Agenda packet — San Jacinto City Council, January 16, 2024 (part 6 of 8)

CASE NARRATIVE
Authorized Signature Name / Title (print) Ken Zheng, President Signature / Date Ken Zheng, President
12/21/2021 10:54:02 Laboratory Job No. (Certificate of Analysis No.) 2112-00175 Project Name / No. RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO C3-8812
Dates Sampled (from/to) 12/15/21 To 12/15/21
Dates Received (from/to) 12/15/21 To 12/15/21
Dates Reported (from/to) 12/21/21 To 12/21/2021
Chains of Custody Received Yes
Comments:

Subcontracting
Organic Analyses
No analyses sub-contracted
Inorganic Analyses
No analyses sub-contracted
Sample Condition(s)
All samples intact
Positive Results (Organic Compounds)
None
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1190 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 2 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
001 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-1-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 1.9 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 130 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 16 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.2 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 7.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 3.3 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum 0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 5.4 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 40 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 40 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1191 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 3 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
001 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-1-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 110 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 002 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-2-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 200 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 19 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 6.7 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 7.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 1.9 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 5.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1192 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 4 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
002 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-2-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 56 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 58 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1193 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 5 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
002 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-2-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Decachlorobiphenyl 110 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 003 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-3-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 170 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 17 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 7.2 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 1.9 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.7 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 47 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 46 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1194 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 6 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
003 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-3-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 004 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-4-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.2 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 180 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 19 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 6.3 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1195 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 7 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
004 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-4-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Copper 6.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 3.8 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum 0.71 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 5.3 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 51 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 51 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1196 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 8 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
004 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-4-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 005 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-5-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.1 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 170 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 18 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 6.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 6.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 3.1 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.9 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1197 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 9 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
005 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-5-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 110 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 006 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-6-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.1 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1198 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 10 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
006 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-6-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Barium 170 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 17 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.7 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 7.4 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 2.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.9 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 47 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 56 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1199 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 11 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
006 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-6-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 140 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 007 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-7-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.2 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 150 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 17 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 6.4 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 2.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.7 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 45 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1200 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 12 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
007 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-7-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Zinc 47 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 140 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1201 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 13 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
008 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-8-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 160 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 17 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 5.5 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 2.1 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.3 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 44 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 48 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1202 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 14 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
008 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-8-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Decachlorobiphenyl 120 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN 009 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-9-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
[Metals Title 22 no Hg]
Metals Acid Digestion Complete EPA 3050B 1.0 12/16/21 TLB Antimony 2.1 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Arsenic <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Barium 150 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Beryllium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cadmium <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Chromium 16 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Cobalt 5.6 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Copper 6.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Lead 2.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Molybdenum <0.50 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Nickel 4.4 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Selenium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1203 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 15 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
009 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-9-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Silver <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Thallium <1.0 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 1.0 12/16/21 TLB
Vanadium 45 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 0.50 12/16/21 TLB
Zinc 49 mg/Kg EPA 6010B 1.0 5.0 12/16/21 TLB
[Mercury]
Mercury Digestion Complete EPA 7471A 1.0 12/20/21 JEN
Mercury <0.20 mg/Kg EPA 7471A 1.0 0.20 12/20/21 JEN
[Pesticides]
Ultrasonic Extraction Complete EPA 3550 1.0 12/16/21 JEN Aldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
alpha-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN beta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN delta-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN gamma-BHC <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Chlordane <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDD <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDE <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN 4,4'-DDT <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Dieldrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan I <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan II <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN
Endrin Aldehyde <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Endrin ketone <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.0050 12/16/21 JEN Methoxychlor <0.010 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.010 12/16/21 JEN Toxaphene <0.050 mg/Kg EPA 8081A 1.0 0.050 12/16/21 JEN [Surrogates]
Tetrachloro-m-xylene 140 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1204 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

Page 16 of 16 ends

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Cust #
Permit Number
Customer P.O.
93681
H080
C3-8812
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
Analysis Result Method Date
12/21/21
12/15/21
Qual Units DF RL Tech

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
009 Date & Time Sampled: 12/15/21 Sample: B-9-0.5'-1.5' Sample Matrix: Soil
.....continued
Decachlorobiphenyl 130 %REC EPA 8081A/8082 50-150 12/16/21 JEN Respectfully Submitted: Ken Zheng - Lab Director

ABBREVIATIONS
DF = Dilution Factor
RL = Reporting Limit, Adjusted by DF
MDL = Method Detection Limit, Adjusted by DF
Qual = Qualifier
Tech = Technician

QUALIFIERS
B = Detected in the associated Method Blank at a concentration above the routine RL.

B1 = BOD dilution water is over specifications . The reported result may be biased high.

D = Surrogate recoveries are not calculated due to sample dilution.

E = Estimated value; Value exceeds calibration level of instrument.

H = Analyte was prepared and/or analyzed outside of the analytical method holding time I = Matrix Interference.

J = Analyte concentration detected between RL and MDL.

Q = One or more quality control criteria did not meet specifications. See Comments for further explanation.

S = Customer provided specification limit exceeded.

The data and information on this, and other accompanying documents, represent only the sample(s) analyzed and is rendered upon condition that it is not to be reproduced, wholly or in part, for advertising or other purposes without approval from the laboratory.

USDA-EPA-NIOSH Testing Food Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Microbiological Analyses and Research

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1205 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT

Page 1 of 2 ends

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
1745 W. ORANGEWOOD AVE.

SUITE 201
ORANGE, CA 92868
Date Reported
Date Received
Invoice No.

Customer #
Date Sampled
93681
H080
12/15/2021
Customer P.O.
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
12/21/2021
12/15/2021
C3-8812
Method # EPA 6010B QC Reference # 100053 Date Analyzed: 12/16/2021 Technician: TLB Samples 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 Results LCS %REC LCS %DUP LCS %RPD SPIKE %RECSPIKE %DUPSPIKE %RPD Antimony 101 101 0.2 93 93 0.4 Arsenic 98 98 0.3 83 83 1.1 Barium 100 100 0.4 88 82 1.0 Beryllium 101 102 1.0 102 101 1.1 Cadmium 99 98 0.6 85 85 0.4 Chromium 100 100 0.4 68 67 0.9 Cobalt 99 98 1.3 83 83 0.3 Copper 100 102 2.5 90 93 2.0 Lead 99 98 1.1 79 80 1.5 Molybdenum 99 98 1.4 91 91 0.7 Nickel 99 98 1.0 81 82 1.0 Selenium 99 100 0.8 74 75 0.9 Silver 97 99 1.7 88 89 1.6 Thallium 98 103 5.0 80 83 7.9 Vanadium 101 102 0.8 92 96 1.5 Zinc 99 98 0.6 79 80 0.7 Control Ranges
LCS %REC LCS %RPD SPIKE %RPD
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20
75 - 125 0 - 20 0 - 20 Method # EPA 7471A QC Reference # 100106 Date Analyzed: 12/20/2021 Technician: JEN Samples 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 Results LCS %REC LCS %DUP LCS %RPD SPIKE %RECSPIKE %DUPSPIKE %RPD Mercury 94 91 3 85 88 3 Control Ranges LCS %REC LCS %RPD SPIKE %RPD
75 - 125 0 - 25 0 - 25 Method # EPA 8081A QC Reference # 100063 Date Analyzed: 12/16/2021 Technician: JEN Samples 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 Results LCS %REC SPIKE %RECSPIKE %DUPSPIKE %RPD
4,4'-DDT 70 63 51 12 Aldrin 110 120 110 10 Dieldrin 100 110 110 0 Endrin 72 93 95 2 gamma-BHC 96 120 100 20 Heptachlor 70 94 95 1 Control Ranges
LCS %REC SPIKE %RPD
30 - 130 0 - 30
50 - 140 0 - 30
70 - 130 0 - 30
70 - 150 0 - 30
50 - 150 0 - 30
50 - 150 0 - 30 Method # EPA 8081A/8082
QC Reference # 100063 Date Analyzed: 12/16/2021 Technician: JEN Samples 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1206 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) CHEMISTRY · MICROBIOLOGY · FOOD SAFETY · MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD · COSMETICS · WATER · SOIL · SOIL VAPOR · WASTES
909-781-6335
1650 S. GROVE AVE., SUITE C
ONTARIO, CA 91761
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
www.arlaboratories.com [email protected]

QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT

Page 2 of 2 ends

HILLMANN GROUP

RYAN TERWILLIGER
Date Reported
Date Received
Date Sampled 12/15/2021
2112-00175
Project: RICHLAND - SAN JACINTO
12/21/2021
12/15/2021
Method # EPA 8081A/8082
QC Reference # 100063 Date Analyzed: 12/16/2021 Technician: JEN Samples 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 Results BLKSRR%R
EC Decachlorobiphenyl 91 Tetrachloro-m-xylene 110 Control Ranges BLKSRR%REC
50 - 150
50 - 150 No method blank results were above reporting limit Respectfully Submitted: Ken Zheng - President

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1207 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1208
Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202

4.1.t
Packet Pg. 1209 Attachment: Appendix F3 - Limited Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

PRELIMINARY

HYDROLOGY STUDY
FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 38202
Prepared by:

BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING
41555 East Florida Avenue, Suite G
Hemet, CA 92544
March 24, 2022

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1210 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 1:

Appendix A:

Appendix B:

Appendix C:

Appendix D:

Table of Contents
Study Narrative and Runoff Summary
Vicinity Map, Soils Group Map, Precipitation Plates, Runoff Index Plate
10-Year and 100-Year Rational Hydrology Calculations,
Undeveloped Condition. Hydrology Exhibit Undeveloped
Condition
10-Y ear and 100-Y ear Rational Hydrology Calculations, Developed Condition. Hydrology Exhibit Developed
Condition
Preliminary Basin Sizing Hydrology for Mitigating Incremental Increase (West Basin)
- 10-Year, 24 Hour Unit Hydrograph, Undeveloped Condition - 10-Year, 24 Hour Unit Hydrograph, Developed Condition - Unit Hydrograph Exhibit - Undeveloped Condition
- Unit Hydrograph Exhibit - Developed Condition
- Supporting Data

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1211 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) NARRATIVE:

TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 38202

PRELILMINARY HYDROLOGY STUDY
Tentative Tract No. 38202 is a 181 lot subdivision on 33.8 acres located on the east side of Lyon Avenue, approximately 566 feet north of Cottonwood Avenue. The site naturally drains to the west/northwest and the project has been conceptually designed to honor that drainage pattern. Site soils are AC and BC. The site has been designed to drain to two onsite detention/infiltration basins.

Basin No. 1 is located at the northwest comer of the site. Basin No. 2 is located along the north tract boundary between Lots 30 and 31. The basins serve as water quality mitigation basins as well as stormwater mitigation, the design of which is discussed in the project P-WQMP. With respect to storm water mitigation, Basin No. I has been designed to retain the volumetric difference between the developed and undeveloped condition I 0-year, 24 hour storm in accordance with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District preliminary design criteria. Unit hydrograph calculations for the preliminary design are included in Appendix D of this report.

Basin No. 2 drains to MDP Line G-3 proposed for construction as a part of this project. As Line G-3 is a Master Planned drainage facility, Basin No. 2 has been designed to retain only the BMP volume as calculated in the project P-WQMP.

The following report also includes rational hydrology calculations for the I 0-year and 100-year recurrence interval for the undeveloped and developed site conditions. Stormwater flows are intercepted via onsite storm drain systems and discharged to the infiltration/detention basins discussed above. The peak runoff flows at the two locations is summarized as follows:

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1212 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Rational Hydrology Runoff Summary
Drainage Area Designation* Area (Ac) Orn{cfs) 0100 (cfs) Undeveloped Site 33.8 27.3 44.1
Area A 9.3 9.7 15.3
AreaB 5.4 5.8 9.0
AreaC 8.5 8.8 13.7
AreaD 8.5 9.8 14.9
Areas A & B 14.7 15.5 24.3
Areas C & D 17.0 18.6 28.6
* See Rational Hydrology Exhibits in Appendix B and C

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1213 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPENDIX 'A'

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1214 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) rn
RAMONA EXPY.
w w tii ~ ~
NORTH SITE 0
I-
:z:
-:,
~
:z:
<C

COTTONWOOD (/)
w
>- ro :z: ~ ~ a:: 0 Isz ~ ::::::!!: (/)
_J
<C
7TH STREET a.. 7TH STREET

VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1215 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) .r--
·.r .. --.,.,.

LEGEND

SOILS GROUP BOUNDARY
A SOLS GROUP DESK.NATION
RCFC a WCD
HYDROLOGY JVlANUAL
5olL ·. 1sC0 -- - FEET - -~

HYDROLOGIC SOILS GROUP
FOR
SAN JAClNTO
Pl ATF'
r' I,
C
MAP

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1216 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ..,- RAINFALL INTENSITY-INCHES PER HOUR ....._ :u
--< n RIVERSIDE RIVERSIDE I RUBIDOUX I 0 SAN JACINTO I SUN C !TY ::a .,.. (l'QQTHI LL AREAS I 0 1- n MINUTES
DURATION FREQUENCY OURUION FREQUENCY DURATION FREQUENCY DURATION FREQUENCY DURATION FREQUE,.,CY 0 141NUTES MINUTES MINUTES MINUTES ~, l 0 100 Io 100 10 l 00 10 100 10 100 a, YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR --< 5 2.75 3.92 5 3.U 4.71 5 3.18 4. 71 5 2.a1 4. 16 5 3.25 4.85 7 • 6 2.48 3.55 6 2. 84 4,26 6 2.87 4.26 6 2.56 3,79 6 2.95 4.40 ::5:.... 7 2.ze 3.26 7 2,61 3.91 7 2.64 J.91 7 2.37 3.51 7 2.12 4.06 )> • n 2.12 J.03 8 2.42 3.63 8 2.45 J.63 8 2.22 J.29 8 2.53 3.78 9 l. 99 2.114 9 2.21 3.41 9 2.30 3.41 9 2.09 3.10 9 2.38 3.55 :z C 0 10 I .118 2.611 10 2. 14 3.21 10 2 . 17 3.21 10 l, 98 2.94 10 2.25 3.36 )> 11 1. 78 2.54 11 2.03 3.05 11 2 . 06 J.05 II 1 .89 2.80 11 2.14 3.19 r- 12 1.10 2.42 12 l. 94 2.91 12 I , 96 2. 91 12 I• 8 l 2,68 12 2.04 J.05 13 1.62 2.32 13 I. 86 2.78 13 1.811 2,78 13 1.74 2,58 13 1, 96 2 ,92 14 l • 56 2.23 14 I• 78 2.67 14 1.eo 2.67 14 I, 68 2,48 14 1.88 2.81 15 1.so 2,14 IS 1.71 2.57 15 l • 74 2.57 15 l • 62 2.40 15 I• 8 l 2, 71 16 1.45 2.01 16 I. 66 2.48 16 l; 68 2,48 16 1. 57 2.32 16 1.75 2,62 17 1 • 40 2.00 17 1.60 2.40 17 l. 62 2 ,40 17 I• 52 2.25 17 l. 70 2. 54 111 l • 36 l .94 18 l • ~5 2.33 18 1. 57 2,33 18 lo48 2. l 9 18 l • 65 2,4& 19 l • 32 l. 88 }CJ l • 5 I 2 • 26 19 I .52 2.26 19 I• 44 2.13 19 l. 60 2.39 20 1 .28 1 • 113 20 1.46 2.20 20 1. 411 2.20 20 I• 40 2.08 20 I, 56 2,33 22 I .22 lo74 22 1. 39 2.oe 22 1.41 2.oe 22 I. 34 1,98 22 I. 48 2,21 Z4 1.16 1,66 24 1.32 I. 99 24 I .34 ).99 24 I, 28 I. 90 24 1,41 2.11 26 1, II 1.511 26 1.27 1.90 26 I .28 1.90 26 I. 23 1.82 26 1.36 2.03 28 1.06 1,52 28 1.22 1.82 28 l • 23 1.e2 28 1.19 1.76 28 I.JO I, 95 JO 1.02 1.46 30 1.11 I, 76 JO 1.111 l. 76 30 1.15 1.10 30 I. 26 1 .ea 32 .99 1.41 32 1. 13 I. 70 32 1.14 I, 70 32 l • 11 ).64 32 l. 2 I l ,81 z 34 • 96 J.37 34 1.09 1.64 34 1.11 1.64 34 1.011 1.59 34 I. I 8 I, 76 -i 36 ,93 1,32 36 1.06 1,59 36 1.01 j,59 36 1.05 l .55 36 I .14 I. 70 fTl 0 311 .90 1.29 311 I.OJ l. 54 38 1,04 l .54 38 1.02 1.s1 38 l. 11 1,66 C z 40 .87 1.25 40 I. 00 I.SO 40 I, 0 I ,.so 40 .99 I .47 40 1.08 1.61 ::0 en (/) 45 . e2 1. 17 45 , 94 l i 45 ,95 I, 4 I 45 ,94 I ,39 45 I, O I I, 51 < -i iJ 50 ,77 I• 11 50 ,88 I, 33 50 ,90 I• 33 so .99 I, JI 50 .96 I ,43 fT1 ~ 55 .73 1.os 55 , 84 1.26 55 .es 1.26 55 ,85 1 . 25 55 .91 1.36 (/) z .. .70 1.00 60 • 80 1,20 60 .81 1.20 60 .a1 1 .20 110 .117 I. 30 I 0 "ti 0 6!i • 67 ,96 65 ,77 1.15 65 .78 1, 15 65 • 78 1.1s 65 . 83 1,25 l> r 0 C 70 .64 .92 70 .73 l • l 0 70 .1• l • l D 70 .75 l .I l 70 . 110 1.20 ::0 75 .62 ••• 7!i .71 1.06 75 .72 ).06 75 .1z 1.01 75 .11 1.15 )> --f ~ ::0 0 110 .60 .es 110 .68 I. oz 80 .69 I• DZ 110 .10 1.04 80 • 75 1.12 rTI ~ 115 ,58 ,83 85 066 .99 115 .67 .99 85 • 611 l • 0 I 115 • 72 1.08 l> 0 I -
0 I SLOPE• .550 I SLOPE s .sso I SLOPE • .550 I SLOPE" = .500 .. I SLOPE • .s10 z --UI 0 ....
en

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1217 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

RUNOFF INDEX NUMBERS OF HYDROLOGIC SOIL-COVER COMPLEXES FOR PERVIOUS AREAS-AMC II Cover Type ( 3)
,NATURAL COVERS -
Barren
(Rockland, eroded and graded land)
Chaparrel, Broadleaf
(Manzonita, ceanothus and scrub oak)
Chaparrel, Narrowleaf
(Chamise and redshank)
Grass, Annual or Perennial
Meadows or Cienegas
(Areas with seasonally high water table,
principal vegetation is sod forming grass)
Open Brush
(Soft wood shrubs - buckwheat, sage, etc.)
Woodland
(Coniferous or broadleaf trees predominate.

Canopy density is at least 50 percent)
Woodland, Grass
(Coniferous or broadleaf trees with canopy
density fran 20 to 50 percent)

URBAN COVERS -
Residential or Commercial Landscaping
(Lawn, shrubs, etc.)
Turf
(Irrigated and mowed grass)

AGRICULTURAL COVERS -
Fallow
(Land plowed but not tilled or seeded)
Quality of Soil Group 1---.----...... ------1 Cover (2) A B C D Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
78 86 91 93
53 70
40 63
31 57
71 82
55 72
67 78
so 69
38 61
63 77
51 70
30 58
62 76
46 66
41 63
45 66
36 60
28 55
57 73
44 65
33 58
32 56
58 74
44 65
33 58
80 85
75 81
71 78
88 91
81 86
86 89
79 84
74 80
85 88
80 84
72 78
84 88
77 83
75 81
77 83
73 79
70 77
82 86
77 82
72 79
69 75
83 87
77 82
72 79
76 85 90 92
RCFC a WCD
HYDROLOGY .NJA NUAL

RUNOFF INDEX NUMBERS
FOR

PERVIOUS AREA
PLATE 0-5.5 (I of 2)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1218 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) I

RUNOFF INDEX NUMBERS OF HYDROLOGIC SOIL-COVER COMPLEXES FOR PERVIOUS AREAS-AMC II Cover Type (3)
AGRICULTURAL COVERS (cont. ) -
Legumes, Close Seeded
(Alfalfa, sweetclover, timothy, etc.)
Orchards, Deciduous
(Apples, apricots, pears, walnuts, etc.)
Orchards, Evergreen
(Citrus, avocados, etc.)
Pasture, Dryland
(Annual grasses)
Pasture, Irrigated
(Legumes and perennial grass)
Row Crops
(Field crops - tomatoes, sugar beets, etc.)
Small Grain
(Wheat, oats, barley, etc.)
Vineyard
Notes:

Quality of Soil Group t----,.----,---,..-----1 Cover (2) A B C D Poor
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Fair
Good
Poor
Good
Poor
Good
66 77 85 89
58 72 81 85
See Note 4
57 73 82 86
44 65 77 82
33 58 72 79
67 78 86 89
so 69 79 84
38 61 74 80
58 74 83 87
44 65 77 82
33 58 72 79
72 81 88 91
6 7 78 85 89
6 5 76 84 88
6 3 75 83 87
See Note 4 I I I
1 ~ All runoff index (RI) numbers are for Antecedent Moisture Condition (AMC) II.

2. Quality of cover definitions:

Poor-Heavily grazed or regularly burned areas. Less than 50 percent of the ground surface is protected by plant cover or brush and tree canopy.

Fair-Moderate cover with SO percent to 75 percent of the ground surface protected.

Good-Heavy or dense cover with more than 75 percent of the ground surface protected.

3. See Plate C-2 for a detailad description of cover types.

4. Use runoff index numbers based on ground cover type. See discussion under "Cover Type Descriptions" on Plate C-2.

5. Reference Bibliography i tern 17.

RCFC a WCD

HYDROLOGY NJANUAL

RUNOFF INDEX NUMBERS
FOR

PERVIOUS AREA
PLATE 0-5.5 (2 of 2)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1219 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

ACTUAL IMPERVIOUS COVER
Land Use (1)
Natural or Agriculture
Single Family Residential: (3)
40,000 s. F. (1 Acre) Lots
20,000 s. F. (~ Acre) Lots
7,200 - 10,000 s. F. Lots
Multiple Family Residential:

Condominiums
Apartments
Mobile Horne Park
Commercial, Downtown
Business or Industrial
Notes:

Range-Percent
0 - 10
10 - 25
30 - 45
45 - 55
45 - 70
65 - 90
60 - 85
80 -100
Recommended Value
For Average
Conditions-Percent(2
0 20
40 50
65 80
75 90

1. Land use should be based on ultimate development of the watershed.

Long range master plans for the County and incorporated cities should be reviewed to insure reasonable land use assumptions.

2. Recommended values are based on average conditions which may not apply to a particular study area. The percentage impervious may vary greatly even on comparable sized lots due to differences in dwelling size, improvements, etc. Landscape practices should also be considered as it is common in some areas to use ornamental gravels underlain by impervious plastic materials in place of lawns and shrubs. A field investigation of a study area should always be made, and a review of aerial photos, where available may assist in estimating the percentage of impervious cover in developed areas.

3. For typical horse ranch subdivisions increase impervious area 5 percent over the values recommended in the table above.

RCFC a WCD
HYDROLOGY .NJANUAL

IMPERVIOUS COVER
FOR

DEVELOPED AREAS
PLATE 0-5.6

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1220 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPENDIX 'B'

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1221 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

RATIONAL HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS

UNDEVELOPED CONDITION
10-Year Storm
100-Year Storm
Hydrology Exhibit - Undeveloped Condition

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1222 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File : 3820210YRUNDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

2.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
10 YEAR STORM

UNDEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 10.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 10.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= 0.810(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 675.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 12.400(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.000(Ft.)
Difference in elevation= 2.400(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00356 s(percent)= 0.36

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1223 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

3.000
TC= k(0.530)*((lengthA3)/(elevation change)JA0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 22.173 min.

Rainfall intensity= l.332(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Runoff Coefficient= 0.738
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group 8 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 82.00
Pervious area fraction=
Initial subarea runoff=

1.000; Impervious fraction

9.832(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 1.000
10 . 0 0 0 ( Ac . )

0.000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station
**** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION****
Top of natural channel elevation= 10.000(Ft.)
End of natural channel elevation= 6.000(Ft.)
Length of natural channel 1370.000(Ft.)
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel= 21.533(CFS) Natural valley channel type used
L.A. County flood control district
Velocity(ft/s) = (7 + 8(q(English
Velocity using mean channel flow=
formula for channel velocity:

Units)A.352) (slopeA0.5)
l.65(Ft/s)
Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2)
Normal channel slope 0.0029
Corrected/adjusted channel slope= 0.0029
Travel time= 13.82 min. TC= 36.00 min.

Adding area flow to channel
UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Runoff Coefficient= 0.703
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil (AMC 2) 82. 00
Pervious area fraction= 1.000; Impervious fraction
Rainfall intensity l.046(In/Hr) for a 10.0
Subarea runoff= 17.502(CFS) for 23.BOO(Ac.)

0.000
year storm
Tg tal runo ff = 27 . 33 4 (CFS ) Total area=
End of computations, total study area=
3 3 . 8 0 0 (Ac. )

33. 80 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 82.0

1.000

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1224 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 7 .1
Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202100YRUNDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

2.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
100 YEAR STORM

UNDEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information
English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
**********
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition 2 Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 100.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= l.200(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)

1.200 (In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 675.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 12.400(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.000(Ft.)
Difference in elevation= 2.400(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00356 s(percent)= 0.36

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1225 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

3.000
TC= k(0.530)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 22.173 min.

Rainfall intensity= l.974(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Runoff Coefficient= 0.784
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 82.00
Pervious area fraction=
Initial subarea runoff=

1.000; Impervious fraction

15.472(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 1.000
1 0 . 0 0 0 ( Ac . )

0.000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station
**** NATURAL CHANNEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION****
Top of natural channel elevation= 10.000(Ft.)
End of natural channel elevation= 6.000(Ft.)
Length of natural channel 1370.000(Ft.)
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of channel= 33.884(CFS) Natural valley channel type used
L.A. County flood control district
Velocity(ft/s) = (7 + B(q(English
Velocity using mean channel flow=
formula for channel velocity:

Units)A.352) (slopeA0.5)
l.87(Ft/s)
Correction to map slope used on extremely rugged channels with drops and waterfalls (Plate D-6.2)
Normal channel slope 0.0029
Corrected/adjusted channel slope= 0.0029
Travel time= 12.20 min. TC= 34.37 min.

Adding area flow to channel
UNDEVELOPED (poor cover) subarea
Runoff Coefficient= 0.760
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil (AMC 2) 82.00
Pervious area fraction= 1.000; Impervious fraction
Rainfall intensity l.586(In/Hr) for a 100.0
Subarea runoff= 28.670(CFS) for 23.800(Ac.)

0.000
year storm
Total runoff= 44.142 (CFS) Total area=
End o f computations, total study area=
3 3 . 8 0 0 ( Ac . )

33. 80 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area .

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 82.0

1.000

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1226 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. ESTRELLA ST. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR.

TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 A-1 10.0 A-2 23.8 2 10.0 1 12.4

6.0 3 L = 1370'
L =675' TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO LEGEND FLOW DIRECTION DRAINAGE BOUNDARY SUB AREA DESIGNATION AREA IN ACREAGE G9.62 NODE NUMBER HYDROLOGY EXHIBIT - UNDEVELOPED CONDITION HYDROLOGY EXHIBIT UNDEVELOPED CONDITION 4.1.u Packet Pg. 1227 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPENDIX 'C'

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1228 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

RATIONAL HYDROLOGY CALCULATIONS

DEVELOPED CONDITION
10-Year Storm
100-Year Storm
Hydrology Exhibit - Developed Condition

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1229 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAA10YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

2.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
10 YEAR STORM

AREA A, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 10.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 10.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= 0.810(In/Hr)

1.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)

1.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 740.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 15.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 12.200(Ft.)
Difference in elevation= 3.000(Ft.)
Slope= 0 .00405 s(percent)= 0.41

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1230 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

3.000
TC= k(0.390)*((lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 16.488 min.

Rainfall intensity l.545(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.746
Decimal fraction soil group A 0 . 000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction
Initial subarea runoff= 6.459(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

5.600(Ac.)

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 12.200(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 11.000(Ft.)
Length of street segment 730.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2] side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000(Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street= 8.165(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.478(Ft.), Average velocity= 1.271(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 17.567(Ft.)
Flow velocity= 1.27(Ft/s)
Travel time= 9.57 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.723
TC=
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50

26.06 min.

Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction 0.500 Rainfall intensity 1.229(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
Subarea runoff 3.286 (C FS) for 3.700(Ac.)
Total runoff= 9.745(CFS) Total area= 9.300(Ac.)
Street flow at end of street= 9.745(CFS)
Half street flow at end of street 4.872(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.504(Ft.), Average velocity l.320(Ft /s) Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1231 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Distance that curb overflow reaches into property= 0.2l(Ft.) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 18.882(Ft.)
End of computations, total study area= 9.30 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1232 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAA100YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

2.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
100 YEAR STORM

AREA A, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information
English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
**********
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition 2 Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 100.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= l.200(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 740.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 15.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 12.200(Ft . )
Difference in elevation= 3.000(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00405 s(percent)= 0.41

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1233 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

3.000
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 16.488 min.

Rainfall intensity 2.289(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.783
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction=
I n itial subarea runoff=

0.500; Impervious fraction

10.043(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

5. 600 (Ac. )

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 2.000 to Point/Station
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 12.200(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 11.000(Ft.)
Length of street segment 730.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2] side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000(Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street
Depth of flow= 0.548(Ft.), Average velocity=
Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb

12.745(CFS)
l.3B0(Ft/s)
Note: depth of flow exceeds top of street crown.

Distance that curb overflow reaches into property
Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 20.000(Ft.)
Flow velocity= 1.38(Ft/s)
Travel time= 8.82 min. TC= 25.30 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.764
A
B
C
D
0 . 000

0.500

0.000

62.50 Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
RI index for soil (AMC 2)
Pervious area fraction = 0.500; Impervious fraction
Rainfall intensity l.848(In/Hr) for a 100.0
Subarea runoff 5.224(CFS) for 3.700(Ac.)
Total runoff= 15. 267 (CFS) Total area
s"""t_r_e_ 0_~.,.. t __,.f,..,,. l_o_w_ a _ _ e_n_d,--o__,£0--s- t,...r_e_ e.,.. t - = 15. 2 67 (CFS)

2. 41 (Ft.)

0.500
year storm

9. 300 (Ac.)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1234 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Half street flow at end of street= 7.633(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.577(Ft.), Average velocity= 1.448(Ft/s) Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb
Note: depth of flow exceeds top of street crown.

Distance that curb overflow reaches into property 3.83(Ft.) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 20.000(Ft.)
End of computations, total study area= 9.30 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1235 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAB10YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

5.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
10 YEAR STORM

AREA B, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 10.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 10.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= 0.810(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0 . 5000
2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 940.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 14.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 11.000(Ft.)
Difference in elevation= 3.200(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00340 s(percent)= 0.34

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1236 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) TC= k(0.390)*((lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 18.789 min.

Rainfall intensity l.447(In/ Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.740
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil (AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fra c tion=
Initial subarea runoff=

0.500; Impervious fraction
5 . 783 (CFS )
Tot a l init ial stream area 5 . 4 00 (Ac.)
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

0.500
End of computations, total study area= 5.40 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1237 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 ++++

5.000
Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study Date: 03/23/22 File:l.out
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
100 YEAR CONDITION

AREA B, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information
English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
**********
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition 2 Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto) area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 100.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= l.200 (In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 940.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 14.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 11.000(Ft . )
Difference in elevation= 3.200(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00340 s(percent)= 0.34
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1238 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Initial area time of concentration= 18.789 min.

Rainfall intensity 2.144(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.778
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction
Initial subarea runoff= 9 . 006 (CFS )
Total initial stream area 5.400(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

0.500
End of computations, total study area= 5.40 (Ac. )
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) 0.500
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1239 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAC10YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

7.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
10 YEAR STORM

AREA C, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 10.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto) area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 10.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= 0.810(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION*** *
Initial area flow distance= 950.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 15.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.700(Ft . )
Difference in elevation= 4.500(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00474 s(percent)= 0.47

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1240 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

8.000
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 17.663 min.

Rainfall intensity l.493(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (l/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.743
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction
Initial subarea runoff= 5.657(CFS)
Total initial stream area 5.l00(Ac.)
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point /Station 7.000 to Point /S tation
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 10.700(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 8.600(Ft.)
Length of street segment 670.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2) side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000(Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street=
Depth of flow= 0.422(Ft.), Average velocity=
Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 14.777(Ft.)
Flow velocity= l.58(Ft/s)
Travel time= 7.07 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.725
TC=
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50

24.73 min.

7.296(CFS)
l.579(Ft/s)
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction 0.500 Rainfall intensity l.262(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
Subarea runoff 3.lll(CFS) for 3.400(Ac.)
Total runoff= 8.768(CFS) Total area= 8.500(Ac.)
Street flow at end o f s t reet= 8.768(CFS)
Half street flow at end of street 4.384(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.445(Ft.), Average velocity= l.65l(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 15.904(Ft.)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1241 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) End of computations, total study area= 8.50 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1242 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAC100YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
++++

7.000
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
100 YEAR STORM

AREA C, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information
English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
**********
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition 2 Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto J area used .
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 100.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= l.200(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/ Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 950.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 15.200(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.700(Ft . )
Difference in elevation= 4.SOO(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00474 s(percent)= 0.47

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1243 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++

8.000
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 17.663 min.

Rainfall intensity 2.212(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.780
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0 . 000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction=
Initial subarea runoff=

0.500; Impervious fraction

8.803(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

5.l00(Ac.)

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station 7.000 to Point/Station
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 10.700(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 8.600(Ft.)
Length of street segment 670.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2] side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000 (Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street= ll.334(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.479(Ft.), Average velocity= l.757(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 17.604(Ft.)
Flow velocity= l.76(Ft/s)
Travel time= 6.36 min. TC= 24.02 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.766
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction 0.500 Rainfall intensity l.897(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Subarea runoff 4.943(CFS) for 3.400(Ac.)
Tota l r unoff = 13.746(CFS) Total area= 8.500(Ac.)
Street flow at end of s t ree t = 13.746(CFS)
Half street flow at end of street 6.873(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.508(Ft.), Average velocity l.823(Ft/s) Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1244 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Distance that curb overflow reaches into property= 0.42(Ft.) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 19.085 (Ft.)
End of computations, total study area= 8.50 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1245 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
Fil e ; 38202AREAD10YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
10 YEAR STORM

AREA D, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 10.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 10.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data;
1 hour intensity= 0.810(In/Hr)
l.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)
l.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
2 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++
Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station

10.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 460.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 12.400(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.600(Ft.)
Difference in elevation= l.800(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00391 s(percent)= 0.39

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1246 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3) / (elevation change)] A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 13.730 min.

Rainfall intensity 1.693(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.756
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil (AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction=
Initial subarea runoff=

0.500; Impervious fraction

3.710(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

2. 900 (Ac.)

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station

11. 000

10.000 to Point/Station
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 10.600(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 8.600(Ft.)
Length of street segment 600.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2] side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000(Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street=
Depth of flow= 0.4ll(Ft.), Average velocity=
Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 14.217(Ft.)
Flow velocity= 1.59(Ft/s)
Travel time= 6.28 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.779
TC=
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.500
RI index for soil(AMC 2) 72.00

20.01 min.

6.836(CFS)
l.59l(Ft/s)
Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction 0.500 Rainfall intensity l.402(In/Hr) for a 10.0 year storm
Subarea runoff 6.114(CFS) for 5.600(Ac.)
-< Total runoff = 9 . 82 5 (CFS) To cal a r ea = 8 . 500 (Ac .) Street flow at end of street= 9.825(CFS)
Half street flow at end of street 4.912(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.455(Ft.), Average velocity= l.737(Ft/s) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 16.437(Ft.)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1247 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) End of computations, total study area= 8.50 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area.

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap) ~ 0.500
Area averaged RI index number= 68.8

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1248 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

7.1 Riverside County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c) 1989 - 2005 Version Rational Hydrology Study
File:38202AREAD100YRDEV.out
Date: 03/23/22
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY
100 YEAR STORM

AREA D, DEVELOPED CONDITION
********* Hydrology Study Control Information ********** English (in-lb) Units used in input data file
Program License Serial Number 4061
Rational Method Hydrology Program based on
Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District 1978 hydrology manual
Storm event (year) = 100.00 Antecedent Moisture Condition 2 Standard intensity-duration curves data (Plate D-4.1)
For the [ San Jacinto] area used.
10 year storm 10 minute intensity=
10 year storm 60 minute intensity=
100 year storm 10 minute intensity
100 year storm 60 minute intensity=
Storm event year= 100.0
Calculated rainfall intensity data:
1 hour intensity= l.200(In/Hr)

1.980(In/Hr)

0.810(In/Hr)

2.940(In/Hr)

1.200(In/Hr)
Slope of intensity duration curve= 0.5000
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++
Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station

10.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION****
Initial area flow distance= 460.000(Ft.)
Top (of initial area) elevation= 12.400(Ft.)
Bottom (of initial area) elevation= 10.600(Ft . )
Difference in elevation= 1.800(Ft.)
Slope= 0.00391 s(percent)= 0.39

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1249 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ++++
TC= k(0.390)*[(lengthA3)/(elevation change)]A0.2
Initial area time of concentration= 13.730 min.

Rainfall intensity 2.509(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.791
Decimal fraction soil group A 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group C 0.500
Decimal fraction soil group D 0.000
RI index for soil (AMC 2) 62.50
Pervious area fraction=
Initial subarea runoff=

0.500; Impervious fraction

5.756(CFS)
Total initial stream area
Pervious area fraction= 0.500

2. 900 (Ac.)

0.500
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Process from Point/Station

11. 000

10.000 to Point/Station
**** STREET FLOW TRAVEL TIME+ SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION**** Top of street segment elevation= 10.600(Ft.)
End of street segment elevation= 8.600(Ft.)
Length of street segment 600.000(Ft.)
Height of curb above gutter flowline 6.0(In.)
Width of half street (curb to crown) 20.000(Ft.)
Distance from crown to crossfall grade break 18.000(Ft.) Slope from gutter to grade break (v/hz) = 0.020
Slope from grade break to crown (v/hz) 0.020
Street flow is on [2] side(s) of the street
Distance from curb to property line 10.000(Ft.)
Slope from curb to property line (v/hz) 0.020
Gutter width= 2.000(Ft.)
Gutter hike from flowline = 2.000(In.)
Manning's Nin gutter= 0.0150
Manning's N from gutter to grade break 0.0150
Manning's N from grade break to crown= 0.0150
Estimated mean flow rate at midpoint of street= 10.406(CFS) Depth of flow= 0.463(Ft.), Average velocity= l.76l(Ft/s) Streetflow hydraulics at midpoint of street travel:

Halfstreet flow width= 16.815(Ft.)
Flow velocity= l.76(Ft/s)
Travel time= 5.68 min. TC= 19.41 min.

Adding area flow to street
SINGLE FAMILY (1/4 Acre Lot)
Runoff Coefficient= 0.776
Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
Decimal fraction soil group
RI index for soil(AMC 2)
A 0.000
B 0.500
C 0.500
D 0.000

62.50 Pervious area fraction= 0.500; Impervious fraction 0.500 Rainfall intensity 2.ll0(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Subarea runoff 9.172(CFS) for 5.600(Ac.)
Total runoff= 14.928 (CFS ) Total area= 8.500(Ac.)
Street flow at end of street= 14.928(CFS)
Half street flow at end of street 7.464(CFS)
Depth of flow= 0.51B(Ft.), Average velocity l.883(Ft/s) Warning: depth of flow exceeds top of curb

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1250 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Distance that curb overflow reaches into property= 0.90(Ft.) Flow width (from curb towards crown)= 19.567(Ft.)
End of computations, total study area= 8 . 50 (Ac.)
The following figures may
be used for a unit hydrograph study of the same area .

Area averaged pervious area fraction(Ap)
Area averaged RI index number= 62.5

0.500

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1251 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

LYON AVENUE APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR. 436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 436-280-022 436-280-021 MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL 436-280-010 TRACT 31097 TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 ESTRELLA ST. 436-280-023 436-280-024 L = 690' C-2 3.4 D-2 5.6 C-1 5.1 B5.4 D-1 2.9 A-1 5.6 A-2 3.7 11 8 2 4 6 1 3 5 9 10 7 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO RATIONAL HYDROLOGY EXHIBIT DEVELOPED CONDITION LEGEND FLOW DIRECTION DRAINAGE BOUNDARY SUB AREA DESIGNATION AREA IN ACREAGE A-1 5.62 NODE NUMBER RATIONAL HYDROLOGY EXHIBIT - DEVELOPED CONDITION 4.1.u Packet Pg. 1252 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPENDIX 'D
.'

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1253 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

PRELIMINARY BASIN HYDROLOGY

WEST PROJECT BASIN
BASINNO.1
10-Year, 24 Hour Unit Hydrograph-Undeveloped Condition
10-Year, 24 Hour Unit Hydrograph-Developed Condition
Unit Hydrograph Exhibit - Undeveloped Condition
Unit Hydrograph Exhibit - Developed Condition

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1254 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) f'\2--1€-l-\ \r-A. I ~~y'L>-( ~t ~ S\ -Z..\,J~-;
t...--1. c:;;,r- . ~ \.EJ - 'if-, ~s_- \-M... ~rro-<L-w '""fei.(L ~C..fc:+uJc:t c,::::! ... :~\ ~ 0- \ A.. •
l>JrtS"f ~~~.__\ L'fbASI t,j ,-jb, \J ,
,T;>'=..✓ ~ 'To-l \ G::. °\ ~ ~
\.] l) r-.!'t1:£"' .: l 4. ' "i... (., ~ ~

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1255 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2008, Version 8 . 1 Study date 03/23/22 File: 3820210YR24HRUNDEV2410.out
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978
Program License Serial Number 4061
English (in-lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY BASIN SIZING HYDROLOGY

UNDEVELOPED CONDITION
10 YEAR, 24 HOUR STORM
Drainage Area= 17.00(Ac.) 0.027 Sq. Mi.

Drainage Area for Depth-Area Areal Adjustment= 17.00(Ac.) Length along longest watercourse 1580.00(Ft.)
Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid
Length along longest watercourse 0.299 Mi.

Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid
Difference in elevation 5.20(Ft.)
Slope along watercourse 17.3772 Ft./Mi.

Average Manning's 'N' = 0.030
Lag time= 0.122 Hr.

Lag time= 7.33 Min.
25% of lag time= 1.83 Min.
40% of lag time= 2.93 Min.

Unit time= 15.00 Min.

Duration of storm= 24 Hour(s)
User Entered Base Flow= 0.0O(CFS)
2 YEAR Area rainfall data:

Area(Ac.) [l]

17.00 Rainfall (In) [ 2]

1. 90
100 YEAR Area rainfall data:

Area(Ac.) [l]

17.00 STORM EVENT (YEAR)
Rainfall (In) [ 2]

4.70 10.00
Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall
Weighting[l*2]

32.30 Weighting[l*2]

79.90 1. 900 ( In)
6 9 0 . 0 0 ( Ft . )

0.131 Mi.

0.027 Sq. Mi .

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1256 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall 4.700(In}
Point rain (area averaged) = 3 . 052(In}
Areal adjustment factor= 100.00 %
Adjusted average point rain= 3.052(In)
Sub-Area Data:

Area (Ac.)

17. 000
Runoff Index

65.00 Impervious%

0.000
Total Area Entered= 17. 00 (Ac. )
RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F
AMC2 AMC-2

65.0 65.0
(In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr} (Dec.} ( In/Hr)

0.416

0.416 0.0 0 0 0.416 1.000
Area averaged mean soil loss (F)
Minimum soil loss rate ((In/ Hr) }
(for 24 hour storm duration)
Soil low loss rate (decimal) =
(In/Hr) =

0.208

0.900
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
VALLEYS-Curve
Unit Hydrograph Data

0. 416
Unit time period
(hrs}
Time % of lag Distribution
Graph%
1 0.250 204.717 44.205
2 0.500 409.433 43.040
3 0.750 614.150 8.604
4 1. 000 818.867 4.151
Sum= 100. 000 Sum=
Sum ( F}
Unit Hydrograph
(CFS}

7.574

7.374

1. 4 74

0. 711
1 7. 133
The foll owing loss rate calculations reflect use of the minimum calculated loss rate subtracted from the Storm Rain to produce the maximum Effective Rain value Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Lo ss rate (In. / Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr)
1 0.25 0.20 0.024 0.735) 0.022 0.002
2 0.50 0.30 0.037 0. 726) 0.033 0.004
3 0.75 0.30 0.037 0. 718) 0.033 0.004
4 1.00 0.40 0.049 0. 709) 0.044 0.005
5 1. 25 0.30 0.037 0.701) 0.033 0.004
6 1.50 0.30 0.037 0.692) 0.033 0.004
7 1. 75 0.30 0.037 ( 0.684) 0.033 0.004
8 2.00 0.40 0.049 ( 0. 67 6) 0.044 0.005
9 2.25 0.40 0.049 ( 0.668) 0.044 0.005
10 2.50 0. 40 0.049 ( 0. 660) 0.044 0.005
11 2.75 0.50 0.061 ( 0.652) 0.055 0.006
12 3.00 0.50 0.061 0.644) 0.055 0.006
13 3.25 0.50 0.061 0. 636) 0.055 0.006
14 3.50 0.50 0.061 0. 628) 0.055 0.006
15 3.75 0.50 0.061 0. 620) 0.055 0.006
16 4.00 0.60 0.073 0.612) 0.066 0.007
17 4.25 0.60 0.073 0.604) 0.066 0.007
18 4.50 0.70 0.085 0.597) 0. 077 0.009

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1257 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 19 4.75 0.70 0.085 0. 589) 0.077 0.009
20 5.00 0.80 0.098 0. 581) 0.088 0.010
21 5.25 0.60 0.073 0.574) 0.066 0.007
22 5.50 0.70 0.085 0. 566) 0.077 0.009
23 5.75 0.30 0.093 0. 559) 0.088 0.010
24 6.00 0.80 0.098 0.552) 0.088 0.010
25 6.25 0.90 0.llO 0.544) 0.099 0. Oll
26 6.50 0.90 O. llO 0.537) 0.099 O.Oll
27 6.75 1.00 0.122 0.530) O.llO 0.012
28 7.00 1.00 0.122 0.523) 0. llO 0.012
29 7.25 1.00 0.122 0. 516) 0. llO 0.012
30 7.50 1.10 0.134 0. 509) 0.121 0. 013
31 7.75 1. 20 0.146 0.502) 0 .132 0.015
32 8.00 1. 30 0.159 0. 4 95) 0.143 0.016
33 8.25 1.50 0.183 0.488) 0.165 0.018
34 8.50 1.50 0.183 0.481) 0.165 0.018
35 8.75 1. 60 0.195 0.474) 0.176 0.020
36 9.00 1. 70 0.208 0. 4 68) 0.187 0.021
37 9.25 1. 90 0.232 0. 4 61) 0.209 0.023
38 9.50 2.00 0.244 0.454) 0.220 0.024
39 9.75 2.10 0.256 0.448) 0.231 0.026
40 10.00 2.20 0.269 0.441) 0.242 0.027
41 10.25 1. 50 0.133 0.435) 0.165 0.013
42 10.50 1.50 0.183 0.429) 0. 165 0.018
43 10. 75 2.00 0.244 0.422) 0.220 0.024
44 11. 00 2.00 0.244 0. 416) 0.220 0.024
45 11. 25 1. 90 0.232 0.410) 0.209 0.023
46 11. 50 1. 90 0.232 0.404) 0.209 0.023
47 ll. 75 1. 70 0.208 0.398) 0.187 0.021
48 12.00 1. 80 0.220 0.392) 0.198 0.022
49 12.25 2.50 0.305 0. 386) 0.275 0.031
50 12.50 2.60 0.317 0.381) 0.286 0.032
51 12.75 2.80 0.342 0.375) 0.308 0.034
52 13. 00 2. 90 0.354 0. 369) 0.319 0.035
53 13. 25 3.40 0.415 0.364 0.374) 0.051
54 13.50 3.40 0.415 0.358 0.374) 0.057
55 13.75 2.30 0.281 0.353) 0.253 0.028
56 14.00 2.30 0.281 0.347) 0.253 0.028
57 14.25 2.70 0.330 0.342) 0.297 0.033
58 14.50 2.60 0.317 0.337) 0.286 0.032
59 14.75 2. 60 0.317 0.332) 0.286 0.032
60 15.00 2.50 0.305 0.327) 0.275 0.031
61 15.25 2.40 0. 293 0.322) 0.264 0.029
62 15.50 2.30 0.281 0.317) 0.253 0.028
63 15.75 1. 90 0.232 0.312) 0.209 0.023
64 16.00 1. 90 0.232 0.307) 0.209 0.023
65 16.25 0.40 0.049 0.302) 0.044 0.005
66 16.50 0.40 0.049 0.298) 0.044 0.005
67 16. 75 0.30 0.037 0.293) 0.033 0.004
.68 17.00 0.30 0.037 { 0.289) 0.033 0.004
69 17. 25 0.50 0.061 { 0.284) 0.055 0.006
70 17.50 0.50 0.061 ( 0.280) 0.055 0.006
71 17.75 0.50 0.061 ( 0. 27 6) 0.055 0.006
72 18.00 0.40 0.049 ( 0. 272) 0.044 0.005
73 18.25 0.40 0.049 0.268) 0.044 0.005
74 13.50 0.40 0.049 0.264) 0.044 0.005
75 18.75 0.30 0.037 0. 260) 0.033 0.004
76 19.00 0.20 0.024 0. 256) 0.022 0.002
77 19.25 0.30 0.037 0.253) 0.033 0.004
78 19.50 0.40 0.049 0.249) 0.044 0.005
79 19.75 0.30 0.037 0. 24 6) 0.033 0.004

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1258 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 80 20.00 0.20 0.024 0.243) 0.022 0 . 002
81 20.25 0.30 0.037 0.239) 0.033 0.004
82 20.50 0.30 0.037 0. 236) 0.033 0.004
83 20.75 0.30 0.037 0.233) 0.033 0 . 004
84 21.00 0.20 0.024 0.231) 0.022 0 . 002
85 21. 25 0.30 0.037 0.228) 0.033 0.004
86 21.50 0.20 0.024 0.225) 0.022 0.002
87 21. 7 5 0.30 0.037 0.223) 0.033 0.004
88 22.00 0.20 0.024 0.220) 0.022 0.002
89 22.25 0.30 0.037 0.218) 0.033 0 . 004
90 22.50 0.20 0.024 I 0. 216) 0.022 0 . 002 ' 91 22.75 0.20 0.024 ( 0.214) 0.022 0 . 002 92 23.00 0.20 0.024 ( 0. 213) 0.022 0.002
93 23.25 0.20 0.024 ( 0. 211) 0.022 0.002
94 23.50 0.20 0.024 ( 0.210) 0.022 0.002
95 23.75 0.20 0.024 ( 0.209) 0.022 0 . 002
96 24.00 0.20 0.024 0.208) 0.022 0 . 002
(Loss Rate Not Used)
Sum= 100. 0 Sum= 1. 2
Flood volume= Effective rainfall 0.3l(In)
times area 1 7. 0 (Ac.)/ [ (In) / (Ft.)] 0.4(Ac.Ft)
Total soil loss= 2.74(In)
Total soil loss= 3.882 (Ac.Ft)
Total rainfall= 3.05(In)
Flood volume= 19223.4 Cubic Feet
Total soil loss= 169105.7 Cubic Feet
Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = O.B87(CFS)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Time(h+m)
24 - HOUR STORM
R u n o f f
Hydrograph in 15
Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0
H y d r o g r a p h
Minute intervals ((CFS))

2.5 5.0 7 . 5
----------- --------~---------------------------- --- ----- - ----------- 0+15 0.0004 0 . 02 Q 0+30 0.0013 0 . 05 Q
0+45 0.0025 0 . 06 Q
l+ 0 0.0040 0.07 Q
1+15 0.0055 0.07 Q
1+30 0.0068 0.06 Q
1+45 0.0081 0.06 Q
2+ 0 0.0096 0.07 Q
2+15 0. 0113 0.08 QV
2+30 0.0130 0.08 QV
2+45 0.0149 0.09 QV
3+ 0 0.0170 0.10 QV
3+15 0.0192 0.10 QV
3+30 0.0213 0.10 QV
3+45 0.0235 0.10 Q V
4+ 0 0.0259 0.11 Q V
4+15 0.0284 0.12 Q V
4+30 0.0312 0.13 Q V
4+45 0.0341 0.14 Q V
5+ 0 0.0373 0.15 Q V
5+15 0.0404 0.15 Q V
5+30 0.0432 0.14 Q V
5+45 0. 04 64 0.15 Q V

10.0 4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1259 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 6+ 0 0.0498 0.16 Q V I I
6+15 0.0534 0.18 Q V I I
6+30 0.0573 0.19 Q V I I
6+45 0. 0 613 0.20 Q V I I
7+ 0 0.0656 0.21 Q V I I
7+15 0.0699 0.21 Q V I I
7+30 0.0744 0.22 Q V I I
7+45 0.0793 0.24 Q V I I
8+ 0 0.0846 0.26 Q V I I
8+15 0.0906 0.29 Q V I \
8+30 0. 0969 0.31 Q V I I
8+45 0.1036 0.32 Q VI I
9+ 0 0. 1106
0 .34 Q V I
9+15 0 .11 83 0.37 Q V I
9+30
0 .1266 0.40 Q V I
9+45 0.1353 0.42 Q I V I
10+ 0 0.1445 0.45 Q I V I
10+15 0. 1526 0.39 Q I V I
10+30 0.1595 0.33 Q I V I
10+45 0.1670 0.37 Q I V I
11+ 0 0.1754 0.41 Q I V I
11+15 0.1838 0.40 Q I V I
11+30 0.1920 0.40 IQ I V I I
11+45 0.1999 0.38 IQ I V I I
12+ 0 0.2075 0.37

I Q I V I I
12+15 0.2166 0.44
I Q I
V I I
12+30 0. 2272 0.51 I Q I V I
12+45 0.2387 0.55 I Q I V I
13+ 0 0.2508 0.59 I Q I I V I
13+15
0 .265 8 0. 72 I Q I I V I
13+30 0.2841 0.89 I Q I I V I
13+45
0 .2993
0 .73 I Q I I V I
14+ 0 0.3104 0.54 I Q I I V I
14+15 0.3216 0.54 I Q I I VI
14+30 0.3328 0.55 I Q I I V
14+45 0.3441
0 .54 I Q I I V
15+ 0 0.3551 0.54 I Q r I I V J
15+15
0 .365 8 0.52 I Q I I I V I
15+30 0.3761 0.50 IQ I I I V I
15+45 0.3853 0.45 IQ I I I V I
16+ 0 0 .3938 0.41 IQ I I I V I
16+15 0.3992
0 .26 IQ I I I V I
16+30 0.4017 0.12 Q I I I V I
16+45 0.4035
0 .0 9 Q I I I V 1
17+ 0 0.4049 0.07 Q I 1 I V I
17+15 0.4066 0.08 Q I I I V I
17+30 0.4086 0.10 Q I I I V I
17+45
0 .4108
0 .1 0 Q I I I V I
18+ 0 0.4127 0.10 Q I 1 I V I
18+15 0.4145 0.09 Q I I I V I
18+30 0.4163 0.08 Q I I I V I
18+45 0.4178 0.07 Q I I I V I
19+ 0 0.4190 0.06 Q I I I V I
19+15 0.4201 0.05 Q I I I V I
19+30
0 .421 6 0.07 Q I I I V I
19+45 0.4230 0.07 Q I I I V I
20+ 0 0.4242 0.06 Q I I I V I
20+15 0.4253 0.05 Q I I I V I
20+30 0 .4265 0.06 Q I I I V I
20+45 0.4278 0.06 Q I I I V I
21+ 0

0. 4289

0. 05 Q I I I V I

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1260 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 21+15
21+30
21+45
22+ 0
22+15
22+30
22+45
23+ 0
23+15
23+30
23+45
24+ 0
24+15
24+30
24+45

0.4300

0.4311

0.4322

0.4333

0.4344

0.4354

0.4363

0.4372 0 .4381

0.4390

0.4398

0.4407

0.4412

0.4413

0.05 Q

0.04 Q

0.04 Q
0 . .04 Q

0.04 Q

0.02 Q

0.01 Q

0.00 Q
V I
Vi
VI

VI VI VI VI V I V I
VI
V) V I
VI
VI
V

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1261 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) U n i t H y d r o g r a p h A n a l y s i s
Copyright (c) CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN, 1989 - 2008, Version 8 . 1 Study date 03/23/22 File: 3820210YR24HRDEV2410.out
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Riverside County Synthetic Unit Hydrology Method
RCFC & WCD Manual date - April 1978
Program License Serial Number 4061
English (in-lb) Input Units Used
English Rainfall Data (Inches) Input Values Used
English Units used in output format
TENTATIVE TRACT 38202

PRELIMINARY BASIN SIZING HYDROLOGY

DEVELOPED CONDITION
10 YEAR, 24 HOUR STORM
Drainage Area= 17.00(Ac.) 0.027 Sq. Mi.

Drainage Area for Depth-Area Areal Adjustment= 17 . 00(Ac.) 0.027 Sq. Mi.

Length along longest watercourse 1700.00(Ft.)
Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid 820.00(Ft.) Length along longest watercourse 0.322 Mi.

Length along longest watercourse measured to centroid 0.155 Mi.

Difference in elevation 7.20(Ft.)
Slope along watercourse 22.3624 Ft./Mi.

Average Manning's 'N' = 0.015
Lag time= 0.064 Hr.

Lag time= 3.83 Min.
25% of lag time= 0.96 Min.
40% of lag time= 1.53 Min.

Unit time= 15.00 Min.

Duration of storm= 24 Hour(s)
Oser Entered Base Flow= 0.00(CFS)
2 YEAR Area rainfall data:

Area (Ac.) [l]

17.00 Rainfall (In) [ 2]

1. 90
100 YEAR Area rainfall data :

Area (Ac.) [l]

17.00 Rainfall (In) [2]

4.70 STORM EVENT (YEAR) 10.00
Area Averaged 2-Year Rainfall
Weighting[l*2]

32.30 Weighting[l*2]

79.90 1. 900 ( In)

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1262 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Area Averaged 100-Year Rainfall= 4.700(In)
Point rain (area averaged) = 3 . 052(In)
Areal adjustment factor= 100.00 %
Adjusted average point rain= 3.052(In)
Sub-Area Data:

Area (Ac.)

17.000
Runoff Index Impervious%

50.00 0.550
Total Area Entered= 17. 00 (Ac.)
RI RI Infil. Rate Impervious Adj. Infil. Rate Area% F
(In/Hr)

0.289

0.289
AMC2 AMC-2

50.0 50.0
(In/Hr) (Dec.%) (In/Hr) (Dec.)

0.572 0.550 0.289 1.000
Area averaged mean soil loss (F)
Minimum soil loss rate ((In/Hr))
(for 24 hour storm duration)
Soil low loss rate (decimal) =
(In/Hr) =

0.144

0. 4 60
U n i t H y d r o g r a p h
VALLEYS-Curve
Unit Hydrograph Data

0.289
Unit time period
(hrs)
Time% of lag Distribution
Graph %
1 2
3 0.250

0.500

0.750
391.226
782.452
1173.678

64.470

32.573

2.957
Sum= 100.000 Sum=
Sum (F)
Unit Hydrograph
(CFS)

11. 046

5.581

0.507
17 .133
The following loss rate calculations reflect use of the minimum calculated loss rate subtracted from the Storm Rain to produce the maximum Effective Rain value Unit Time Pattern Storm Rain Loss rate(In./Hr) Effective (Hr.) Percent (In/Hr) Max I Low (In/Hr)
1 0.25 0.20 0.024 0.510) 0. 011 0. 013
2 0.50 0.30 0.037 0.504) 0.017 0.020
3 0.75 0.30 0.037 0.498) 0.017 0.020
4 1.00 0. 4 0 0.049 0.492) 0.022 0.026
5 1. 25 0.30 0.037 0.487) 0.017 0.020
6 1.50 0.30 0.037 0.481) 0.017 0.020
7 1. 75 0.30 0.037 0.475) 0.017 0.020
8 2.00 0.40 0.049 0. 4 69) 0.022 0.026
9 2.25 0.40 0.049 0.464) 0.022 0.026
10 2.50 0.40 0.049 0.458) 0.022 0.026
11 2.75 0.50 0.061 0.452) 0.028 0.033
12 3.00 0.50 0.061 0.447) 0.028 0.033
13 3.2S 0.50 0.061 0.441) 0.028 0.033
14 3.50 0.50 0.061 0. 436) 0.028 0.033
15 3.75 0.50 0.061 0.430) 0.028 0.033
16 4.00 0.60 0. 073 0.425) 0.034 0.040
17 4.25 0.60 0.073 0.420) 0.034 0 . 040
18 4.50 0.70 0.085 0.414) 0.039 0 . 046
19 4.75 0.70 0.085 0. 409) 0.039 0.046

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1263 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 20 5.00 0.80 0.098 0.404) 0.045 0.053
21 5.25 0.60 0.073 0.398) 0.034 0.040
22 5.50 0.70 0.085 0.393) 0.039 0.046
23 5.75 0.80 0.098 0.388) 0.045 0.053
24 6.00 0.80 0.098 0.383) 0.045 0.053
25 6.25 0.90 0 .110 0.378) 0.051 0.059
26 6.50 0.90 0.110 0.373) 0.051 0.059
27 6.75 1.00 0.122 0.368) 0.056 0.066
28 7.00 1.00 0.122 0.363) 0.056 0.066
29 7.25 1.00 0.122 0.358) 0.056 0.066
30 7.50 1.10 0 .134 0.353) 0.062 0.073
31 7.75 1. 20 0.146 0.348) 0.067 0.079
32 8.00 1. 30 0.159 0.343) 0.073 0.086
33 8.25 1. so 0.183 0.339) 0.084 0.099
34 8.50 1.50 0.183 0.334) 0.084 0.099
35 8.75 1. 60 0.195 0.329) 0.090 0.105
36 9.00 1. 70 0.208 0.325) 0.095 0 .112
37 9.25 1. 90 0.232 0.320) 0.107 0.125
38 9.50 2.00 0.244 0.315) 0 .112 0 .132
39 9.75 2.10 0.256 0. 311) 0 .118 0.138
40 10.00 2.20 0.269 0.307) 0.124 0.145
41 10.25 1.50 0.183 0.302) 0.084 0.099
42 10.58 1.5:J 8.1B3 0.298) O.:J84 0.099
43 10.75 2.00 0.244 0.293) 0 .112 0 .132
44 11. 00 2.00 0.244 0.289) 0 .112 0.132
45 11. 25 1. 90 0.232 0.285) 0.107 0.125
46 11. 50 1. 90 0.232 0.281) 0.107 0.125
47 11.75 1. 70 0.208 0.276) 0.095 0 .112
48 12.00 1.8:J 0.220 0. 272) 0.101 0 .119
49 12.25 2.50 0.305 0.268) 0.140 0.165
50 12.50 2.60 0.317 0.264) 0.146 0 .171
51 12.75 2.80 0.342 0.260) 0.157 0.185
52 13.00 2.90 0.354 0.256) 0.163 0.191
53 13.25 3.40 0.415 0.253) 0.191 0.224
54 13.50 3.40 0.415 0.249) 0.191 0.224
55 13. 75 2.30 0.281 0.245) 0.129 0.152
56 14.00 2.30 0.281 0.241) 0.129 0.152
57 14.25 2.70 0.330 0.237) 0.152 0 .178
58 14.50 2.60 0.317 0.234) 0.146 0 .171
59 14.75 2.60 0.317 0.230) 0.146 0 .171
60 15.00 2.50 0.305 0.227) 0.140 0.165
61 15.25 2.40 0.293 0.223) 0.135 0.158
62 15.50 2.30 0.281 0.220) 0.129 0.152
63 15.75 1. 90 0.232 0.217) 0.107 0.125
64 16.00 1. 90 0.232 0 .213) 0.107 0.125
65 16.25 0.40 0.049 0.210) 0.022 0.026
66 16.50 0.40 0.049 0.207) 0.022 0.026
67 16.75 0.30 0.037 0.204) 0.017 0.020
68 17.00 0.30 0.037 0.201) 0.017 0.020
69 17.25 0.50 0.061 ( 0.198) 0.028 0.033
70 17.50 0.50 0.061 ( 0.195) 0.028 0.033
71 17.75 0.50 0.061 ( 0.192) 0.028 0.033
72 18.00 0.40 0.049 ( 0 .18 9) 0.022 0.026
73 18.25 0.40 0.049 ( 0 .18 6) 0.022 0.026
74 18.50 0.40 0.049 ( 0.183) 0.022 0.026
75 18.75 0.30 0.037 0.181) 0.017 0.020
76 19.00 0.20 0.024 0.178) 0. 011 0.013
77 19.25 0.30 0.037 0 .176) 0.017 0.020
78 19.50 0.40 0.049 0.173) 0.022 0.026
79 19.75 0.30 0.037 0 .171) 0. 017 0.020
80 20.00 0.20 0.024 0.168) 0. 011 0.013

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1264 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 81 20.25 0.30 0.037 0 .166) 0.017 0.020
82 20.50 0.30 0.037 0.164) 0.017 0.020
83 20.75 0.30 0.037 0.162) 0.017 0.020
84 21. 00 0.20 0.024 0.160) 0.011 0.013
85 21. 25 0.30 0.037 0.158) 0.017 0.020
86 21.50 0.20 0.024 0.156) 0.011 0.013
87 21.75 0.30 0.037 0.155) 0. 017 0.020
88 22.00 0.20 0.024 0. 153) 0.011 0. 013
89 22.25 0.30 0.037 0.152) 0.017 0.020
90 22.50 0.20 0.024 0.150) 0. 011 0.013
91 22.75 0.20 0.024 0 .14 9) 0. 011 0.013
92 23.00 0.20 0.024 0.148) 0. 011 0.013
93 23.25 0.20 0.024 0.147) 0. 011 0.013
94 23.50 0.20 0.024 0.146) 0. 011 0.013
95 23.75 0.20 0.024 0.145) 0.011 0.013
96 24.00 0.20 0.024 0.145) 0. 011 0.013
(Loss Rate Not Used)
Sum= 100.0 Sum= 6.6
Flood volume= Effective rainfall 1. 65 (In)
times area 1 7 . 0 ( Ac . ) / [ ( In) / ( Ft . ) ] 2.3(Ac.Ft) Total soil loss= l.40(In)
Total soil loss = l.989(Ac.Ft)
Total rainfall= 3.0S (In)
Flood volume= 101697.7 Cubic Feet
Total soil loss = 8 6631. 4 Cubic Feet
Peak flow rate of this hydrograph = 3. 8 25 (CFS)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Time(h+m)
24 - HOUR STORM
R u n o f f
Hydrograph in 15
Volume Ac.Ft Q(CFS) 0
H y d r o g r a p h
Minute intervals ((CFS))

2.5 5.0 7.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0+15 0.0030 0.15 Q 0+30 0.0090 0.29 VQ
0+45 0.0160 0.34 VQ
1+ 0 0.0245 0.41 VQ
1+15 0.0323 0.38 VQ
1+30 0.0393 0.34 VQ
1+45 0.0463 0.34 VQ
2+ 0 0.0548 0. 41 VQ
2+15 0.0641 0. 45 Q
2+30 0.0734 0.45 IQ
2+45 0.0843 0 . 52 IVQ
3+ 0 0.0959 0.56 IVQ
3+15 0.1076 0 . 56 IVQ
3+30 0. 1192 0 . 56 I Q
3+45 0 .1309 0 . 56 I Q
4+ 0 0.1441 0.64 I Q
4+15 0.1580 0.67 I Q
4+30 0. 1 735 0 . 75 I VQ
4+45 0.1898 0 . 79 I Q
5+ 0 0.2077 0.86 I Q
5+15 0.2233 0 . 75 I Q
5+30 0.2389 0 . 76 I QV
5+45 0.2567 0 . 86 I QV
6+ 0 0.2753 0.90 I QV

10.0 4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1265 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 6+15
6+30
6+45
7+ 0
7+15
7+30
7+45
8+ 0
8+15
8+30
8+45
9+ 0
9+15
9+30
9+45
10+ 0
10+15
10+30
10+45
11+ 0
11+15
11+30
11+45
12+ 0
12+15
12+30
12+45
13+ 0
13+15
13+30
13+45
14+ 0
14+15
14+30
14+45
15+ 0
15+15
15+30
15+45
16+ 0
16+15
16+30
16+45
17+ 0
17+15
17+30
17+45
18+ 0
18+15
18+30
18+45
19+ 0
19+15
19+30
19+45
20+ 0
20+15
20+30
20+45
21+ 0
21+15

0.2955

0.3164

0.3389

0.3622

0.3856

0.4104

0.4375

0. 4 670

0.5003

0.5352

0.5717

0.6105

0.6531

0.6988

0.7470

0.7974

0.8382

0.8737

0.9162

0.9626

1.0078

1.0522

1.0935

1.1349

1.1874

1.2468

1.3104

1. 3771

1.4523

1. 5313

1. 5942

1. 6486

1.7083

1. 7 696

1. 8304

1.8896

1.9465

2.0011

2.0488

2.0935

2. 1152

2.1256
2 .1334

2.1405

2.1505

2.1621

2.1737

2.1839

2.1933

2.2027

2.2105

2.2161

2.2223

2.2307

2.2385

2.2441

2.2503

2.2573

2.2643

2.2698

2.2760

0.98 1.01

1.09 1.13

1.13 1. 20

1. 31

1. 43

1. 61

1. 69

1. 77

1. BB

2.06 2.21

2.33 2.44

1. 97

1. 72

2.06 2.24

2.19 2.15

2.00 2.00

2.54 2.87

3.08 3.23

3. 64

3.83 3.04

2. 64

2.89 2. 96

2.94 2.87

2.76 2. 64

2.31 2.16

1.05 0.50

0.38 0.34

0.48 0.56

0.56 0.49

0. 46

0.45 0.38

0.27 0.30

0.41 0.38

0.27 0.30

0.34 0.34

0.27 0.30
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Q
IQ
IQ
IQ
I Q
I Q
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
Q V
QV
QV
Q V
Q V
Q V
Q V
Q V
Q V I
Q VI
Q VI
Q V
Q V
Q IV

QI V QI
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q I
Q
IQ
I Q
I Q
I
I
I Q
Q
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
IQ
Q
QI
Q I
Q I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V[
V
V
I V
I
Q I
Q I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
V
V
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
V I
V I
V I
VI
V
V
I V
I V
I V
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I
V I

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1266 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 21+30
21+45
22+ 0
22+15
22+30
22+45
23+ 0
23+15
23+30
23+45
24+ 0
24+15
24+30

2.2814

2.2877

2.2931

2.2993

2.3048

2.3095

2.3142

2.3189

2.3235

2.3282

2.3329

2.3345

2.3347
O. 26 IQ

0. 30 IQ
o. 26 IQ

0.30 IQ

0.26 IQ

0.23 Q

0. 23 Q

0.08 Q

0.01 Q
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI
VI

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1267 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. ESTRELLA ST. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR.

TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO LEGEND FLOW DIRECTION DRAINAGE BOUNDARY UNIT HYDROGRAPH EXHIBIT - UNDEVELOPED CONDITION UNIT HYDROGRAPH EXHIBIT UNDEVELOPED CONDITION CENTROID OF AREA 4.1.u Packet Pg. 1268 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

LYON AVENUE APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR. 436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 436-280-022 436-280-021 MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL 436-280-010 TRACT 31097 TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 ESTRELLA ST. 436-280-023 436-280-024 CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 UNIT HYDROLOGY EXHIBIT DEVELOPED CONDITION LEGEND FLOW DIRECTION DRAINAGE BOUNDARY SUB AREA DESIGNATION AREA IN ACREAGE G9.62 NODE NUMBER UNIT HYDROGRAPH EXHIBIT - DEVELOPED CONDITION 4.1.u Packet Pg. 1269 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) ,...,.,~ ,-.
"~ . ~- :i..
r~~-~-.~· ·~
..... 1..,.,,. / '-• .a~ ;,.• r
,, \ -- --~~ __,. ._
:.
-~ ·tfel-~ - I _._.,_.•.;:-, ,.. •
..,. .... , l --. ,i;J..- • •,
. rWATER
AND

CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Ar,-FI O'Yt.g>ll ll:I'
0AT 11t
2-YEAR 24-HOUR

PRECIPITATION
t:J-1:i:.,,:~ a,
:,..,u D11•WM j o .. 1'.o

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1270 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) WATER
AND

CONSERVATION DISTRICT
1OO-YEAR - 24 - HO UR

PRECIPITATION
,.. .. l",.ov·• o
1---"";;;....;'';:.' __;•_·•c.;~-'-~=-•__;•c..•-•-•-"-'-+""=-'-0-,«,...•-•-•-------i 011 ,._o

4.1.u
Packet Pg. 1271 Attachment: Appendix G1 - Preliminary Hydrology Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 1 -
Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan
A Template for Projects located within the Santa Ana Watershed Region of Riverside County Project Title: Tentative Tract 38202
Development No:

Design Review/Case No: P21-076
Original Date Prepared: July 7, 2021
Revision Date(s):

Prepared for Compliance with
Regional Board Order No. R8-2010-0033
Template revised June 30, 2016
Contact Information:

Prepared for:

JA Bray LLC/JS Bray LLC
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 425
Irvine, CA 92612
(949) 383-4127
Prepared by:

Blaine Womer, President
Blaine A. Womer Civil Engineering
41555 East Florida Avenue, Suite G
Hemet, CA 92544
(951) 658-1727
Preliminary
Final

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1272 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 2 -
A Brief Introduction
This Project-Specific WQMP Template for the Santa Ana Region has been prepared to help guide you in documenting compliance for your project. Because this document has been designed to specifically document compliance, you will need to utilize the WQMP Guidance Document as your “how-to” manual to help guide you through this process. Both the Template and Guidance Document go hand-in-hand, and will help facilitate a well prepared Project-Specific WQMP. Below is a flowchart for the layout of this Template that will provide the steps required to document compliance.

Section A Project and Site Information Section B Optimize Site Utilization Section C Delineate Drainage Management Areas (DMAs) Section G Source Control BMPs Section I Operation, Maintenance, and Funding Section F Hydromodification Section E Alternative Compliance Section D Implement LID BMPs Section H Construction Plan Checklist

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1273 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1274 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 4 -
Table of Contents
Section A: Project and Site Information........................................................................................................ 6 A.1 Maps and Site Plans............................................................................................................................6 A.2 Identify Receiving Waters...................................................................................................................7 A.3 Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project: ....................................................................8 Section B: Optimize Site Utilization (LID Principles) ..................................................................................... 9 Section C: Delineate Drainage Management Areas (DMAs)....................................................................... 10 Section D: Implement LID BMPs................................................................................................................. 12 D.1 Infiltration Applicability ....................................................................................................................12 D.2 Harvest and Use Assessment............................................................................................................13 D.3 Bioretention and Biotreatment Assessment....................................................................................15 D.4 Feasibility Assessment Summaries...................................................................................................16 D.5 LID BMP Sizing ..................................................................................................................................17 Section E: Alternative Compliance (LID Waiver Program).......................................................................... 18 E.1 Identify Pollutants of Concern ..........................................................................................................19 E.2 Stormwater Credits...........................................................................................................................20 E.3 Sizing Criteria.....................................................................................................................................20 E.4 Treatment Control BMP Selection ....................................................................................................21 Section F: Hydromodification ..................................................................................................................... 22 F.1 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) Analysis..........................................................................22 F.2 HCOC Mitigation................................................................................................................................23 Section G: Source Control BMPs................................................................................................................. 24 Section H: Construction Plan Checklist....................................................................................................... 26 Section I: Operation, Maintenance and Funding........................................................................................ 27

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1275 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 5 -
List of Tables
Table A.1 Identification of Receiving Waters................................................................................................7 Table A.2 Other Applicable Permits..............................................................................................................8 Table C.1 DMA Classifications.....................................................................................................................10 Table C.2 Type ‘A’, Self-Treating Areas.......................................................................................................10 Table C.3 Type ‘B’, Self-Retaining Areas .....................................................................................................10 Table C.4 Type ‘C’, Areas that Drain to Self-Retaining Areas......................................................................11 Table C.5 Type ‘D’, Areas Draining to BMPs ...............................................................................................11 Table D.1 Infiltration Feasibility ..................................................................................................................12 Table D.2 LID Prioritization Summary Matrix .............................................................................................16 Table D.3 DCV Calculations for LID BMPs...................................................................................................17 Table E.1 Potential Pollutants by Land Use Type........................................................................................19 Table E.2 Water Quality Credits..................................................................................................................20 Table E.3 Treatment Control BMP Sizing ....................................................................................................20 Table E.4 Treatment Control BMP Selection ..............................................................................................21 Table F.1 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Summary ..............................................................................22 Table G.1 Permanent and Operational Source Control Measures .............................................................24 Table H.1 Construction Plan Cross-reference.............................................................................................26 List of Appendices
Appendix 1: Maps and Site Plans................................................................................................................28 Appendix 2: Construction Plans..................................................................................................................29 Appendix 3: Soils Information.....................................................................................................................30 Appendix 4: Historical Site Conditions........................................................................................................31 Appendix 5: LID Infeasibility........................................................................................................................32 Appendix 6: BMP Design Details.................................................................................................................33 Appendix 7: Hydromodification..................................................................................................................34 Appendix 8: Source Control ........................................................................................................................35 Appendix 9: O&M .......................................................................................................................................36 Appendix 10: Educational Materials...........................................................................................................37

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1276 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 6 -
Section A: Project and Site Information

PROJECT INFORMATION
Type of Project: Single-Family Residential
Planning Area: N/A
Community Name: San Jacinto
Development Name: Tentative Tract 38202

PROJECT LOCATION
Latitude & Longitude (DMS): 33°47’25”N, -116°59’12”W
Project Watershed and Sub-Watershed: Watershed: Santa Ana River Sub-Watershed: San Jacinto Valley
Gross Acres: 33.8
APN(s): 436-280-011, 012, 013, 014, 025
Map Book and Page No.: Portion Lot 142, MB 8/357

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Proposed or Potential Land Use(s) Single-Family Residential Proposed or Potential SIC Code(s) N/A
Area of Impervious Project Footprint (SF) 668,104
Total Area of proposed Impervious Surfaces within the Project Footprint (SF)/or Replacement 668,104 Does the project consist of offsite road improvements? Y N Does the project propose to construct unpaved roads? Y N Is the project part of a larger common plan of development (phased project)? Y N

EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Total area of existing Impervious Surfaces within the Project limits Footprint (SF) 0 Is the project located within any MSHCP Criteria Cell? Y N If so, identify the Cell number: N/A
Are there any natural hydrologic features on the project site? Y N Is a Geotechnical Report attached? Y N
If no Geotech. Report, list the NRCS soils type(s) present on the site (A, B, C and/or D) N/A What is the Water Quality Design Storm Depth for the project? 0.69 Narrative:

Tentative Tract 38202 is a proposed subdivision of 33.8 acres into 181 single-family residential lots. The minimum lot size is 5000 square feet. The project is located on the east side of Lyon Avenue, approximately 566 feet north of Cottonwood Avenue in San Jacinto. The site is currently vacant land surrounded by a school and single-family residential to the north, single-family residential to the east and south, and Lyon Avenue on the west boundary. The site has a natural gradient to the west/northwest, and the site has been preliminarily designed to honor the existing drainage pattern.

The site is HCOC exempt per the current HCOC applicability map on the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District website. Water quality mitigation for the site will be accomplished through the construction of infiltration basins. Site specific infiltration testing yielded results ranging from 3.3 to 8.0 inches per hour. Infiltration Basin No. 1 is located at the northwest corner of the project and treats approximately 18.2 acres of tributary development. Infiltration Basin No. 2 is located on the north tract boundary between Lots 30 and 31, and treats approximately 15.1 acres of tributary

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1277 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 7 -
development. Both basins also mitigate the calculated V-BMP. As an LID enhancement to the above referenced structural BMPs, each lot within the subdivision will self-retain stormwater runoff in landscaped rock beds on the lots. The average retention area of the self-retaining areas will be 150 sf/lot. Project CC&Rs will have specific text for the perpetual retention and maintenance of the individual lot self-retaining LID.

A.1 Maps and Site Plans
When completing your Project-Specific WQMP, include a map of the local vicinity and existing site. In addition, include all grading, drainage, landscape/plant palette and other pertinent construction plans in Appendix 2. At a minimum, your WQMP Site Plan should include the following:
 Drainage Management Areas
 Proposed Structural BMPs
 Drainage Path
 Drainage Infrastructure, Inlets, Overflows
 Source Control BMPs
 Buildings, Roof Lines, Downspouts
 Impervious Surfaces
 Standard Labeling
 BMP Locations (Lat/Long)
Use your discretion on whether or not you may need to create multiple sheets or can appropriately accommodate these features on one or two sheets. Keep in mind that the Co-Permittee plan reviewer must be able to easily analyze your project utilizing this template and its associated site plans and maps.

Appendix 1 includes the following exhibits:
- Vicinity Map, A-1
- Regional Waters Map, A-2
- Drainage Area Map, A-3
- Post Construction BMP Site Plan, A-4
A.2 Identify Receiving Waters
Using Table A.1 below, list in order of upstream to downstream, the receiving waters that the project site is tributary to. Continue to fill each row with the Receiving Water’s 303(d) listed impairments (if any), designated beneficial uses, and proximity, if any, to a RARE beneficial use. Include a map of the receiving waters in Appendix 1.

Table A.1 Identification of Receiving Waters
Receiving
Waters EPA Approved 303(d) List Impairments Designated Beneficial Uses Proximity to RARE
Beneficial Use
Storm Drain None None Not designated as RARE
San Jacinto
River
Reach 4
None AGR-GWR-REC1-REC2-WARMWILDNot designated as RARE
Canyon Lake Pathogens , Nutrients MUN-AGR-GWR-REC1-REC2-

WARM-WILD
Not designated as RARE
Lake Elsinore Nutrients, PCB’s, Organic Enrichment/ Dissolved Oxygen, Sediment Toxicity, Unknown Toxicity REC-1-REC2-WARM-WILD Not designated as RARE

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1278 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 8 -
A.3 Additional Permits/Approvals required for the Project:

Table A.2 Other Applicable Permits
Agency Permit Required
State Department of Fish and Game, 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement Y N State Water Resources Control Board, Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Cert. Y N US Army Corps of Engineers, CWA Section 404 Permit Y N
US Fish and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act Section 7 Biological Opinion Y N Statewide Construction General Permit Coverage Y N
Statewide Industrial General Permit Coverage Y N
Western Riverside MSHCP Consistency Approval (e.g., JPR, DBESP) Y N Other (please list in the space below as required)
Y N
If yes is answered to any of the questions above, the Co-Permittee may require proof of approval/coverage from those agencies as applicable including documentation of any associated requirements that may affect this Project-Specific WQMP.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1279 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 9 -
Section B: Optimize Site Utilization (LID Principles)
Review of the information collected in Section ‘A’ will aid in identifying the principal constraints on site design and selection of LID BMPs as well as opportunities to reduce imperviousness and incorporate LID Principles into the site and landscape design. For example, constraints might include impermeable soils, high groundwater, groundwater pollution or contaminated soils, steep slopes, geotechnical instability, high-intensity land use, heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic, utility locations or safety concerns.

Opportunities might include existing natural areas, low areas, oddly configured or otherwise unbuildable parcels, easements and landscape amenities including open space and buffers (which can double as locations for bioretention BMPs), and differences in elevation (which can provide hydraulic head).

Prepare a brief narrative for each of the site optimization strategies described below. This narrative will help you as you proceed with your LID design and explain your design decisions to others.

The 2010 Santa Ana MS4 Permit further requires that LID Retention BMPs (Infiltration Only or Harvest and Use) be used unless it can be shown that those BMPs are infeasible. Therefore, it is important that your narrative identify and justify if there are any constraints that would prevent the use of those categories of LID BMPs. Similarly, you should also note opportunities that exist which will be utilized during project design. Upon completion of identifying Constraints and Opportunities, include these on your WQMP Site plan in Appendix 1.

Consideration of “highest and best use” of the discharge should also be considered. For example, Lake Elsinore is evaporating faster than runoff from natural precipitation can recharge it. Requiring infiltration of 85% of runoff events for projects tributary to Lake Elsinore would only exacerbate current water quality problems associated with Pollutant concentration due to lake water evaporation. In cases where rainfall events have low potential to recharge Lake Elsinore (i.e. no hydraulic connection between groundwater to Lake Elsinore, or other factors), requiring infiltration of Urban Runoff from projects is counterproductive to the overall watershed goals. Project proponents, in these cases, would be allowed to discharge Urban Runoff, provided they used equally effective filtration-based BMPs.

Site Optimization
The following questions are based upon Section 3.2 of the WQMP Guidance Document. Review of the WQMP Guidance Document will help you determine how best to optimize your site and subsequently identify opportunities and/or constraints, and document compliance.

Did you identify and preserve existing drainage patterns? If so, how? If not, why? The site has been preliminarily designed to honor the existing drainage pattern of the site by draining west/northwest.

Did you identify and protect existing vegetation? If so, how? If not, why? No existing vegetation to protect. The site is a regularly disked field.

Did you identify and preserve natural infiltration capacity? If so, how? If not, why? Yes, natural infiltration rates were sufficient to utilize infiltration BMPs, 3.3 inches/hour to 8.0 inches/hour.

Did you identify and minimize impervious area? If so, how? If not, why? To the greatest extent possible for a single-family residential development.

Did you identify and disperse runoff to adjacent pervious areas? If so, how? If not, why? Site runoff is intercepted by an onsite storm drain and conveyed to the onsite infiltration basins.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1280 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 10 -
Section C: Delineate Drainage Management Areas
(DMAs)
Utilizing the procedure in Section 3.3 of the WQMP Guidance Document which discusses the methods of delineating and mapping your project site into individual DMAs, complete Table C.1 below to appropriately categorize the types of classification (e.g., Type A, Type B, etc.) per DMA for your project site. Upon completion of this table, this information will then be used to populate and tabulate the corresponding tables for their respective DMA classifications.

Table C.1 DMA Classifications
DMA Name or ID Surface Type(s)12 Area (Sq. Ft.) DMA Type A/1 Landscape/Concrete 6,318 Self-Treating
A/2 Landscape/Concrete 6,907 Self-Treating
B/1 Landscape 10,260 Self-Retaining
D/1 Roof 133,440 Drains to BMP
D/2 Asphalt 145,411 Drains to BMP
D/3 Concrete 77,248 Drains to BMP
D/4 Landscape 436,524 Drains to BMP
D/5 Roof 115,370 Drains to BMP
D/6 Asphalt 129,042 Drains to BMP
D/7 Concrete 67,593 Drains to BMP
D/8 Landscape 347,504 Drains to BMP
1Reference Table 2-1 in the WQMP Guidance Document to populate this column 2 If multi-surface provide back-up
Table C.2 Type ‘A’, Self-Treating Areas
DMA Name or ID Area (Sq. Ft.) Stabilization Type Irrigation Type (if any) A/1 6,318 Drought Tolerant Landscape Drip
A/2 6,907 Drought Tolerant Landscape Drip
Table C.3 Type ‘B’, Self-Retaining Areas
Self-Retaining Area
Type ‘C’ DMAs that are draining to the Self-Retaining
Area
DMA
Name/ ID
Post-project
surface type
Area
(square
feet)
Storm
Depth
(inches) DMA Name /
ID
[C] from Table C.4 =
Required Retention Depth
(inches)
[A] [B] [C] [D]
B/1 Landscape 10,260 0.69 N/A

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1281 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 11 -
[𝐷] = [𝐵] +
[𝐵] ∙ [𝐶]
[𝐴]
Table C.4 Type ‘C’, Areas that Drain to Self-Retaining Areas DMA Receiving Self-Retaining DMA DMA Name/ ID Area (square feet) Post-project surface type Impervious fraction Product
DMA name /ID
Area (square
feet) Ratio
[A] [B] [C] = [A] x [B] [D] [C]/[D]
N/A
Table C.5 Type ‘D’, Areas Draining to BMPs
DMA Name or ID BMP Name or ID
D/1 Infiltration Basin No. 1
D/2 Infiltration Basin No. 1
D/3 Infiltration Basin No. 1
D/4 Infiltration Basin No. 1
D/5 Infiltration Basin No. 2
D/6 Infiltration Basin No. 2
D/7 Infiltration Basin No. 2
D/8 Infiltration Basin No. 2
Note: More than one drainage management area can drain to a single LID BMP, however, one drainage management area may not drain to more than one BMP.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1282 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 12 -
Section D: Implement LID BMPs
D.1 Infiltration Applicability
Is there an approved downstream ‘Highest and Best Use’ for stormwater runoff (see discussion in Chapter

2.4.4 of the WQMP Guidance Document for further details)? Y N If yes has been checked, Infiltration BMPs shall not be used for the site; proceed to section D.3 If no, continue working through this section to implement your LID BMPs. It is recommended that you contact your Co-Permittee to verify whether or not your project discharges to an approved downstream ‘Highest and Best Use’ feature.

Geotechnical Report
A Geotechnical Report or Phase I Environmental Site Assessment may be required by the Copermittee to confirm present and past site characteristics that may affect the use of Infiltration BMPs. In addition, the Co-Permittee, at their discretion, may not require a geotechnical report for small projects as described in Chapter 2 of the WQMP Guidance Document. If a geotechnical report has been prepared, include it in Appendix 3. In addition, if a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has been prepared, include it in Appendix 4.

Is this project classified as a small project consistent with the requirements of Chapter 2 of the WQMP Guidance Document? Y N
Infiltration Feasibility
Table D.1 below is meant to provide a simple means of assessing which DMAs on your site support Infiltration BMPs and is discussed in the WQMP Guidance Document in Chapter 2.4.5. Check the appropriate box for each question and then list affected DMAs as applicable. If additional space is needed, add a row below the corresponding answer.

Table D.1 Infiltration Feasibility
Does the project site… YES NO
…have any DMAs with a seasonal high groundwater mark shallower than 10 feet? X If Yes, list affected DMAs:
…have any DMAs located within 100 feet of a water supply well? X If Yes, list affected DMAs:
…have any areas identified by the geotechnical report as posing a public safety risk where infiltration of stormwater could have a negative impact? X
If Yes, list affected DMAs:
…have measured in-situ infiltration rates of less than 1.6 inches / hour? X If Yes, list affected DMAs:
…have significant cut and/or fill conditions that would preclude in-situ testing of infiltration rates at the final infiltration surface? X
If Yes, list affected DMAs:
…geotechnical report identify other site-specific factors that would preclude effective and safe infiltration? X Describe here:

If you answered “Yes” to any of the questions above for any DMA, Infiltration BMPs should not be used for those DMAs and you should proceed to the assessment for Harvest and Use below.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1283 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 13 -
D.2 Harvest and Use Assessment
Please check what applies:
☐ Reclaimed water will be used for the non-potable water demands for the project. ☐Downstream water rights may be impacted by Harvest and Use as approved by the Regional Board (verify with the Copermittee).
☒The Design Capture Volume will be addressed using Infiltration Only BMPs. In such a case, Harvest and Use BMPs are still encouraged, but it would not be required if the Design Capture Volume will be infiltrated or evapotranspired.

If any of the above boxes have been checked, Harvest and Use BMPs need not be assessed for the site. If none of the above criteria applies, follow the steps below to assess the feasibility of irrigation use, toilet use and other non-potable uses (e.g., industrial use).

Irrigation Use Feasibility
Complete the following steps to determine the feasibility of harvesting stormwater runoff for Irrigation Use BMPs on your site:

Step 1: Identify the total area of irrigated landscape on the site, and the type of landscaping used.

Total Area of Irrigated Landscape: Insert Area (Acres)
Type of Landscaping (Conservation Design or Active Turf): List Landscaping Type Step 2: Identify the planned total of all impervious areas on the proposed project from which runoff might be feasibly captured and stored for irrigation use. Depending on the configuration of buildings and other impervious areas on the site, you may consider the site as a whole, or parts of the site, to evaluate reasonable scenarios for capturing and storing runoff and directing the stored runoff to the potential use(s) identified in Step 1 above.

Total Area of Impervious Surfaces: Insert Area (Acres)
Step 3: Cross reference the Design Storm depth for the project site (see Exhibit A of the WQMP Guidance Document) with the left column of Table 2-3 in Chapter 2 to determine the minimum area of Effective Irrigated Area per Tributary Impervious Area (EIATIA).

Enter your EIATIA factor: EIATIA Factor
Step 4: Multiply the unit value obtained from Step 3 by the total of impervious areas from Step 2 to develop the minimum irrigated area that would be required.

Minimum required irrigated area: Insert Area (Acres)
Step 5: Determine if harvesting stormwater runoff for irrigation use is feasible for the project by comparing the total area of irrigated landscape (Step 1) to the minimum required irrigated area (Step 4).

Minimum required irrigated area (Step 4) Available Irrigated Landscape (Step 1) Insert Area (Acres) Insert Area (Acres)

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1284 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 14 -
Toilet Use Feasibility
Complete the following steps to determine the feasibility of harvesting stormwater runoff for toilet flushing uses on your site:

Step 1: Identify the projected total number of daily toilet users during the wet season, and account for any periodic shut downs or other lapses in occupancy:

Projected Number of Daily Toilet Users: Number of daily Toilet Users Project Type: Enter 'Residential', 'Commercial', 'Industrial' or 'Schools' Step 2: Identify the planned total of all impervious areas on the proposed project from which runoff might be feasibly captured and stored for toilet use. Depending on the configuration of buildings and other impervious areas on the site, you may consider the site as a whole, or parts of the site, to evaluate reasonable scenarios for capturing and storing runoff and directing the stored runoff to the potential use(s) identified in Step 1 above.

Total Area of Impervious Surfaces: Insert Area (Acres)
Step 3: Enter the Design Storm depth for the project site (see Exhibit A) into the left column of Table 2- 2 in Chapter 2 to determine the minimum number or toilet users per tributary impervious acre (TUTIA).

Enter your TUTIA factor: TUTIA Factor
Step 4: Multiply the unit value obtained from Step 3 by the total of impervious areas from Step 2 to develop the minimum number of toilet users that would be required.

Minimum number of toilet users: Required number of toilet users Step 5: Determine if harvesting stormwater runoff for toilet flushing use is feasible for the project by comparing the Number of Daily Toilet Users (Step 1) to the minimum required number of toilet users (Step 4).

Minimum required Toilet Users (Step 4) Projected number of toilet users (Step 1) Insert Area (Acres) Insert Area (Acres)
Other Non-Potable Use Feasibility
Are there other non-potable uses for stormwater runoff on the site (e.g. industrial use)? See Chapter 2 of the Guidance for further information. If yes, describe below. If no, write N/A.

Insert narrative description here.

Step 1: Identify the projected average daily non-potable demand, in gallons per day, during the wet season and accounting for any periodic shut downs or other lapses in occupancy or operation.

Average Daily Demand: Projected Average Daily Use (gpd) Step 2: Identify the planned total of all impervious areas on the proposed project from which runoff might be feasibly captured and stored for the identified non-potable use. Depending on the configuration of buildings and other impervious areas on the site, you may consider the site as a whole, or parts of the site, to evaluate reasonable scenarios for capturing and storing runoff and directing the stored runoff to the potential use(s) identified in Step 1 above.

Total Area of Impervious Surfaces: Insert Area (Acres)

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1285 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 15 -
Step 3: Enter the Design Storm depth for the project site (see Exhibit A) into the left column of Table 2- 4 in Chapter 2 to determine the minimum demand for non-potable uses per tributary impervious acre.

Enter the factor from Table 2-4: Enter Value
Step 4: Multiply the unit value obtained from Step 3 by the total of impervious areas from Step 2 to develop the minimum number of gallons per day of non-potable use that would be required.

Minimum required use: Minimum use required (gpd)
Step 5: Determine if harvesting stormwater runoff for other non-potable use is feasible for the project by comparing the projected average daily use (Step 1) to the minimum required non-potable use (Step 4).

Minimum required non-potable use (Step 4) Projected average daily use (Step 1) Minimum use required (gpd) Projected Average Daily Use (gpd) If Irrigation, Toilet and Other Use feasibility anticipated demands are less than the applicable minimum values, Harvest and Use BMPs are not required and you should proceed to utilize LID Bioretention and Biotreatment per Section 3.4.2 of the WQMP Guidance Document.

D.3 Bioretention and Biotreatment Assessment
Other LID Bioretention and Biotreatment BMPs as described in Chapter 2.4.7 of the WQMP Guidance Document are feasible on nearly all development sites with sufficient advance planning.

Select one of the following:
☐ LID Bioretention/Biotreatment BMPs will be used for some or all DMAs of the project as noted below in Section D.4 (note the requirements of Section 3.4.2 in the WQMP Guidance Document). ☐ A site-specific analysis demonstrating the technical infeasibility of all LID BMPs has been performed and is included in Appendix 5. If you plan to submit an analysis demonstrating the technical infeasibility of LID BMPs, request a pre-submittal meeting with the Copermittee to discuss this option. Proceed to Section E to document your alternative compliance measures.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1286 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 16 -
D.4 Feasibility Assessment Summaries
From the Infiltration, Harvest and Use, Bioretention and Biotreatment Sections above, complete Table D.2 below to summarize which LID BMPs are technically feasible, and which are not, based upon the established hierarchy.

Table D.2 LID Prioritization Summary Matrix
DMA
Name/ID
LID BMP Hierarchy No LID
(Alternative

1. Infiltration 2. Harvest and use 3. Bioretention 4. Biotreatment Compliance) D/1
D/2
D/3
D/4
D/5
D/6
D/7
D/8
For those DMAs where LID BMPs are not feasible, provide a brief narrative below summarizing why they are not feasible, include your technical infeasibility criteria in Appendix 5, and proceed to Section E below to document Alternative Compliance measures for those DMAs. Recall that each proposed DMA must pass through the LID BMP hierarchy before alternative compliance measures may be considered.

Insert narrative description here.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1287 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 17 -
D.5 LID BMP Sizing
Each LID BMP must be designed to ensure that the Design Capture Volume will be addressed by the selected BMPs. First, calculate the Design Capture Volume for each LID BMP using the VBMP worksheet in Appendix F of the LID BMP Design Handbook. Second, design the LID BMP to meet the required VBMP using a method approved by the Copermittee. Utilize the worksheets found in the LID BMP Design Handbook or consult with your Copermittee to assist you in correctly sizing your LID BMPs. Complete Table D.3 below to document the Design Capture Volume and the Proposed Volume for each LID BMP. Provide the completed design procedure sheets for each LID BMP in Appendix 6. You may add additional rows to the table below as needed.

Table D.3 DCV Calculations for LID BMPs
DMA
Type/ID
DMA
Area
(square
feet)
PostProject
Surface
Type
Effective
Impervious
Fraction, If
DMA
Runoff
Factor
DMA
Areas x
Runoff
Factor
Infiltration Basin No. 1
[A] [B] [C] [A] x [C]
D/1 133,440 Roof 1.0 0.89 119,028.5
Design
Storm
Depth
(in)
Design
Capture
Volume, VBMP
(cubic feet)
Proposed
Volume
on Plans
(cubic
feet)
D/2 145,411 Asphalt 1.0 0.89 129,706.6
D/3 77,248 Concrete 1.0 0.89 68,905.2
D/4 436,524 Landscape 0.1 0.11 48,217.6
792,623 365,857.9 0.69 21,036.8 53,872
[B], [C] is obtained as described in Section 2.3.1 of the WQMP Guidance Document [E] is obtained from Exhibit A in the WQMP Guidance Document [G] is obtained from a design procedure sheet, such as in LID BMP Design Handbook and placed in Appendix 6 Table D.4 DCV Calculations for LID BMPs
DMA
Type/ID
DMA
Area
(square
feet)
PostProject
Surface
Type
Effective
Impervious
Fraction, If
DMA
Runoff
Factor
DMA
Areas x
Runoff
Factor Infiltration Basin No. 2
[A] [B] [C] [A] x [C]
D/5 115,370 Roof 1.0 0.89 102,910
Design
Storm
Depth
(in)
Design
Capture
Volume, VBMP
(cubic feet)
Proposed
Volume
on Plans
(cubic
feet)
D/6 129,042 Asphalt 1.0 0.89 115,105.5
D/7 67,593 Concrete 1.0 0.89 60,293
D/8 347,504 Landscape 0.1 0.11 38,384.6
659,509 316,693.1 0.69 18,209.9 28,790
[B], [C] is obtained as described in Section 2.3.1 of the WQMP Guidance Document [E] is obtained from Exhibit A in the WQMP Guidance Document [G] is obtained from a design procedure sheet, such as in LID BMP Design Handbook and placed in Appendix 6

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 18 -
Section E: Alternative Compliance (LID Waiver Program)
LID BMPs are expected to be feasible on virtually all projects. Where LID BMPs have been demonstrated to be infeasible as documented in Section D, other Treatment Control BMPs must be used (subject to LID waiver approval by the Copermittee). Check one of the following Boxes:
☒ LID Principles and LID BMPs have been incorporated into the site design to fully address all Drainage Management Areas. No alternative compliance measures are required for this project and thus this Section is not required to be completed.
- Or -
☐ The following Drainage Management Areas are unable to be addressed using LID BMPs. A sitespecific analysis demonstrating technical infeasibility of LID BMPs has been approved by the CoPermittee and included in Appendix 5. Additionally, no downstream regional and/or sub-regional LID BMPs exist or are available for use by the project. The following alternative compliance measures on the following pages are being implemented to ensure that any pollutant loads expected to be discharged by not incorporating LID BMPs, are fully mitigated.

List DMAs here.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1289 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 19 -
E.1 Identify Pollutants of Concern
Utilizing Table A.1 from Section A above which noted your project’s receiving waters and their associated EPA approved 303(d) listed impairments, cross reference this information with that of your selected Priority Development Project Category in Table E.1 below. If the identified General Pollutant Categories are the same as those listed for your receiving waters, then these will be your Pollutants of Concern and the appropriate box or boxes will be checked on the last row. The purpose of this is to document compliance and to help you appropriately plan for mitigating your Pollutants of Concern in lieu of implementing LID BMPs.

Table E.1 Potential Pollutants by Land Use Type
Priority Development
Project Categories and/or
Project Features (check those
that apply)
General Pollutant Categories
Bacterial
Indicators Metals Nutrients Pesticides
Toxic
Organic
Compounds
Sediments Trash &
Debris
Oil &
Grease
Detached Residential
Development P N P P N P P P
Attached Residential
Development P N P P N P P P(2)
Commercial/Industrial
Development P(3) P P(1) P(1) P(5) P(1) P P
Automotive Repair
Shops N P N N P(4, 5) N P P
Restaurants
(>5,000 ft2)

P N N N N N P P
Hillside Development
(>5,000 ft2)

P N P P N P P P
Parking Lots
(>5,000 ft2)
P(6) P P(1) P(1) P(4) P(1) P P
Retail Gasoline Outlets N P N N P N P P
Project Priority Pollutant(s)
of Concern
P = Potential
N = Not Potential
(1) A potential Pollutant if non-native landscaping exists or is proposed onsite; otherwise not expected (2) A potential Pollutant if the project includes uncovered parking areas; otherwise not expected (3) A potential Pollutant is land use involving animal waste (4) Specifically petroleum hydrocarbons
(5) Specifically solvents
(6) Bacterial indicators are routinely detected in pavement runoff

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1290 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 20 -
E.2 Stormwater Credits
Projects that cannot implement LID BMPs but nevertheless implement smart growth principles are potentially eligible for Stormwater Credits. Utilize Table 3-8 within the WQMP Guidance Document to identify your Project Category and its associated Water Quality Credit. If not applicable, write N/A.

Table E.2 Water Quality Credits
Qualifying Project Categories Credit Percentage2
N/A
Total Credit Percentage1
1Cannot Exceed 50%
2Obtain corresponding data from Table 3-8 in the WQMP Guidance Document E.3 Sizing Criteria
After you appropriately considered Stormwater Credits for your project, utilize Table E.3 below to appropriately size them to the DCV, or Design Flow Rate, as applicable. Please reference Chapter 3.5.2 of the WQMP Guidance Document for further information.

Table E.3 Treatment Control BMP Sizing
DMA
Type/ID
DMA
Area
(square
feet)
PostProject
Surface
Type
Effective
Impervious
Fraction, If
DMA
Runoff
Factor
DMA
Area x
Runoff
Factor
Enter BMP Name / Identifier Here
[A] [B] [C] [A] x [C]
N/A
Design
Storm
Depth
(in)
Minimum
Design
Capture
Volume or
Design Flow
Rate (cubic
feet or cfs)
Total Storm
Water
Credit %
Reduction
Proposed
Volume
or Flow
on Plans
(cubic
feet or
cfs)
AT =
Σ[A] Σ= [D] [E] [F] =
[D]x[E]
[G]
[F] X (1-[H]) [I]
[B], [C] is obtained as described in Section 2.3.1 from the WQMP Guidance Document [E] is for Flow-Based Treatment Control BMPs [E] = .2, for Volume-Based Control Treatment BMPs, [E] obtained from Exhibit A in the WQMP Guidance Document
[G] is for Flow-Based Treatment Control BMPs [G] = 43,560, for Volume-Based Control Treatment BMPs, [G] = 12 [H] is from the Total Credit Percentage as Calculated from Table E.2 above [I] as obtained from a design procedure sheet from the BMP manufacturer and should be included in Appendix 6

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1291 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 21 -
E.4 Treatment Control BMP Selection
Treatment Control BMPs typically provide proprietary treatment mechanisms to treat potential pollutants in runoff, but do not sustain significant biological processes. Treatment Control BMPs must have a removal efficiency of a medium or high effectiveness as quantified below:
 High: equal to or greater than 80% removal efficiency  Medium: between 40% and 80% removal efficiency
Such removal efficiency documentation (e.g., studies, reports, etc.) as further discussed in Chapter 3.5.2 of the WQMP Guidance Document, must be included in Appendix 6. In addition, ensure that proposed Treatment Control BMPs are properly identified on the WQMP Site Plan in Appendix 1.

Table E.4 Treatment Control BMP Selection
Selected Treatment Control BMP
Name or ID1
Priority Pollutant(s) of
Concern to Mitigate2
Removal Efficiency
Percentage3
N/A
1 Treatment Control BMPs must not be constructed within Receiving Waters. In addition, a proposed Treatment Control BMP may be listed more than once if they possess more than one qualifying pollutant removal efficiency. 2 Cross Reference Table E.1 above to populate this column. 3 As documented in a Co-Permittee Approved Study and provided in Appendix 6.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1292 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 22 -
Section F: Hydromodification
F.1 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) Analysis
Once you have determined that the LID design is adequate to address water quality requirements, you will need to assess if the proposed LID Design may still create a HCOC. Review Chapters 2 and 3 (including Figure 3-7) of the WQMP Guidance Document to determine if your project must mitigate for Hydromodification impacts. If your project meets one of the following criteria which will be indicated by the check boxes below, you do not need to address Hydromodification at this time. However, if the project does not qualify for Exemptions 1, 2 or 3, then additional measures must be added to the design to comply with HCOC criteria. This is discussed in further detail below in Section F.2.

HCOC EXEMPTION 1: The Priority Development Project disturbs less than one acre. The Copermittee has the discretion to require a Project-Specific WQMP to address HCOCs on projects less than one acre on a case by case basis. The disturbed area calculation should include all disturbances associated with larger common plans of development.

Does the project qualify for this HCOC Exemption? Y N
If Yes, HCOC criteria do not apply.

HCOC EXEMPTION 2: The volume and time of concentration1 of storm water runoff for the postdevelopment condition is not significantly different from the pre-development condition for a 2-year return frequency storm (a difference of 5% or less is considered insignificant) using one of the following methods to calculate:
 Riverside County Hydrology Manual
 Technical Release 55 (TR-55): Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (NRCS 1986), or derivatives thereof, such as the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph Method  Other methods acceptable to the Co-Permittee
Does the project qualify for this HCOC Exemption? Y N
If Yes, report results in Table F.1 below and provide your substantiated hydrologic analysis in Appendix 7.

Table F.1 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Summary
2 year – 24 hour
Pre-condition Post-condition % Difference
Time of
Concentration

INSERT VALUE INSERT VALUE INSERT VALUE
Volume (Cubic Feet) INSERT VALUE INSERT VALUE INSERT VALUE 1 Time of concentration is defined as the time after the beginning of the rainfall when all portions of the drainage basin are contributing to flow at the outlet.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1293 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 23 -
HCOC EXEMPTION 3: All downstream conveyance channels to an adequate sump (for example, Prado Dam, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, Santa Ana River, or other lake, reservoir or naturally erosion resistant feature) that will receive runoff from the project are engineered and regularly maintained to ensure design flow capacity; no sensitive stream habitat areas will be adversely affected; or are not identified on the Co-Permittees Hydromodification Susceptibility Maps.

Does the project qualify for this HCOC Exemption? Y N
If Yes, HCOC criteria do not apply and note below which adequate sump applies to this HCOC qualifier:

INSERT TEXT HERE
F.2 HCOC Mitigation
If none of the above HCOC Exemption Criteria are applicable, HCOC criteria is considered mitigated if they meet one of the following conditions:
a. Additional LID BMPS are implemented onsite or offsite to mitigate potential erosion or habitat impacts as a result of HCOCs. This can be conducted by an evaluation of site-specific conditions utilizing accepted professional methodologies published by entities such as the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCRWP), or other Co-Permittee approved methodologies for site-specific HCOC analysis. b. The project is developed consistent with an approved Watershed Action Plan that addresses HCOC in Receiving Waters.
c. Mimicking the pre-development hydrograph with the post-development hydrograph, for a 2-year return frequency storm. Generally, the hydrologic conditions of concern are not significant, if the post-development hydrograph is no more than 10% greater than pre-development hydrograph.

In cases where excess volume cannot be infiltrated or captured and reused, discharge from the site must be limited to a flow rate no greater than 110% of the pre-development 2-year peak flow.

Be sure to include all pertinent documentation used in your analysis of the items a, b or c in Appendix 7. *Project is HCOC Exempt per the HCOC Applicability Map in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District map as Geodatabase, approved 4/20/2017.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1294 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 24 -
Section G: Source Control BMPs
Source control BMPs include permanent, structural features that may be required in your project plans — such as roofs over and berms around trash and recycling areas — and Operational BMPs, such as regular sweeping and “housekeeping”, that must be implemented by the site’s occupant or user. The MEP standard typically requires both types of BMPs. In general, Operational BMPs cannot be substituted for a feasible and effective permanent BMP. Using the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist in Appendix 8, review the following procedure to specify Source Control BMPs for your site:

1. Identify Pollutant Sources: Review Column 1 in the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist. Check off the potential sources of Pollutants that apply to your site.

2. Note Locations on Project-Specific WQMP Exhibit: Note the corresponding requirements listed in Column 2 of the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist. Show the location of each Pollutant source and each permanent Source Control BMP in your Project-Specific WQMP Exhibit located in Appendix 1.

3. Prepare a Table and Narrative: Check off the corresponding requirements listed in Column 3 in the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist. In the left column of Table G.1 below, list each potential source of runoff Pollutants on your site (from those that you checked in the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist). In the middle column, list the corresponding permanent, Structural Source Control BMPs (from Columns 2 and 3 of the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist) used to prevent Pollutants from entering runoff. Add additional narrative in this column that explains any special features, materials or methods of construction that will be used to implement these permanent, Structural Source Control BMPs.

4. Identify Operational Source Control BMPs: To complete your table, refer once again to the Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist. List in the right column of your table the Operational BMPs that should be implemented as long as the anticipated activities continue at the site. Copermittee stormwater ordinances require that applicable Source Control BMPs be implemented; the same BMPs may also be required as a condition of a use permit or other revocable Discretionary Approval for use of the site.

Table G.1 Permanent and Operational Source Control Measures Potential Sources of Runoff
pollutants
Permanent Structural Source
Control BMPs
Operational Source Control BMPs
On-site Storm Drain Inlets Mark all inlets with the words “only rain down the storm drain”
or similar. Catch Basin Markers
may be available from the
RCFC&WCD.

Maintain and periodically repaint
or replace inlet markings.

Provide stormwater pollution
prevention information to new
site owners, lessees, or
operators.

See applicable operational BMPs
in Fact Sheets SC-44, “Drainage
System Maintenance”
Include the following in lease
agreements: “Tenant shall not

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1295 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 25 -
allow anyone to discharge
anything to storm drains or to
store or deposit materials so as
to create a potential discharge to
storm drains.”
Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide
Use
Design landscaping to minimize
irrigation and runoff, to promote
surface infiltration where
appropriate and to minimize the
use of fertilizers and pesticides
that can contribute to
stormwater pollution.

Where landscaped areas are
used to retain or detain
stormwater, specify plants that
are tolerant of saturated soil
conditions.

Consider using pest-resistant
plants, especially adjacent to
hardscape.

To insure successful
establishment, select plants
appropriate to site soils, slopes,
climate, sun, wind, rain, land
use, air movement, ecological
consistency and plant
interactions.

Maintain landscaping using
minimum or no pesticides.

See applicable operational BMPs
in “What you should know for
….Landscaping and Gardening”
at http://rcflood.org/stormwater
Provide IPM information to new
owners, lessees and operators.

Rooftop Equipment
Roofing, gutters and trim
Condensate drain lines may
discharge to landscaped areas if
the flow is small enough that
runoff will not occur.

Condensate drain lines may not
discharge to the storm drain
system.

Rooftop equipment with
potential to produce pollutants
shall be roofed and/or have
secondary containment.

Avoid roofing, gutters and trim
made of copper or other
unprotected metals that may
leach into runoff.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1296 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 26 -
Section H: Construction Plan Checklist
Populate Table H.1 below to assist the plan checker in an expeditious review of your project. The first two columns will contain information that was prepared in previous steps, while the last column will be populated with the corresponding plan sheets. This table is to be completed with the submittal of your final Project-Specific WQMP.

Table H.1 Construction Plan Cross-reference
BMP No. or
ID
BMP Identifier and
Description
Corresponding Plan Sheet(s) BMP Location (Lat/Long)
To be included in the Final WQMP
Note that the updated table — or Construction Plan WQMP Checklist — is only a reference tool to facilitate an easy comparison of the construction plans to your Project-Specific WQMP. Co-Permittee staff can advise you regarding the process required to propose changes to the approved Project-Specific WQMP.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1297 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 27 -
Section I: Operation, Maintenance and Funding
The Copermittee will periodically verify that Stormwater BMPs on your site are maintained and continue to operate as designed. To make this possible, your Copermittee will require that you include in Appendix 9 of this Project-Specific WQMP:

1. A means to finance and implement facility maintenance in perpetuity, including replacement cost.

2. Acceptance of responsibility for maintenance from the time the BMPs are constructed until responsibility for operation and maintenance is legally transferred. A warranty covering a period following construction may also be required.

3. An outline of general maintenance requirements for the Stormwater BMPs you have selected.

4. Figures delineating and designating pervious and impervious areas, location, and type of Stormwater BMP, and tables of pervious and impervious areas served by each facility. Geolocating the BMPs using a coordinate system of latitude and longitude is recommended to help facilitate a future statewide database system.

5. A separate list and location of self-retaining areas or areas addressed by LID Principles that do not require specialized O&M or inspections but will require typical landscape maintenance as noted in Chapter 5, pages 85-86, in the WQMP Guidance. Include a brief description of typical landscape maintenance for these areas.

Your local Co-Permittee will also require that you prepare and submit a detailed Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan that sets forth a maintenance schedule for each of the Stormwater BMPs built on your site. An agreement assigning responsibility for maintenance and providing for inspections and certification may also be required.

Details of these requirements and instructions for preparing a Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan are in Chapter 5 of the WQMP Guidance Document.

Maintenance Mechanism: Homeowner’s Association
Will the proposed BMPs be maintained by a Home Owners’ Association (HOA) or Property Owners Association (POA)?
Y N
Include your Operation and Maintenance Plan and Maintenance Mechanism in Appendix 9. Additionally, include all pertinent forms of educational materials for those personnel that will be maintaining the proposed BMPs within this Project-Specific WQMP in Appendix 10.

To be included in the Final WQMP.

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1298 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 28 -
Appendix 1: Maps and Site Plans
Location Map, WQMP Site Plan and Receiving Waters Map

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1299 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1300 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1301 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

LYON AVENUE APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR. 436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 436-280-022 436-280-021 MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL 436-280-010 TRACT 31097 TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 ESTRELLA ST. CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 DRAINAGE AREA MAP EXHIBIT A-3 INFILTRATION BASIN NO. 1 SECTION INFILTRATION BASIN NO. 2 SECTION DRAINAGE AREA MAP P21-076 4.1.v Packet Pg. 1302 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

LYON AVENUE APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. LEE ANN CIR. CHRISTA CIR. SYKES DR. 436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 436-280-022 436-280-021 MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL 436-280-010 TRACT 31097 TRACT 29384 COTTONWOOD AVE. 434225247LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8 ESTRELLA ST. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 38202 CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL DIG ALERT FOR W.O. SCALE BENCHMARK: DATE DATE CITY APPR. CHECKED BY: BY MARK ENGINEER REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DATE DESIGNED BY: SHEET NO. FILE NO. R.C.E. NO. 1 APPROVED BY: EXP. DATE DATE PREPARED BY: DATE CITY ENGINEER R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE OF 1 SHEETS BLAINE A. WOMER CIVIL ENGINEERING Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347 Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 BWA 46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC 1" = 100' JULY 2021 1" = 100' 0 100 200 300 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202 IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO P21-076 POST-CONSTRUCTION BMP SITE PLAN EXHIBIT A-4 TYPICAL LOT DRAINAGE / SELF-RETAINING LID NTS INFILTRATION BASIN NO. 1 SECTION INFILTRATION BASIN NO. 2 SECTION HOUSE ROOF DRAIN DETAIL POST-CONSTRUCTION BMP SITE PLAN 4.1.v Packet Pg. 1303 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 29 -
Appendix 2: Construction Plans
Grading and Drainage Plans
To be included in the Final WQMP

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1304 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 30 -
Appendix 3: Soils Information
Geotechnical Study and Other Infiltration Testing Data

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1305 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1306 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1307 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1308 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1309 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1310 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1311 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1312 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1313 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1314 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1315 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 31 -
Appendix 4: Historical Site Conditions
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment or Other Information on Past Site Use Not Available

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1316 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 32 -
Appendix 5: LID Infeasibility
LID Technical Infeasibility Analysis
Not Applicable

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1317 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 33 -
Appendix 6: BMP Design Details
BMP Sizing, Design Details and other Supporting Documentation

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1318 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1319 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1320 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1321 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1322 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 34 -
Appendix 7: Hydromodification
Supporting Detail Relating to Hydrologic Conditions of Concern HCOC Exempt

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1323 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 35 -
Appendix 8: Source Control
Pollutant Sources/Source Control Checklist

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1324 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1325
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1326
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1327
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1328
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1329
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1330
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1331
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1332
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1333
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1334
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1335
Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 36 -
Appendix 9: O&M
Operation and Maintenance Plan and Documentation of Finance, Maintenance and Recording Mechanisms To be included in the Final WQMP

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1336 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) - 37 -
Appendix 10: Educational Materials
BMP Fact Sheets, Maintenance Guidelines and Other End-User BMP Information To be included in the Final WQMP

4.1.v
Packet Pg. 1337 Attachment: Appendix G2 - Project Specific WQMP (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

SAN JACINTO RESIDENTIAL TTM
38202 PROJECT

NOISE STUDY
Prepared for:

VCS ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Prepared by:

July 2022

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1338 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study

City of San Jacinto
i
SAN JACINTO RESIDENTIAL TTM 38202 PROJECT

SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA
Noise Study
Table of Contents
Page
Project Description............................................................................................................................. 1 Setting.................................................................................................................................................. 4 Overview of Sound Measurement ................................................................................................. 4 Sensitive Receptors .......................................................................................................................... 5 Project Site Setting ............................................................................................................................ 5 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................................................ 7 Vibration Standards ......................................................................................................................... 8 Impact Analysis.................................................................................................................................. 9 Methodology and Significance Thresholds .................................................................................. 9 Temporary Construction Noise .................................................................................................... 10 Temporary Construction‐Related Vibration .............................................................................. 13 Operational Noise Exposure ......................................................................................................... 14 References ......................................................................................................................................... 18 List of Figures
Figure 1 – Vicnity Map...................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 – Site Plan ............................................................................................................................ 3 Figure 3 – Noise Monitoring Locations .......................................................................................... 8 Figure 4 – Noise Receiver Locations ............................................................................................. 16 List of Tables

Table 1 Sound Level of Typical Noise Sources and Noise Environments ................................. 6 Table 2 Noise Monitoring Results ................................................................................................... 7 Table 3 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................. 11

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1339 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study

City of San Jacinto
ii
Table 4 Typical Maximum Construction Noise Levels at Various Distances from Project Construction ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Table 5 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.................................................. 14 Table 6 Modeled Sound Levels ...................................................................................................... 15 Appendices
Appendix A ‐ Monitoring Sheet and Modeling Files
This page intentionally left blank.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1340 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
1 SAN JACINTO RESIDENTIAL TTM 38202 PROJECT

SAN JACINTO, CALIFORNIA
This report is an analysis of the potential noise impacts associated with the proposed Tentative Tract Map 38202 in the City of San Jacinto, California. This report has been prepared by Birdseye Planning Group (BPG) under contract to the applicant, to support preparation of the environmental documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

This study analyzes the potential for temporary noise impacts associated with construction activity and long‐term impacts associated with operation of the proposed project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project would develop an approximately 33.8‐acre vacant site with up to 181 single‐family residential homes and associated infrastructure. The Project requires subdividing five (5) existing parcels (APNs 436‐280‐011, 436‐280‐012, 436‐280‐013, 436‐280‐014 and 436‐280‐ 025) (Figure 1 – Vicinity Map). Lot sizes would vary within an approximate range of 5,000 to 8,000 square feet. The Project proposes to modify development standards and reduce the minimum RL lot size below 7,200 square feet and density above 2.1 units per acre as allowable under a Planned Development Permit (PDP), Site Plan, and Design Review. The preliminary site plan is shown on Figure 2 – Proposed Site Plan.

Access to the new development would be provided from Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street. Internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation would be accessible on new streets and sidewalks that would be publicly maintained in the future. Parking would be accommodated in two‐car garages, two‐car driveways, and on public streets.

Offsite improvements include connecting the proposed internal circulation system to the intersections of Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street; connecting to existing utility systems within Lyon Avenue; frontage improvements along Lyon Avenue including a Class I multi‐use path (per City of San Jacinto Trails Master Plan), sidewalk and street lights; and constructing a portion of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system Line G‐3 from Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street along the northeast edge of the development to a future connection point (note: continuation of Line G‐3 to be constructed by others) at the Monte Vista Middle School property to the north. Total off‐site improvements would comprise approximately 1.26 acres.

Project construction stages would include site preparation, import of fill soils, grading, building construction (and construction of offsite facilities), underground utility construction, export of lot spoils and street paving. Project construction is anticipated to begin in the first quarter of 2023 and last approximately 24 months.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1341 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Figure 1 — Vicinity Map ‐ Project Site

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1342
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Figure 2 — Site Plan

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1343
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
4 SETTING
Overview of Sound Measurement
Noise level (or volume/loudness) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A‐weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A‐weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels to be consistent with that of human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (about the highest note on a piano) and less sensitive to low frequencies (below 100 Hertz).

Sound pressure level is measured on a logarithmic scale with the 0 dB level based on the lowest detectable sound pressure level that people can perceive (an audible sound that is not zero sound pressure level). Based on the logarithmic scale, a doubling of sound energy is equivalent to an increase of 3 dBA, and a sound that is 10 dBA less than the ambient sound level would be half as loud and influence the character of ambient noise without influencing the overall sound level. Because of the nature of the human ear, a sound must be about 10 dBA greater than the reference sound to be judged as twice as loud. In general, a 3 dBA change in community noise levels is noticeable, while 1‐2 dB changes generally are not perceived. Quiet suburban areas typically have noise levels in the range of 40‐50 dBA, while arterial streets are in the 50‐60+ dBA range. Normal conversational levels are in the 60‐65 dBA range, and ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA can interrupt conversations. Noise levels typically attenuate (or drop off) at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from point sources (i.e., industrial machinery). Noise from lightly traveled roads typically attenuates at a rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from heavily traveled roads typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The manner in which older homes in California were constructed (approximately 30 years old or older) generally provides a reduction of exterior‐to‐interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows. The exterior‐to‐interior reduction of newer residential units and office buildings construction to California Energy Code standards is generally 30 dBA or more (FTA 2018).

In addition to the actual instantaneous measurement of sound levels, the duration of sound is important since sounds that occur over a long period of time are more likely to be an annoyance or cause direct physical damage or environmental stress. One of the most frequently used noise metrics that considers both duration and sound pressure level is the equivalent noise level (Leq). The Leq is defined as the single steady A‐weighted level that is equivalent to the same amount of energy as that contained in the actual fluctuating levels over a period of time (essentially, the average noise level). Typically, Leq is summed over a one‐hour period. Lmax is the highest RMS (root mean squared) sound pressure level within the measuring period, and Lmin is the lowest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1344 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
5 The time period in which noise occurs is also important since noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which occurs during the day. Community noise is usually measured using Day‐Night Average Level (Ldn), which is the 24‐hour average noise level with a 10‐dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) hours, or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24‐hour average noise level with a 5 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. and a 10 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Noise levels described by Ldn and CNEL usually do not differ by more than 1 dB. Table 1 shows sound levels of typical noise sources in Leq.

Sensitive Receptors
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with each of these uses. Urban areas contain a variety of land use and development types that are noise sensitive including residences, schools, churches, hospitals and convalescent care facilities. The closest properties defined herein as sensitive receptors are single‐family residences and Monte Vista Middle School located within approximately 50 feet from the eastern and northern project boundaries, respectively.

Project Site Setting
The project area is urbanizing and located proximal to existing single‐family residences. Low‐ density residential uses are located adjacent to and south of the site. Single‐family neighborhoods are located to the east/northeast and west. Monte Vista Middle School is north of the project site. The most common and primary sources of noise in the project site vicinity are motor vehicles (e.g., automobiles and trucks) operating on North Lyon Avenue. Motor vehicle noise is of concern because where a high number of individual events occur, it can create a sustained noise level. Aircraft overflights occur but do not noticeably contribute to the ambient noise environment.

To gather data on the general noise environment at the project site, three weekday morning 15‐ minute noise measurements were taken on the site on January 6, 2022, using an ANSI Type II integrating sound level meter. The predominant noise source was traffic. The temperature during monitoring was 55 degrees Fahrenheit with no perceptible wind.

The monitoring site (Site 1) is located along the western site boundary along North Lyon Avenue approximately 600 feet north of Cottonwood Avenue. Site 2 is located at the southwest corner of the Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street intersection. Site 3 is located along the north side of Cottonwood Avenue approximately 700 feet west of Palm Avenue. During monitoring, 41 cars/light trucks, one medium truck (six tires/two axles) and zero heavy trucks (all vehicles with three or more axles) passed Site 1. A total of seven cars/light trucks, zero medium truck (six tires/two axles) and zero heavy trucks (all vehicles with three or more axles) passed Site 2. A total of 64 cars/light trucks, one medium truck (six tires/two axles) and one heavy truck (all vehicles with three or more axles) passed Site 3.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1345 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
6 Table 1. Sound Levels of Typical Noise Sources and Noise Environments Noise Source
(at Given
Distance)
Noise Environment
A-Weighted
Sound Level
(Decibels)
Human Judgment of
Noise Loudness
(Relative to Reference
Loudness of 70
Decibels*)
Military Jet Takeoff
with Afterburner
(50 ft)
Carrier Flight Deck 140 128 times as loud
Civil Defense Siren (100 ft) 130 64 times as loud
Commercial Jet Take-off (200
ft) 120
32 times as loud
Threshold of Pain
Pile Driver (50 ft)
Rock Music Concert
Inside Subway Station
(New York)
110 16 times as loud
Ambulance Siren (100 ft)
Newspaper Press (5 ft)
Gas Lawn Mower (3 ft)
100 8 times as loud
Very Loud
Food Blender (3 ft)
Propeller Plane Flyover (1,000
ft) Diesel Truck (150 ft)
Boiler Room
Printing Press
Plant
90 4 times as loud
Garbage Disposal (3 ft) Noisy Urban Daytime 80 2 times as loud Passenger Car, 65 mph (25 ft)
Living Room Stereo (15 ft)
Vacuum Cleaner (10 ft)
Commercial Areas 70 Reference Loudness
Moderately Loud
Normal Speech (5 ft)
Air Conditioning Unit
(100 ft)
Data Processing Center
Department Store 60 ½ as loud
Light Traffic (100 ft) Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime 50 ¼ as loud
Bird Calls (distant) Quiet Urban Nighttime 40
1/8 as loud
Quiet
Soft Whisper (5 ft) Library and Bedroom at
Night Quiet Rural Nighttime 30 1/16 as loud
Broadcast and Recording
Studio 20
1/32 as loud
Just Audible
0 1/64 as loud
Threshold of Hearing
Source: Compiled by dBF Associates, Inc., 2016

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1346 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
7 The dominant noise source is traffic on North Lyon and Cottonwood Avenue. General background noise noticeably contributes to ambient conditions. Table 2 identifies the noise measurement location and measured noise level.

Table 2
Noise Monitoring Results
Measurement Location Primary Noise
Source Sample Time Leq (dBA)
Project site approximately 600 feet north of
Cottonwood Avenue
Traffic Weekday morning 61.2
Southwest corner of Marilyn Drive and Estrella Street Traffic Weekday morning 53.7 North side of Cottonwood Avenue approximately 700
feet west of Palm Avenue. Traffic Weekday morning 64.7
Source: Field visit using ANSI Type II Integrating sound level meter.

The monitoring locations are shown in Figure 3. As shown in Table 2, the measured Leq at Site 1 was 61.2 dBA; 53.7 dBA at Site 2 and 64.7 dBA at Site 3. The monitoring data sheet is provided in Appendix A.

Regulatory Setting
In 1976, the California Department of Health, State Office of Noise Control published a recommended noise/land use compatibility matrix which many jurisdictions have adopted as a standard in their general plan noise elements. The California State Office of Planning and Research 2017 updates to the General Plan Guidelines, Appendix D Noise Element Guidelines, Figure 2, shows that exterior noise levels up to 60 dBA (CNEL or Ldn) are normally compatible in rural residential areas. Noise levels up to 70 dBA (CNEL or Ldn) are conditionally compatible.

City of San Jacinto Noise Ordinance
Section 8.040.090 (A) of the City of San Jacinto Municipal Code allows construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction is allowed on Sunday or federal holidays. Construction occurring consistent with these provisions is exempt from noise regulations.

Section 8.040.040 (A) of the San Jacinto Municipal Code states the maximum exterior noise level for single‐family residences is 65 dBA Leq from 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Section 8.040.050 (A) states the maximum interior noise level for single family residences is 45 dBA Leq from 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 40 dBA Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1347 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Figure 3 — Noise Monitoring LocaƟons ‐ Project Site
M3
M2
M1
‐ Noise Monitoring LocaƟon

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1348
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
9 Vibration Standards
Vibration is a unique form of noise as the energy is transmitted through buildings, structures and the ground whereas audible noise energy is transmitted through the air. Thus, vibration is generally felt rather than heard. The ground motion caused by vibration is measured as peak particle velocity in inches per second and is referenced as vibration decibels (VdB). The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.

The City of San Jacinto Municipal Code does not address construction‐related vibration; thus, for the purpose of evaluating project‐related vibration impacts, thresholds established in the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (September 2018) (Table 6‐3) are used. A threshold of 65 VdB is used for buildings where low ambient vibration is essential for interior operations. These buildings include hospitals and recording studios. A threshold of 72 VdB is used for residences and buildings where people normally sleep (i.e., hotels and rest homes). A threshold of 75 VdB is used for institutional land uses where activities occur primarily during the daytime (i.e., churches and schools). The threshold used for the proposed project is 72 VdB as single‐family residences are the nearest sensitive receptors to the site.

Construction activities such as blasting, pile driving, demolition, excavation or drilling have the potential to generate ground vibrations. With respect to ground‐borne vibration impacts on structures, the FTA states that ground‐borne vibration levels in excess of 90 VdB would damage buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage. No historic buildings or buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage are known to occur near the site; thus, 94 VdB (PPV

0.2), the standard for potential damage to non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings is used herein to evaluate potential vibration impacts to neighboring structures. Construction activities referenced above that would generate significant vibration levels are not proposed.

However, to provide information for use in completing the CEQA evaluation, construction‐ related vibration impacts are evaluated using the above referenced criteria.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Construction noise estimates are based upon noise levels reported by the Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment, and the distance to nearby sensitive receptors. Reference noise levels from that document were used to estimate noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors based on a standard noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance (free field propagation of sound attenuation).

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1349 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
10 The proposed project would be a new use; thus, noise levels associated with existing and future traffic were based on the difference in trip volumes between existing conditions and the proposed use. A doubling of traffic volumes would be required to cause a noticeable increase (3 dBA) in traffic noise. Baseline conditions do not exceed 65 dBA Leq, the normally acceptable exterior sound level at single‐family residences referenced in Section 8.040.040 (A) and depicted in Table N‐1 of the City of San Jacinto General Plan Noise Element. Baseline and with project sound levels were calculated to determine whether project traffic, when added to baseline traffic, would exceed the conditionally compatible standard or noticeably increase (+3 dBA or greater) the Leq over baseline conditions.

As noted, a noise increase greater than 3 dBA is readily perceptible to the average human ear; and thus, is the level considered a substantial noise increase related to traffic operations. For the purpose of this evaluation, the peak hour Leq is used for traffic noise as it provides a conservative estimate of potential noise levels. As discussed, existing noise levels do not exceed the normally acceptable sound levels for single‐family residential receivers. Thus, the impact determination is based on whether noise levels would exceed those levels considered acceptable for single‐family residential areas.

Temporary Construction Noise
The main sources of noise during construction activities would include heavy machinery used during, site preparation, grading the site, as well as equipment used during building construction and paving. Table 3 demonstrates the typical noise levels associated with heavy construction equipment. As shown, average noise levels associated with the use of heavy equipment at construction sites can range from about 81 to 95 dBA at 25 feet from the source, depending upon the types of equipment in operation at any given time and phase of construction (FTA 2018).

The noise level used to estimate the typical maximum noise level that could occur during project construction is based on use of a bulldozer as it is likely to be the noisiest type of equipment used over a sustained period of time adjacent to nearby residences and Monte Vista Middle School during site preparation and grading activities. Site preparation and grading activities are estimated to last approximately 136 working days. Actual noise levels will fluctuate throughout the day and may periodically exceed 88 dBA at the property line depending on the type and location of equipment used and whether multiple pieces of equipment are operating simultaneously in the same area. For noise and distance reference purposes, the project site is approximately 750 feet by 1,960 feet.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1350 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
11 Table 3
Typical Maximum Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment Onsite
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 25
Feet from the
Source
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 50 Feet
from the Source
Typical Maximum
Level (dBA) 100
Feet from the
Source
Air Compressor 84 79 73
Backhoe 84 79 73
Bobcat Tractor 84 79 73
Concrete Mixer 85 78 72
Bulldozer 88 82 76
Jack Hammer 95 89 83
Pavement Roller 86 80 74
Street Sweeper 88 82 76
Man Lift 81 75 69
Dump Truck 82 76 70
Source: Noise levels based on FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (2006) Users Guide Table 1.

Noise levels based on actual maximum measured noise levels at 50 feet (Lmax).

Noise levels assume a noise attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance.

The proposed project’s estimated maximum construction noise levels at varying distances are shown in Table 4 based on a reference noise level of 88 dBA at 25 feet. The reference level of 88 dBA is associated with operation of a bulldozer, which is the loudest piece of equipment commonly used during site preparation and grading. Noise levels at neighboring residences and Monte Vista Middle School will vary based on the distance from the equipment and the receiver as equipment moves around the approximately 750 feet by 1,960 foot project site.

As shown in Table 4, exterior noise levels would periodically exceed 88 dBA at the project site boundary. Such exceedances would be expected to occur during the most heavy‐equipment intensive construction phases of site preparation and grading, which are estimated to last 136 working days. Exterior noise levels experienced at different receptor locations would be reduced by approximately 6 dBA with each doubling of distance that equipment is operating away from a particular receptor. Further interior noise attenuation of approximately 20 to 30 dBA would occur inside residential and school structures with closed windows.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1351 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
12 Table 4
Typical Maximum Construction Noise Levels
at Various Distances from Project
Construction
Distance from
Construction
Typical Maximum Noise
Level at Receptor
(dBA)
25 feet 88
50 feet 82
100 feet 76
250 feet 68
500 feet 62
1,000 feet 56

While construction noise would be periodically audible at residences and Monte Vista Middle School neighboring the project site, construction noise would be temporary and is not anticipated to be a cause of substantial annoyance or to cause direct physical damage or environmental stress. In addition, the proposed project would comply with limitations on hours of construction activity defined in Section 8.040.090 of the San Jacinto Municipal Code. Based on the analysis above, noise impacts during construction of each phase would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Temporary construction noise could be reduced by implementing one or more of the following measures:

N‐1 Construction Equipment. Electrical power shall be used to run air compressors and similar power tools. Internal combustion engines should be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer and in good repair. All diesel equipment shall be operated with closed engine doors and be equipped with factory‐ recommended mufflers. Construction equipment that continues to generate substantial noise at the project boundaries shall be shielded with temporary noise barriers, such as barriers that meet a sound transmission class (STC) rating of 25, sound absorptive panels, or sound blankets on individual pieces of construction equipment. Stationary noise‐generating equipment, such as generators and compressors, shall be located as far as practically possible from the nearest residential and school property lines.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1352 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
13 N‐2 Limit Operations Adjacent to Receivers. Limit the number of large pieces of equipment (i.e., bulldozers or concrete mixers) operating adjacent to receivers at any given time.

N‐3 Neighbor Notification. Provide notification to Monte Vista Middle School and residential occupants nearest to the project site at least two weeks prior to initiation of construction activities that could result in substantial noise levels at outdoor or indoor living areas. This notification shall include the anticipated hours and duration of construction and a description of noise reduction measures being implemented at the project site. The notification shall include a telephone number for local residents to call to submit complaints associated with construction noise. The notification should be posted along North Lyon Avenue and Marilyn Drive and be visible from adjacent properties.

Temporary Construction‐Related Vibration
The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for many people. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration from traffic is barely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, which is the typical background vibration velocity, to 94 VdB, which is the standard for potential damage to non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings. There are no exisitng activities occurring in the project area that generate perceptible groundborne vibration.

Construction activity on the project site would be temporary and any vibration would not persist for long periods. Assuming vibration levels would be simlar to those associated with a large bulldozer, typical groundborne vibration levels would be 91 VdB at 25 feet, 85 VdB at 50 feet, and 79 Vdb at 100 feet, based on the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (September 2018) as shown in Table 5.

As referenced, the closest single‐family residence is approximately 50 feet east of the eastern property line. The nearest school structure is also approximately 50 feet from the project’s northern property line. Based on the information presented in Table 5, vibration levels would attenuate to between 91 VdB (distance at 25 feet) and 85 VdB (distance at 50 feet) at these residences during construction along the eastern and northern property lines assuming a bulldozer is the heaviest piece of equipment used during site preparation or grading. As discussed below, 94 VdB is the threshold where minor damage can occur in non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings. Vibration levels are projected to be under this threshold; thus, structural damage is not expected to occur as a result of construction activities associated with the proposed project.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1353 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
14 Vibration may be perceptible at the nearest receiver periodically during equipment pass by events. Any vibration would be temporary in duration and occur within the timeframe designated in the City of San Jacinto Code as referenced above. Thus, temporary vibration impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Table 5
Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment Approximate VdB
25 Feet 50 Feet 60 Feet 75 Feet 100 Feet
Large Bulldozer 91 85 83 82 79
Loaded Trucks 90 84 82 81 78
Jackhammer 94 88 86 85 82
Loader 86 80 78 77 74
Source: FTA, 2018
Operational Noise Exposure
Operation of the proposed project was evaluated for potential exterior traffic related impacts caused by increased traffic volumes associated with the project as well as interior noise levels caused by traffic. The proposed project is considered a typical development that would not significantly contribute new vehicle trips to the existing road network or distribution of nighttime traffic. The majority of all project traffic would be concentrated on North Lyon Avenue west of the site, Cottonwood Avenue south of the site and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street/Sykes Street east of the site. The Ldn/CNEL values associated with project‐related traffic Leq are estimated by adding 1 dB to predicted peak‐hour Leq traffic noise levels for comparison with the City of San Jacinto Noise Element Table N‐2 criteria for exterior noise levels generated by traffic. For the purpose of the impact assessment, the Leq is used per the City of San Jacinto Municipal Code as referenced above.

Exterior Traffic Noise. Traffic is the primary noise source that would be generated by the proposed project. Existing noise levels were measured at the project site on January 6, 2021. The Leq during the 15‐minute monitoring period was 61.2 dBA along North Lyon Avenue, 53.7 at the northeast corner of the site along Marilyn Drive and 64.7 dBA along Cottonwood Avenue.

Existing measured noise levels do not exceed the 65 dBA Leq exterior standard referenced above at any of the monitoring locations. Measured baseline and with project sound levels were calculated to determine whether project traffic, when added to baseline traffic, would exceed the noise standard or noticeably increase (+3 dBA or greater) over baseline conditions.

The roadway network adjacent to the project site (i.e., North Lyon Avenue, Cottonwood Avenue, Estrella Street and Marilyn and Sykes Avenues) was modeled using the Federal

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1354 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
15 Highway Administration Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 software. The model calculates traffic noise at receiver locations based on traffic volumes, travel speed, mix of vehicle types operating on the roadways (i.e., cars/trucks, medium trucks and heavy trucks) and related factors. Traffic volumes used to establish the vehicle mix on North Lyon Avenue and Cottonwood Avenue are based on traffic counts obtained during the monitoring period.

Hourly average baseline noise levels (Leq) were calculated for four residential receivers located proximal to the project site to establish baseline conditions. These are the closest receivers to the project site and would experience the highest concentration of project‐related traffic.

1. Single‐family residence at 179 North Lyon Avenue south of the site;

2. Single‐family residence at 1407 Cottonwood Avenue south of the site;

3. Single‐family residence at 1182 Estrella Street northeast of the site; and

4. Single‐family residence at 1198 Sykes Avenue southeast of the site.

Noise levels associated with the project were calculated by distributing the 169 P.M. peak hour project trips into the baseline traffic volumes onto North Lyon Avenue, Cottonwood Avenue, Estrella Street, Marilyn Drive and Sykes Street as shown in Traffic Impact Study (TJW Engineering, Inc., March 2022). Volumes were concentrated in this area for the purpose of evaluating worst case noise conditions. The receiver locations are shown in Figure 4 and the modeling results are shown in Table 6. Project traffic will have no noticeable effect on baseline conditions. The highest projected increase would occur at Receiver 1 (+1.4 dBA) , but would not result in a perceptible change (3 dBA or greater) and would not result in exceeding the 65 dBA Leq standard. The highest modeled existing Leq is 64.1 dBA at Receiver 2, which is located along Cottonwood Avenue. With the addition of project traffic, the Leq would increase by +0.9 dBA to 65.0 dBA at this location but would not exceed the Leq standard. The Leq with project traffic would not exceed the 65 dBA Leq standard at any of the receivers modeled. Thus, the project will have no adverse traffic‐related noise effects.

Table 6
Modeled Noise Levels
Receptor Existing
Leq
Existing
Ldn/CNEL
With Project
Leq
With Project
Ldn/CNEL
Decibel
Change Significant Impact
Receiver 1 60.6 61.6 62.0 63.0 +1.4 No
Receiver 2 64.1 65.1 65.0 66.0 +0.9 No
Receiver 3 54.0 55.0 55.2 56.2 +1.2 No
Receiver 4 53.0 54.0 54.3 55.3 +1.3 No
As shown, the projected Ldn/CNEL at Receiver 2 exceeds the 65 dBA standard depicted in the City of San Jacinto General Plan Noise Element (Table N‐1) referenced above by 1 dBA. When baseline conditions exceed the standard, the project impact is determined by whether project‐ related traffic will cause a noticeable increase in noise levels. As stated, a noticeable increase is a change of +/‐ 3 dBA. As shown in Table 6, project traffic would add 0.9 dBA to the Ldn/CNEL

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1355 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Figure 4 — Noise Receiver LocaƟons ‐ Project Site
R2
R4 R1
‐ Noise Receiver LocaƟons
R3

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1356
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
17 This would not be a noticeable increase; thus, the project will have a less than significant impact based on the General Plan standard of 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL.

Interior Traffic Noise. California Energy Code Title 24 standards specify construction methods and materials that result in energy efficient structures up to a 30 dBA reduction in exterior noise levels (assuming windows are closed). This includes operation of mechanical ventilation (e.g., heating and air conditioning), in combination with standard building construction that includes dual‐glazed windows with a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 26 or higher. When windows are open, the insertion loss drops to about 10 dBA.

Some residences within the project area appear to have been constructed before Title 24 standards were implemented. As stated, the manner in which older homes in California were constructed (approximately 30 years old or older) generally provides a reduction of exterior‐to‐ interior noise levels of approximately 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows. Assuming windows are closed and a 20 dBA insertion loss, interior noise levels at residences modeled would range between 35.3 dBA and 46.0 dBA. Interior noise levels could reach 46 dBA CNEL at Receiver 2; however, the project‐related increase is +0.9 dBA. This would not be considered a significant impact as operation of the project would not cause a noticeable increase in noise levels relative to existing conditions (i.e., +3 dBA or greater).Thus, exterior and interior noise levels associated with operation of the project would be less than significant.

CONCLUSION
The proposed project will have no adverse construction or operational traffic noise impacts.

Section 8.040.090 (A) of the City of San Jacinto Municipal Code allows construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction is allowed on Sunday or federal holidays. Construction occurring consistent with these provisions is exempt from noise regulations. Section 8.040.040 (A) of the San Jacinto Municipal Code states the maximum exterior noise level for single‐family residences is 65 dBA Leq from 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Section 8.040.050 (A) states the maximum interior noise level for single family residences is 45 dBA Leq from 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 40 dBA Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Baseline peak hour noise conditions at the modeled receivers are within the City standards for both exterior and interior noise levels. The proposed project would not noticeably change noise levels. While the exterior or interior CNEL would exceed the single‐family daytime or nighttime residential standard at Receiver 2, the project increase would not be noticeable relative to baseline conditions. The project would have a less than significant noise impact.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1357 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
18 REFERENCES
City of San Jacinto Municipal Code, Chapter 8.40 Noise Control, August 2021 City of San Jacinto General Plan, Noise Element, Tables N‐1 and N‐2, May 2006. dBF & Associates, Inc., Reference Noise Level Compilation Table, 2016.

Federal Highway Administration. Roadway Construction Noise Model. 2006. Users Guide Table 1.

Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5, 2004.

Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. September 2018.

TWJ Engineering Inc., 291 North Lyon Traffic Impact Analysis, San Jacinto, CA, March 2022.

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1358 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) San Jacinto Residential TTM 38202 Noise Study
City of San Jacinto
19 Appendix A
Monitoring Data Sheet and Modeling Results

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1359 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1360 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Site
1 Start Date 1/6/2022
Start Time 7:01:47 AM
End Time 7:16:46 AM
Duration 00:14:59
Meas Mode Single
Input Range High
Input Type Mic
SPL Time Weight Slow
LN% Freq Weight dBA
Overload No
UnderRange No
Sensitivity 18.44mV/Pa

LZeq 67.0
LCeq 66.3
LAeq 61.2
LZSmax 77.5
LCSmax 76.9
LASmax 72.3
LZSmin 60.2
LCSmin 58.7
LASmin 47.3
LZE 96.5
LCE 95.8
LAE 90.7
LZpeak 90.6
LCpeak 90.5
LApeak 86.0
1% 70.8
2% 70.3
5% 68.5
8% 67.0
10% 65.9
25% 60.0
50% 55.0
90% 51.1
95% 50.1
99% 48.2

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1361 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Site
2 Start Date 1/6/2022
Start Time 7:27:33 AM
End Time 7:42:32 AM
Duration 00:14:59
Meas Mode Single
Input Range High
Input Type Mic
SPL Time Weight Slow
LN% Freq Weight dBA
Overload No
UnderRange No
Sensitivity 18.44mV/Pa

LZeq 63.5
LCeq 62.2
LAeq 53.7
LZSmax 73.1
LCSmax 71.4
LASmax 63.1
LZSmin 60.7
LCSmin 59.2
LASmin 47.9
LZE 93.0
LCE 91.7
LAE 83.2
LZpeak 88.7
LCpeak 86.3
LApeak 83.5
1% 60.5
2% 59.2
5% 57.1
8% 56.2
10% 55.8
25% 54.4
50% 52.7
90% 49.6
95% 49.1
99% 48.4

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1362 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Site
3 Start Date 1/6/2022
Start Time 7:51:05 AM
End Time 8:06:04 AM
Duration 00:14:59
Meas Mode Single
Input Range High
Input Type Mic
SPL Time Weight Slow
LN% Freq Weight dBA
Overload No
UnderRange No
Sensitivity 18.44mV/Pa

LZeq 70.9
LCeq 70.1
LAeq 64.7
LZSmax 86.9
LCSmax 86.4
LASmax 81.4
LZSmin 62.4
LCSmin 61.2
LASmin 50.3
LZE 100.4
LCE 99.6
LAE 94.2
LZpeak 101.3
LCpeak 100.2
LApeak 96.2
1% 74.4
2% 72.9
5% 70.6
8% 69.5
10% 68.9
25% 64.6
50% 58.6
90% 52.2
95% 51.3
99% 50.7

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1363 Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS <Project Name?>
<Organization?> 6 January 2022 <Analysis By?> TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSPROJECT/CONTRACT: <Project Name?> RUN: TM 38202 Existing BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverName No. #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier LAeq1h LAeq1h Increase over existing Type Calculated Noise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact LAeq1h Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus
Goal
dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB
R1 - 179 North Lyon Avenue 1 1 0.0 60.6 66 60.6 10 ---- 60.6 0.0 8 -8.0 R2 - 1407 Cottonwood 2 1 0.0 64.1 66 64.1 10 ---- 64.1 0.0 8 -8.0 R3 - 1182 Estrella 3 1 0.0 54.0 66 54.0 10 ---- 54.0 0.0 8 -8.0 R4 - 1198 Sykes 4 1 0.0 53.0 66 53.0 10 ---- 53.0 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB
All Selected 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 All Impacted 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 All that meet NR Goal 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 C:\TNM25\Program\TM 38202 San Jacinto 1 6 January 2022

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1364
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RESULTS: SOUND LEVELS <Project Name?>
<Organization?> 13 April 2022 <Analysis By?> TNM 2.5
Calculated with TNM 2.5
RESULTS: SOUND LEVELSPROJECT/CONTRACT: <Project Name?> RUN: TM 38202 w-Project BARRIER DESIGN: INPUT HEIGHTS Average pavement type shall be used unless a State highway agency substantiates the use
ATMOSPHERICS: 68 deg F, 50% RH of a different type with approval of FHWA.ReceiverName No. #DUs Existing No Barrier With Barrier LAeq1h LAeq1h Increase over existing Type Calculated Noise Reduction Calculated Crit'n Calculated Crit'n Impact LAeq1h Calculated Goal Calculated Sub'l Inc minus
Goal
dBA dBA dBA dB dB dBA dB dB dB
R1 - 179 North Lyon Avenue 1 1 0.0 62.0 66 62.0 10 ---- 62.0 0.0 8 -8.0 R2 - 1407 Cottonwood 2 1 0.0 65.0 66 65.0 10 ---- 65.0 0.0 8 -8.0 R3 - 1182 Estrella 3 1 0.0 55.2 66 55.2 10 ---- 55.2 0.0 8 -8.0 R4 - 1198 Sykes 4 1 0.0 54.3 66 54.3 10 ---- 54.3 0.0 8 -8.0 Dwelling Units # DUs Noise Reduction Min Avg Max dB dB dB
All Selected 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 All Impacted 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 All that meet NR Goal 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 C:\TNM25\PROGRAM\TM 38202 SAN JACINTO\TM 38202 W-PROJECT 1 13

4.1.w
Packet Pg. 1365
Attachment: Appendix H - Noise Study (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RECEIVED DECEMBER 28, 2021

VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700

FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES QUESTIONNAIRE
Please respond to the following questions providing as much information as possible (necessary to evaluate potential impacts).

Name/Title/Email/Phone Number of person filling out this questionnaire.

Adria Reinertson/Deputy Fire Marshal/[email protected]/951-955-5272

1. Please indicate the name and location of the fire station(s) that would serve the Project site. Also, please indicate the equipment, personnel, and emergency medical services available at each station?
Station 78 is approximately 1.6 miles from center of project, equipped with one Type 1 engine with 3 personnel
Station 25 is approximately 2 miles from center of the project, equipped with one Type 1 Engine with 3 personnel

2. Are current staff levels and facilities adequate or deficient under existing conditions? Yes

3. Does your agency have an established target response time? What is the current actual response time to the Project site from each station? Is the proposed Project anticipated to substantially impact current response times?
We are currently working on our response time standards. The estimated response time from Station 78 is 6 minutes, Station 25 is 7 minutes

4. Please indicate the present Insurance Services Office (ISO) rates throughout the City and any potential fire hazard impacts. Would the ISO rating remain the same with the implementation of the proposed Project?
The current classification of the area in question is ISO Class 3, implementation of project should not change that

5. Please indicate fire flow requirements based on land use types near the Project site (i.e., residential, office/commercial, and industrial).

Required fire flow for single-family residential is 500 gpm

6. Are there any plans for facility expansion or new facilities? Please provide as much detail as possible. Where does your agency acquire funding for new facilities? Not to my knowledge in the area of this project. Funding comes from a variety of sources including development impact fees, general fund, and other tax related sources.

7. Do you anticipate that project implementation would result in the need for physical additions to your agency (i.e., construction of new fire stations or alterations to existing stations)? No but will be expected to pay development impact fees to support future development of stations, alterations, apparatus, etc.

8. Please indicate any assessment fees required for new developments.

This will come from the City of San Jacinto.

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1366 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RECEIVED DECEMBER 28, 2021

VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700

9. Do you anticipate that compliance with City Fire Code requirements and payment of required fees and taxes provided by new developments associated with the proposed Project would adequately accommodate the expected increase in fire and emergency medical service demand? If not, do you have any required or recommended mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to less than significant?
Yes

10. Please include any additional information you feel is pertinent to the analysis for the proposed Project.
n/a

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1367 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RECEIVED ON JANUARY 14, 2022

SCHOOL FACILITIES QUESTION N AIRE
Please respond to the following questions providing as much information as possible (necessary to evaluate potential impacts).

Name/Title/Email/Phone Number of person filling out this questionnaire.

Alexander Adame / Facilities & Operations Facilities Planner / (951)654-7769 Ext 4680 / [email protected]

1. Which elementary, middle and high schools would serve the Project site and what is their available capacity? San Jacinto Unified will provide a Will Serve Letter stating that we will serve students from that development at one of our schools.

2. Are there any plans for facility expansion or new facilities, please provide as much detail as possible. Where does the District acquire funding for new facilities? We plan on building a new elementary school off of vernon and ramona expressway. District acquires funds from the state, bonds and developer fees

3. Are fees assessed against new developments for school–related services? If so, how are they calculated? Yes, they are calculated through our Justification Study and School Fees Needs Analysis

4. What are the generation rates used by the District to predict future population growth? We have a formula we use updated with our current enrollment

5. Does the District anticipate being able to accommodate the student population that may be generated by the proposed Project? Yes, we will be able to accommodate.

6. Do you anticipate that project implementation would result in the need for physical additions to your District (i.e., construction of new schools or alterations to existing schools)? Potentially yes

7. Do you anticipate that payment of required fees and taxes provided by new development associated with the proposed Project would adequately accommodate the expected increase in student population? If not, do you have any required or recommended mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to less than significant? No and not at this time

8. Please provide any additional comments that would pertain to potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. N/A

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1368 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RECEIVED DECEMBER 28, 2021

VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700

SOLID WASTE QUESTIONNAIRE
Please respond to the following questions providing as much information as possible (necessary to evaluate potential impacts).

Name/Title/Email/Phone Number of person filling out this questionnaire.

Mathew Osborn, City of San Jacinto Water Utilities Superintendent Email: [email protected], Office: 951-487-7330 ext. 755

1. Which landfills are presently used in disposal of solid waste from the Project area? Lamb Canyon Does the landfill(s) have sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project’s solid waste disposal needs? Yes

2. What is the estimated solid waste generation based upon information provided? The average generations are as follows MSW 47.4 lbs/house, Recycle 21.25 lbs/house, Organics 12.8 lbs/house.

3. Would solid waste pickup service be available for the Project? Roll-off, C&D, Commercial and Residential

4. What federal, state, and local statues and regulations would the proposed Project be required to comply with?

5. Do you anticipate that implementation of the proposed Project would result in the need for physical additions to your agency (i.e., construction of solid waste facilities)? No

6. Do you anticipate the Project would have any potential significant impacts on solid waste service? If yes, do you have any required or recommended mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to less than significant? No

7. Please provide any additional comments that would pertain to potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. N/A

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1369 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) RECEIVED APRIL 27, 2022

VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700

WASTEWATER SERVICE QUESTIONNAIRE
Please respond to the following questions providing as much information as possible (necessary to evaluate potential impacts).

Name/Title/Email/Phone Number of person filling out this questionnaire.

MATHEW OSBORN, CITY OF SAN JACINTO WATER UTILITIES SUPERINTENDENT EMAIL: [email protected], OFFICE: 951-487-7330 EXT. 755

1. Are there any existing sewer lines in the Project area and if so, what is the available capacity of those lines?
THE CITY HAS AN 8” PVC SEWER MAIN THAT FLOWS NORTH ON LYON AVE. THE MAIN LINE

CURRENTLY HAS MINIMAL FLOW AND CAN EASILY HANDLE THE FLOW OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

2. Are there any new facilities or expansion of existing facilities planned that would serve the city? NO

3. What are the estimated sewage flows or generation rates (based on land uses) for the proposed Project?
THIS IS BEST ANSWERED BY THE DEVELOPER IN THE SEWER WILL SERVE LETTER.

4. Would implementation of the proposed Project present a potential significant increase in service demand?
I WOULD THINK NOT HOWEVER I WOULD NEED TO SEE A SEWER WILL SERVE FIRST.

5. Would existing trunk/sewer lines within the city have adequate capacity to accommodate the estimated wastewater flows associated with the proposed Project based on the information provided?
THE CITY SEWER MAIN ON LYON CAN ADEQUATELY ACCOMMODATE THE FLOW OF UP TO 181 HOMES AS STATED IN THE PROPOSAL.

6. Do the wastewater treatment facilities have adequate capacity to serve the anticipated demands of the proposed Project in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? SAN JACINTO DOES NOT HAVE A WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY. THIS WOULD FLOW TO EMWD’S FACILITY ON SANDERSON AVE.

7. Please identify any connection or assessment fees required for new developments? CONTACT EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FOR CONNECTION OR ASSESSMENT FEES. THEY CAN BE REACHED AT 951-928-3777.

8. Please provide any additional comments that would pertain to potential impacts associated with the proposed Project.

WATER WILL BE PROVIDED BY EMWD, THE SEWER SYSTEM IS MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO AND PUSHED INTO EMWD SEWER MAINS. THE CITY WILL REQUIRE A SEWER WILL SERVE LETTER AND EMWD WILL LIKELY WANT A WATER AND SEWER WILL SERVE LETTER.

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1370 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) January 13, 2022
Mr. Eric Turner
VCS Environmental
30900 Rancho Viejo Rd., Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
Email: [email protected]
Subject: San Jacinto Residential Development Project (TTM 38202) APN: 436-280-011, -012, -013, & -014
Location: South of Monte Vista Middle School, east of Lyon Avenue and Appaloosa Drive, north of Cottonwood Avenue, and west of Marylin Drive and Estrella Street in the City of San Jacinto
Dear Mr. Turner:

Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) thanks you for the opportunity to provide a response to the VCS Environmental Questionnaire (attached pages 3 & 4). EMWD understand the San Jacinto Residential Development Project (TTM 38202) consist of the development of approximately 27 acres of vacant land with up to 135 detached single-family homes and associated infrastructure and amenities to serve the residential community (“Project”). The Project would include the subdivision of four parcels and the construction of homes, two pocket parks, two water quality/stormwater detention basins, internal streets and sidewalks, landscaping, signage, and utility improvements to serve the site. Offsite improvements include street and sidewalk connections (at the intersections of Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street), frontage improvements, and constructing a portion of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system.

The subject project may requires water and recycled water services from EMWD. The details of said service connection points will be further detailed in a separate document, known as EMWD’s Design Conditions (DC), formerly known as Plan of Service (POS), to be developed by the project proponent and approved by EMWD.

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1371 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Maroun El-Hage, MPA, MS, PE
Principal Civil Engineer
Development Services Department
Eastern Municipal Water District
MEH:arj:lm
Attachments:
- EMWD Responses to VCS Enviornmental Questionnaire (pages 3 & 4) - Original Project Information and Exhibits (pages 5 through 13) - EMWD Water, Sewer, and Recycled Water Facilities Exhibits (pages 14 through 16) c: Alfred “Al” Javier, Director of Environmental and Regulatory Compliance TTM 38202
January 13, 2022

Page 2 of 16 ends

The project may require on-site and offsite facilities, such as water and recycled water pipelines, and other possible improvements yet to be identified in the DC evaluation, as well as associated easements and/or Right-of-Way Permits to adequately serve the project demands.

On December 21, 2021 the subject project was reviewed for Due Diligence with EMWD’s Development Services Department, with a Project Number WS2021-1458.

To date, EMWD has not received a Work Order deposit to develop the DC, to identify on-site and offsite facilities required to serve this project.

If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 928-3777, extension 4468 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1372 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) VCS Environmental – Water Services Questionnaire

1. What is the current and projected water capacity for the District; annual use in acre-feet, daily flow in cfs and peak demand in MGD?
Ă͘ WĞƌƚŚĞϮϬϮϬhƌďĂŶtĂƚĞƌDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚWůĂŶ͕ƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĂƉƉƌŽǆŝŵĂƚĞĚĞŵĂŶĚƐǁĞƌĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƉĂƌĐĞůƐ͗ŶŶƵĂůĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϱϵ͘ϴ&z͕ǀĞƌĂŐĞĂǇ&ůŽǁŽĨ Ϭ͘ϬϴϮϱĐĨƐ͕DĂǆĂǇĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϬ͘ϭϬϳD';ĂƐƐƵŵŝŶŐĂϮ͘ϬƉĞĂŬŝŶŐĨĂĐƚŽƌͿ ď͘ ŽŶƚĞǆƚ
ŝ͘ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐƚŚĂƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶƚƌĂĐŬĞĚƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞϮϬϮϬ htDWĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇůŽǁĞƌƚŚĂŶĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚ͘
ŝŝ͘ dŽďĞĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝǀĞ͕ƚŚĞhtDWĚĞŵĂŶĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝŽŶƐĂƐƐƵŵĞĚĂŚŝŐŚĞƌƉĞƌͲĐĂƉŝƚĂ ǁĂƚĞƌƵƐĞƚŚĂŶǁŚĂƚŚĂƐĂĐƚƵĂůůǇŽĐĐƵƌƌĞĚƚŚĞƉĂƐƚƐĞǀĞƌĂůǇĞĂƌƐ ŝŝŝ͘ dŚĞƐĞĨŝŐƵƌĞƐĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďŝůŝƚǇŽŶůǇ͕ŶŽƚƚŚĞĐĂƉĂĐŝƚǇŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚͲĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ ŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ

2. What is the projected water demand for the Project based on the information provided? a. The proposed project consists of 135 lots which are estimated to generate an Average Day Demand of 59,400 gallons per day and a Maximum Day Demand of 118,800 gallons per day.

3. Please indicate any existing facilities on/near the Project site. a. Please see EMWD’s attached water and recycled water facilities map. For sewer facilities information please contact the City of San Jacinto.

4. What is the current rate of local groundwater extraction and existing groundwater quality? Will the proposed Project have a potential impact on groundwater quality? a. (See response from Environmental and Regulatory Compliance, page 4)

5. Will the proposal require new facilities or additions to existing facilities? If so, please list/summarize any changes.
a. The project will be required to extend 8-inch public water facilities in-tract to serve all the proposed lots with two points of connection (POC) to EMWD’s existing water system as noted herein: POC-1 located at Estrella Street and Marilyn Drive, and POC-2 located at Appaloosa Drive and Lyon Avenue.

6. Do you have any required assessment fees or other required or recommended mitigation measures for potential Project impacts?
a. The project will be subject to EMWD’s standard Connection Fees for water and sewer, as well as (sewer) Special Benefit Area surcharge.

7. Does your agency have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlement and resources, or are new or expanded entitlement needed? a. Yes, EMWD’s existing water and sewer systems are capable of providing service to the proposed project.

8. Is there any other relevant information regarding potential significant effects of the Project? a. Not at this time; however, on December 21, 2021 the project proponent was advised to start the Design Conditions (DC) process with EMWD. During this DC effort full project conditions will be identified upon further evaluation of the project.

Reponse Prepared by:

Maroun El-Hage, MPA, MS, PE
Principal Civil Engineer of Development Services
Office (951) 928-3777 ext. 4468
Email: [email protected].

Page 3 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1373 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

Page 4 of 16 ends

VCS Environmental – Water Services Questionnaire
No. 4. What is the current rate of local groundwater extraction and existing groundwater quality? Will the proposed Project have a potential impact on groundwater quality? There are multiple sources, local wells and imported water, where water will be supplied to the project. Currently, there are 12 wells that EMWD owns and operates, providing local groundwater. In addition, EMWD owns and operates the Hemet Water Filtration Plant which serves imported water from State Water Project. EMWD provides an annual “Consumer Confidence Report” (CCR) for water quality serviced to its customers and can be found online at emwd_2020_ccr_final.pdf. A description and map of the water being served can also be found within the CCR. EMWD does not see an impact on groundwater quality as there are no land discharge associated with the project as long as the development project is sewered and stormwater requirements are met.

Reponse Prepared by:

Alfred “Al” Javier
Director of Environmental and Regulatory Compliance
Office (951) 928-3777 ext. 6327
Email: [email protected]

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1374 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700 San Jacinto Residential Development Project, Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 38202, APNs: 436-280-011, 012, 013, and 014

PROJECT INFORMATION

PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project proposes to develop approximately 27 acres of vacant land with up to 135 detached singlefamily homes and associated infrastructure and amenities to serve the residential community (“Project”).

The Project would include the subdivision of four parcels and the construction of homes, two pocket parks, two water quality/stormwater detention basins, internal streets and sidewalks, landscaping, signage, and utility improvements to serve the site. Offsite improvements include street and sidewalk connections (at the intersections of Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street), frontage improvements, and constructing a portion of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system Line G-3.

LOCATION
The Project is in the City of San Jacinto, County of Riverside, and within Township 4 South and Range 1 West, Section 28 of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map, 7.5 Minute Series, San Jacinto; refer to Figure 1, Regional Site Location Map and Figure 2, USGS Map. The Project site is situated south of Monte Vista Middle School, east of Lyon Avenue and Appaloosa Drive, north of Cottonwood Avenue, and west of Marylin Drive and Estrella Street; refer to Figure 3, Aerial Vicinity Map. Regional access to the site is provided by Highway 79 to Interstate 10 (I-10) to the north and by Highway 74 to Interstate 215 (I-215) to the south and west. Highway 79 is located approximately 1.5 miles to the north via Lyon Avenue and Highway 74 is located approximately 2.8 miles to the south via Lyon Avenue.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Project site is comprised of four (4) parcels totaling approximately 27 acres and is currently vacant and undeveloped. The site was most recently used as a horse ranch prior to 2005 and is currently heavily disturbed. No existing structures or facilities are present. The site supports one (1) vegetation community/land cover type, which is non-native grassland, and the site is regularly maintained for weed abatement. Topography throughout the Project site is generally flat with gradual drainage to the west/northwest. Elevations range from 1,505 to 1,510 feet (~458 to 460 meters) above mean sea level (MSL).

Surrounding land uses include a mix of undeveloped, rural residential, low-density residential, park (i.e., Stallions Crossing, Warneke, and Haugen Parks), and educational (i.e., Monte Vista Middle School) uses.

Based on review of historic aerials, the most recently constructed low-density residential communities within the Project Vicinity were built between 2003 and 2006 and Monte Vista Middle School was built between 2019 and 2021. To the east of the Project site, along Marilyn Drive, is an existing concrete retention basin that is a section of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system Line G3. This existing section was constructed as part of the residential community to east, also between 2003 and 2006. Line G-3 is not fully constructed.

Page 5 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1375 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 2 | Page

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed Project would develop an approximately 27-acre vacant site with up to 135 single-family residential homes and associated infrastructure; refer to Figure 4, Site Plan. The Project requires subdividing four (4) existing parcels (APNs 436-280-011, 436-280-012, 436-280-013 and 436-280-014).

Lot sizes would vary within an approximate range of 5,000 to 8,000 square feet. The Project proposes to modify development standards and reduce the minimum RL lot size below 7,200 square feet and density above 2.1 units per acre as allowable under a Planned Development Permit (PDP), Site Plan, and Design Review.

Access to the new development would be provided from Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street. Internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation would be accessible on new streets and sidewalks that would be publicly maintained in the future. Parking would be accommodated in two-car garages, two-car driveways, and on public streets.

Offsite improvements include connecting the proposed internal circulation system to the intersections of Lyon Avenue/Appaloosa Drive and Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street; connecting to existing utility systems within Lyon Avenue; frontage improvements along Lyon Avenue including a Class I multi-use path (per City of San Jacinto Trails Master Plan), sidewalk and street lights; and constructing a portion of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system Line G-3 from Marilyn Drive/Estrella Street along the northeast edge of the development to a future connection point (note: continuation of Line G-3 to be constructed by others) at the Monte Vista Middle School property to the north.

INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN
Drainage
A preliminary drainage report and Water Quality Management Plan have been prepared for the Project.

The site has been designed to drain to two onsite detention/infiltration basins. Basin No. 1 is located at the northwest corner of the site while Basin No. 2 is located along the north tract boundary between lots 31 and 32. These basins are planned to serve as water quality/stormwater management basins. In addition, the City has conditioned the Project to construct a portion of the San Jacinto Valley Master Drainage Plan storm drain system Line G-3.

Water Service
Water service for the Project would be provided by the Eastern Municipal Water District with anticipated connection to an existing water line in Lyon Avenue.

Sewer Service
The City of San Jacinto collects the wastewater produced in the city and transfers sewage to the Eastern Municipal Water District’s treatment Plant. The development is anticipated to connect to an existing sewer line in Lyon Avenue.

Dry Utilities
Dry utility connections are anticipated to be made in Lyon Avenue. Dry Utility providers for the project are shown in Table 1.

Page 6 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1376 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 3 | Page
Table 1
Utility Providers
Provider Utility
Electrical Service San Jacinto Power/Southern California Edison Gas Service Southern California Gas Company
Trash Service CR&R Incorporated

PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection
The Riverside County Fire Department would provide Fire Protection Service for the Project. The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire and emergency services. Fire service is anticipated to be provided by two fire stations located within the city, Station 25 and 78. Station 25 is located at 132 S San Jacinto Avenue and Station 78 is located at 12450 W. Cottonwood Avenue. The closest fire station to the site would be Fire Station 78 which is approximately 1.3 miles west of the Project site.

Police Services
The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department is anticipated to provide police services for the Project. The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department responds to emergency situations and patrols neighborhoods and commercial areas within the City to promote a safe environment. The staff maintains a patrol unit, traffic unit, K-9 team, School Resource Officer Program and Crime Prevention Unit. Additionally, the Department maintains a business office with personnel on staff to assist residents in obtaining information regarding specific reported crimes or traffic incidents and directs them to available resources within the department.

The San Jacinto Police Department is located at 160 W. Sixth Street and is approximately 1.6 miles southeast of the Project site.

School Services
The Project site is within the San Jacinto Unified School District. The Project’s student population is anticipated to be served by the following school facilities: De Anza Elementary, Monte Vista Middle School, and San Jacinto High School.

Solid Waste Disposal
The City of San Jacinto solid waste collection is contracted out to CR&R Incorporated. CR&R collects both solid and green waste (grass clippings, tree and shrub clippings), and items for recycling. Solid waste within the City of San Jacinto is taken to the Lamb Canyon Landfill located between the City of Beaumont and the City of San Jacinto at 16411 Lamb Canyon Road. The Landfill is owned and operated by Riverside County.

City of San Jacinto Residents are given three specially designed automated containers with attached lid and wheels, one for regular refuse, one for recyclables, and one for green/yard waste. San Jacinto residents are responsible for disposing of hazardous household materials at one of the County of Riverside Household Hazardous Waste drop off centers.

Page 7 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1377 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) VCS Environmental provides CEQA/NEPA, Biological, Regulatory & Cultural Services 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 | 949.489.2700

WATER SERVICES QUESTIONNAIRE
Please respond to the following questions providing as much information as possible (necessary to evaluate potential impacts).

Name/Title/Email/Phone Number of person filling out this questionnaire.

1. What is the current and projected water capacity for the District; annual use in acre-feet, daily flow in cfs and peak demand in MGD?

2. What is the projected water demand for the Project based on the information provided?

3. Please indicate any existing facilities on/near the Project site.

4. What is the current rate of local groundwater extraction and existing groundwater quality? Will the proposed Project have a potential impact on groundwater quality?

5. Will the proposal require new facilities or additions to existing facilities? If so, please list/summarize any changes.

6. Do you have any required assessment fees or other required or recommended mitigation measures for potential Project impacts?

7. Does your agency have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlement and resources, or are new or expanded entitlement needed?

8. Is there any other relevant information regarding potential significant effects of the Project?

Page 8 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1378 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 'DWH
-XO\ I 6RXUFH
(65,9&6 3UHSDUHG%\
Richland Communities
9&6(QYLURQPHQWDO

0LOHV )LJXUH 5HJLRQDO6LWH/RFDWLRQ0DS
Project Site

Page 9 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1379
Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) Lakeview
San Jacinto
'DWH
$XJ I 0LQXWH4XDGUDQJOH
6DQ-DFLQWR 6HFWLRQ
7RZQVKLS 5DQJH
765:
&RXQW\
5LYHUVLGH6WDWH
&DOLIRUQLD
3UHSDUHG%\
Richland Communities
9&6(QYLURQPHQWDO

)HHW 86*67RSRJUDSKLF0DS
3URMHFW6LWH0LQXWH4XDGUDQJOH)UDPH
)LJXUH

Page 10 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1380
Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) 'DWH
'HFHPEHU I 6RXUFH
(65,9&6
San Jacinto Residential Development Project 3UHSDUHG%\

9&6(QYLURQPHQWDO

)HHW $HULDO9LFLQLW\0DS
3URMHFW6LWH
)LJXUH

Page 11 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1381
Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) $33$/226$'5,9(
5(7(17,21?
:4%$6,1
23(1
63$&(
5(7(17,21?
:4%$6,1
23(1
63$&(
/<21$9(18(

MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL
436-280-010
TRACT 31097
436-280-015
(675(//$67
0$5,/<1 '5 TRACT 29384
436-280-022
436-280-021 436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 &27721:22'$9(
6+76
6+((712

2)
$33529('%<
35(3$5('%<

'$7(
(;3'$7((;3'$7(
'$7(
%(1&+0$5.
&,7<2)6$1-$&,172

3DUN&LW\87
&RYH&DQ\RQ'U3KRQH

)D[

+HPHW&$
()ORULGD$YH6XLWH*3KRQH

)D[

&,9,/(1*,1((5,1*


 %/$,1($:20(5

-$18$5<
-$%5$<//&?-6%5$<//&
5&(12
%/$,1($:20(5
6)/277,1*678'<
$66(6625
63$5&(/12

(;,67/$1'86('(6,*1,7,21
/2:'(16,7<5(6,'(17,$/
(;,67,1*=21,1*
5/
352326('180%(52)/276

352326(''(16,7<
'8$&

6,7(
9,&,1,7<0$3
176
352326('/276,=(
6)0,1,080
*5266$5($
$&5(6
'JHVSF4JUF1MBO

Page 12 of 16 ends

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1382
Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

LYON AVENUE

APPALOOSA DRIVE
MARILYN DR. LEE ANN CIR.

CHRISTA CIR.

SYKES DR.
436-280-016 436-280-017 436-280-018 436-280-019 436-280-022 436-280-021
436-280-015

MONTE VISTA MIDDLE SCHOOL
436-280-010 TRACT 31097
TRACT 29384
COTTONWOOD AVE.
43 42
25 24
7 LOT 'I'
MB346/5-8
ESTRELLA ST.

SEE DETAIL 'A'

CL CL ESTRELLA STREET
CL
CL

MARILYN
DRIVE

TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
N0. 38202

CITY OF SAN JACINTO SEAL

DIG ALERT
FOR W.O.

SCALE BENCHMARK:

DATE
DATE
CITY
APPR.

CHECKED BY:

BY MARK

ENGINEER REVISIONS
DRAWN BY:

DATE
DESIGNED BY:

SHEET NO.

FILE NO.

R.C.E. NO.
1 APPROVED BY:

EXP. DATE
DATE
PREPARED BY: DATE

CITY ENGINEER
R.C.E. NO. EXP. DATE
OF 1 SHEETS
BLAINE A. WOMER

CIVIL ENGINEERING
Hemet, CA. 92544, 41555 E Florida Ave., Suite G, Phone (951)658-1727 Fax (951)658-9347Park City, UT 84098, 5133 Cove Canyon Dr, #302, Phone/Fax (435)615-1489 


46354 JA BRAY, LLC / JS BRAY, LLC
1" = 100'JULY 2021
1" = 100'
0 100 200 300
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38202

IN THE CITY OF SAN JACINTO

DETAIL 'A'

Page 13 of 16 ends

4.1.x
Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076)) SOMBRA

CAMPHOR
AMOR
LILA

CAMINO CORTO

TWILIGHT
SAGE

MIDNIGHT ANDALUSIAN
CLOVER
QUIET
REEDS
SUN UP
SHADY
DUSK

MONTEGO

ENCANTO

PALOMAR

SAND KEY
WELSH

PALOMINO
SYKES

LEE ANN

SANDY N O
O
K

CHRISTA

GALICENO

SANDALW
O
O
D

LIPIZZAN
PINTO
REPOSO
BEACON
S
U
N
NYSIDE

COTTONWOOD

POTRERO
PINE

PEPPERWOOD

LORI ANN
NOGA

PEACEFUL
BAY

DE ANZA

CASEROS

APPALOOSA

ESTRELLA
NIG
H
TFALL
PALM

HAZELDELL
LYON
434060024
APN:

APN: 434522008
APN:
436280008
APN:
436280020
APN:
436292021
APN:
436331017
APN: 436271024 APN:

APN:
436350052
APN:
436351016
APN: 434521005
APN:
436220004
APN:
436220001 APN: 434040039
APN:
434500004
APN:
434510030
APN:
435020007
APN:
436280009
APN: 436280021
APN:
436290006
APN:
436280018
APN:
436490015
APN:
436490002
APN:
436280007
APN:
436280022
APN:
436321001
APN:
436490001
APN:
436490014
APN:
436490019
APN:
436490016
APN:
436280016
APN:
436280024
APN:
436280023
APN:
436280011
8'' PVC
D-32399
6'' CML&W
D-3361
8'' PVC
D-28296 8'' PVC D-28295
12'' CML&C
D-31826
8'' PVC
D-29643
8''
PVC
D-11330
8'' PVC
D-25099
8'' PVC
D-32397
8''
PVC
8'' PVC
D-30325
D-30326
12'' PVC
D-28295
18'' PVC
D-25879
24'' PVC
D-38171
D-32394
8'' PVC
8'' PVC
D-25879
8''
PVC
D-29300
D-25096
8'' PVC
8''
D-31056
PVC
12''
CML&C
D-1702
8'' PVC
D-29302
8'' PVC
D-29640
8'' PVC
D-30324 12''
D-11329
PVC
12''
CML&C
D-3360
8'' PVC
D-31051
8''
PVC
D-25881
8'' PVC
D-30327
8'' PVC
D-32395 12'' PVC
D-12584
8'' PVC
D-32396
8'' PVC
D-31055
12''
CML&C
D-1703
8''
PVC
D-29303
8'' PVC
D-31054
24''
CML&C
D-51248
18'' PVC
D-30047
8'' PVC
D-31059
8'' PVC
D-32389
45''
MP D-64
8'' PVC
D-29642
48'' MP D-64
8'' PVC
D-25884
8'' PVC D-25880
8'' PVC
D-30302
D-31057
8'' PVC
8'' PVC
D-25882
6''

CML&C NO
DWG
8'' CML&W
NO DWG
8'' PVC
D-9052
8'' PVC
D-29301
8'' PVC
D-32392
D-32388
8'' PVC
8'' PVC
D-12362
8'' PVC
D-32393
8'' PVC
D-31058
8'' ACP D-4806
8'' ACP D-4044
8'' PVC D-32391
8'' PVC
D-31060
8'' PVC D-25883
8'' PVC D-32390
12'' PVC
D-28296
18'' PVCD-25878
8'' PVC D-29644
6'' CML&W
NO DWG
12'' CML&C D-996
8'' PVC D-29641
8'' PVC
D-30301
8'' PVC D-31053
24'' PVC D-38170
48'' MP D-63
12'' PVCD-28297
8'' PVC D-32387
12'' CML&W NO DWG
City of San
Jacinto Water
(951) 654-7337
FM
2914
FM
2925
FM 2743
FM
14688
FM 2744
FM 393
FM
298
FM
6313
FM
613
FM
2464
FM
2127
FM
3032
FM 394
FM
4791
FM
484
3258
FM
FM
11768
FM 613
FM
507 FM 287
FM 362
FM 288
FM 507 FM 354-A
FM 875-A FM 3966 FM
A-289
FM 472 FM 471
FM
A-297
FM
A-400
FM
893
FM 14795-A
14764
FM
FM 354-A
A-14686
FM
FM 14554-A
FM
2378
FM 14795-A
FM 13932
FM
373 FM 874
FM 14686-A
FM 258-A
FM 14554-A
FM 875-A
FM 14742-A
FM 353
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14795-A
PZ
1719
GIS data shown is for informational purposes only, is subject to change without notice and may not be suitable for legal, engineering, construction, or surveying purposes. Information should be reviewed against reliable sources to ascertain its usability. Eastern Municipal Water District assumes no liability for any incorrect results, any lost profits and direct, special, indirect or consequential damages to any party, arising out of or in connection with the use or the Map Produced 12/1/2021 By EMWD Staff inability to use the data hereon or the services. 0 385 770
Feet
1 in = 481 ft
Bray Subdivision APN 436-280-011 Water Map :

Legend
!(þ: Blowoff, 2" 1-2.5"
!(þ: Blowoff, 4" 1-2.5"
!: Blowoff, 6" 1-2.5"
(!___
Hydrant, 4" 1-2.5"
!J Hydrant, 6" 1-2.5"
!
!
T
Hydrant, 6" 1-2.5" 1-4"
!
T!! Hydrant, 6" 2-2.5" 1-4"
Wtr Blowoff Hydrant Lateral
!C Wtr Interagency Tie
!( Wtr Manway
UT Wtr Tank
Wtr Arrow
!
As Built
CIP
Wtr Main Abandoned
MWD Connections
MWD Canals
Wtr Vault
Box Springs Mutual Water Company
City of Hemet Water
City of Hemet Water Service and LHMWD
City of Perris Water
City of Riverside Water
City of San Jacinto Water
County Water Company
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
Lake Hemet Municipal Water District
Liberty Utilities (Park Water) Corp
Murrieta Division of Western Water
Nuevo Water Company
Rancho California Water District
The Farm Mutual Water Company
Western Municipal Water District Water
EMWD District Boundary
^EMWD Main Office
Highway
Streets
Water, Reimbursable
Water, Paid
Sewer, Reimbursable
Sewer, Paid
Recycled, Reimbursable
Recycled, Paid
Easements
Riverside County Parcel Labels
Riverside County Parcel Polygons
Notes
Document Path: S:\Projects\NewBusiness\David K\Projects\Due_Diligence_Maps\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011.mxd

Page 14 of 16 ends

4.1.x
Packet Pg. 1384 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

TRISTIAN
SOMBRA

CAMPHOR
TINA
AMOR

AMARILLO
LILA

ENCANTO

CAMINO CORTO
JOSHUA
DUSK

TWILIGHT
SAGE
RAY

CAMARGUE

MIDNIGHT
YOUNG

SYCAMORE

BIRCH CLOVER
MORGAN
QUIET
REEDS
SUN UP
SHADY

ANDALUSIAN

MARILYN

MONTEGO
FOX
TR
O
TTER

PALOMAR

SAND KEY
WELSH

PALOMINO
SYKES

LEE ANN
SANDY
NO
O
K

GEORGETOWN

CHRISTA

BRUSH PRAIRIE

GALICENO

SANDALWOOD

LIPIZZAN
PINTO
REPOSO
BEACON
S
U
N
NYSIDE

NEWBERG COMMONS

POTRERO
PINE

PEPPERWOOD

LORI ANN
NOGA

PEACEFUL
BAY

DE ANZA

CASEROS

APPALOOSA

ESTRELLA
NIG
H
TFALL
PALM

COTTONWOOD

MILWAUKIE PARK

HAZELDELL
LYON
APN: 434511011
APN: 434531019
436500019
APN:

APN:
436350052
APN:
436351016
APN: 436581075
APN: 434521005
APN:
436220004
APN:
436220001 APN:
434040039
APN:
434500004
APN:
434510030
APN:
435020007
APN:
436280009
APN: 436280021
APN:
436290006
APN:
436280018
APN:
436490015
APN:
436490002
APN:
436280007
APN:
436280022
APN:
436321001
APN:
436321004
APN:
436490001
APN:
436490014
APN:
436490019
APN:
436490016
APN:
436280011
APN:
436321002
434060024
APN:

APN: 434522008
APN:
436280008
APN:
436292021
APN:
436331017
APN: 436271024 APN:

APN:
436280026
436290037
APN: 436280004
APN:
436280025
APN:
436301035
APN:
436280012
APN: 436220005
APN:
436280003
APN:
436280002
APN:
436280005
APN:
436490004
APN:
436490013
APN:
434522007
APN:
436280014
APN:
434040021
APN:
435020003
APN:
436280013
APN:
436301017
APN:
436280019
APN:
436280006
APN:
436280017
APN:
436330001
APN:
436490039
APN:
436490018
APN:
436581071
APN:
436490017
APN:
436490020
APN:
436280016
APN:
436280024
APN:
436280023
FM
2914
FM
2925
FM 2743
FM 2744
FM 393
FM
298
FM
6313
FM
613
FM
2127
FM
3032
FM 394
FM
1963
FM
484
FM
3258
FM 11768 FM
613
FM 507
FM
287 FM
362
FM
288
FM 507
FM
3966
FM
A-875
FM
11768
FM
A-289
FM 14686-A
FM
13931
FM 472
FM
471
FM
A-297
FM 400-A
FM
893
FM 14795-A
14764
FM
FM 354-A
FM 14686-A
FM 14554-A
FM
2378
FM
A-14795
FM
13932
FM 373
FM
874
FM
14764
FM 258-A
FM 14554-A
FM 875-A
FM 14742-A
FM 353
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14795-A
City of San
Jacinto Sewer
18'' VCP
D-31251
8'' VCP
SD-520
27'' VCP
SD-522
27''
VCP
SD-520
15'' VCP
SD-1224
15'' HDPE
D-23621
27''
VCP
SD-521
15''
VCP
SD-1225
27''
VCP SD-524
27''
VCP SD-519,SD-518
27''
VCP
SD-522,SD-521
18'' VCP
D-31252
D-31250
18'' VCP
27'' VCP
SD-524,
SD-523
27''
VCP
SD-520,SD-519
27''
VCP SD-520,SD-521
GIS data shown is for informational purposes only, is subject to change without notice and may not be suitable for legal, engineering, construction, or surveying purposes. Information should be reviewed against reliable sources to ascertain its usability. Eastern Municipal Water District assumes no liability for any incorrect results, any lost profits and direct, special, indirect or consequential damages to any party, arising out of or in connection with the use or the Map Produced 12/1/2021 By EMWD Staff inability to use the data hereon or the services. 0 385 770
Feet
1 in = 481 ft
Bray Subdivision APN 436-280-011 Sewer Map- City of San Jacinto Sewer :

Legend
") Coupling
I Flange
[ Plug
ØT
Saddled Outlet
"$Taper
!C Swr Interagency Tie
ä[ Swr Lift Station
Swr Lift Station Polygon
< Cleanout
!! Manhole
( Monitoring
!) Sampling
) Shallow
Dimensioning
!
ÛMainFlow
As Built, Collection
As Built, Distribution
As Built, Effluent Force
As Built, Influent Force
As Built, Interagency
As Built, Transmission
CIP, Collection
CIP, Effluent Force
CIP, Influent Force
CIP, Interagency
CIP, Transmission
Swr Main Abandoned
Swr Main Murrieta
Swr Treatment Plant
Swr Interagency Tie Lines
City of Hemet Sewer
City of Perris Sewer
City of Riverside Sewer
City of Riverside Sewer Area in ECSD
City of San Jacinto Sewer
ECSD Facilities Serviced by City of Riverside
Edgemont Community Services District Boundary
Edgemont Community Services District Sewer
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Sewer
LHMWD & City of San Jacinto Sewer Service
LHMWD Service & City of Hemet Sewer
Lake Hemet Municipal Water District Sewer
Murrieta Division of Western Sewer
Rancho California Water District Sewer
Western Municipal Water District Sewer
EMWD District Boundary
^EMWD Main Office
Highway
Streets
Water, Reimbursable
Water, Paid
Sewer, Reimbursable
Sewer, Paid
Recycled, Reimbursable
Recycled, Paid
Easements
Riverside County Parcel Labels
Riverside County Parcel Polygons
Notes
Document Path: S:\Projects\NewBusiness\David K\Projects\Due_Diligence_Maps\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011.mxd

Page 15 of 16 ends

Packet Pg. 1385 Attachment: Appendix I - PSU Correspondence (JA Bray Community T38202 (P21-076))

TRISTIAN
SOMBRA

CAMPHOR
TINA
AMOR

AMARILLO
LILA

CAMINO CORTO
JOSHUA

TWILIGHT
SAGE
RAY

CAMARGUE

MIDNIGHT
YOUNG

SYCAMORE

BIRCH CLOVER
MORGAN
QUIET
REEDS
SUN UP
SHADY

ANDALUSIAN

MARILYN
DUSK

MONTEGO

ENCANTO
FOX
TR
O
TTER

PALOMAR

SAND KEY
WELSH

PALOMINO
SYKES

LEE ANN
SANDY
NO
O
K

GEORGETOWN

CHRISTA

BRUSH PRAIRIE

GALICENO

SANDALWOOD

LIPIZZAN
PINTO
REPOSO
BEACON
S
U
N
NYSIDE

NEWBERG COMMONS

POTRERO
PINE

PEPPERWOOD

LORI ANN
NOGA

PEACEFUL
BAY

DE ANZA

CASEROS

APPALOOSA

ESTRELLA
NIG
H
TFALL
PALM

COTTONWOOD

MILWAUKIE PARK

HAZELDEL
LYON
L
APN:
434511011
APN: 434531019
436500019
APN:

APN: 434522008
APN:
436280008
APN:
436280020
APN:
436292021
APN:
436331017
APN: 436271024 APN:

APN:
436280026
436290037
APN: 436280004
APN:
436280025
APN:
436301035
APN:
436280012
APN: 436220005
APN:
436280003
APN:
436280002
APN:
436280005
APN:
436490004
APN:
436490013
APN:
434522007
APN:
436280014
APN:
434040021
APN:
435020003
APN:
436280013
APN:
436301017
APN:
436280019
APN:
436280006
APN:
436280017
APN:
436330001
APN:
436490039
APN:
436490018
APN:
436581071
APN:
436490017
APN:
436490020
APN:
436280011
APN:
436321002
APN:
436280016
APN:
436280024
APN:
436280023
FM
2914
FM
2925
FM 2743
FM 2744
FM
11768
FM 393
FM
298
FM
6313
FM
613
FM
2464
FM
2127
FM
3032
FM 394
FM
1963
FM
4791
FM
484
3258
FM
FM 613 FM 11768
FM 507 FM 287
FM 362
FM 288
FM 507 FM 354-A
FM FM 875-A 3966
FM 11768
FM
A-289
FM
613
FM 14686-A
FM
13931
FM 472 FM 471
FM
A-297
FM 400-A
FM 893
FM 14795-A
FM
A-14686
14764
FM
FM 354-A
FM 14686-A
FM 14554-A
FM
2378
FM
A-14795
FM
13932
FM 373 FM 874
FM 14686-A
FM
A-258
FM 14554-A
FM 875-A
FM 14742-A
FM 353
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14554-A
FM 14795-A
FM 14795-A 8'' PVC
D-30002
8'' PVC D-30002
6'' PVC D-31054
6'' PVC
D-31056
6'' PVC D-31057
8'' PVC D-30004
8'' PVC D-30003
GIS data shown is for informational purposes only, is subject to change without notice and may not be suitable for legal, engineering, construction, or surveying purposes. Information should be reviewed against reliable sources to ascertain its usability. Eastern Municipal Water District assumes no liability for any incorrect results, any lost profits and direct, special, indirect or consequential damages to any party, arising out of or in connection with the use or the Map Produced 12/1/2021 By EMWD Staff inability to use the data hereon or the services. 0 385 770
Feet
1 in = 481 ft
Bray Subdivision APN 436-280-011 Recycled Map :

Legend
UT Rcl Tank
!(þ: Blowoff, 4 '' 1-2.5''
!: Blowoff, 6'' 1-2.5 ''
Rcl Blowoff Lateral
!( Meter Not Installed Yet
!(!Meter Not Installed Yet, BF Required
!? Meter
!?!Meter, BF Device
Rcl Service Lateral
Rcl Arrow
!
AS Built
CIP
Rcl Main Abandoned
) Rcl Pump
Ú[ Rcl Pump Station
Rcl Pump Station Polygon
EMWD District Boundary
^EMWD Main Office
Highway
Streets
Water, Reimbursable
Water, Paid
Sewer, Reimbursable
Sewer, Paid
Recycled, Reimbursable
Recycled, Paid
Easements
Riverside County Parcel Labels
Riverside County Parcel Polygons
Notes
Document Path: S:\Projects\NewBusiness\David K\Projects\Due_Diligence_Maps\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011\Bray_Subdivision_APN_436_280_011.mxd

Page 16 of 16 ends

San Jacinto City CouncilJanuary 16, 2024

San Jacinto City Council
January 16, 2024