Empty in hours: (Must be less than 48 hours) 3.3668 3.3671 3.3669 3.3668 IGTota I Treated Flow Rate for Project (ft3/s)
Qtotal =Sum of Item 15 for all DMAs
171s WQV for each DMA treated on-site? Yes No Regional
3 Surface Loading Rate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hr only when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate;
4BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ftB) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 38 of 42 Management Plan Page 38 of 42 BB1 Bl 0 0
If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5, enterthe sum of their 605 7107 WDIV/O! #DIV/O! respective WQVs.

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
435 5110 2905 6700
Top of BMP
Binfiltration rate of underlyingsoils (in/hr) 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 GMaximum ponding depth (ft)

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
BMP specific, see BMP design details
^Pending Depth (ft)

0.280 0.280 0.280 0.280 dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 5 *48 hrs) or Item 6 Binfiltrating surface area, SABMP |ft2)
326 3833 2179 5025
Bottom of BMP
BPIanting media depth, dmedia (ft)

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
lOPIanting media porosity 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35
UGravel depth, dmedia (ft)

3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
Only included in certain BMP types
12G ravel porosity 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.3C
ISRetention Volume Ift3)
Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) 605.2 7,109.3 4,041.6 9,321.4 + (1.5" (Item 5/12))]
14U nt rested Volume (ft3)
Vuntreated = Item 2 — Item 13
0 0 #idiv/o: WDIV/0! If greater than zero, adjust BMP sizing variables and re-compute retention volume
15 Treated Flow Bate (ft3/s)

0.0499 0.5865 0.3334 0.7691 Qtreated = (Item 3 * Item 4)/43,560 15A)Time to Empty in hours: (Must be lessthan 48 hours) 3.3669 3.3668 #DIV/0! WDIV/0! 3 Surface LoadingRate Maximum 5.0 in/hr (5in/hronly when subdrains are used, otherwise use native soil rate/
4BMP Surface Area (ft2)
Form 3-6 Volume-Based Infiltrating Bioretention Measures 1DMA ID No.

If combining multiple DMAs from Form 3-5,
enter a new unique DMA ID No.
2WQV (ft3) Item 5 in Form 3-5
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Sierra Vista Specific Plan - Stormwater Management Plan Page 39 of 42 Management Plan Page 39 of 42 Form 4.2B: Hydrograph Modification Results below:

HydroOmod is demonstrated in the Master Plan

HEC-RAS
211.62
174.87

YES NOT COMPLETE
7i Input a NAME of each POINT OF CONNECTION (POC)
You Can Paste in a Graphic of Hydrographs Comparison if Unsteady State Method is Used or provide additional description here if needed.
r
Source of Hydrograph Modification Peak Flows (ex. Form 3-6 or HEC-RAS) 7A Summarize the Total 2-year Pre Project Peak Runof (ft3/s) 7B Total 2-year Post-Project Peak Runof (ft3/s)
8 Is the total post-project peak runoff
equal to or less than the total pre
project peak runoff? Yes, if Item 7B is less than item 7A. '' A \
£
R\er Cur/ Cree* Reecn Dow 6i
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 40 of 42 APPENDIX B – Vegetated Swale Fact Sheets and
Specifications
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual SDM 6-1
Fact Sheet SDM-6

VEGETATED SWALE
Also known as: Bioretention Swale, Treatment Swale, and Grassed Swale

DESCRIPTION
Vegetated swales are essentially bioretention cells
that are configured as linear channels, but are
typically not designed with an engineered soil matrix
and underlying gravel layer below the vegetation
layer to accommodate additional treatment, storage,
and infiltration. They function as a soil and plant‐
based filtration and infiltration feature that removes
pollutants through a variety of natural physical,
biological, and chemical treatment processes.

Vegetated swales are open, shallow channels with
vegetation covering the side slopes and bottom
that collect and slowly convey stormwater runoff to
downstream discharge points. They are designed to
treat runoff through vegetation filtration, biological
uptake, evapotranspiration, and/or infiltration into
the underlying soils. They trap particulate pollutants
(suspended solids and trace metals), promote infiltration, and reduce the flow velocity of storm water runoff.

Vegetated swales can serve as part of a storm water drainage system and can replace curbs, gutters and storm sewer systems. They are best suited to capture runoff from small impervious areas and should not be implemented in areas with highly contaminated runoff. They can be used as part of treatment train approach and are effective at providing pretreatment for other BMPs.

ADVANTAGES
• Reduces peak flow rates and total runoff volumes.
• Provides effective pretreatment for downstream BMPs by trapping, filtering, and infiltrating particulates and associated pollutants.
• Can serve as a cost-effective alternative to traditional curb and gutter. • Can be integrated into landscape design to improve aesthetic appeal.

LIMITATIONS
• Can be difficult to avoid channelization, which may cause erosion and limit infiltration potential. • Not suitable for steep slopes.
• May not be appropriate for industrial sites or locations where spills may occur. • Best suited for small drainage areas with low flow rates. • A thick vegetative cover is needed for these features to function properly.

KEY DESIGN FEATURES
In order to receive runoff volume reduction credits, vegetated swales must be designed in accordance with Treatment Control BMP 30 (TC-30) from the California Stormwater BMP Handbook, New Development and Redevelopment. Key design elements are summarized below:

Grassed swale. Photo Source: EPA
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual SDM 6-2
Fact Sheet SDM-6

VEGETATED SWALE
• Maximum flow velocity from the design storm event shall not exceed 1.0 foot per second. • Vegetated swales should be designed so that the water level does not exceed 2/3rds the height of the grass or 4 inches, whichever is less, at the design treatment rate. • Longitudinal slopes between 0.5% and 2.5% are recommended. • Provide sufficient length to achieve a desired treatment contact time of 10 minutes. Regardless of contact time, the swale should not be less than 100 feet in length.
• Implement check dams for longitudinal slopes > 2.5% as a means to reduce slopes and promote infiltration.

Space as required to maintain maximum longitudinal bottom slope < 2.5%. • Implement entrance/outlet energy dissipation measures to limit erosion and promote retention. • Do not compact soils beneath vegetated swales.
• Trapezoidal channels are normally recommended but other configurations, such as parabolic, can also provide substantial water quality improvement and may be easier to mow than designs with sharp breaks in slope. • Swales constructed in cut are preferred, or in fill areas that are far enough from an adjacent slope to minimize the potential for gopher damage. Do not use side slopes constructed of fill, which are prone to structural damage by gophers and other burrowing animals.
• A diverse selection of low growing, plants that thrive under the specific site, climatic, and watering conditions should be specified. Vegetation whose growing season corresponds to the wet season are preferred. Drought tolerant vegetation should be considered especially for swales that are not part of a regularly irrigated landscaped area.
• The width of the swale should be determined using Manning’s Equation, at the peak of the design storm, and a value of 0.25 for Manning’s n.

West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual SDM 6-3
Fact Sheet SDM-6

VEGETATED SWALE
• If flow is to be introduced through curb cuts, place pavement slightly above the elevation of the the vegetated areas. Curb cuts should be at least 12 inches wide to prevent clogging. • Swales must be vegetated in order to provide adequate treatment and reduction of runoff. It is important to maximize water contact with vegetation and the soil surface. For general purposes, select fine, close-growing, water-resistant grasses. Refer to the Placer County Landscape Design Guidelines for more information. • If possible, divert runoff (other than necessary irrigation) during the period of vegetation establishment.

Where runoff diversion is not possible, cover graded and seeded areas with suitable erosion control materials.

Diverted runoff must be managed and retained onsite to avoid violation of the Phase II MS4 Permit. • Swales used as primary stormwater conveyance facilities (i.e. without high flow bypass) must be designed according to requirements in the Placer County Stormwater Management Manual. These swales will not qualify for volume reduction credits unless the design criteria specified above are also satisfied.

SIZING DESIGN GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS
The Post-Construction Storm Water Quality Plan (SWQP) Form 3-4 should be used to calculate the retention volume (Vret) associated with vegetated swales. This value is then used to calculate the area of impervious surface treated, and determine if other site design measures are necessary to capture the 85th percentile, 24-hour design storm for Regulated Projects. The equation for determining Vret is as follows:

Vret = Aimp * V85 * (1/12)
Where:

Vret = stormwater retention volume (ft3
);
Aimp = impervious area draining to vegetated swale (ft2); and 85 = Runoff volume from the 85th percentile, 24-hour design storm (in)

RUNOFF REDUCTION CREDIT REQUIREMENTS
• Vegetated swales must be designed in accordance with Treatment Control BMP 30 (TC-30 - Vegetated Swale) from the California Stormwater BMP Handbook, New Development and Redevelopment (available at www. cabmphandbooks.com).
• The maximum flow velocity for runoff from the design storm event must be less than or equal to 1.0 foot per second.

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
A maintenance plan shall be provided with the SWQP. The maintenance plan shall include recommended maintenance practices, state the parties responsible for maintenance and upkeep, specify the funding source for ongoing maintenance, and provide a site specific inspection checklist. At a minimum, maintenance shall include the following:
• Inspect on a semi-annual basis to assess slope integrity, soil moisture, vegetative health, soil stability, compaction, erosion, ponding, and sedimentation.
• Mow at least once per year, but do not cut grass shorter than the design flow depth because the effectiveness of the vegetation in reducing flow velocity and pollutant removal may be reduced. Grass cuttings should be removed from the swale and composted.
• Remove accumulated sediment when it is 3” deep or higher than the turf to minimize potential concentrated flows and sediment resuspension.
• Irrigate only as necessary to prevent vegetation from dying. • Integrated pest management should be used for pest control. The designer should ideally select vegetation that does not require fertilizers.

West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual SDM 6-4
Fact Sheet SDM-6

VEGETATED SWALE
• Reseed periodically to maintain dense turf.
• Remove trash or obstructions that cause standing water. • Prevent off-street parking or other activities that can cause rutting or soil compaction.

REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2010. Treatment BMP Technology Report. CTSW-RT-09-239.06.

Available online at: http://www.placer.ca.gov/~/media/cdr/Planning/documents/DesignGuides/Landscape%20 Design%20Guidelines.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Post-Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment. BMP Fact Sheets. Available online at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/ PostConstruction-Stormwater-Management-in-New-Development-and-Redevelopment.cfm

Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 41 of 42 APPENDIX C – Bioretention Fact Sheets and
Specifications
Bioretention
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-1
Fact Sheet TR-1
Bioretention facilities, also known as rain gardens and stormwater planters, are planted depressions that slow, treat, and infiltrate stormwater to improve water quality and manage hydromodification.

They can be located in a variety of settings such as along roadsides or incorporated into a site’s landscaping but should be designed by a qualified professional. Bioretention cells receive runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces and provide treatment through settling, filtration, and biological processes as stormwater ponds and percolates through planting soil media and into a subsurface gravel storage bed. Runoff volume is reduced by evapotranspiration and, if conditions are suitable, by infiltration into the underlying soils and groundwater. Bioretention facilities are effective at removing a variety of pollutants including trash, sediment, metals, nutrients, bacteria and hydrocarbons. Bioretention areas are usually designed to allow shallow ponding, with an overflow outlet to prevent flooding during heavy storms. The overflow can be directed to a storm drain system or to another BMP.

Two general types of bioretention facilities are allowable in the Permit including infiltrating bioretention and flow-through planters. Flowthrough planters are used in locations not suitable for infiltration and include impermeable liners and an underdrain pipe to collect the treated water and discharge it to the municipal storm drain or other appropriate location.

ADVANTAGES
• Protects and improves water quality by removing pollutants from stormwater runoff. • Reduces surface runoff volumes and attenuates peak flows. • Wide range of scales and site applicability.
• Attractive and relatively easy and inexpensive to install and maintain. • Improves air quality and reduces heat island effects. • Increases groundwater recharge.
• Creates habitat and increases biodiversity.

LIMITATIONS
• Infiltration of stormwater can negatively impact structural foundations and increase other geological hazards.

Locations shall be approved by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer. • High groundwater can slow infiltration rates or even seep into bioretention cells and discharge as surface water. An average 10 ft. separation, and a minimum of 5 ft., between the bottom of the BMP and groundwater is recommended.
• Contaminants in soil and groundwater can be mobilized by infiltrating water. • Existing infrastructure such as underground utilities and drainage infrastructure may constrain bioretention design.
• Vegetation requires maintenance and can look overgrown or weedy; seasonally it may appear dead.

KEY DESIGN FEATURES
The design of bioretention facilities involves many considerations and planning activities should be started at the earliest possible stage of a projects. It is critical that the facilities achieve the required performance standards while also protecting public health and safety, infrastructure and property. Bioretention design should begin during the site assessment and layout phase when determining building and parking locations and footprints and before the Roadside bioretnetion. Source: sitephocus.com
Bioretention
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-2
Fact Sheet TR-1
site grading plan is prepared. For infiltration type
planters, consult a licensed geotechnical engineer
about site suitability.

The key design features and considerations for
bioretention facilities include the following:

1. Topography: In appropriate conditions and
with careful design, bioretention facilities can
be located on slopes by incorporating check
dams, terracing, or other methods to pond
the water. Infiltration on slopes can create,
or increase, the potential for downgradient
seepage, landslides, and other geotechnical
hazards. Infiltration is generally not
recommended on slopes exceeding 10 percent.

2. Adjacent structures: Where bioretention
facilities are located next to structures such as
curb and gutter, sidewalks, buildings, additional
structural support may be required between the adjacent road or parking surface and bioretention soil media.

Vertical cutoff walls or impervious liners should be considered to keep stormwater from migrating into structural fill or road base materials. In expansive (C, D) soils, locate stormwater planters far enough from structures to avoid damage to foundations (as determined by a structural or geotechnical engineer). 10 feet is a typical ruleof-thumb.

Subsurface utilities should not be located within the bioretention facility and utility trenches should be isolated from the infiltrating areas to prevent the formation of preferential flow paths along trenches, migration of backfill materials, and flooding of utility vaults.

3. Inlet design: Inlets can include a variety of structures and configurations including curb cuts, open channels, and pipes. The design must provide the width and geometry needed to direct flows into the facility and its elevation must provide adequate hydraulic head for filtration and storage volume. To prevent stormwater runoff from eroding the soil surface as it enters the facility, a concrete splash pad or rock energy dissipater (3”-5” -size rounded rock, 6” depth) should be placed at the inlets.

4. Overflow: Provisions to bypass flows that exceed the design ponding depth must be included in bioretention designs. Overflow systems should be located near the entrance of the bioretention facility to prevent scouring of the system and mobilization of the mulch layer. Overflow provisions shall not impact structures. Overflow structures may consist of a raised overflow structure connected via pipe to an approved discharge point, or a surface conveyance route (e.g., curb cuts, open channel, or pipe). Overflow structures must be sized to convey peak flood flows, per Placer County SWMM requirements, and include provisions for clogging. Elevations must be set to provide storage of the required water quality volume.

5. Surface ponding: A minimum design depth of 6 inches is required for surface ponding to provide additional stormwater storage capacity, with a maximum depth of 12 inches. Ensure that the design does not allow ponding to persist for longer than 72 hours for vector control.

LID vegetated swale parking lot. Shellito Indoor Pool, Roseville. Photo: Greg Bates Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-3

6. Aggregate layer: A minimum 12-inch thick layer of ¾-inch washed aggregate below the planting media increases the facility’s water storage capacity and promotes positive drainage through the underdrain system. A 3-inch layer of smaller aggregate (washed pea gravel) between the planting media and ¾-inch aggregate layer can omit the need for filter fabric, which is known to cause clogging.

7. Bioretention soil media: A minimum 18-inch thick mixture of 60-70 percent sand meeting the specifications of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) C33 and 30-40 percent compost may be used to provide filtration of runoff while supporting healthy plant growth. It may be possible in some cases to use native soil or to amend the native soil so that it is suitable. Use of native soil will depend on the evaluation of the criteria in “Section 3 - Site Assessment” as well as consideration of structural needs and may require evaluation by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer.

8. Mulch: If the area will be mulched, initial excavation depth must anticipate the total combined media depth, to avoid having to reduce soil depth during construction to accommodate mulch at final grades. If mulch is used as a top dressing avoid wood chips or other material that will float and potentially clog overflow structures. Mulch should not be installed just before or during the rainy season.

9. Underdrain: An underdrain system should be included with the discharge elevation at the top of the aggregate layer to convey runoff not infiltrated into the native soil to the stormwater system or other appropriate discharge point. The underdrain may be eliminated in areas of high groundwater, rapidly infiltrating soils or where connection of the underdrain to a surface discharge point or to a subsurface storm drain are infeasible. The perforations in the underdrain must be directed down or else water flowing through the planting media into the gravel layer will immediately be collected and discharged through the underdrain. Maintenance access and cleanout ports should be provided so that underdrain system can be routinely inspected and cleaned as needed.

10. Liners: Facilities with documented high concentrations of pollutants in underlying soil or groundwater, facilities located where infiltration could contribute to a geotechnical hazard, and facilities located on elevated plazas or other structures may incorporate in impervious liner and may locate the underdrain discharge at the bottom of the subsurface aggregate layer.

11. Plants: A list of native plant species for the Sacramento Valley is provided in the table below. Use a variety of trees, shrubs and herbaceous plant materials. Native grass meadows are especially effective at controlling and treating storm water over a large area. Choose moisture-tolerant plants for the bottom of a bioretention swale or basin. Choose plants that can tolerate both fluctuating water conditions and drought conditions for the side edges.

Guidance on planting and general landscape design is provided in the Placer County Landscape Design Guidelines (Placer County Planning Services Division, 2013).

12. Pre-treatment: Runoff from industrial sites or locations where spills may occur or areas with excessive erosion or sediment sources should be pre-treated to address pollutants of concern prior to discharging into bioretention systems.

13. Underlying soils: Soils beneath the facility must be protected from compaction during construction activities.

If soils have been compacted previously they should be ripped as deeply as necessary to loosen the soils and re-establish natural infiltration rates.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-4 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Collinsia heterophylla Chinese Houses 1-2’ X X D
Eschscholzia californica California Poppy 1-1.5’ X X X D Gilia capitata Globe gilia 0.5-1’ X X X X D
Bouteloua gracilis Blue gramma grass 1.5-2’ X X D
Deschampsia caespitosa Tufted hair grass 1-2’ X X X EElymus glaucus Blue wildrye 1’ X X X E Elymus triticoides Creeping wildrye 1-3’ X X X X DFestuca californica 'Serpentine Blue' Serpentine blue California fescue 2-3’ X X X X E Festuca idahoensis Blue Idaho fescue 1’ X X X X E
Festuca idahoensis 'Siskiyou Blue' Siskiyou Blue Idaho fescue 2’ X X X ELeymus condensatus 'Canyon Prince' Canyon prince lyme grass 4’ X X X X ELeymus triticoides (Elymus triticoides) Creeping wild rye 1.5-3’ X X X X EMelica californica California melic 1-3’ X X D Muhlenbergia rigens Deer grass 5’ X X X X E
Sporobolus airoides Alkali sacaton 2’ X X X X D
Stipa cernua Nodding needlegrass 2’ X X X D
Stipa lepida Foothill needlegrass 2-3” X X X D
Stipa pulchra Purple needlegrass 2’ X X D
Carex barbarae Santa Barbara sedge 1-3’ X X X X X ECarex pansa California meadow sedge 0.5’ X X X ECarex praegracilis Clustered field sedge 1-2’ X X X X E Juncus balticus Baltic rush or wire rush 1-4’ X X X EJuncus effusus Common rush 1.5-2’ X X X E Juncus effusus var. brunneus Common rush 3-4’ X X X X E Juncus effusus var. pacificus Common rush 2-3’ X X X E
Juncus patens California gray rush 1.5-2.5’ X X X X EJuncus patens 'Carman's Gray' Carman's California gray rush 1-2’ X X X X E Scirpus robustus Alkali bull rush 5-15’ X X X EXerophyllum tenax Bear grass 2-4’ X X D Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow 1-3’ X X X X EAchillea millefolium 'Island Pink' Island pink common yarrow 2’ X X XAcmispon glaber (syn. Lotus scoparius) Deerweed 3’ X X E Aquilegia exima Serpentine columbine 2’ X X X X DAquilegia formosa Western columbine 1.5-3’ X X X X D Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort 3-5’ X X X X X EAsarum caudatum Wild ginger 1’ X X X X EAsclepias cordifolia Purple Milkweed 1-3’ X X X X D Asclepias fascicularis Narrowleaf milkweed 2-3’ X X X D

ANNUAL PLANTS

GRASSES & GRASS-LIKE PLANTS

PERENNIAL PLANTS
Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-5 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Asclepias speciosa Showy milkweed 3-6’ X X X DCarex tumulicola Foothill Sedge 1.5’ X X X X X E Dudleya cymosa Dudleya, Liveforever 3-6” X X X E
Epilobium canum California fuchsia 1-1.5’ X X DEpilobium canum 'Carman's Grey' Carman’s grey California fuchsia 2’ X X X X D Epilobium canum 'Catalina' Tall California fuchsia 1.5-3’ X X X X D Epilobium septentrionalis 'Select Select Mattole California fuchsia 0.25-0.5’ X X X DEquisetum scirpoides Dwarf scouring rush 0.5’ X X X X E Erigeron glaucus ‘Wayne Roderick’ Seaside Daisy 0.5’ X X X EErigeron karvinskianus Mexican daisy, Santa Barbara daisy 1-1.5’ X X X EEriodictyon californicum Yerba Santa 3-6’ X X X X EEriogonum gracile Wild buckwheat/ Slender 14-16” X X X X X D Eriogonum grande var rubescens Red-Flowered buckwheat 1-3’ X X EEriogonum umbellatum var. polyanthum Sulfur buckwheat 0.5-1’ X X X X EEriogonum ursinum Bear Valley buckwheat 0.25-1’ X x X X EEriophyllum lanatum Woolly sunflower 1-2’ X X X EFragaria vesca Wild strawberry 4-6” X X X X E EGrindelia stricta venulosa Coastal gum plant 1-2’ X X X X EHelenium bigelovii Bigelow's sneezeweed 2-3’ X X X DHeuchera 'Canyon Quartet' Canyon quartet alum root 1-2’ X X X X E Heuchera 'Lillian's Pink' Lillian’s pink alum root 1-2’ X X X E Heuchera maxima Island alum root 2-3’ X X X X E
Heuchera micrantha Crevice alum root 1-2’ X X X X EHeuchera 'Rosada' Rosada alum root 2-3 X X X X E Hibiscus lasiocarpus Hibiscus 4-6’ X X X X DIris douglasiana Douglas iris 1-2’ X X X X EIris Pacific Coast Hybrid 'Canyon White Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X E Iris Pacific Coast Hybrid 'Dorothea's Burgundy Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X E Iris Pacific Coast Hybrid 'Lavender' Lavender Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X E Iris Pacific Coast Hybrid 'Purple and Purple and white Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X E Iris Pacific Coast Hybrid 'Yellow' Yellow Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X EIris Pacific Coast Iris mixed Mixed colors Pacific Coast hybrid iris 1-2’ X X X X E Lilium pardilinum Leopard lily 3-8’ X X X D
Linum lewisii Blue Flax 2-3’ X X X X DLupinus polyphyllus Streamside lupine 1-3’ X X X D Mentzelia laevicaulis Blazing star 2-3’ X X D
Mimulus aurantiacus Sticky monkeyflower 3-5’ X X X X E
Mimulus aurantiacus ’Verity’, Bush monkeyflower 1-4’ X X X E Mimulus cardinalis Scarlet Monkeyflower 1 ½ -3’ X X X D Monardella odoratissima Mountain pennyroyal, coyote mint 0.3-2’ X X E PERENNIAL PLANTS CONT.

Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-6 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Penstemon azureus Azure penstemon 0.5-1.5’ X X X X D
Penstemon heterophyllus Foothill penstemon 1-3’ X X X X EPenstemon heterophyllus 'Margarita BOP' Margarita BOP foothill penstemon 1.5-2’ X X X X EPenstemon spectabilis Showy penstemon 3-4.5’ X X X E Phacelia imbricate Rock Phacelia, Pine Bee Flower 1-2’ X X DPhyla nodiflora Lippia 2-4" X X DPotentilla glandulosa Sticky cinquefoil 1-2’ X X X DRubus leucodermis Western raspberry 3-4’ X X DRubus parviflorus Thimbleberry 3-6’ X X X D Salvia 'Bee's Bliss' Bee's bliss Sonoma sage 1-1.5 X X X X E Salvia sonomensis Creeping Sage 1’ X X X EScrophularia californica California figwort, Bee Plant 4-6’ X X D Sedum obtusatum Sierra sedum 0.5’ X X X E
Sisyrinchium bellum Blue-eyed grass 1’ X X X D
Solidago californica California goldenrod 1’ X X X D
Solidago Californica 'Cascade Creek' Cascade Creek California goldenrod 3-4’ X X X D Symphyotrichum chilense California aster 2’ X X X X X D Whipplea modesta Western whipplea 0.25-0.75’ X X DWoodwardia fimbriata Western chain fern 4-6’ X X X E Wyethia angustifolia Narrowleaf mule’s ears 20” X X X X D Wyethia mollis Mountain mule's ears 0.5-2’ X X X DArctostaphylos bakeri 'Louis Pink manzanita 5-6’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos densiflora 'Howard McMinn's manzanita 5-8’ X X X X EArctostaphylos densiflora 'Sentinel' Sentinel manzanita 6-8’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos edmundsii 'Carmel Sur' Carmel Sur manzanita 1-1.5’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos ' Emerald Carpet' Emerald carpet manzanita 1’ X X X X EArctostaphylos glauca Bigberry manzanita 15’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos hookeri 'Wayside' Wayside Monterey manzanita 4’ X X X X EArctostaphylos 'John Dourley’ John Dourley manzanita 2-4’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos manzanita ' Dr. Hurd' Dr. Hurd's manzanita 10-12’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos uva-ursi ' Green Green Supreme bearberry 1’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 'Massachusetts' Massachusetts bearberry 1’ X X X X E Arctostaphylos uva-ursi 'Pacific Mist' Pacific Mist bearberry 2-3’ X X X X EArctostaphylos uva-ursi ' Point Reyes' Pt. Reyes bearberry 1’ X X X X EArctostaphylos uva-ursi ' Radiant' Radiant bearberry 1’ X X X X EArctostaphylos viscida Whiteleaf manzanita 4-12’ X X E Atriplex lentiformis Quail bush 3-10’ X X DBaccharis pilularis Coyote brush 4-8’ X X EBaccharis pilularis 'Pigeon Point' Pigeon Point coyote brush 1.5-3’ X X X E PERENNIAL PLANTS CONT.

SHRUBS
Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-7 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Calycanthus occidentalis Western Spicebush 8-15’ X X X X D Carpenteria californica California bush anemone 4-8’ X X X X ECarpenteria californica ' Elizabeth' Dr. McClintock's bush anemone 3-5’ X X X X E Ceanothus 'Blue Jeans' Blue jeans wild lilac 7-9 X X E
Ceanothus 'Centennial' Centennial wild lilac 2’ X X E
Ceanothus 'Concha' Concha wild lilac 6-7’ X X ECeanothus cuneatus Buck brush 5-10’ X X ECeanothus 'Dark Star' Dark Star wild lilac 5-6’ X X E Ceanothus gloriosus Pt. Reyes wild lilac 1-1.5’ X X E
Ceanothus gloriosus 'Anchor Bay' Anchor Bay wild lilac 1-1.5’ X X ECeanothus gloriosus var. exaltatus Emily Brown's hallelujah bush 1-2 X X X X E Ceanothus griseus 'Louis Edmunds' Louis Edmunds wild lilac 5-6’ X X E Ceanothus griseus var. horizon. 'Yankee Point' Yankee Point wild lilac 2-3’ X X E Ceanothus griseus var. horizontalis Carmel creeper wild lilac 1.5-2.5’ X X ECeanothus integerrimus Deerbrush wild lilac 3-7’ X X X DCeanothus 'Joan Mirov' Joan Mirov wild lilac 3-6’ X X X X ECeanothus 'Joyce Coulter' Joyce Coulter wild lilac 2-5’ X X ECeanothus 'Julia Phelps' Julia Phelps wild lilac 5-7’ X X ECeanothus maritimus ' Point Sierra' Pt. Sierra wild lilac 2-3’ X X ECeanothus maritimus ' Valley Violet' Valley Violet wild lilac 2-3 X X X ECeanothus ' Owlswood Blue' Owlswood blue island wild lilac 10’ X X X ECeanothus prostratus Squaw carpet 1’ X X X ECeanothus ' Ray Hartman' Ray Hartman wild lilac 12-20’ X X E Ceanothus thrysifolius repens 'Louis Edmunds' Louis Edmunds prostrate blue blossom 0,5-2’ X X X X E Ceanothus thyrsiflorus Blue blossom 5-15’ X X ECeanothus thyrsiflorus 'Skylark' Skylark compact blue blossom 3-6’ X X ECeanothus thyrsiflorus 'Snow Flurry' Snow flurry wild lilac 6-10’ X X ECercocarpus betuloides Mountain Mahogany, Birchleaf Mountain Mahogany 10-15’ X X X E Cercocarpus betuloides var blancheae Island mountain mahogany 10-12’ X X X E Cornus stolonifera (syn. C. sericea) redtwig or western dogwood 7-9’ X X X D Cornus stolonifera 'Peter's Choice' redtwig or western dogwood 7-9’ X X X DEriogonum fasciculatum (E. f. var. foliolosum) California buckwheat 1-3 X X X EEriogonum giganteum St. Catherine's lace 3-4’ X X X EFrangula tomentella Hoary coffeeberry 6-10’ X X X X E Fremontodendron ' Ken Taylor' Ken Taylor flannel bush 4-6’ X X E Fremontodendron 'Pacific Sunset' Pacific Sunset flannel bush 12-15’ X X EFremontodendron 'San Gabriel' San Gabriel flannel bush 15-20’ X X E Garrya elliptica 'Evie' Evie coast silktassel 8-15’ X X EGarrya elliptica 'James Roof' James Roof coast silktassel 8-15’ X X E Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon 8-15’ X X X E
SHRUBS CONT.

Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-8 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Heteromeles arbutifolia 'Davis Gold' Yellow berry toyon 8-15’ X X X E Isomeris arborea Bladderpod 3-4’ X X X E
Lupinus albifrons Silver Bush lupine 3-5’ X X X E
Lupinus arboreus Yellow flowered bush lupine 4-5’ X X X EMahonia aquifolium Oregon grape 3-6’ X X X X EMahonia aquifolium compacta Compact Oregon grape 2-4’ X X X X E Philadelphus lewisii 'Goose Creek' Double flowered wild philadelphus 4-8’ X X X DPrunus andersonii Desert peach 3-6’ X X DRhamnus californica Coffeeberry 3-15’ X X X E Rhamnus californica ‘Mound San Mound San Bruno coffeeberry 4-6’ X X X X E Rhamnus californica 'Eve Case' Eve Case coffeeberry 4-8’ X X X E Rhamnus californica ssp. tomentella Coffeeberry 6-15’ X X X X E Rhamnus ilicifolia Holly-leaf Redberry 5-15’ X X X X E
Rhamnus purshiana Cascara sagrada 10-15’ X X X X E
Rhus integrifolia Lemonade berry 3-10’ X X E
Rhus ovata Sugar bush 4-10’ X X E
Ribes aureum var. aureum Western golden currant (mountain) 3-6’ X X X X X DRibes aureum var. gracillimum Golden currant 3-6’ X X X X X D Ribes californicum Hillside gooseberry 3’ X X DRibes malvaceum Chaparral flowering currant 3-4’ X X D Ribes sanguineum Winter current 3-6’ X X X X D
Ribes sanguineum var. glutinosum Flowering currant 3-5’ X X X X DRibes sanguineum var. glutinosum Claremont flowering currant 3-6' X X X X DRibes sanguineum 'White Icicle' White icicle flowering currant 6-8’ X X X X D Ribes speciosum Fuchsia flowering gooseberry 3-6’ X X X X DRibes viburnifolium Evergreen currant 2-3’ X X X X E Rosa californica California wild rose 3’ X X X DSalvia apiana White sage 3-5’ X X X ESalvia clevelandii Cleveland’s sage 3-5’ X X ESalvia clevelandii 'Allen Chickering' Allen Chickering Cleveland’s sage 3-5 ’ X X ESalvia clevelandii 'Whirly Blue' Whirly blue Cleveland's sage 3-5’ X X X ESalvia clevelandii 'Winnifred Gilman' Winnifred Gilman Cleveland's sage 3’ X X E Salvia leucophylla Purple sage 3-7’ X X ESalvia mellifera Black sage 3-6’ X X X ESalvia mellifera 'Terra Seca' Terra seca black sage 2’ X X X E Sambucus caerulea Blue elderberry 6-9’ X X X DSambucus mexicana Mexican elderberry 6-12’ X X X X D Spiraea douglasii Western spiraea 4-5’ X X X D
Styrax redivivus officinalis Snow drop bush 5-7’ X X X D Symphoricarpos albus Snowberry 6-12’ X X X X D
Trichostema lanatum Wooly bluecurls 3-4’ X X E
Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-9 Botanic name Common name Height Dry Med Water Wet Full Sun Part Shade Shade Deciduous/ Evergreen Viguera parishii Desert golden eye 1-3’ X X X DCephalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush (buttonwillow) 3-15’ X X X X DCercis occidentalis Western redbud 15-25’ X X X X DMyrica californica Pacific wax myrtle 10-30’ X X E Prunus lyonii (P. ilicifolia ssp. lyonii) Catalina cherry 15-20’ X X X ESalix exigua (Salix hindsiana) Coyote willow 6-20’ X X X D Salix laevigata Red willow 10-25’ X X X DSalix lasiolepsis Arroyo willow 10-20’ X X DUmbellularia californica California bay 6-50’ X X EAcer circinatum Vine maple 5-35’ X X X X DAcer macrophyllum Big-leaf maple 30-50’ X X X X DAesculus californica California buckeye 10-30’ X X X X D Arbutus menziesii Madrone 20-50’ X X X X E
Calocedrus dedurrens Incense cedar 50-90’ X X X E
Cornus nuttallii mountain dogwood 20-50’ X X X DCupressus sargentii Sargent cypress 10-40’ X X E Fraxinus latifolia Oregon ash 30-40’ X X X X D
Juglans californica var. hindsii Northern California black walnut 30-60’ X X X DPinus attenuata Knobcone pine 20-40’` X X EPinus jeffreyi Jeffrey pine 60-120’ X E Pinus lambertiana Sugar 60-200’ X EPinus ponderosa Ponderosa pine 80-100’ X E Pinus sabiniana Foothill pine 40-80’ X EPlatanus racemosa California sycamore 40-60’ X X D Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 20-70 X X EQuercus berberidifolia Scrub oak 6-15’ X X E Quercus douglasii Blue oak 30-50’ X X X X D
Quercus durata Leather Oak 10’ X X E
Quercus kelloggii Black oak 30-80’ X X DQuercus lobata Valley oak 50-70’ X X D Quercus wislizenii Interior live oak 30-80’ X X X E
Aristolochia californica California pipe vine 10-40’ X X X X DClematis ligusticifolia Western clematis 4-30’ X X X X DClematis sp. Virgin’s Bower 10-30’ X X X DLonicera hispidula Pink Honeysuckle 8-12' x x x D Vitis californica California wild grape 10-20’ X X X D
TREES
VINES
SHRUBS CONT.

SHRUBS/TREES
Sacramento Valley Native Plant List. Provided by the California Native Plant Society, Sacramento Valley Chapter, July 2015.

Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-10

SIZING DESIGN GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS
The Post-Construction Storm Water Quality Plan (SWQP) Form 3-5 should be used to calculate the Water Quality Volume (WQV) of bioretention areas for Regulated Projects. This value is then used to iteratively determine the necessary bioretention area sizing to capture the remainder of the 85th percentile, 24-hour design storm not retained by Site Design Measures. The equation for determining the WQV is as follows:

WQV = Unit WQV * Aimp * RC
Where:

WQV = Water Quality Volume (ft3);
Unit WQV = design storm based on elevation and drawdown time Aimp = impervious drainage area untreated by Site Design Measures (ft2 ); and
RC = Runoff Coefficient (default 0.9).

Sites with documented high concentrations of pollutants in underlying soil or groundwater, sites located where infiltration could contribute to a geotechnical hazard, and sites located on elevated plazas or other structures may incorporate an impervious liner and may locate the underdrain discharge at the bottom of the gravel layer to create a “Flow-Through Planter.” These Flow-Through Planters must be sized according to Water Quality Flow (WQF) using Form 3-5 and Form 3-7 of the SWQP. The equation for determining the WQF for Flow-Through Planters is as follows:

WQF = Aimp * PF
/ 43,200
Where:

WQF = Water Quality Flow (cfs);
Aimp = impervious drainage area untreated by Site Design Measures (ft2); and PF = flow based design storm intensity (0.2 inch/hr).

CONSTRUCTION PHASE CONSIDERATIONS
Protection and Excavation
Protecting bioretention areas during all phases of construction is a top priority. In project specifications, and during pre-bid and pre-construction meetings, communicate requirements and expectations to the contractor. From the start of construction, areas should be fenced to define limits and keep heavy equipment out. Erosion and sediment control measures should be placed so that construction sediment and wastes cannot enter the facility. Excavation activities should avoid compacting the facility base and sidewalls and should not take place during wet weather. Inlets should be blocked until construction sediment sources are removed and plants are sufficiently established to hold up to stormwater flows. Plant establishment times will depend on plant species. Storm water directed away from bioretention areas during plant establishment must be managed using temporary BMPs.

Structures and Materials
Structures such as curbs, inlets, checkdams, bypass and underdrain systems and containment walls are critical to facility function. During construction, verify that the elevations of these elements match the design drawings. For example, the raised overflow structures used in bioretention facilities may look like a plan error to contractors not Bioretention
Fact Sheet TR-1
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-10
experienced with LID. Clearly communicating design objectives will help avoid uninformed field adjustments.

The bioretention soil mix and aggregate layers are also key components to achieving the desired performance. During pre-bid and pre-construction meetings, explain the characteristics and purpose of these materials to contractors and follow up by thoroughly reviewing construction material submittals.

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
A maintenance plan shall be provided with the Final SWQP. The maintenance plan shall include recommended maintenance practices, state the parties responsible for maintenance and upkeep, specify the funding source for ongoing maintenance, with provisions for full replacement when necessary, and provide site specific inspection checklist.

At a minimum the following inspections and maintenance activities should be conducted on an annual basis or more frequently if necessary:

Maintenance Indicator Required Maintenance Activity
Is litter, excess sediment or debris present in the upstream drainage or in the bioretention facility?
Remove litter, sediment/debris.

Inspect the areas upstream of the bioretention facility to make sure the tributary area is properly stabilized.

Is standing water present in the facility for longer than 72 hours after a storm?
Remove any accumulated sediment and flush drainage
system including underdrain.

Remove and replace top few inches of soil.

Remove and replace all soil, re-grade and re-plant.

Are dead plants, weeds present? Remove dead vegetation and replace as necessary. Pull weeds and trim excess plant growth.

Is erosion occurring within the facility or drainage system? Repair erosion and stabilize to prevent recurrence Are holes or voids present in the facility? Inspect underdrain and replace soil if needed.

Are unwanted rodents or other pests present? Implement environmentally friendly pest control practices. Do not use pesticides or herbicides in the
bioretention facility.

REFERENCES
City of Salinas Department of Engineering and Transportation. 2014. Stormwater Standard Plans (SWSPs). Available online at: http://www.ci.salinas.ca.us/services/engineering/engineering.cfm Placer County Planning Services Division. 2013. Placer County Landscape Design Guidelines.

Available online at: http://www.placer.ca.gov/~/media/cdr/Planning/documents/DesignGuides/Landscape%20 Design%20Guidelines.pdf
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-11
Bioretention FaciLITIES
Fact Sheet TR-1

IN STREET BIORETENTION - WITHOUT PARKING
Plan & Section Views

DESIGN DETAILS
DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Source: Adapted from City of Salinas West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-12
Bioretention FaciLITIES
Fact Sheet TR-1

IN STREET BIORETENTION - WITH PARKING
Plan and Section Views

DESIGN DETAILS
DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Source: Adapted from City of Salinas West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 1-13
Bioretention FaciLITIES
Fact Sheet TR-1
DRAWING NOT TO SCALE Source: Adapted from City of Salinas

BIORETENTION IN LANDSCAPE OR OPEN SPACE AREAS
Plan and Section Views

DESIGN DETAILS

West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 2-1
Fact Sheet TR-2
Media Filter

DESCRIPTION
Storm water media filters are typically two-chambered
including a pretreatment settling basin and a filter consisting of sand, gravel, or other adsorptive filtering media. As storm water flows into the first chamber, large particles settle out, and then finer particles and other pollutants are removed as stormwater flows through the filtering media in the second chamber. There are a number of design variations including the Austin sand filter, Delaware sand filter, multi-chambered treatment train (MCTT), and manufactured storm water
filters. Treated storm water is collected in an effluent chamber or underdrain, and subsequently discharged to a storm water conveyance system or other appropriate location.

Manufactured storm water filters are typically underground systems that utilize membranes of various materials or
cartridges filled with different types of media to filter stormwater runoff. For cartridge systems, the media used can be inert, such as sand, or adsorptive, such as peat or manufactured media. The effectiveness of these systems depends on the type of membrane or media being implemented, the filter loading rate, and the characteristics of the influent storm water. For some systems, the water chemistry will also determine the effectiveness of the filter in removing dissolved constituents.

Advantages
• Protects and improves water quality by removing pollutants from storm runoff. • Customizable sizing (small footprint).
• Customizable filter media to target key site pollutants. • May be located underground.
• Does not require irrigation.

Limitations
• Minimal reduction in runoff volume in comparison to other systems that promote infiltration, evaporation, or evapotranspiration.
• Designs that maintain permanent standing water may create vector concerns • Confined space training may be required for maintenance on vault systems. • Failure to maintain media filter may result in clogging and system failure. • Significant head loss through filters may limit use on flat sites. • High installation and maintenance costs.

KEY DESIGN FEATURES
Media filters may only be implemented for Regulated Projects that demonstrate use of bioretention facilities to be infeasible. Regulated Projects implementing media filters must meet the following requirements:

1. Projects creating or replacing an acre or less of impervious area, and located in a designated pedestrian-oriented commercial district (i.e., smart growth projects), and having at least 85% of the entire project site covered by permanent structures;

2. Facilities receiving runoff solely from existing (pre-project) impervious areas; and Photo Source: Portland BES
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 2-2
Fact Sheet TR-2
Media Filter

3. Historic sites, structures or landscapes that cannot alter their original configuration in order to maintain their historic integrity.

The performance of any media filter is governed primarily by the following factors which should be carefully evaluated when designing the facility:
• Hydraulic Loading Rate – The application rate of untreated water to the surface of the filter media usually expressed as a flow rate per filter surface area (i.e. gpm/ft2 );
• Filter Media Gradation – A finer media gradation reduces hydraulic conductivity and increases the capture efficiency for fine particulate pollutants. Finer media also has a greater surface area which increases sorption rates for chemically active media. A more homogenous media gradation increases voids volume in a media bed.

Finer media is more susceptible to surface clogging.
• Residence Time - Residence time is a function of media gradation, hydraulic loading rate and the media bed depth and configuration. A longer residence time generally improves pollutant removal performance. • Media Chemical Properties – Filter media can be inert (i.e. sand) or can be selected to target specific pollutants of concern (i.e. activated carbon for trace organics). Chemically active options may be organic, mineral or synthetic or a combination of types. Media should be selected with consideration of the type and load of pollutants requiring removal.
• Pretreatment – Integrate adequate pretreatment facilities into media filter designs to reduce sediment loading and maintenance frequency. The level of pretreatment required is dependent on the tributary drainage area, but typical pretreatment consists of a sedimentation chambers, hydrodynamic separator, vegetated buffer strips, and vegetated swales.
• Hydraulic Head – Different media filters types have varying hydraulic head requirements that must be considered during design. Certain media filter configurations may not be suitable for flat sites.

SIZING DESIGN GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS
The Post-Construction Storm Water Quality Plan (SWQP) Form 3-5 should be used to calculate the Water Quality Flow (WQF) of media filters for Regulated Projects. This value is then used in Form 3-7 to iteratively determine the necessary media filter sizing to capture the remainder of the 85th percentile, 24-hour design storm not retained by Site Design Measures. The equation for determining the WQF for media filters is as follows:

WQF = Aimp * PF
/ 43,200
Where:

WQF = Water Quality Flow (cfs);
Aimp = impervious drainage area untreated by Site Design Measures (ft2 ); and
PF = flow based design storm intensity (0.2 inch/hr).

Construction Phase Considerations
• Divert flow around the sand filter to protect it from sediment loads during construction. If sediment does enter the facility during construction, the sediment will require removal after the tributary area has been stabilized.

Diverted flow must be managed using temporary BMPs.

West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 2-3
Fact Sheet TR-2
Media Filter
• Where underdrains are used, ensure that the minimum slope of the pipe is 0.5 (1/2) percent. • Ensure that the inverts of notches, orifices, or weirs dividing chambers correspond with design elevations to ensure proper function.
• The surface of bed filters should be completely level to promote uniform filtration. • If precast concrete lids are used, provide lifting rings or threaded sockets to allow easy removal with standard lifting equipment.
• Once construction is complete, stabilize the entire tributary area to the media filter before allowing runoff to enter the unit.

Maintenance Considerations
Media filters may exhibit decreased effectiveness after a single year of operation, depending on the activities occurring in the drainage area and filter loading. They clog easily when subjected to high sediment loads, and sediment reducing pretreatment practices placed upstream of the filter should be maintained properly to reduce sediment loads into the filter.

Maintenance efforts will need to focus on basic housekeeping practices such as removal of sediment and debris accumulations to prevent clogs and/or ponds of standing water. To minimize the potential for clogging, frequent maintenance and inspection practices are required. Waste sand, gravel, membranes, or filter media must be disposed of properly and in accordance with all applicable laws.

Media filters can become a nuisance due to mosquito or midge breeding if not properly designed and maintained.

Installations should dewater completely (recommended 96 hour or less residence time) to prevent creating mosquito and other vector habitats.

Available Vendor Products
The names of vendor products listed below are for
informational purposes only. Their appearance here is
not an endorsement of the products or manufacturers by
Placer County.
• BayFilter™
• Fabco Filter Cartridges
• Jellyfish®
• Media Filtration System (MFS)
• Perk Filter™
• Puristorm™
• Up-Flo™
• StormFilter®
• VortFilter™
References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2010. Treatment BMP Technology Report. CTSW-RT-09-239.06.

Available online at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/stormwater/pdf/CTSW-RT-09-239-06.pdf California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA). 2003. California Stormwater BMP Handbook – New Development and Redevelopment. BMP Fact Sheet TC-40: Media Filter and BMP Fact Sheet MP-40: Media Filter. Available online at:
https://www.casqa.org/resources/bmp-handbooks/new-development-redevelopment-bmp-handbook Photo Source: Contech®
West Placer Stormwater Quality Design Manual TR 2-4
Fact Sheet TR-2
Media Filter
Low Impact Development Center, Inc. 2010. Low Impact Development Manual for Southern California: Technical Guidance and Site Planning Strategies. Available online at: https://www.casqa.org/sites/default/files/downloads/ socallid-manual-final-040910.pdf
Sacramento County, et al. 2014. Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region. Available online at:
http://www.beriverfriendly.net/docs/files/Master%20Stormwater%20Quality%20Manual%202014_FINAL_W%20 APPEND_W%20COVER.pdf
Sierra Vista Specific Plan – Stormwater Management Plan Page 42 of 42 APPENDIX D – Oversized Exhibit SWQ-1
Environmental Noise Assessment
Westbrook Parcel WB-41 Residential Development
Roseville, California
BAC Job # 2021-128
Prepared For:

Westpark SV 400, LLC
Prepared By:

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc.

Dario Gotchet, Senior Consultant
August 25, 2021
Attn: Ryan O’Keefe
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 265
Roseville, CA 95661
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. ● 3551 Bankhead Road, Loomis, CA 95650 ● Phone: (916) 663-0500 ● bacnoise.com ADDENDUM ATTACHMENT 4
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Environmental Noise Assessment
Westbrook Parcel WB-41 Residential Development – Roseville, California

Page 1 ends

Roseville City CouncilJanuary 19, 2022

Roseville City Council
January 19, 2022