Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) — Santa Clarita City Council, July 14, 2026 (part 3 of 4)

REGULATORY SETTING
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland lakes, streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The USACE regulates activities that result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. (WoUS), including wetlands, pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the state agencies, the RWQCB regulates discharges to waters of the State (WoS), including wetlands, pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, Section Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
et seq
Custom Soil Resources Report for Orange County and Part of Riverside County, California
Hydric Soils List for California
13263 of the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act), and State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State; and, the CDFW regulates alterations to lakes, stream.beds, and associated riparian habitats pursuant to Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC).

LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to conducting the field delineation, Michael Baker conducted a review of relevant literature and materials to obtain a general understanding of the environmental setting and preliminarily identify features/areas within the project site that may fall under the jurisdiction of the regulatory agencies. Refer to the subsections below for a summary of relevant materials, databases, technical reports, and guidance documents that were obtained/reviewed by Michael Baker. In addition, a complete list of references is provided as Attachment G to this report.

Santa Clara River Watershed
The project site is located within the Lower Bouquet Canyon (HUC 180701020202) portion of the Santa Clara River Watershed (HUC 18070102). The project site occurs approximately 0.06 mile east of Haskell Canyon Wash, which is tributary to the Santa Clara River, a tributary to the Pacific Ocean. The Santa Clara River watershed comprises approximately 1,040,515 acres in Los Angeles County, California. The watershed is divided into numerous subwatersheds based on flow direction and landscape, all of which ultimately connect to the Santa Clara River. Haskell Canyon Wash and the Santa Clara River are not Designated Rivers under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.

Soils
According to the
(U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] 2024a), the project site is underlain by four soil map units: Castaic-Balcom silty clay loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded; Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded; Sorrento loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes; and Yolo loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes. Michael Baker also reviewed the (USDA 2024b) to preliminarily verify whether the soil map units listed above was classified as a "hydric soil" in the Antelope Valley and Los Angeles areas.

According to the list, the subject soil map units are not listed as hydric.

National Wetlands Inventory
Based on a review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (USFWS 2024), five riverine resources mapped in the NWI coincide with the project site and are shown in Attachment B. Two mapped riverine features on the western portion of the project site flow to the west into Haskell Canyon Wash. These features are described as riverine intermittent stream.bed seasonally-flooded (R4SBC). One riverine feature is mapped on the eastern portion of the project site. This feature is classified as riverine intermittent stream.bed temporarily-flooded (R4SBA) and flows to the south off the project site into the Santa Clara River. The headwaters of two riverine features are present in the southwestern portion 3 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version

2.0 State Wetland Definition and Procedures for
Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State of the project site. These two features are classified as R4SBC and flow to the south into Haskell Canyon Wash and the Santa Clara River.

Flood Zone
Based on a review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer (FEMA 2024), the project site is located within Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel Numbers 06037C0810G and 06037C0830G. The project site occurs within Zones X and Das shown in Attachment C. Zone X is described as an area of minimal flood hazard and Zone D is described as an area of undetermined flood hazard.

National Hydrography Dataset
Based on a review of the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Advanced Viewer (USGS 2024a), thirteen unnamed ephemeral drainages are mapped within the project site, as shown in Attachment D. Features within the eastern portion of the site generally flow to the south off site and into the Santa Clara River downstream. Features within the western portion of the site generally flow to the west and south of site and into Haskell Canyon Wash and the Santa Clara River.

FIELD METHODOLOGY
Michael Baker wetland delineators April Nakagawa and Megan Minter conducted a jurisdictional delineation/field survey of the project site on February 13, 14, and 15, 2024 using the most recent, agency approved methodology, to identify and map the extent of state and federal jurisdictional features (i.e., wetland and non-wetland WoUS, WoS, streambed, associated riparian vegetation). Based on the project's location, potential state and federal wetlands were delineated in accordance with the methods and guidance provided in the (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the
(Arid West Regional Supplement; USACE 2008), and the
(State Water Resources Control Board
2019b).

While in the field, jurisdictional features were recorded on an aerial photograph at a scale of 1" = 400' using topographic contours and visible landmarks as guidelines. Data points were recorded in the field using a Garmin GPS Map 64sx Global Positioning System (GPS) to identify specific widths and length of jurisdictional features and the location of any ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) indicators, photograph points, soil pits, and other pertinent site characteristics. These data were then uploaded as a .shp file and confirmed/refined to ensure accuracy and consistency with hardcopy notes and aerial mapping completed in the field. Michael Baker then used ESRI ArcGIS Pro software to calculate the total acreage of jurisdictional features and prepare final project figures.

Stream Duration Assessment Method
4 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
User
Manual for a Beta Streamflow Duration Assessment Method for the Arid West of the United States, Version

1.1 Site Photographs
Bromus madritensis
Bromus diandrus Rhus aromatica Quercus
(Sisymbrium irio Croton setiger Hordeum
Erodium cicutarium Hirschfeldia incana
Salsola tragus Salvia apiana Avena
Malacothamnus
Isocoma menziesii Amsinckia
For this project location, stream flow duration was determined using the methods outlined in the (SDAM; Mazor et. al, 2023). This document is intended to provide a rapid and repeatable method to distinguish between ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial streamflow. The SDAM considers several variables in determining the stream duration of a given reach, including presence and abundance of hydrophytic plant species, presence and abundance of aquatic invertebrates, presence or absence of EPT tax.a (comprised of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera), presence or absence of algae, and presence or absence of single indicators (fish and/or algae cover ::::10% ).

RESULTS
Non-Wetland Features
Eleven ephemeral drainage features were identified within the project site during the February 2024 site visit (refer to Attachment E,
Aquatic Feature 1
).

Aquatic Feature 1 (AF-1) is an earthen ephemeral channel that begins along the south-facing slopes of steep ridges along the northern project boundary. AF-1 generally flows southwest for approximately 400 linear feet before transitioning to overland sheetflow and dissipating into the surrounding grassland. At the time of the survey, AF-1 was completely dry and did not contain flowing or standing water. The bed and banks of AF-1 are vegetated similarly to the surrounding uplands and contain brome grasses ( UPL; , UPL), fragrant sumac ( , FACU), scrub oak ( sp., UPL), London rocket , UPL), doveweed ( , UPL), barley ( sp.), redstemmed filaree ( , UPL ), summer mustard ( , UPL ), Russian thistle ( , FACU), white sage ( , UPL) wild oats ( sp., UPL), and bush mallow ( sp.). An OHWM is present within AF-1 that is approximately one foot wide and defined by vegetation matting, sediment deposition, and a clear line impressed on the bank. The bank-to-bank width of AF-1 is approximately five feet and the banks in the upper portion of the drainage are two to three feet in height.

Aquatic Feature 2
Aquatic Feature 2 (AF-2) is a large earthen ephemeral channel beginning in the center of the project site and flowing from east to west. AF-2 flows for approximately 1,724 linear feet before ending in sheetflow near the western project boundary and dissipates into the surrounding landscape. The bank-to-bank width of AF-2 varies and ranges from 2 to 8 feet in the lower portions, 10 to 20 feet in the middle, and 5 to 8 feet in the upper headwaters. Bank height ranges from 3 to 8 feet. At the time of the field survey, AF-2 was completely dry. Small mammal burrows are present throughout the bed and banks of the drainage. The bed and banks of AF-2 are vegetated with brome grasses, scrub oak, white sage, mustard, Russian thistle, Menzies' goldenbush ( , FACU), fiddleneck ( sp., UPL), California buckwheat 5 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
Eriogonum fasciculatum Rumex crispus
Sambucus nigra,
Salvia
mellifera Artemisia californica Adenostoma fasciculatum Centaurea melitensis Elymus glaucus
Avena fatua
Bromus tectorum
( , UPL ), and curly dock ( , F AC). Scrub oak is present within the stream bed and is much denser in the downstream portion of the stream bed than the surrounding uplands.

An OHWM is present within AF-2 is varies from one to ten feet. The OHWM is defined by a clear line impressed on the banks, sediment sorting, drainage patterns, and vegetation matting. SDAM Reach 2 was completed within this drainage and confirmed AF-2 exhibits an ephemeral flow regime ( data sheets are provided in Attachment F).

Aquatic Feature 3
Aquatic Feature 3 (AF-3) is a small ephemeral tributary to AF-2 originating along a dirt access road. AF-3 flows from southeast to northwest for approximately 300 linear feet before the confluence with Aquatic Feature 2. Vegetation within the streambed is similar to AF-2 and includes brome grasses, doveweed, scrub oak, mustard, buckwheat, and elderberry ( FACU). At the time of the field survey, AF- 3 was completely dry. Small mammal burrows are present throughout the bed and banks of the drainage. The OHWM is defined by a clear line impressed on the banks, sediment sorting, drainage patterns, and vegetation matting. The bank-to-bank width of AF-3 is 15 feet. Bank height is approximately 2 to 3 feet.

Aquatic Feature 4
Aquatic Feature 4 (AF-4) is an ephemeral drainage flowing from northwest to southeast along Blue Cloud Road. This feature flows through a steep, narrow valley for approximately 970 linear feet before dissipating into sheetflow and terminating within the project site. AF-4 is densely vegetated with black sage ( , UPL), California sagebrush ( , UPL), chamise (
UPL), tocalote ( , UPL), scrub oak, blue wild rye ( , FACU), and California buckwheat. A 1-foot wide OHWM is present and is defined by a clear line impressed on the banks, sediment deposition, and a change in vegetation. The bank-to-bank width ranges from 5 to 10 feet and the bank height is 2 to 3 feet.

Aquatic Feature 5
Aquatic Feature 5 (AF-5) is a short, deeply incised ephemeral drainage flowing from northwest to southeast and into AF-6. AF-5 flows for approximately 493 linear feet and contains an OHWM that is one foot wide and a top of bank that is 2 feet wide. The OHWM is defined by sediment deposits, a clear line impressed on bank, a change in vegetation, and drainage patterns. AF-5 is vegetated with summer mustard, California buckwheat, Russian thistle, wild oats ( , UPL), bush mallow, chamise, black sage, scrub oak, California sagebrush, red-stemmed filaree, and brome grasses including downy chess ( UPL).

Aquatic Feature 6
Aquatic Feature 6 (AF-6) is a short, deeply incised ephemeral drainage flowing from northeast to southwest and offsite to the south. The feature originates in a steep, south-facing narrow canyon and flows for approximately 225 linear feet before exiting the site to the south. The bed of AF-6 is unvegetated while the 6 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
Atriplex canescens
Gutierrezia sarothrae
Heteromeles arbutifolia
banks are vegetated with black sage, California buckwheat, mustard, and red-stemmed filaree. The bankto-bank width of AF-6 is 10 feet and the OHWM width is 3 feet. The OHWM is defined by a change in vegetation, sediment deposition, and a clear line impressed on the bank.

Aquatic Feature 7
Aquatic Feature 7 (AF-7) is a steep, deeply incised drainage flowing from northwest to southeast through a narrow valley and eventually into AF-8. AF-7 flows for approximately 708 linear feet within the project site and was completely dry at the time of the survey. AF-7 is densely vegetated with California buckwheat, wild oats, fourwing saltbush ( , UPL ), brome grasses, black sage, and scrub oak. The drainage contains an OHWM defined by sediment deposition and a change in vegetation. Portions of the drainage are very densely vegetated and the OHWM is obscured. Bank-to-bank width is 20 feet and the OHWM width is 2 feet. The OHWM is defined by sediment deposition and a change in vegetation.

Aquatic Feature 8
Aquatic Feature 8 (AF-8) is a large, meandering drainage flowing from northeast to southwest within the project site for approximately 1,872 linear feet before continuing offsite and connecting downstream to Bouquet Creek. Aquatic Features 9 (AF-9) and 10 (AF-10) connect to AF-8 downstream within the project boundary. AF-8 is incised 5 to 10 feet with steep, almost vertical banks. The bank-to-bank width ranges from 6 to 20 feet and the OHWM width ranges from one to three feet. The OHWM is defined by sediment deposition, a change in vegetation, and a clear line impressed on the bank. The bed and banks are densely vegetated with California sagebrush, California buckwheat, chamise, snakeweed ( UPL ), brome grasses, summer mustard, black sage, scrub oak, and toyon ( , UPL).

SDAM Reach 1 was completed within this drainage and confirmed AF-8 exhibits an ephemeral flow regime ( data sheets are provided in Attachment F).

Aquatic Feature 9
AF-9 is a short ephemeral drainage flowing north to south and connects downstream to AF-8. AF-9 begins within the project site on a steep, south-facing slope and flows for approximately 280 linear feet before the confluence with AF-8. Additionally, AF-10 connects downstream to AF-9 within the project site.

Vegetation within AF-9 is similar to that of AF-8 and includes brome grasses, California buckwheat, summer mustard, scrub oak, California sagebrush, and black sage. An OHWM is present within AF-9 that is approximately 2 feet wide and defined by vegetation matting, change in vegetation, and a clear line impressed on the bank. The bank-to-bank width of AF-9 is approximately 20 feet and the banks are 1-2 feet in height.

Aquatic Feature 10
Aquatic Feature 10 (AF-10) is a short ephemeral drainage flowing northwest to southeast and connecting downstream to AF-9. AF-10 begins on a steep, southeast-facing slope and flows for approximately 220 feet 7 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
SDAM Forms
before dissipating into sheet:flow. The sheet:flow at the bottom of AF-10 flows across a narrow dirt access road and connects downstream to AF-9. AF-10 feature is densely vegetated with scrub oak, Russian thistle, black sage, and toyon along the upper portion of the steep banks. The channel invert is vegetated with California sagebrush, California buckwheat, summer mustard, and tocalote. The OHWM is defined by sediment deposition and a change in vegetation and is 2 feet wide. The bank-to-bank width of AF-10 is 15 feet.

Aquatic Feature 11
Aquatic Feature 11 (AF-11) is a wide ephemeral drainage originating from Blue Cloud Road and flowing to the east for approximately 443 linear feet before continuing off site. AF-11 is densely vegetated with fourwing saltbush, fragrant sumac, scrub oak, white sage, tocalote, blue wild rye, and elderberry. A one to three feet wide OHWM is present within AF-11 and is defined by sediment deposition and a change in vegetation. AF-11 widens and :flattens moving downstream as it parallels Blue Cloud Road, with the bankto-bank width varying from 8 feet in the upper portion of the drainage to 40 feet in the lower portion.

Wetland Features
Due to the dominance of upland plant species and ephemeral flow regime of all drainages within the project site, it was determined that no potential wetland conditions or wetland features were present within the project site. Therefore, no soil pits were investigated within the project site.

Streamflow Duration Assessment Method
Michael Baker conducted a stream duration assessment using the SDAM for two representative aquatic features within the project site. Reach 1 is within AF-8 (downstream end latitude 34.478483°, longitude - 118.491448°) and had a mean channel width of9 meters and a reach length of200 meters. Reach 2 is within AF-2 (downstream end latitude 34.476644°, longitude -118.504810°) and had a mean channel width of2.1 meters and a reach length of 80 meters. Neither reach exhibited hydrophytic vegetation, aquatic invertebrates, algal cover, or single indicators. Therefore, both Reach 1 and Reach 2 would be considered ephemeral. Refer to Attachment F, , for a copy of the Beta Arid West Stream:flow Duration Assessment Method forms.

Non-Jurisdictional Topographic Features
Steep, undulating topography is present on the project site that contains numerous steep, narrow valleys in between sharp peaks. Each small valley has the potential to be a jurisdictional feature if signs of flow are present. Each of these valleys were reviewed during the desktop review and visited during the field survey.

Most of the steep valleys were determined to be non-jurisdictional due to the lack of signs of flow and/or an OHWM. They do not contain a defined bed and bank but rather a steep, vegetated crevice between two peaks. No change in vegetation was observed from adjacent uplands and, in most cases, the ground where a "streambed" would be was so densely vegetated that the ground was not visible. In these cases, no vegetation matting was observed. Since no signs of regular flow were observed and no defined bed and 8 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
et seq.
bank are present within numerous crevices on site, these crevices were determined to be non-jurisdictional topographic features.

FINDINGS
All of the mapped aquatic features are tributaries to the Santa Clara River. These features exhibit an ephemeral flow regime based on the results of the SDAM assessment, are not relatively permanent waters (RPW), and do not exhibit a continuous surface connection to a downstream traditional navigable water (TNW). Accordingly, these features would not be considered subject to USACE jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Therefore, the jurisdiction of the RWQCB reflects that of the State and totals approximately 0.39 acre (7,570 linear feet) of non-wetland WoS. In addition, these aquatic features exhibited a bed and bank and are therefore considered jurisdiction to CDFW under Section 1600 of CFGC; the onsite portions of these aquatic features comprise approximately 2.05 acres (7,570 linear feet) of jurisdictional vegetated stream bed. No associated riparian habitat was observed in association with any of these aquatic features. Refer to Table 2 below and Figures 4 and 5 provided in Attachment A). 9 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
Table 2: State and Federal Jurisdictional Resources
Acreage within Project Site
Regional Board CDFW
Location Cowardin Linear
Feature Name NonLat/Long Type Feet Wetland Vegetated Wetland Riparian WoS
WoS Stream bed
Aquatic Feature 1 34.478566°
Riverine 174 0.QI - 0.04 - -118.505720°
Aquatic Feature 2

34.476463°
Riverine 1,724 0.14 - 0.43 - -118.504156°
Aquatic Feature 3

34.476294°
Riverine 288 0.03 - 0.10 - -118.502707°
Aquatic Feature 4

34.477001 °
Riverine 952 0.04 - 0.17 - -118.496221 °
Aquatic Feature 5

34.472952°
Riverine 493 0.QI - 0.o3 - -118.496707°
Aquatic Feature 6

34.472277°
Riverine 258 0.02 - 0.06 - -118.495826°
Aquatic Feature 7

34.479145°
Riverine 732 0.03 - 0.34 - -118.494172°
Aquatic Feature 8 34.479166°
Riverine 1,891 0.07 - 0.49 - -118.491190°
Aquatic Feature 9

34.479576°
-118.491490°
Riverine 400 0.01 - 0.11 -
Aquatic Feature IO

34.479316°
-118.492216°
Riverine 208 0.01 - 0.o7 -
Aquatic Feature 11

34.475834°
-118.495172°
Riverine 450 0.02 - 0.21 -
TOTAL 7,570 0.39 - 2.05 -

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The USACE regulates discharge of dredged or fill material into WoUS pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Although evidence of an OHWM was noted within all aquatic features within the project site, these features exhibit an ephemeral flow regime, are not RPW s, do not exhibit a continuous surface connection to a downstream TNW, and would not be subject to USACE jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Therefore, there is no USA CE jurisdiction within the project site and no Section 404 permit is required prior to commencement of construction activities.

The RWQCB regulates discharges to surface waters pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and Section 13263 of the Porter-Cologne Act. Temporary and/or permanent impacts resulting from the proposed project may require a Water Discharge Requirement (WDR) from the RWQCB pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Act prior to impacts occurring within jurisdictional areas. The RWQCB also requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to obtaining authorization. A RWQCB application fee is required with the application package and is calculated based on the acreage of jurisdictional impacts.

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
et seq
A. Project Figures
B. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map
C. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
D. USGS National Hydrography Dataset Advanced Viewer Map E. Site Photographs
F. SDAM Data Forms
G. References
The CDFW regulates alterations to lakes, streambeds, and riparian habitats pursuant to Section 1600 of the CFGC. Therefore, formal notification to and subsequent authorization from CDFW may be required prior to commencement of any construction activities within the CDFW jurisdictional areas. The CDFW also requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to issuing the final Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement. In addition, a notification fee is required, which is calculated based on project costs within CDFW jurisdictional areas.

Please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 472-3468 or [email protected] should you have any questions or require further information.

Sincerely,
April Nakagawa
Senior Regulatory Specialist
Natural Resources & Environmental Services
Attachments:
11 Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Attachment A
Project Figures
~
KE
\l\ ,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.!!0 S~~ - - - - - A~ T \
Hur\gry
State\Ve
Recreat io
\
l\
\
\
\
LIEBRE

MOUNTAIN

SAWMILL

MOUNTAIN
e
am
Regi
Airp
Pal
li
iii
!t=_~===---~ ~ ~

SANTA SU
Nr 11/N \ s
\
Simi Valle \
- - _, I
SIMI HllLS I
saadOaks ~ :
✓------- ...
"' Agoura Hills
Michael Baker 3
SANT
6 Mi

ICA MOUNT

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT 0 0 Regional Vicinity IN TE RN ATIO NA Ll-_;;;;------------------------------=------------ Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS, Los Angeles County, Kem County, Ventura County Figure 1 Legend
I 1 1 J Project Site

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
Michael Baker 0 0 Site Vicinity INTERNATIONAL--------------------------------------------------

0.5 Mi
Source: USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Wann Springs Mountain, Green Valley, Newhall, and Mint Canyon, California. Figure 2 :::.::: I- Q) M
0::: 0::: Q)
ci: 0 ~ ::::,
... a.. a.. en Cl
wW ii: :::.::: 0:::
t5
ZCDO
-z
Q) 0~ ·- >-w 0 Zz I... ci: - (.) ...J a..
w
....10
...Jw
(/)
(/)
:::.:::w
(.)
ci: 0:::

I::,
ci:
0 :::,
~
(.)
0:::
w
(/)
0 -a; 0 Q)
0 u. ~
I
u
5 E'
0 < 0 .3 IO
ci
<I)
8 ii"
0 ·c
<(
E
- 0 ,l'.l C: ~ ·5 5 a. a, <I)
a, - _, 0 u5 < C:
- a, 0 ... a, ~ .o'
"C a, ... ,_
C 0:::: a. <
Cl)
~ C)
EB w Cl)
..J z
,_
Legend
EB Reference Point
I I I I Project Site
0 SDAM Locations
, Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
Non-Wetland WoS (0.39 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
Michael Baker - n son -- 1,000
- ,v ,.vvv -Fe ,et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi-------------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a.- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4 Legend
I I I I Project Site , Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
Non-Wetland WoS (0.01 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT - n --
- ,v -vv ·et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL1------------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a..- Michael Baker 10n 200
~ Fe
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4a
Legend
I I I I Project Site 0 SDAM Locations
, Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
Non-Wetland WoS (0.17 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT - n --
- •V -vv ,et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL 1-----------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a..- Michael Baker 12" 250
~ Fe
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4b
Legend
I I I I Project Site , Photograph Point and Direction
Non-Wetland WoS (0.03 Acres)
~ M ~~ l,1'.'I A J!6!~ ll'JI

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
Michael Baker - n --
- ,v -vv ·et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi------------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a..- 10n 200
~ Fe
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4c
Legend
I I I I Project Site
Michael Baker
, Photograph Point and Direction
Non-Wetland WoS (0.06 Acres)
- n 10n -- 200
~ Fe

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
- ,v -vv ·et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL1------------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a..- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4d Legend
I I I I Project Site 0 SDAM Locations
, Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
Non-Wetland WoS (0.12 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
Michael Baker - n -
11-n 300
_ •v -FE vvv ,et Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL 1------------------'"'-----------"-----------------....a..- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 4e
Legend
EB Reference Point , Photograph Point and Direction
I 1 1 J Project Site Sheetflow
Michael Baker
1111 Vegetated Streambed (2.05 Acres)
- n son -- 1,000
-FE

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
- ,v ,.vvv,et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL i--------------------'--------------------------'- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 5
Legend
I 1 1 I Project Site
Michael Baker
• Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
1111 Vegetated Streambed (0.04 Acres)
- n 10n -- 200
~ Fe

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
- ,v -vv ·et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi--------------------'--------------------------'- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure Sa Legend
I 1 1 I Project Site
Michael Baker
• Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
1111 Vegetated Streambed (0.53 Acres)
- n 12" -- 250
~ Fe

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
- •V -vv ,et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONAL i--------------------'--------------------------'- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure Sb
Legend
I 1 1 I Project Site • Photograph Point and Direction
1111 Vegetated Streambed (0.09 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT - n --
- ,v -vv ·et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi--------------------'--------------------------'- Michael Baker 10n 200
~ Fe
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure Sc
Legend
I 1 1 I Project Site • Photograph Point and Direction
1111 Vegetated Streambed (0.38 Acres)

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT - n --
- ,v -vv ·et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi--------------------'--------------------------'- Michael Baker 10n 200
~ Fe
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure 5d
Legend
I 1 1 I Project Site
Michael Baker
• Photograph Point and Direction
Sheetflow
1111 Vegetated Streambed (1 .01 Acres)
- n -
11-n 300
-FE

HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK

AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT
_ •v vvv ,et California Department of Fish and Wildlife Jurisdictional Map INTERNATIONALi--------------------'--------------------------'- Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online Figure Se Attachment B
USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map
February 9, 2024
Wetlands

0.4 0.5mi

0.8 km
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
D Estuarine and Marine Wetland
D Freshwater Emergent Wetland
■ Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
D Freshwater Pond
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project
■ Lake
D Other
Riverine
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Vllildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.

National Wetlands Inventory (NVVI)
This page was produced by the NVVI mapper
Attachment C
FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps
.Z:ONI.AII!:

FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION
S:tfi!i rtff"O!tfrOIC ~AllfOUCilf'l~NIO ll'lotl ""'"'~ r ~ M ,., • .rm.UM>IIT IHllNI-OIIIAAl'Ofl Ol,.CllOON tHIS MAP ANO suir.-o~tN.i D()ClMElil~ M EALSOAV,l.,llAILE ll't O;GtTAL fOIIM.\T .\1 t{TTPS://MSC.l'Et.lA,COV
07!EAAF,wor
R.OOONI.ZAAO
Wlttitl"Ec,Otpl'I ,.,._( itl, .tll WA~
llegu»'.arrflH<q
- (l.2;4flrl•iji lCht -Fwdltourll,.t«<, d1', i001ttl(:1),11,celll>>6"'Ua1er-<l!fl , . ~:fl l"6Vml DfOlfftDr !I' t.11 d1ainnr1
, rusor 1954 --~ DU KUil"ll mlt 1-)"
_ Rr.ur,c,n:1tiv111t" "'.,~••
C:hit~en,~Hu.tld l""11X
- hNwll'hal;,edrlff(,11~ 4~ct~ L ... cu SeeNotU lY>tX
OltiU ~j 1n:oser ... 111111alOti'~IU.7.-l(l 7cMX
J.f.fAS ArtUIL.rtO-ltem'lht4 FltN<l lh.zn ~I.I
1 --- c11.1·1u 1,C~I\O'tcrs:omStKtt
l•ffl(R.lt. ' ''''''"'1 l.e¥(._,Jll<torflo1""".llll
:.TFtUClLRES
~ CtMCSectit~llitf\1,_NMIParic,,
----!!:! w~91 su-uc.U1J<1m;i1tm:,
(!}----- Coastal 1rnse.::t
--·--· COils~Trusett6<Mire
-- P,oftte-easetae
---ttwro~aoUcfeatui:
- =i•t-- baF1o<Jllr.it o1lJ1111Sra
011<, --Unl:tfStAJ
R:Al\.RE$ --J~~co,,e,ullCl.w,
NOTES TO USERS ,_ __________ w1,,..._ ____ A ____ ,_
__ :..-=:r.:::.=.:::.~T~=-=!::=.=:-::..:r.:-.:.:.= .... ___ ... ,.,·----· .. _..,_,,_ ... _ ::;=...--:;::'L!:...-r:;;...-...:.::::--.::..-::..:.-:-.::.::..-:.: .,._, ... ....,1o1., ____ .__ ..... _ _ __ ,_ C-•-•'""""..,_,,, .. , ______ ..... ~--- - :.:::-... 1(~11 - r-..., .... - ....... - .... --c., ... ,,.,. __ --~----.. -·--.... ~----.,, ... __,_ ::..--:::::.-=:v----::-.;.;:.::--..... ____ ., ... _ 16--,1 ~:.:=.+E:"'.,;:::",.,;:~==~=!..~.::~'
SCALE
_ ..... _...-.,..io .. ~i~ .- ... --""'J;
........ Q,....,_ .... ..,,_c._......ou. 'I
~-'
N 1 lnct1 ... 1,000 feet

PANEL LOCATOR
"" .,,,
~"
''" '"'
U0.000
E
~ ~ e J:.LI 0...
~ QJ
0 ;t ) C
I!!
::,
.,,
-= -0
a
a
ii:
.;;
C
a
.:,
z: "'
''"
Chy of S.1t1 ta Cl,.riu
96(11J9
A,11tdn /'htiuaa1
Fono
c11y l'lf!ii,u,,,.r1i:.rt1i:.
06(),Z'}
Los A•ttlt~ CIG"urlly
Lnlnrorp.rUP<I A l'fH
~so.u An;:1IM N1.lio1111
f._·t1I
Lo~ A • t•I•\ Counl)'
Unin,•orpo,.lt d Arus
()651.MJ
N.&.TIONAL FLOOD INSURANC:r F'RO<lltAM

LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
C,\UfORWA
IMI~ 810 Cf 2350
,-, ,rrMl,IJI
tOMMUnrn IIIUNIIJI PMl[l SU-JU.
,c,,-.i:,:)Qllt,n 1•i'"• c...,,,:,n0r -
H), ~ =~
\tltSICNttNl!U
:u u
N#'N.Nflt'.ll
06037CO~I0G
M.IS ~QllstD
JUNE2 202.1.

FLOOD HAZARD INFORMATION
S:tfi!i rtff"O!tfrOIC ~AllfOUCilf'l~NIO ll'lotl ""'"'~ r ~ M ,., • .rm.UM>IIT IHllNI-OIIIAAl'Ofl Ol,.CllOON tHIS MAP ANO suir.-o~tN.i D()ClMElil~ M EALSOAV,l.,llAILE ll't O;GtTAL fOIIM.\T .\1 t{TTPS://MSC.l'Et.lA,COV
07!EAAF,wor
R.OOONI.ZAAO
Wlttitl"Ec,Otpl'I ,.,._( itl,.tll W "~
llegu»'.arrflH<q
- (l,2;4""•iji l Cht -Fwdlt.,uull,,lru,
d1', i001ttl(:1),11,celll>:i4"'Uir.er<l!fl
, . ~:fl l"6Vml DfOllfftDr !I' tll d1ainnr1
,rusor 1954 --~ DU KUil"ll mlt 1-)"
_Rr.ur,c,n:1tiv111 t" "'.,~••
C:hit'l1:en,~Hu.tJd l""11X
- hNwll'hal;,ed rlff(,11~4~ct~L ... cu SeeNotU lY>tX
OltiU ~ j 1n:oser ... 111111a lOti'~IU.7.-l(l 7cMX
J.f.fAS ArtUIL.rtO-ltem'lht4 FltN<l lh.zn ~I.I
1 --- c11.1·1u 1,C~I\O'tcrs:omStKtt
l•ffl(R.li.. ' ' ' ' '''"'1 l.e¥(._,Jll<t orflot"""-•1U :OTFtUClLRES
~ CtMCSOC1Hnc.11itf\t'\l,J,/1V3j0,311¢1
-----!!:! w~91 su-uoeu.wm:i1tm1
(!}----- Coastal 'lrn se.::t
--·--· C<Mls~ T~t6<Mi re
---P,olile-Easatae
---ll'ldro~,oUcfeatui:
-=i•t-- baFbJll:Mli.l<OllJl"llllra
011<, --Unl:tfStAJ
R:Al\.llES --J~~co,,e,u1<1tr1
NOTES TO USERS ,_ ________ __ w1,,..._ ____ A ____ ,_
:..-=:r.:::.=.:::.~,~=-=1::=.=:-::..:r.:-.:.:.= __ M .. ---... A,•----·,._..,_,,_ ... _ ::.,._, ;=...--:;::'L!:...-r:;;...-...:.::::--.::..-::..:.-:-.::.::..-:.: ... .....,1o1., ____ .__ ..... ____ ,_ C-•-· - ........... ,,_..,, ______ ..... ~-...... .. -
:.:::-... 1(~11- r-..., .......... ...., .... .... __ c.,,...,.,. __ .__._,, ____ .. _ ___ ., .. ~----.,, ... __,_
::..--:::::.-=:v----::-.;.;:.::-- ..... ____ ., ... _ 16--,1 ~=~="'.::.:""'.;"~==~=!..--::-=:;:~•
, t "J
~ '
'
~ I'
SCALE
. ........ Q ,....,_ . ... ..,._c._......o,.
,.,
--
• 1=:....-.~~-m-M--~•c
N 1 lnct1 '"'1,000fect 1;12,000
1,0.)0 2.0tO · ~
.,,~ ... , .. 1,000

PANEL LOCATOR
[:] ''" '"' ..,.
~
■ »ID ""'
.,., ceu j
""' ,.., .,. ,.1,
"I
~· ~ d "'. _, ~ SllOT
E
~ ~ e ~ Cl.
~ QJ
0 :f ) C I!!
::, "' .!:
-0
a
a
ii:
.;;
C
a
.:,
z: "'
O tHe A
N.&.TIONAL FLOOD INSURANC:r F'RO<lltAM

LOS ANGELES COUNTY,
C,\UfORWA
IMU. 830 U 2350
,.,rr1 ~•nr
l:OMMUnrn
l(lj.~l!l,Qol.,/<O
'°'""'o-'i•u.,;w•~
111.iMHtl PM[L SUmA
11611 ... ~ g:;:
\tltSICNl'lJ'l!l!U
:uu
N#H.Netll
060JJCG3JOG
M.IS ~QIIStD
JUNE2 202.1
Attachment D
USGS National Hydrography Dataset Advanced Viewer Map
The National Map Advanced Viewer
2/9/2024, 12:31 :09 PM 1 :9,028
LJ 4 • Swamp Marsh • DamWeir I SeaOcean Flowline - Large Scale -- Connector ► StreamRiver Line - Large Scale 0 0.07 0.15 0.3mi Waterbody - Large Scale Area - Large Scale - Flume - Special Use Zone -- Perennial -- Pipeline ► StreamRiver - Perennial -- Line 0 0.13 0.25 0.5km Estuary - Area of Complex Channels - Foreshore - Spillway ···- Intermittent -- Underground Conduit ► StreamRiver - Intermittent Tunnel - lceMass - Area to be Submerged - Hazard Zone - StreamRiver .. ,_ Ephemeral Flow Direction ► StreamRiver - Ephemeral . Point Event USGS The National Map: Orthoimagery. Data refreshed December, • Lake Pond I ► Connector Point 2021.. USGS TNM - National Hydrography Dataset. Data Baylnlet I Inundation Area - Submerged Stream -- Artificial Path ► Pipeline Refreshed January, 2024. - Bridge • Lock Chamber -- Canal Ditch ► CanalDitch ■ Dam/Weir Playa Wash ► Artificial Path - CanalDitch ► Underground Conduit 0 Other Reservoir - Rapids r, Water lntakeOutllow -- CoasUine USGS 2021 USGS
Attachment E
Site Photographs
Photograph 1: Downstream view of Aquatic Feature 1, facing S at

34.478566°, -118.505720°.

Photograph 3: Upstream view of overland sheetflow at the terminus of Aquatic Feature 2, facing SE at 34.476663°, -118.506046° .

Photograph 2: Upstream view of overland sheetflow at the end of Aquatic Feature 1, facing NE at 34.4 77759°, -118.506088°.

Photograph 4: Downstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 2, facing E at 34.476581 °, -118.503421 °.

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 5: Downstream view of the upper portion of Aquatic Feature 2, facing Wat 34.4 76650°, -118.501259°.

Photograph 7: Downstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 4, facing SE at 34.479145°, -118.494172°.

Photograph 6: Upstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 3, facing SE at

34.476294°, -118.502707°.

Photograph 8: Representative view of lower portion of Aquatic Feature 5, facing downstream, SW at 34.477956°, -118.491962° .

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 9: Representative view of upper portion of Aquatic Feature 5, facing downstream, SW at 34.479478°, -118.490396°.

Photograph 11 : Representative view of middle portion of Aquatic Feature 8.

Photo facing downstream, SW at 34.479166°, -118.491190° .

Photograph 1 0: Representative view of lower portion of Aquatic Feature 8, facing upstream, Nat 34.478462°, -118.491429°.

Photograph 12: Representative view of middle portion of Aquatic Feature 8. Photo facing upstream, NE at 34.479160°, -118.491173° .

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 13: Upper portion of Aquatic Feature 5. Photo facing downstream, SW at 34.479755°, -118.490155°.
i.1:1:ii.!:

Photograph 15: Upstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 10, facing NW at 34.479316°, -118.492216°.

Photograph 14: Representative view of Aquatic Feature 9, facing downstream, S at 34.4 79576°, -118.491490° .

Photograph 16: Upstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 11, facing Wat 34.475834°, -118.494183°.

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 17: View of OHWM of Aquatic Feature 11, facing across the drainage, Sat 34.475834°. -118.495172°.

Photograph 19: Downstream representative view of Aquatic Feature 4, facing S at 34.477001 °, -118.496221 °.

Photograph 18: Upstream view of OHWM of Aquatic Feature 4, facing N at

34.476531 °, -118.496215°.

Photograph 20: Downstream representative view of the upper portion of Aquatic Feature 4, facing SE at 34.477893°, -118.497006° .

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 21 : Downstream representative view of the beginning of Aquatic Feature 5, facing SE at 34.472952°, -118.496707°.

Photograph 23: Overview of topography in northern portion of site. A typical non-jurisdictional swale is present in the foreground, facing S at

34.482029°, -118.499417° .

Photograph 22: Downstream representative view of the beginning of Aquatic Feature 5, facing SE at 34.472277°, -118.495826° .

Photograph 24: Representative view of typical non-jurisdictional feature containing upland vegetation, facing SW at 34.481024°, -118.498459°.

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 25: Overview of lower portion of Aquatic Feature 2. Photo facing upstream, SE at 34.476595°, -118.504784°.

Photograph 27: Overview of middle portion of Aquatic Feature 2. Photo facing downstream, Wat 34.476463°, -118.504156° .

Photograph 26: Overview of middle portion of Aquatic Feature 2. Photo facing upstream, Eat 34.476471 °, -118.504178°.

Photograph 28: Overview of upper portion of Aquatic Feature 2. Photo facing downstream, WSW at 34.476525°, -118.503674°.

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Photograph 29: Representative overview of topography in the eastern portion of the site. Photo facing SE at 34.480416°, -118.495103°. - .u.l,1-
P hotog raph 31 : Representative overview of topography in the southern portion of the site. Photo facing SW 34.4 7 4005°, -118.500412°.

Photograph 30: Representative overview of topography in the western portion of the site. Photo facing SE at 34.4 76754 °, -118.506329°.

Photograph 32: Representative overview of topography in the northern portion of the site. Photo facing SW at 34.480491°, -118.500072°.

Michael Baker I Site Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Attachment F
SDAM Datasheets
Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020 Page 1 of 4
Beta Arid West Streamflow Duration Assessment Method
General site information
Project name or number: Haskell Canyon Bike Park
Site code or identifier: Reach 1 Assessor(s): April Nakagawa, Megan Minter Waterway name: Aquatic Feature 8 Visit date: Feb 14, 2024 Current weather conditions (check one)
D Storm/heavy rain
D Steady rain
Notes on current or recent weather
conditions (e.g., precipitation in previous
week):

Coordinates at downstream end
( decimal degrees):

Lat (N): 34.476644
□ Intermittent rain
□ Snowing
D Cloudy (_%cover)
Ji( Clear/Sunny
Surrounding land-use within 100 m ( check one or two):

D Urban/industrial/residential
D Agricultural (farmland, crops, vineyards, pasture)
D Developed open-space (e.g., golf course)
□ Forested
,Rf Other natural Undeveloped open space
D Other:

Mean channel width (m)
9m
Reach length (m): 40x width; min 40 m; max 200 m.
200 m
Disturbed or difficult conditions (check all that apply):

D Recent flood or debris flow
□ Stream modifications (e.g., channelization)
□ Diversions
D Discharges
□ Drought
□ Vegetation removal/limitations
D Other (explain in notes)
,0"None
Observed hydrology:
0 % of reach with surface flow
0 % of reach with sub-surface or surface flow
0 Long(W): -118.504810
Datum: NAD84
Describe reach boundaries:
- Reach extends 200 m upstream from a representative point of entire drainage
- Reach extends to top of bank on both sides
Enter photo ID, or check if completed
Top down: Photo 4 Mid down: Photo 2
Mid up: Photo 3 Bottom up: Photo 1
Notes on disturbances or difficult site conditions:

Site is generally undisturbed open
space owned by the City of Santa
Clarita
Comments on observed hydrology:

Stream is dry at time of survey; OHWM is
present with sediment deposits, a line on the
bank, sediment sorting, and a wrack line
all
Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020

1. Hydrophytic plant species

Page 2 of 4 ends

Record up to 5 hydrophytic plant species (FACW or OBL in the Arid West regional wetland plant list) within the assessment area: within the channel or up to one half-channel width. Explain in notes if species has an odd distribution ( e.g., covers less than 2% of assessment area, long-lived species solely represented by seedlings, or long-lived species solely represented by specimens in decline), or if there is uncertainty about the identification. Enter photo ID, or check if photo is taken.

Check if applicable: □ No vegetation in assessment area Odd
distribution?
,¢'No hydrophytes in assessment area
Photo
S~cies
Notes on hydrophytic vegetation:
2 and 3. Aquatic invertebrates
I
I
Notes ------, ID
I
I

2. How many aquatic
invertebrates are
quantified in a 15-minute
search?

3. Is there evidence of aquatic stages of EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera Number of ,;z{None
individuals □ 1 to 19
quantified: □ 20 +
(Do not
count
mosquitos)
Photo ID:
--------
Notes on aquatic invertebrates:

4. Algal Cover
and Trichoptera)?
Ephemeroptera larva
Im e credit: Dieter Trace
Yes l!No!
Plecoptera larva
Trace Saxb
Are algae found on the ;6 Not detected Notes on algae cover:
stream bed? □ Yes, < l 0% cover
D Check if observed □ Yes, 2'. 10% ( check
- Yes in single algae appear to be deposited indicator below) from an upstream source.

5. Are single indicators observed?
Indicator
Fish
Algae cover 2'. 10%
Present
□ Yes
)1 No, no fish
D No, only non-native mosquitofish
□ Yes
)21No
No algae observed
Notes
Trichoptera larva
Trace Saxb
Photo ID:

Photo ID
Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020 Page 3 of 4
Supplemental information E.g., aquatic or semi-aquatic amphibians, snakes, or turtles; iron-oxidizing bacteria and fungi; etc.
- Stream is vegetated with upland vegetation within bed and banks - no evidence of aquatic species
- moss is present along the banks
- no bacteria/fungus is evident
Photo log
Indicate if any other photos taken during the assessment Photo ID Description
Additional notes about the assessment:

Channel is incised 4-6 feet through the reach. The banks contain scour and the channel contains leaf litter.

Shading provided to enhance readability by increasing the contrast between neighboring cells; empty cells indicate the classification will not change with additional information however it is recommended that all five indicators be measured and recorded during every assessment.

Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020 Page 4 of 4
Classification: Ephemeral

1. Hydrophytic 2. Aquatic 3.EPT 4. Algae 5. Single indicators Classification plant species invertebrates taxa • fish present
• at;ae cover> 10¾
IAbsentl I Absent I !Ephemeral
INonel I Absent Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information Present
Present At least intermittent
Absent Absent Need more information
Absent Present At least intermittent
Present Absent Need more information
Few (1-19) Present At least intermittent I None I
Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
Present At least intermittent
Absent
Absent Need more information
Many (20+) Present
Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
None Absent Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent I Intermittent
Absent
Present At least intermittent
Few (1-2)
Few (1-19) I Present At least intermittent
Absent Intermittent
Absent I Present At least intermittent
Many (20+) Absent At least intermittent
Present
Present Intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
None Absent Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent I At least intermittent
Few (1-19) Many (3+) Present Perennial
Absent I At least intermittent
Many (20+)
Present Perennial
SDAM Photograph 1: Downstream most point of SDAM Reach 1 within Aquatic Feature 8. Photo facing upstream, N.

SDAM Photograph 3: Mid point of SDAM Reach 1 within Aquatic Feature 8.

Photo facing upstream, NE.

SDAM Photograph 2: Mid point of SDAM Reach 1 within Aquatic Feature 8.

Photo facing downstream, SW.

SDAM Photograph 4: End point of SDAM Reach 1 within Aquatic Feature 8.

Photo facing downstream, SW.

Michael Baker I SDAM Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020 Page 1 of 4
Beta Arid West Streamflow Duration Assessment Method
General site information
Project name or number: Haskell Canyon Bike Park
Site code or identifier: Reach 2 I Assessor(s): April Nakagawa, Megan Minter Waterway name: Aquatic Feature 2 Visit date: Feb 15, 2024 Current weather conditions (check one) Notes on current or recent weather Coordinates at downstream end D Storm/heavy rain conditions (e.g., precipitation in previous ( decimal degrees):
□ Steady rain week): Lat (N): 34.476644
□ Intermittent rain
□ Snowing Long(W): -118.504810
D Cloudy (_%cover) Datum: NAD84 Ji( Clear/Sunny
Surrounding land-use within 100 m ( check one or two): Describe reach boundaries:

D Urban/industrial/residential - Upstream reach extends to a confluence D Agricultural (farmland, crops, vineyards, pasture) - Downstream reach is representative of entire drainage D Developed open-space (e.g., golf course) - Reach extends to top of bank on both sides □ Forested
,Rf Other natural Undeveloped open space
D Other:

Mean channel width (m) Reach length (m): Enter photo ID, or check if completed

2.1 m 40x width; min 40 m; max 200 m. Top down: Photo 8 Mid down: Photo 5 80m Mid up: Photo 6 Bottom up: Photo 4
Disturbed or difficult conditions (check all that apply): Notes on disturbances or difficult site conditions:

D Recent flood or debris flow
□ Stream modifications (e.g., channelization) Site is generally undisturbed open □ Diversions space owned by the City of Santa
□ Discharges Clarita
□ Drought
□ Vegetation removal/limitations
D Other (explain in notes)
,0"None
Observed hydrology: Comments on observed hydrology:
0 % of reach with surface flow Stream is dry at time of survey; minimal soil --- 0 % of reach with sub-surface or surface flow cracking observed, vegetation matting --- observed, OHWM is present 0 # of isolated pools Site sketch:
all
Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020

1. Hydrophytic plant species

Page 2 of 4 ends

2. How many aquatic
invertebrates are
quantified in a 15-minute
search?

Stream is vegetated with upland vegetation within bed and banks Channel is incised 3-5 feet through the reach.

Photo log
Indicate if any other photos taken during the assessment Photo ID Description
Additional notes about the assessment:
mid channel width = 4 meters
bottom channel width = 4 meters
Shading provided to enhance readability by increasing the contrast between neighboring cells; empty cells indicate the classification will not change with additional information however it is recommended that all five indicators be measured and recorded during every assessment.

Field form for the beta Arid Streamflow Duration Assessment Method Revision Date December 8, 2020 Page 4 of 4
Classification: Ephemeral

1. Hydrophytic 2. Aquatic 3.EPT 4. Algae 5. Single indicators Classification plant species invertebrates taxa • fish present
• at;ae cover> 10¾
IAbsentl I Absent I !Ephemeral
INonel I Absent Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information Present
Present At least intermittent
Absent Absent Need more information
Absent Present At least intermittent
Present Absent Need more information
Few (1-19) Present At least intermittent I None I
Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
Present At least intermittent
Absent
Absent Need more information
Many (20+) Present
Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
None Absent Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent I Intermittent
Absent
Present At least intermittent
Few (1-2)
Few (1-19) I Present At least intermittent
Absent Intermittent
Absent I Present At least intermittent
Many (20+) Absent At least intermittent
Present
Present Intermittent
Absent Need more information
Absent
None Absent Present At least intermittent
Present At least intermittent
Absent I At least intermittent
Few (1-19) Many (3+) Present Perennial
Absent I At least intermittent
Many (20+)
Present Perennial
SDAM Photograph 5: Downstream most point of SDAM Reach 2 within Aquatic Feature 2. Photo facing upstream, SE.

SDAM Photograph 7: Mid point of SDAM Reach 2 within Aquatic Feature 2.

Photo facing downstream, W
SDAM Photograph 6: Mid point of SDAM Reach 2 within Aquatic Feature 2.

Photo facing upstream, E.

SDAM Photograph 8: End point of SDAM Reach 2 within Aquatic Feature 2.

Photo facing downstream, WSW
Michael Baker I SDAM Photographs , N r E R N Ar , o N A L JN 195477 Haskell Canyon Bike Park Attachment G
References
Park Project
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming Distribution of Ordinary High Water
Mark Indicators and their Reliability in Identifying the Limits of “Waters of the United States” in the Arid Southwestern Channels
A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual Munsell Soil Color Charts
State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0).

Special Public Notice: Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Regulatory Division Regulatory Program
Special Public Notice: Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports
Attachment G - References
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. . Technical Report Y87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.

Federal Register. 2023. , 88 F.R. 61964
(September 8, 2023).

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2024. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette Flood Insurance Rate Map Nos. 06037C0810G and 06037C0830G. Accessed online at:
htt_ps:/ /msc.fema.gov/nfhl.

Google, Inc. 2024. Google Earth Pro Imagery Version 7.3.6.9750, build date January 12, 2024. Aerial Image dated June 15, 2023.

Lichvar, R.W., D.C. Finnegan, M.P. Ericsson, and W. Ochs. 2006 . . ERDC/CRREL TR-06-5. Hanover, New Hampshire: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

Lichvar, R.W., and S.M. McColley. 2008.

ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

Mazor, RD., Topping, B., Nadeau, T.-L., Fritz, K.M., Kelso, J., Harrington, R., Beck, W., McCune, K., Lowman, H., Allen, A., Leidy, R., Robb, J.T., and David, G.C.L. 2023. User Manuel for a Beta Streamflow Duration Assessment Method for the Arid West of the United States. Version 1.1.

DocumentNo. EPA-800-5-21001
Munsell Color. 2012. . X-rite. Grand Rapids, Michigan.

SWRCB. 2019b.

Effective May 28, 2020. Available online at:
htt_ps://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/cwa401/wrapp.html.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008.

ERDC/EL TR-08-28. Vicksburg, MS: U.S.

Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

USACE. 2016.
. Issued on February 10, 2016.

USACE. 2017.
. Issued on March 16, 2017.

USACE. 2024. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.6 Available online at https://wetlandplants.sec. usace.army .mil/.,_ Haskell Canyon Bike G-1
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Bike Park Project
Custom Soil Resources Report for Antelope Valley Area,
California
Hydric Soils List of California
National Wetlands Inventory
National Hydrography Dataset
Mint Canyon
Newhall
Attachment G - References
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2024a .
. Accessed online at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/.

USDA. 2024b.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/publications/query-by-state.html.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024.
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper .html.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2024a.
https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/.

Accessed online at:
. Accessed online at:
. Accessed online at:

USGS. 2024b.
2024.

7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed via Google Earth February USGS. 2024c. 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangle. Accessed via Google Earth February 2024.

Haskell Canyon G-2
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
APPENDIX D:

PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES

ASSESSMENT

Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for
the Blue Cloud Bike Park Project
Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California
Prepared for:

City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd.

Valencia, CA 91355
Prepared by:

James T. Daniels Jr., MA, RPA
Senior Archaeologist
and
Marcel Young, BA
Associate Archaeologist
Michael Baker International
April 2024
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260 I Carlsbad, CA 92008
Office: 760.603-6251 I Fax: 858.614-5001
Contact: James T. Daniels, Jr. [email protected] JN192626
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California
Prepared for
City of Santa Clarita
Planning Division
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, California 91355
Prepared by
James T. Daniels Jr., MA, RPA
and
Marcel Young, BA
5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Project No. 195477
April 2024
Draft
National Archaeological Database (NADB)
Type of Study: Literature Search, Intensive Pedestrian Survey, Significance Evaluation New Sites: BlueCloud MBI 01H
Updated Sites: CA LAN 3132H
USGS 7.5 Quadrangle: Newhall and Mint Canyon
Acreage: 500 acres
Level of Investigation: CEQA Phase I
Keywords: Santa Clarita; CEQA; BlueCloud MBI 01H; CA LAN 3132H Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Page i
Management Summary........................................................................................................................ 3

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................. 4

1.2 Study Area..................................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Regulatory Framework.................................................................................................................. 9

1.4 Project Personnel........................................................................................................................ 14

2.0 Project Setting ........................................................................................................................ 15

2.1 Natural Setting ............................................................................................................................ 15

2.2 Cultural Setting ........................................................................................................................... 15

3.0 Records Search Results and Archival Research........................................................................ 22

3.1 SCCIC Records Search.................................................................................................................. 22

3.2 Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Search.............................................. 24

3.3 Historical Maps, Aerial Photographs, and Archives Research .................................................... 24

4.0 Methods................................................................................................................................. 28

4.1 Survey Methodology................................................................................................................... 28

5.0 Pedestrian Survey Results....................................................................................................... 29

5.1 Archaeological Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................. 33

6.0 Evaluation Recommendations ................................................................................................ 34

7.0 Conclusions and Management Recommendations.................................................................. 36

8.0 Professional Qualifications ..................................................................................................... 38

9.0 References.............................................................................................................................. 39 Figure 1. Blue Cloud Bike Park Project Vicinity Map..................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Blue Cloud Bike Park Project Location Map................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Blue Cloud Bike Park Project Area ................................................................................................. 8 Figure 4. Structures once located within the project area and associated with site CA LAN 3132H......... 27 Figure 5. Overview of the southwestern portion of the survey area showing dense low lying vegetation. .................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 6. Small ~5 x 8 meter concrete pad associated with CA LAN 3132H. ............................................. 30 Figure 7. Brick fragment with McClintock stamped on the surface in Site CA LAN 3132H. ................... 30 Figure 8. Overview of Blue Cloud Dust Mine (BlueCloud MBI 01H)........................................................... 31 Figure 9. Mining wash plant associated with Blue Cloud Dust Mine site................................................... 32 Figure 10. Trailmobile trailer associated with Blue Cloud Dust Mine site.................................................. 32 Figure 11. Water storage tank. ................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 12. Blue Cloud Mine refuse and equipment including water trailer, tractor, and truck. ................ 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment Page ii
Table MS 1. Cultural Resources within the Project Area.............................................................................. 3 Table 1. Previous Studies within a Half Mile of the Project Area ............................................................... 23 Table 2. Previously Recorded Resources Within a Half Mile of the Project Area....................................... 24 APPENDIX A Confidential: Records Search Summary and Map APPENDIX B Native American Heritage Commission correspondence APPENDIX C Confidential: Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Forms APPENDIX D BLM GLO Records

LIST OFT ABLES

APPENDICES
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 3 ends

The City of Santa Clarita (City) proposes to construct the Blue Cloud Bike Park Project (project), a mountain bike park in the northern portion of the City that would include approximately 15 miles of 4 to 6 foot wide trails interspersed throughout the project site and two activity/programming areas. Trail types for all skill levels provided would include approximately 3.7 miles of perimeter and climbing trails, approximately 5.5 miles of downhill bike trails, and approximately 5 miles of multi use trails. The Project would also maintain approximately 1.6 miles of existing multi use trails. The Haskell Bike Park Core, located on the western portion of the project site, would include an event plaza with picnic tables and a flexible stage, pump tracks, a dual slalom course, progressive jumplines, a progressive skills area, event/spectator areas, shade structures, two vault restrooms , a bike repair station, a rest area with benches and shade structure, and cargo containers for storage areas. Parking for the Haskell Bike Park Core would be provided within a 99 space parking lot and a parking/emergency turnaround with eight additional parking spaces, two American Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces, and four spaces for food trucks. The Blue Cloud Trailhead, located near the central portion of the project site, would feature a field station with gathering and restoration workspaces for volunteers, designated areas for potential future landscape restoration, a multi use trailhead, vault restrooms, a bike repair station, and the Saddle Trail Hub (meeting space for riders with a shade structure). Parking for the Blue Cloud Trailhead would be provided within a parking/emergency turnaround with 10 parking spaces and one ADA parking space, and along Blue Cloud Road.

The project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City is the CEQA lead agency. This Phase 1 Cultural Resources Assessment is produced compliant with CEQA standards.

In support of the project, Michael Baker International conducted background and archival research, South Central Coastal Information Center records search, Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File search, an archaeological field survey, buried site sensitivity analysis, and California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) evaluation of one previously recorded historic period archaeological site and one newly identified site. These efforts were completed to determine whether the proposed project could result in significant impacts to historical and archaeological resources as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5.

Based on the results of the study, the two historic period archaeological sites have been evaluated as ineligible for the California Register, and therefore are not historical resources as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a), nor do they meet the definition of a unique archeological resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. As such, no further work is recommended for these resources. A finding of less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated under CEQA is appropriate for the project.

Refer to the recommended mitigation measures in Chapter 7.

TABLE MS 1. CULTURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
California Register Evaluation Historic Property/
Resource Name Description Recommendation Historical Resource CA-LAN-3132H Structure Pads Ineligible No
BlueCloud-MBI-OlH Mining Site Ineligible No
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 4 ends

This report presents the results of Michael Baker Internationals Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Blue Cloud Bike Park Project (project). The cultural resources assessment was conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for which the City of Santa Clarita (City) is the lead agency. The cultural resources assessment included background and archival research, a South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) records search, a Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File search, historical society consultation, an archaeological field survey, buried site sensitivity analysis, and California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) evaluation of two historic period archaeological sites. The sites are recommended as ineligible for listing in the California Register. These efforts were completed to determine whether the proposed project could result in significant impacts to historical and archaeological resources as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5.

The 380.82 acre project site is generally located roughly 6 miles east of Interstate 5 and roughly 5 miles north of State Route 14 within the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California (Figure 1). The proposed project area is mapped in Section 31, Township 5 North, Range 15 West on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mint Canyon, California 7.5 minute quadrangle and Section 36, Township 5 North, Range 16 West on the USGS Newhall, California 7.5 minute quadrangle (Figure 2). Specifically, the project site is located within Haskell Canyon Open Space south of the Angeles National Forest, north of Copper Hill Drive, east of an unnamed Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) dirt access road adjacent to Haskell Canyon Wash, and northwest of Blue Cloud Road. The project site is primarily located on Assessors Parcel Numbers (APN) 2813 010 273, 2813 010 274, 2813 010 275, 2813 010 276, 2813 010 900, 2813 010 901, 2813 010 902, 2813 025 270, and 3244 031 901.

The project proposes to construct the Blue Cloud Bike Park Project (project), a mountain bike park in the northern portion of the City that would include approximately 15 miles of 4 to 6 foot wide trails interspersed throughout the project site and two activity/programming areas. Trail types for all skill levels provided would include approximately 3.7 miles of perimeter and climbing trails, approximately 5.5 miles of downhill bike trails, and approximately 5 miles of multi use trails. The Project would also maintain approximately 1.6 miles of existing multi use trails. The Haskell Bike Park Core, located on the western portion of the project site, would include an event plaza with picnic tables and a flexible stage, pump tracks, a dual slalom course, progressive jumplines, a progressive skills area, event/spectator areas, shade structures, two vault restrooms, a bike repair station, a rest area with benches and shade structure, and cargo containers for storage areas. Parking for the Haskell Bike Park Core would be provided within a 99 space parking lot and a parking/emergency turnaround with eight additional parking spaces, two American Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces, and four spaces for food trucks. The Blue Cloud Trailhead, located near the central portion of the project site, would feature a field station with gathering and restoration workspaces for volunteers, designated areas for potential future landscape restoration, a multi use trailhead, vault restrooms, a bike repair station, and the Saddle Trail Hub (meeting space for riders with a shade structure). Parking for the Blue Cloud Trailhead would be provided within a parking/emergency turnaround with 10 parking spaces and one ADA parking space, and along Blue Cloud Road.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 5 ends

The cultural resources study area for the project consists of the proposed trails and amenities for the bike park and a 20 meter radius surrounding them (Figure 3). This was the area covered during the pedestrian survey, less those areas with slopes of 30 degrees or greater, as slopes of 30 degrees or greater pose a hazard for pedestrian surveys and have low probability for archaeological deposits.

1.2 STUDY AREA
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 6 ends

KERN COUNTY
_I J _ ':':S ANGELES COUNTY .. ~
' I \
' ' '
h Fillmore
' ' ' '
UEBRE

MOUNTAIN
_______ ,,,,,,

SANTA SUSAK
\ ·'JL!}IJ N
, ' 41Ns
'
Simi Valley, '

SIMI HILLS
I
I
usand Oaks I
--------1
~<?al
(

SAWMILL

MOUNTAIN
San nando .
r::~:==::::~~=:::::::::=~-:-;::::::- .~ ndale
e
am
Reg,
Airp
Pal
L keview .
s
.

J .,, .,,
([

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

CITY OF SANTA CLAR ITA, CA
0 ° 3 6Miles Regional Vicinity INTERNATIONAL I-..::=:...._-=======----------------------___::~--------~ Michael Baker
Souit:e ESRI, US Count~ ol Los Angele!; Figure 1
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 7 ends

~ Legend
~ I• ii Blue Cloud Bike Park Project Area
e J D 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle boundaries
!:
.,.
~
~
§

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK PROJECT

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CA
0 ° 0
•
25 O.SMiles Project Location
INTERNATIONALl--=--=--------------------------------=---------- Michael Baker
Sout . Esr 1 ArcGIS nhne, u GS 7 5-Minute topOg,a!)h lC que1Clra1\g le maps. Newlwll Md Mml Car,yori. CaMowts Figure 2 ~d
~ Blue Cloud Project Area
c:::J Blue Cloud Cultural Survey Area

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK
Michael Baker o 500 1 000 SANTA CLARITA, CA
INTERNATIONA~I O • Feet Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Area Source Esn,ArcGIS Online, 2023 Nearrnap Imagery Santa Clarita, California Fig ure 3 Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 9 ends

CEQA applies to all discretionary projects undertaken or subject to approval by the states public agencies (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14[3] Section 15002[i]). CEQA conditions that it is the policy of the state of California to take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with historic environmental qualities and preserve for future generations examples of the major periods of California history (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21001[b], [c]). Under the provisions of CEQA, a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5[b]).

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) defines a historical resource as a resource that meets one or more of the following criteria:

Listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register.

Listed in a local register of historical resources (as defined in PRC Section 5020.1[k]).

Identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting PRC Section 5024.1(g) requirements.

Determined to be a historical resource by a projects lead agency (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5[a]).

A historical resource consists of any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California.

Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be historically significant if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5[a][3]).

The CEQA planning process requires considering historical resources and unique archaeological resources (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5; PRC Section 21083.2). If feasible, adverse effects to the significance of historical resources must be avoided or mitigated (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5[b][4]). The significance of a historical resource is impaired when a project demolishes or materially alters adversely those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and justify its eligibility for the California Register. If there is a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, the preparation of an environmental impact report may be required (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15065[a]).

If the cultural resource in question is an archaeological site, CEQA (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15064.5[c][1]) requires that the lead agency first determine if the site is a historical resource as defined in CCR Title 14(3) Section 15064.5(a). If the site qualifies as a historical resource, potential adverse impacts must be considered in the same manner as a historical resource (California Office of Historic Preservation [OHP] 2001a). If the archaeological site does not qualify as a historical resource but does qualify as a unique archaeological site, then the archaeological site is treated in accordance with PRC Section 21083.2 (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15069.5[c][3]). In practice, most archaeological sites that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource will also meet the definition of a historical resource. CEQA defines a unique archaeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be

1.3 REGULA TORY FRAMEWORK
•
•
•
•

1.3.1 California Environmental Quality Act
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 10 ends

demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets one or more of the following criteria:

Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.

Has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.

Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC Section 21083.2[g]).

If an impact to a historical or archaeological resource is significant, CEQA requires feasible mitigation measures to minimize the impact (CCR Title 14[3] Section 15126.4[a][1]). Mitigation must lessen or eliminate the physical impact that the project will have on the resource. Generally, drawings, photographs, and/or displays do not mitigate the physical impact on the environment caused by the demolition or the destruction of a historical resource. However, CEQA (PRC Section 21002.1[b]) requires that all feasible mitigation be undertaken even if it does not mitigate impacts to a less than significant level (OHP 2001a: 9).

The California Register is a guide to cultural resources that must be considered when a government agency undertakes a discretionary action subject to CEQA. The California Register helps government agencies identify and evaluate Californias historical resources (OHP 2001b: 1) and indicates which properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change (PRC Section 5024.1[a]). Any resource listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register is to be considered during the CEQA process (OHP 2001a: 7).

A cultural resource is evaluated under four criteria to determine its historical significance. A resource must be significant in accordance with one or more of the following criteria:

Criterion 1: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of Californias history and cultural heritage.

Criterion 2: Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

Criterion 4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the California Register requires that sufficient time must have passed to allow a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource. Fifty years is used as a general estimate of the time needed to understand the historical importance of a resource (OHP 2006: 3). OHP recommends documenting, and taking into consideration in the planning process, any cultural resource that is 45 years or older (OHP 1995: 2). •
•
•

1.3.2 California Register of Historical Resources
Age
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 11 ends

The period of significance for a property is the length of time when a property was associated with important events, activities, persons, or attained the characteristics which qualify it for National Register listing (NPS 1997: 42). The period of significance begins with the date of the earliest important land use or activity that is reflected by historic characteristics tangible today. The period closes with the date when events having historical importance ended. The period of significance for an archaeological property is the broad span of time about which the site or district is likely to provide information (NPS 1997: 42).

Archaeological properties may have more than one period of significance.

The California Register also requires a resource to possess integrity, which is defined as the authenticity of a historical resources physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resources period of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (OHP 2006: 2).

Archaeologists use the term integrity to describe the level of preservation or quality of information contained within a district, site, or excavated assemblage. Integrity is relative to the specific significance that the resource conveys. Although it is possible to correlate the seven aspects of integrity with standard archaeological site characteristics, those aspects are often unclear for evaluating the ability of an archaeological resource to convey significance under Criterion 4. The integrity of archaeological resources is judged according to the sites ability to yield scientific and cultural information that can be used to address important research questions (NPS 1997: 4449).

Resources that are significant, meet the age guidelines, and possess integrity are considered eligible for listing in the California Register.

PRC Section 5097.5 prohibits excavation or removal of any vertebrate paleontological site or any other
archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Public lands are defined to include lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of the state or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. PRC Section 5097.5 states that any unauthorized disturbance or removal of archaeological, historical, or paleontological materials or sites located on public lands is a misdemeanor.

California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroners authority. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the coroner Period of Significance
Integrity
Eligibility

1.3.3 California Public Resources Code Section 5097.5

1.3-4 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 12 ends

must notify the NAHC within 24 hours of this identification. The NAHC will identify a Native American most likely descendant to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

The Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan for the City of Santa Clarita (2011) includes the following goals, objectives, and policies related to cultural resources that would be applicable to the proposed project:

Goal CO 5: Protection of historical and culturally significant resources that contribute to community identity and a sense of history.

Objective CO 5.1: Protect sites identified as having local, state, or national significance as a cultural or historical resource.

Policy CO 5.1.1: For sites identified on the Cultural and Historical Resources Map (Exhibit CO 6), review appropriate documentation prior to issuance of any permits for grading, demolition, alteration, and/or new development, to avoid significant adverse impacts. Such documentation may include cultural resource reports, environmental impact reports, or other information as determined to be adequate by the reviewing authority.

Policy CO 5.1.2: Review any proposed alterations to cultural and historic sites identified in Table CO 1 or other sites which are so designated, based on the guidelines contained in the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Properties (Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1, Part 68, also known as 36 CFR 68), or other adopted City guidelines.

Policy CO 5.1.3: As new information about other potentially significant historic and cultural sites becomes available, update the Cultural and Historical Resources Inventory and apply appropriate measures to all identified sites to protect their historical and cultural integrity.

Objective CO 5.3: Encourage conservation and preservation of Native American cultural places, including prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, and ceremonial sites on both public and private lands, throughout all stages of the planning and development process.

Policy CO 5.3.1: For any proposed general plan amendment, specific plan, or specific plan amendment, notify and consult with any California Native American tribes on the contact list maintained by the California Native American Heritage Commission that have traditional lands located within the Citys jurisdiction, regarding any potential impacts to Native American resources from the proposed action, pursuant to State guidelines.

Policy CO 5.3.2: For any proposed development project that may have a potential impact on Native American cultural resources, provide notification to California Native American tribes on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission that have traditional lands within the Citys jurisdiction, and consider the input received prior to a discretionary decision.

1.3.S City of Santa Clarita General Plan and Municipal Code Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 13 ends

Policy CO 5.3.3: Review and consider a cultural resources study for any new grading or development in areas identified as having a high potential for Native American resources, and incorporate recommendations into the project approval as appropriate to mitigate impacts to cultural resources.

Chapter 17.64 of the City of Santa Claritas Municipal Code, Historic Preservation, seeks preservation and protection of public and private historic, cultural, and natural resources which are of special historic or aesthetic character or interest, or relocating such resources where necessary for their preservation and for their use, education, and view by the general public. A building, structure, or object may be designated by the Planning Commission as a historic resource if it possesses sufficient character defining features and integrity, and meets at least one of the following criteria:

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the historical, archaeological, cultural, social, economic, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural development of the City, State or Nation; or

2. Is associated with persons significant in the history of the City, State or Nation; or

3. Embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or

4. Has a unique location, singular physical characteristic(s), or is a landscape, view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City; or

5. Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the history or prehistory of the City, State, or Nation.
Federal and state laws mandate that contemporary Native Americans' concerns about potentially ancestral human remains, associated funerary objects, and items of cultural patrimony be considered.

Consequently, an important element in assessing the significance of the study site has been evaluating the likelihood that these classes of items are present in areas that would be affected by the proposed project.

Potentially relevant to prehistoric archaeological sites is the category termed traditional cultural properties (TCP) in discussions of cultural resource management performed under federal auspices.

According to Patricia L. Parker and Thomas F. King (1998), traditional in this context refers to those beliefs, customs, and practices of a living community of people that have been passed down through the generations, usually orally or through practice. The traditional cultural significance of a historic property, then, is significance derived from the role the property plays in a community's historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices. Cultural resources can include TCPs, such as gathering areas, landmarks, and ethnographic locations, in addition to archaeological districts. Generally, a TCP may consist of a single site, or group of associated archaeological sites (district or traditional cultural landscape), or an area of cultural/ethnographic importance.

1.3.6 Native American Heritage Values
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 14 ends

In California, the Traditional Tribal Cultural Places Bill of 2004 requires local governments to consult with Native American tribes during the project planning process, specifically before adopting or amending a general plan or a specific plan, or when designating land as open space for protecting Native American cultural places. The intent of this legislation is to encourage consultation and assist in the preservation of Native American places of prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, and ceremonial importance. State Assembly Bill (AB) 52, effective July 1, 2015, introduced into CEQA the tribal cultural resource (TCR) as a class of cultural resources and additional considerations relating to Native American consultation. As a general concept, a TCR is similar to the federally defined TCP; however, it incorporates consideration of local and state significance and requires mitigation under CEQA. A TCR may be considered significant if it is included in a local or state register of historical resources; is determined by the lead agency to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PCR Section 5024.1; is a geographically defined cultural landscape that meets one or more of these criteria; and/or is a historical resource described in PCR Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource described in PCR Section 21083.2, or is a non unique archaeological resource if it conforms with PRC Section 21074(a).

James Daniels, MA, RPA, served as principal investigator and primary author of this report. Marcel Young, BA, and Epifanio Figueroa, BA, conducted the archaeological pedestrian survey. Marc Beherec, PhD, RPA, provided overall project management support and senior technical review.

1.4 PROJECT PERSONNEL
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 15 ends

California is divided into 11 geomorphic provinces, each defined by unique geologic and geomorphic characteristics. The project area is in the central portion of the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province, marked by eastwest trending mountain ranges and valleys in contrast to the northwest trending ranges of coastal California (CGS 2002). This geomorphic province extends offshore to include physiogeographic features, such as the northern members of the Channel Islands of Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa, and San Miguel Islands (CGS 2002). The Transverse Ranges province crosses several counties and is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the Coast Ranges and Sierra Nevada geomorphic provinces to the north, the Mojave Desert geomorphic province to the east, and the Peninsular Ranges and Colorado Desert geomorphic provinces to the south.

The geology of the Santa Clarita area was mapped by Campbell et al. (2016) at a scale of 1:100,000 and by Dibblee and Ehrenspeck (1996) at a scale of 1:24,000. Geologic units underlying the project area are mapped as alluvial gravel, sand, and clay of the valley area that date to the Holocene epoch (Qa of Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1996). The Mint Canyon formation consists of terrestrial sedimentary deposits ranging from conglomerate through sandstone to claystone that date to the Miocene epoch (Tmc of Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1996).

According to the Custom Soil Resource Report for Antelope Valley Area, California (US Department of Agriculture 2023), the project site is underlain by four soil map units: Castaic Balcom silty clay loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (CmF2); Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (ScF2); Sorrento loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (SsB); and Yolo loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes (YoC).

The project area is within the Venturan Angeleno Coastal Hills ecoregion, a part of the larger California Coastal Sage and Chaparral ecoregion. The plant and animal species that would have been present during prehistoric times in this ecoregion include a mix of California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), blue elderberry (Sambucus Mexicana), bigpod ceanothus (Ceanothus megacarpus), black sage (Salvia mellifera), white sage (Salvia apiana), and California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) (Griffith et al. 2016). The vegetation is adapted to a Mediterranean climate, with hot, dry summers and mild, wet winters. The regions wildlife during late prehistory would have included the California condor (Gymnogyps californianus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), California red legged frog (Rana draytonii), bobcat (Lynx rufus), coyote (Canis latrans), black tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), California quail (Callipepla californica), white tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), red tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and great horned owl (Bubo virginianus).

This section provides a brief summary of the prehistoric record and ethnohistoric and historic settings of the project area.

2.0 PROJECT SETTING

2.1 NATURAL SETTING

2.2 CULTURAL SETTING
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 16 ends

The project area is within a segment of California where the prehistoric record is not as well documented as in other regions in the state. There have been a few significant archaeological studies within the Santa Clarita Valley, but they have not fully defined the local culture history of the Santa Clarita Valley and have thus lumped the region into neighboring cultural historical schemes of the Southern California coast (e.g., Glassow et al. 2007; Waugh 1999; ICF 2021). The summary of the prehistoric occupation of the region here follows the general cultural history schema of those previous reports.

The prehistoric occupation of Southern California is divided chronologically into four temporal phases or horizons (Moratto 1984). Horizon I, or the Early Man Horizon, began at the first appearance of people in the region (approximately 12,000 years ago) and continued until approximately 5,000 BC. One of the oldest archaeological finds in the region is Daisy Cave, on San Miguel Island, where cultural remains have been radiocarbon dated to between 11,100 BC and 10,950 BC (Moratto 1984). These early occupants of Southern California are believed to have been nomadic large game hunters whose tool assemblage included percussion flaked scrapers and knives; large, well made stemmed, fluted, or leaf shaped projectile points (e.g., Lake Mojave, Silver Lake); crescentics; heavy core/cobble tools; hammerstones; bifacial cores; and choppers and scraper planes. Warren (1968) and W. J. Wallace (1955) suggest that the absence of milling tools commonly used for seed preparation indicates that an orientation toward hunting continued throughout this phase.

Horizon II, also known as the Millingstone Horizon or Encinitas Tradition, began around 5,000 BC and continued until approximately 1,500 BC. The Millingstone Horizon is characterized by the widespread use of milling stones (manos and metates) and core tools, with few projectile points or bone or shell artifacts.

This horizon represents a diversification of subsistence activities and a more sedentary settlement pattern. Archaeological evidence suggests that hunting became less critical and that a reliance on collecting shellfish and vegetal resources increased (Moratto 1984: 159). The inland occupants collected primarily hard seeds and hunted small mammals; projectile points were more common in inland assemblages.

A greater emphasis on seed gathering marked the general settlement/subsistence patterns of the Middle Holocene. Coastal and inland sites exhibit shallow midden accumulations, suggesting seasonal camping, and midden accumulation at desert locales dating to this period is generally rare. Based on the distribution of sites assigned to this period, aboriginal groups likely followed a modified, centrally based wandering pattern, with an inferred shift toward enhanced logistical settlement organization (Warren 1968). In this semisedentary pattern, larger groups occupied a base camp for a portion of the year, while smaller groups used satellite camps to exploit seasonally available floral resources such as grass seeds, berries, tubers, and nuts. King suggests that the coastal sites probably represent more permanent occupations than those found in the interior because coastal inhabitants were sustained by more reliable and abundant food resources (King 1967: 66 67).

Horizon III, the Intermediate Horizon or Campbell Tradition, began around 1,500 BC and continued until approximately AD 600800. Horizon III is defined by a shift from the use of milling stones to increased use of mortar and pestle, possibly indicating a greater reliance on acorns as a food source. Projectile points

2.2.1 Prehistoric Period
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 17 ends

become more abundant and, together with faunal remains, indicate increased use of both land and sea mammals (Moratto 1984: 159).

Horizon IV, the Late Horizon, which began around AD 600800 and terminated with the arrival of Europeans in the early sixteenth century, is characterized by dense populations; diversified hunting and gathering subsistence strategies, including intensive fishing and hunting for sea mammals; extensive trade networks; use of the bow and arrow; and a general cultural elaboration (Moratto 1984: 159). All regional chronological sequences recognize the introduction of the bow and arrow at about AD 500 by the appearance of small arrow points and arrow shaft straighteners. Diagnostic artifacts for the Late Horizon include small triangular projectile points, mortars and pestles, steatite ornaments and containers, perforated stones, circular shell fishhooks, numerous and varied bone tools, and bone and shell ornamentation. Elaborate mortuary customs, generous use of bitumen, and the development of extensive trade networks are also characteristic of this period. Pottery, ceramic pipes, cremation urns, rock paintings, and some European trade goods were added to the previous cultural assemblage during the latter half of the late prehistoric occupation of the Southern California coastal region (Meighan 1954).

Native American territorial occupation of the Los Angeles Basin and surrounding areas was traditionally assigned to the Gabrielino, also known as the Tongva, Chumash, and Tataviam Native American groups.

The latter occupies the northwest and northern limits of the San Fernando Valley and other surrounding territories (Grant 1978; King and Blackburn 1978). For this study, a short description of Tataviam ethnography is provided.

The Tataviam are one of the least understood Native American groups in California. Their original territory has been estimated to lie within Los Angeles, Ventura, and Kern Counties (King and Blackburn 1978). Their language belongs to the Takic branch of the larger Uto Aztecan linguistic family and, therefore, exhibits phylogenetic (based on natural evolution) relationships to other Takic languages of Southern California, such as those of the Gabrielino of the Los Angeles Basin and the Kitanemuk of the Antelope Valley. The name Tataviam means people facing the sun. Their territory is thought to include the upper reaches of the Santa Clara River drainage east of Piru Creek, extending north to the southwestern fringes of the Antelope Valley (Fortier 2009; King and Blackburn 1978). Their neighbors included the Kitanemuk and Vanyume to the north, Chumash communities to the west, Gabrielino territories to the south, and Serrano communitiesto the east and southeast (King and Blackburn 1978). At the time of the missionary conquest, in the late eighteenth century, Tataviam villages were numerous. Many of the thousand Tataviam in the Los Angeles region were eventually sent to Mission San Fernando. Of those with a known ethnicity baptized at the mission, 27 percent were Tataviam (Fortier 2009).

Some of the most established Tataviam villages during the historic period included Waatnga and Coaynga near present day Piru; Kavwénga at the present day Cahuenga; Tujunga at Rancho Tujunga; Chaguayanga and Tochonanga near Newhall; Suitcanga near Encino; and Mapipinga at Vazquez Rocks. Mission San Fernando itself was established in the village of Achoicominga. On the eve of colonial contact, circa 1770, evidence suggests that Tataviam economic strategies were like those of the Gabrielino and the other similar groups in the vicinity. The Tataviam collected yucca, acorns, sage seeds, cherry, juniper berries, and other plants within their territory. Men and women hunted rabbits, rats, deer, birds, and antelope.

2.2.2 Ethnographic Setting
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 18 ends

Spanish occupation of California began at San Diego in 1769 when Franciscan missionaries led by Father Junípero Serra and Spanish soldiers established a military fort and chapel on Presidio Hill, which became colonial Californias first presidio and first mission. That same year, an expedition headed by Gaspar de Portolá traveled north from San Diego to explore Alta California for additional mission sites and search for Monterey Bay, which Spanish mariners had previously encountered. Portolá and his party would be the first people of European descent to travel through the project vicinity. Moving northward, the party reached the Santa Clara River near Castaic Junction on August 8. Recording the expedition in journals, Father Juan Crespi described the area as a very suitable site for a mission, with much good land, many palisades, two very large arroyos of water, and five large [Native American] villages close together. The following day, Portolás party followed the Santa Clara River west toward present day Fillmore (Perkins 1957; Rawls and Bean 2011).

Mission San Gabriel was established in the Los Angeles Basin in 1771. Five years later, a party led by Father Francisco Garcés became the second group of Spanish explorers to travel through the Santa Clara River Valley, this time en route to the San Joaquin Valley. The Los Angeles pueblo was established as a civilian settlement on September 4, 1781. On March 31 of the following year, Father Serra founded Mission San Buenaventura, Californias ninth mission and the last to be established under Serras leadership. The coastal site was approximately 60 miles west northwest of the Los Angeles pueblo. Serras successor as president of the California missions, Father Fermín Lausén, established Mission San Fernando in the northern San Fernando Valley in 1797 (Kimbro et al. 2010; Perkins 1957; Rawls and Bean 2011).

Mission San Fernando leaders sought to colonize the Santa Clara River Valley. They intended to missionize the valleys numerous Native American villages and exploit its natural resources to supplement supplies from other regional missions bound for the military garrison at the Presidio of Santa Barbara. Successfully challenging attempts by civilian Francisco Avila to gain control of lands around the headwaters of the Santa Clara River, Mission San Fernando leaders established an asistencia (a smaller sub mission) in the vicinity of Castaic Junction during the first years of the nineteenth century. The area became known as Rancho San Francisco. As at the missions, asistencia leaders compelled local Native Americans to learn and perform European forms of animal husbandry, construction, and agricultural production. Rancho San Francisco was fenced to control cattle herds, and a dam and irrigation canal were constructed on the eastern portion of the rancho (Perkins 1957).

Spanish colonial officials maintained an ultimately tenuous grip on Alta California as the mission system expanded. Although some missions flourished economically, threats from within and without increasingly undermined stability. Indigenous populations declined dramatically because of disease, overwork, and mission campaigns to end native ways of life. Instances of native resistance to Spanish authority multiplied across Alta California. Mariners with allegiances to competing colonial powers and trappers/explorers from the east and north increasingly challenged the authority of officials and priests, whose problems were of little interest to officials in Spain, which was embroiled in European conflicts and declining as a major power. Spain eventually lost control of its colonies in North America, and Mexico achieved independence and made California a territory in 1821 (Perkins 1957; Rawls and Bean 2011).

2.2.3 Historic Setting
Spanish/Mexican Period
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 19 ends

In the wake of Mexicosindependence from Spain, years of political instability, and several failed attempts to secularize Californias missions, Governor José Figueroa issued a proclamation in 1834, defining the terms of the secularization process that would be instituted over the next two years. Provisions for ensuring that Indians would receive mission lands, however, were of little or no practical benefit to the regions Native Americans. Mission lands were distributed mainly to officials and retired soldiers.

Approximately 500 private land grants were made under Mexican rule. Governors Juan Batista Alvarado, Manuel Micheltorena, and Pío Pico made most of these grants after secularization (Rawls and Bean 2011).

In 1834, Lieutenant Antonio del Valle was given control of Mission San Fernando. Members of del Valles family may have made private use of Rancho San Francisco lands as early as 1824. Del Valle had a map of the rancho produced in 1837, and in 1839, he successfully petitioned Governor Alvarado to grant him the 48,612 acre rancho, which gave him control of its former Mission San Fernando asistencia. Under del Valle, the rancho produced cattle and wheat. In 1841, after Don del Valle died, the land was divided among his children and his widow, who subsequently married Don José Salazar. In 1842, one of del Valles sons, Ygnacio del Valle, established the 1,800 acre Rancho Camulos west of the project alignment (Perkins 1957; Triem and Stone 1996).

Predating the discovery of gold in the Sierra Nevada foothills, which inaugurated the California Gold Rush of 1848, Francisco López first discovered commercially viable quantities of gold in California in 1842, in an area east of the project alignment. While foraging wild onions in Placerita Canyon, east of Newhall, López noticed and gathered several gold nuggets. News of the discovery lured prospectors from Sonora, Mexico, and by the end of 1842, Abel Stearns had sent the first gold extracted from Placerita Canyon mines to the United States Mint in Philadelphia. Over the next several years, Lópezs gold discovery would attract more miners to the upper Santa Clara River region (Kyle et al. 2002; Perkins 1957).

At the conclusion of the Mexican American War in 1848, California was ceded to the United States and granted statehood in 1850. In theory, the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican American War, protected the property rights of Californias Hispanic or Californio population and their prior claims to land. In practice, however, the legal process for vetting land claims set in motion by the Land Commission, established in 1851, combined with the mounting debts of many rancho owners, allowed American and other newcomers to take possession of the abundant rancho lands that had been granted initially to Californios under Mexican rule (Perkins 1957; Rawls and Bean 2011; Guinn 1915).

After 1850, transportation developments like the Southern Pacific Railroad transformed the Santa Clara River Valley from an isolated backwater to a major Southern California travel corridor. In 1854, Fort Tejon was established in the highlands northwest of the project area. The fort functioned as a center of military and political power between Visalia and Los Angeles. Its soldiers accompanied travelers to Salt Lake City and also policed the region, which was marked by frequent conflicts among native groups, miners, and Euro American settlers after 1850. During the 1860s, the fort became part of the vast landholdings of the former Superintendent of Indian Affairs for California, Edward F. Beale. In 1858, Butterfield Overland Mail began operations between Los Angeles and Kern County and established stage stations at Fort Tejon and elsewhere. The road between the Santa Clara River Valley and San Fernando Valley was known as the worst portion of the Butterfield route until Beale received a franchise to develop a toll road. In 1862, Beale American Period
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 20 ends

constructed what became known as Beales Cut, a pass through the mountains that vastly improved travel (Kyle et al. 2002; Perkins 1957).

Surveys for a rail line between Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley and through the project vicinity were conducted as early as the 1850s. Southern Pacific engineers expected this line to be more difficult to build than the original transcontinental railroad through the Sierra Nevada. As developed, the Southern Pacific line required the construction of a 7,000 foot long tunnel near Beales Cut, approximately 9 miles southwest of the project area. In 1876, 1,500 Chinese immigrant laborers worked around the clock to complete the tunnel, the total cost of which surpassed $2 million. The railroad line between Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley was completed in 1877, and in 1886, the Southern Pacific began constructing a branch line from Soledad Canyon to Ventura. Stops on the line included Castaic, Del Valle, and Camulos.

Helen Hunt Jacksons novel, Ramona; Southern Pacific promotional efforts; and cooperation from the del Valle family helped make Rancho Camulos one of the most frequented railroad tourist destinations in Southern California (Guinn 1915; Perkins 1957; Triem and Stone 1996). In addition to tourism, economic activity in the project vicinity included agriculture and mining. At one time, a mining camp was located at the west end of Soledad Canyon.

The town of Newhall took shape after the completion of the Southern Pacific line between the San Joaquin Valley and San Fernando Valley when H. M. Newhallwho had earlier acquired much of Rancho San Franciscoconvinced residents to relocate the townsite approximately 3 miles south to another area along the Southern Pacific line. There, Newhall constructed the Southern Hotel, providing the best accommodations for any stop on the Southern Pacific line between Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley (Perkins 1958a, 1958b).

The most important developments in the project vicinity during the first two decades of the twentieth century involved transportation improvements to accommodate increased automobile travel. During the 1910s, the County of Los Angeles developed the Tejon Castaic Ridge Route between the San Fernando Valley and San Joaquin Valley. Also, in 1910, the County of Los Angeles constructed the Newhall Tunnel to replace Beales Cut. By the early 1920s, the tunnel and the Ridge Route facilitated automobile traffic through the area (Perkins 1958b; Blow 1920).

West of the project area, one of the worst disasters in California history was unleashed during the 1920s.

William Mulholland, who engineered the Los Angeles Department of Water and Powers Los Angeles Aqueduct to deliver water from Owens Valley, thereby enabling Los Angeless rapid urban growth, sought to develop a reservoir to supplement the water supply. In 1926, the department constructed a Mulholland designed dam and reservoir at San Francisquito Canyon on geological foundations that proved catastrophically faulty. In 1928, the dam failed and released a torrent of water that ripped through the Santa Clara River Valley and killed more than 400 people on its path to the Ventura shoreline. The disaster ended Mulhollands career and focused future water planning on the Colorado River (Starr 1990).

By the late 1920s, increased traffic on the Golden State Highway (US 99) between the San Joaquin Valley and San Fernando Valley prompted the State Highway Commission to direct the Department of Public Works to begin a series of highway improvements. The first such improvement was the construction of a new highway segment between Castaic and Gorman. The Department of Public Works also eliminated Newhall Tunnel, which had become a severe bottleneck, and replaced it with an open cut that was Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 21 ends

between 130 and 185 feet deep. A new bridge was also constructed to replace the one washed out in 1928 by the dam failure at San Francisquito Canyon. The highway improvements eliminated numerous dangerous curves and the Newhall Tunnel bottleneck and shortened the route between the San Joaquin Valley and San Fernando Valley by 14 miles (California Highways and Public Works 1930; E. E. Wallace 1930).

Beginning in the 1920s, the small valley known as Val Verde, which is approximately 13 miles west of the project area, became an important site for the Los Angeles area Black community. At that time, racial discrimination kept Black Angelinos from using public beaches and swimming pools and competing for most higher wage jobs. In the mid 1920s, Black professionals, led by newspaper publisher Charlotta Bass and insurance businessman Norman O. Houston, organized a so called Black Palm Springs at the Eureka Tract in Val Verde. There, Black professionals purchased land and built summer vacation homes, while many restaurants and inns began serving Black vacationers. In 1939, the County of Los Angeles donated land to develop Val Verde Park, including a clubhouse and swimming pool. The park became an important site of Black community gatherings. Until the civil rights movement secured access to previously segregated leisure and residential spaces, Val Verde provided a space for Black Angelinos to enjoy rural living and leisure without the threat of racial conflict (Worden 1996).

During the early 1960s, a new phase of transportation improvements occurred near the project area. The State of California adopted the segment of State Route 126 from the Los Angeles/Ventura county line east to the Golden State Freeway. A new interchange connecting State Route 126 to the Golden State Freeway (US 99) at Castaic Junction was constructed in 19641965. This effort was part of converting the Golden State Freeway between the San Joaquin Valley and San Fernando Valley into the eight lane Interstate 5 (Telford 1963, 1964).

With plans to develop the town of Valencia and in hopes of luring visitors to the area, the Newhall Land and Farming Company partnered with Sea World to develop an amusement park on a 70 acre site.

Construction on the park began in 1969. On May 29, 1971, Magic Mountain opened to the public, with attractions that included the Gold Rush roller coaster, El Bumpo bumper boat ride, Log Jammer flume ride, Sky Tower, and double armed ferris wheel. Entertainers such as Barbara Streisand, Bill Cosby, Jimmy Durante, Phyllis Diller, Pat Boone, the Carpenters, Connie Stevens, Mac Davis, and Sonny & Cher performed at the parks 7 UP/Dixi Cola Showcase Theater. Millions of people have visited Magic Mountain since its initial development in the early 1970s (Worden 2012).

In the 1970s, numerous residential tracts were developed west of the project area. Valencia, Newhall, and Santa Clarita became commuter suburbs dominated by single family housing. Suburban tract housing development in these communities, as well as others on the outskirts of the San Fernando Valley in western Los Angeles County and eastern Ventura County, depended on increased water supplies from the State Water Project, which was constructed to convey Northern California water from the Feather River to Southern California via the California Aqueduct. State Water Project water would be pumped up the Tehachapi Mountains, at which point the California Aqueduct would split into east and west branches.

There, the state constructed a dam and created Castaic Lake. The first water conveyed through the California Aqueduct reached the new Castaic Lake reservoir in April 1972 (Schwarz 1991).

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 22 ends

Haskell Canyon was most likely an important place for Native American populations prior to Spanish contact. Still, little information was available about the canyon until the late 1800s when the canyon was homesteaded by the Haskell family for their cattle ranch. John C. Haskell, a pioneer of 1849, played a significant role in the history of Californias cattle ranching. He and his family settled in Haskell Canyon and established the Haskell Ranch in 1890. Over time, he expanded the cattle ranch to cover more than 800 acres. Haskell Canyon was not only home to cattle ranching but also hog ranching. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) General Land Office (GLO) records indicate that land patents were granted to John Haskell in Sections 1 and 25 of Township 5N and Range 16W, which are both north and south edges of the proposed project area.

In 1919, James T. Agajanian, an Armenian immigrant, ventured into the garbage collection and hog raising business in Saugus, California. The Agajanian familys ranch was situated in Haskell Canyon. The pig pens were located in and east of todays Haskell Canyon Wash near the junction of Haskell Canyon Road and Agajanian Lane, south of the proposed project area. However, this was just one of several hog farms that dotted the canyon. During the 1930s1950s, these hog farms served as waste recycling centers. Food waste from restaurants and homes was trucked to these farms, allowed to ferment for a couple of years, and then fed to the hogs.

One hog farm was located at the entrance of the proposed project area and has been recorded as a historic period archaeological site. Previous research indicated that this particular farm was likely to have been owned by Ben Kazarian, who, in January 1950, was granted a permit by Los Angeles County to establish a hog ranch on 320 acres in Haskell Canyon. In 1965, Kazarian applied for a renewal to the permit to operate the hog ranch, located approximately three miles north of the junction of Bouquet Canyon and Haskell Canyon, which would place it in the vicinity of the project area (Valley News 1965, Messick and Hale 2005).

Michael Baker International staff conducted a records search of the California Historical Resource Information System at the SCCIC at California State University, Fullerton on December 6, 2023. The records search covered a half mile radius around the project area and included archaeological and historical resources, locations and citations for previous cultural resources studies, and a review of the state OHP historic properties directory. The records search summary and map are included as Appendix A (Confidential appendices, bound separately).

The records search results identified nine previous cultural resource studies completed within the records search limits, two of which intersect the proposed project area: LA 10205 Archaeological Investigation for Haskell Canyon and the Project Area

3.0 RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS AND ARCHIVAL RESEARCH

3.1 SCCIC RECORDS SEARCH

3.1.1 Previous Studies
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 23 ends

Meadow Peak Project, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 47760 with Final Report and LA 10210 Cultural Resources Survey Report for Antelope Pardee 500 kV Transmission Project (Table 1).

TABLE 1. PREVIOUS STUDIES WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THE PROJECT AREA The SCCIC records search results indicated that six previously recorded cultural resources have been identified and recorded within the half mile radius of the project area, one of which, CA LAN 3132H, a historic period site consisting of two structure pad foundations, intersects the project study area. All of the resources identified within the search area were historic aged resources. No prehistoric aged sites were identified.

Report No. Report Title Author, Date (LA-00000)
LA-01141 An Evaluation of the Potential Impacts to Cultural Resources Located on Wlodarski, Portions of Tentative Parcel Map 14813 Bouquet Canyon, Los Angeles, Ca Robert J., 1982
LA-02447 Cultural Resources Archaeological Survey Seco Canyon Development IV Tartaglia, Project Tentative Tracts: 47447. 37539 and 46908 Louis J., 1991 LA-04104 Cultural Resource Evaluation of the LADWP Power Plant 1--olive Line 1 Macko, Transmission Line Maintenance Project Los Angeles County, California MichaelE., 1993
LA-08893 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit Results for Royal Street Bonner, Communications, LLC Candidate LA2256A (Carmenita).11703 Carmenita Drive, WayneH., Whittier, Los Angeles County, CA 2007
LA-09764 Supplemental Archaeological Assessment, Antelope to Pardee Segment 1 (Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project), Variance 5, Los Angeles County, Gust, Sherri, California 2008
LA-09920 Results of the Class 111 Cultural Resources Investigation for the Southern Schmidt.

California Edison Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project (TRTP) Segment James J., June 1, Angeles National Forest and Adjacent Lands, Los Angeles County, California, A.Schmidt, ARR No. 05-01-01079 and Gwen R.

Romani,
2008
LA-10205 Archaeological Investigation for Meadow Peak Project. Vesting Tentative Messick.

Tract Map 47760 with Final Report Peter,2003
LA-10210 Cultural Resources Survey Report for Antelope-Pardee 500-kV Transmission Ahmet, Koral Project and RogerD.

Mason,2006
LA-10559 Archaeological Impact Analysis: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 43589, 7.S Acres Schmidt. in Bouquet Canyon Area, Los Angeles County James J.,
2000
Source: South Central Coastal Information Center

3.1.2 Previously Recorded Resources
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 24 ends

TABLE 2. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED RESOURCES WITHIN A HALF MILE OF THE PROJECT AREA The California NAHC maintains a confidential Sacred Lands File, which contains sites of traditional, cultural, or religious value to the Native American community. Michael Baker International contacted the NAHC on March 1, 2024, for a records search and list of Native American contacts for the project area.

The NAHC indicated in a response dated March 18, 2024, that the search of the Sacred Lands File was completed for the project area with negative results. They also provided a contact list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project area. Michael Baker International did not send out notification letters regarding the project. The City is conducting direct consultation with the tribes pursuant to Assembly Bill 52. Correspondence with the NAHC and the list of tribal contacts are provided in Appendix B.

Michael Baker International consulted historic topographic maps, aerial imagery (NETR Online and UCSB), and BLM GLO records to gather additional information regarding past land use and disturbances and the potential presence of historic period structures within the project area. Below is a list of sources reviewed:

Resource Trinomial
Number (CA-LAN-#) Description Date , Recorder
(P-19-#)
002132 2132H High voltage electric transmission lines, 1992, Cole, McDowell, Shelton; supported on four legs, rocket ship shaped 1993. M. Macko; carrying two 3-line circuits, constructed in 1917 2004, Whitley; 2007, Koji Tsunoda, Jones and
Stokes;
2010, J.M. Simon
003131 3131H The site consists of a mid-20th century 2003, Peter Messick; historic refuse dump, a refuse scatter, a 2013, M. Vader and V. Ortiz corral, vegetation growing in linear patterns, a
fence line, possible livestock pens, a concrete
foundation, a wood platform, a house
foundation, and a leveled trailer pad
003132 3132H Concrete floor/foundation, mound, and 2003, Peter Messick scattered refuse
004420 4420H River cobble stacked dry rock wall 2013, M. Vader and V. Ortiz 186912 Approximately, seven-mile-long dirt road 2001, D. W. Vance; 2007, Peebles, David 5. and
Joanna Huckabee
188492 Angeles National Forest maintained dirt road
I Source: South Central Coastal Information Center

3.2 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION SACRED LANDS FILE SEARCH

3.3 HISTORICAL MAPS, AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS, AND ARCHIVES RESEARCH Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 25 ends

Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD)
Historicaerials.com
BLM GLO records
Township 5 North Range 15 West, San Bernardino Meridian Plat map (BLM 1880a) Township 5 North Range 16 West, San Bernardino Meridian Plat map (BLM 1880b) Fernando, Calif. 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1900a) San Fernando, Calif. 1:250,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1900b) Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1903) Saugus, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1929) Saugus, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1933) San Fernando, Calif. 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1940) Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1941) Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1943) San Fernando, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1945) Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1952) Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1960) Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1995a) Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 1995b) Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 2012a) Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle (USGS 2012b) Aerial photograph: Flight C 300, Frame 207 (UCSB 1928)
Aerial photograph: Flight C 1001, Frame 280 (UCSB 1930) Aerial photograph: Flight AJX 1940, Frame 18 (UCSB 1940) Aerial photograph: Flight TG 2445, Frame 9 (UCSB 1968)
Aerial photograph: Flight TG 7600, Frame 4 (UCSB 1976)
The earliest USGS mapsFernando 1900, San Fernando 1900, and Santa Susana 1903show the project area as undeveloped. Haskell Canyon is to the west, and Deadman Canyon is to the east, both flanking the project area. Haskell Canyon has a series of dirt roads, while Deadman Canyon has a mapped roadway that connects to Dry Canyon to the southeast. For a wider area context, the project area is situated along the eastern edge of the Pine Mountain and Zaca Lake Forrest Reserve (USGS 1903).

The Santa Clara River lies to the south with the Southern Pacific Railroad line adjacent to its natural course.

The San Gabriel Mountains are south of the project's footprint, and the project area sits in between the north and south portions of the Angeles National Forest (USGS 1900a, 1900b, 1903).

The 1929 Saugus topographic map depicts a power transmission line running north to south through the whole sheet. Along the western margin, a segment of the line intersects the entrance to the project area.

Bouquet Canyon Road is depicted as a dirt roadway to the southeast (USGS 1929, 1933).

In 1933, two structures were mapped outside the project area to the west and northwest, likely related to the area's cattle and hog ranching. The building directly west of the project area had a road leading to it; however, the area remained undeveloped (USGS 1933, 1940, 1941, 1943, 1945). •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

3.3.1 Results
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 26 ends

The 1952 Newhall map reveals two structures within the project area, most likely associated with ranching activity (USGS 1952). These two structures correspond to the site boundary for CA LAN 3132H and the historical structure foundations recorded there. These structures are also visible in aerial imagery from 1940, in the approximate location of those shown on the 1952 Newhall topo map (UCSB 1940). The structures do not appear on the 1928 and 1930 aerials of the region (UCSB 1928, 1930). A third structure is visible on a 1947 aerial of the same area, and some additional smaller structures are visible in the area on the 1959 aerial (HistoricAerials.com n.d.). By 1969, the structures appear to have been demolished (HistoricAerials.com n.d.). Figure 4 shows the progression of development and abandonment of the structures once present in the location of CA LAN 3132H. Archival research has not yielded information on who these structures belonged to, but it is possible they were associated with Ben Kazarian, who ran the pig farm in Haskell Canyon. However, the only land patent available on the BLM GLO records for this particular location was granted to John G. Cox in 1915 (BLM 1915; see Appendix D).

A 1952 aerial shows several structures just north of the entrance to the current project area that were likely associated with pig ranching in the area and the site of CA LAN 3131H. The 1959 aerial shows an expansion of the pig ranching facility. In the 1969 aerial, it appears that by that time, the pig ranch had been abandoned. In the same 1969 aerial, a mining operation is also visible along Blue Cloud Road within the project area. The remnants of that operation are visible in aerial imagery up to the present day.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 27 ends

Legend
~ I 1 1 I Blue Cloud Project Area
i c::::J Previously Recorded Sites

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK PROJECT

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CA
Michael Baker o O 50 100 Structures once located within the project area INTERNATIONAL 1--------------M_ e_t_e_rs ___________ a_n_d_a_s_so_c_i_a_te_d_w_ith_ s_ite_ C_A_-_L_A_N_-_3_13_2_H_.

Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Newhall and Mini Ca11yon, California Figure 4 Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 28 ends

Michael Baker International archaeologists Marcel Young, BA, and Epifanio Figueroa, BA, conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of the project area on February 1214, 2024. During the pedestrian survey, the study area was walked in transects spaced approximately 10 meters apart where possible. Slopes greater than 30 degrees were visually assessed but were not surveyed. A slope analysis of the project area was conducted to identify those areas with slopes of 30 degrees or more and loaded into Esris Field Maps app used by the archaeologists. They also revisited the previously recorded site of CA LAN 3132H that intersects the proposed project area.

Visibility throughout the project area is very poor in most areas, except the existing trails, due to vegetation cover (Figure 5). Vegetation observed consists of non native grass, dove weed, coastal live oak trees, coastal sage scrub brush, white sage, buckwheat, yucca, brittlebrush, Maltese star thistle and seasonal wildflowers. The landform of the project area consists of rolling hills and their associated valleys where slopes range from gentle (2% 7%) up to severe (20% 45%). Along the mid west area, there is a large, shallow, semi flat valley that trends east to west upward at 5%; this is then flanked north and south by hills, with the north margin being at higher elevations. The survey area has a dirt road accessed from the west, which leads to Copper Hill Drive, a main paved road about 1 mile south. Another access point on the east side of the project's footprint is from a main roadway, Bouquet Canyon Road, and Blue Cloud Road, which remains a dirt accessway leading to a locked gate.

4.0 METHODS

4.1 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
s SW VI' NW N 180 210 240 27 300 330 0
I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • 0 272°W (T) (ii 11N3618143815791 ±9ft A 1562ft
FIGURE S. OVERVIEW OF THE SOUTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE SURVEY AREA SHOWING DENSE LOW-LYING VEGETATION.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 29 ends

The survey area has many inaccessible areas due to vegetative growth and severe slopes, many greater than 30 percent. The strategy of the survey utilized existing pathways and easily accessible ridgelines within the project to inspect the whole project area with photo documentation using the Solocator application on an iPhone. Esris Field Maps and Google Earth were also consulted for navigation and deciding the best access routes for the differing sections of the survey. Several disturbances were noted throughout the project area. Most consistently evident about this landform is that it is highly used by the public, being within a natural space corridor. It has dirt bike trails, pedestrian walking trails, and dirt roads.

Other prominent features are several dirt ramps upon finger ridges along many of the trails. There is a fragmented, moderately dispersed modern glass scatter along the mid west area of the project area. The project area is relatively free of modern refuse beyond this glass scatter. Candy wrappers and modern aluminum cans were sparsely encountered, for example.

During the pedestrian survey, archaeologists Marcel Young and Epifanio Figueroa identified one newly recorded mid twentieth century mining site, given the temporary designation of BlueCloud MBI 01H.

They also revisited CA LAN 3132H, a mid twentieth century site comprising two structure pad foundations. A set of updated DPR 523 series forms were completed for CA LAN 3132H and a new set of forms were completed for temporary site number BlueCloud MBI 01H; both are available in Confidential Appendix C. Below are descriptions of the sites identified and revisited.

Peter Messick of Greenwood and Associates recorded CA LAN 3132H in 2003 as consisting of two concrete foundation pads and associated domestic debris (Messick and Hale 2005). The pad measured 13 feet north south by 15 feet and 8 inches east west and was approximately 9 inches thick. Several bricks were identified on the surface around the concrete pad with makers marks reading McClintock. Another smaller concrete floor was noted 7 feet east of the larger concrete pad and measured 8 feet north south by 5 feet east west. Two rusted pipes (7/8 inches diameter) were sticking up 3 feet from the pad. A rusted drum barrel with bullet holes was identified 12 feet east of the smaller pad. A 32 inch square rusted metal shower stall floor was also identified west of the larger concrete pad. An earthen mound approximately 75 feet in diameter with half buried fence posts around it was also identified 130 feet south of the two concrete pads. Other items identified included a refrigerator, oven, corrugated tin roofing, and a small metal trash can.

During the current survey, the only remnants of this historic site visible were the smaller of the two concrete pads with the rusted vertical pipes sticking up from it (Figure 6) and a single brick fragment similar to those described by Messick with the word McClintock stamped on the surface (Figure 7). A search for McClintock stamped bricks did not reveal any information on where the bricks may have been made. None of the other features identified in the previous site record were located again, possibly due to dense vegetation or possibly due to cleanup efforts along the existing bike trails. s.o PEDESTRIAN SURVEY RESULTS
CA-LAN-3132H
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 30 ends

NE E I SE s 30 60 90 20 150 180 210
• I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I 0 118°SE (T) (iJ 11N3620583816010 ±13ft & 1546ft
FIGURE 6. SMALL ~SX 8 METER CONCRETE PAD ASSOCIATED WITH CA-LAN-3132H.

E SE I s 90 120 50 180 210
I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • 0 148°SE (T) @ 11N3620693816007 ±9ft & 1533ft
FIGURE 7. BRICK FRAGMENT WITH "MCCLINTOCK" ST AMPED ON THE SURFACE IN SITE (A-LAN-3132H.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 31 ends

The remnants of one mid twentieth century mining site visible in aerials since 1969 were identified during the survey. The site is in the eastern area of the project area along Blue Cloud Road. The mine consists of a terraced area and has several components (Figure 8), including a wash plant that stands ~70 feet high (Figure 9), a Trailmobile dry semi trailer (Figure 10), a stone hopper with pulverizer, two rubble piles with associated abandoned equipment, a water tank situated for mining operations (Figure 11), a five course brick retaining wall, a water standpipe with a meter, two concrete pads where structures or equipment may have been, an 1800s wooden carriage donned with a metal water tank, a tractor, a truck, and other refuse (Figure 12). Two utility poles were also identified, one cut and one next to the wash plant with breaker box panels. There are at least two quarry areas associated with mining operations, one in the panhandle area of the project and the other along the northern middle section.

The mining site was known as the Blue Cloud Chinchilla Dust Mine and was operated by the Blue Cloud Mineral Co., founded by Walter and Betty Harris as early as 1953. A mining claim was filed in 1966 by Walter and Betty Harris to the BLM for three mining claims in the current project area that intersects Township 5 North, Range 15 West, Section 31. These mining locations are identified on the claim as Blue Cloud West, Blue Cloud Center, and Blue Cloud East (BLM 1966; see Appendix D). The area granted was 116.72 acres. The mine's purpose was to retrieve volcanic tuff that was ground up and used as dry bath powder for pet chinchillas (SCVHistory.com n.d.). After processing at the Blue Cloud Mineral Co.s mill on Bouquet Canyon Road, the chinchilla dust was packaged by Lixit Corp. in Napa, California (SCVHistory.com n.d.). The Harrisess son, Norman Harris, took over the operation and was the owner of the mining company until his death in 2013. Dr. Harris was a prominent figure in the Newhall area, was a founding/charter member of the Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society in 1975, and served as its president and on its board of directors for many years. The mine was closed in 2016 (SCVHistory.com 2013).

BLUECLOUD-MBI-OlH
N NE I E SE 330 0 30 60 90 120 15
• I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I 0 57°NE (T) @ 11 N 362461 3815911 ±13ft • 1740ft
FIGURE 8. OVERVIEW OF BLUE CLOUD DUST MINE (BLUE(LOUD-MBI-OlH).

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 32 ends

N NE I E SE
330 0 30 60 90 120 1
I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • I • 0 54°NE (T) (j) 11N3625403815936 ±13ft A 1641ft
FIGURE 9. MINING WASH PLANT ASSOCIATED WITH BLUE CLOUD DUST MINE SITE.

FIGURE 10. TRAILMOBILE TRAILER ASSOCIATED WITH BLUE CLOUD DUST MINE SITE.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 33 ends

Archaeological sensitivity zones are qualitative and based on the general presence and/or absence of Native American occupation sites, isolated prehistoric Native American artifacts and burials, and historic FIGURE 11 . WATER STORAGE TANK.

FIGURE 12. BLUE (LOUD MINE REFUSE AND EQUIPMENT INCLUDING WATER TRAILER, TRACTOR, AND TRUCK.

5.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 34 ends

archival and archaeological materials exposed during various construction projects. The project area is 3 miles north of the Santa Clara River, which would have provided an important resource procurement locale for prehistoric inhabitants of the area. The project area is composed of Castaic Balcom silty clay loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (CmF2); Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (ScF2); Sorrento loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (SsB); and Yolo loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes (YoC). The majority of the project area is steeply sloped; generally, slopes of greater than 30 degrees have low potential for buried archaeological sites (MnDOT 2002).

Topographic maps, aerial photographs, and archival records have indicated that historic period homesteads and mining operations were established within or near the project area during the early to mid twentieth century. One historic period archaeological site (CA LAN 3132H), comprising two structure pads, and one historic period mining site (temporary site number: BlueCloud MBI 01H) have been identified within the project area, but they do not appear to have the potential to be significant resources.

Based on the archival research, soils, available resources, and pedestrian survey results, the archaeological sensitivity for potentially unknown prehistoric archaeological sites within the area of potential effect is low, and the potential for significant buried historic period resources is also considered low.

The cultural resources located within the study area include one previously recorded historic period domestic site (CA LAN 3132H) comprising concrete structure pads and domestic debris and one newly recorded historic mining site (BlueCloud MBI 01H) consisting of the remnants of the Blue Cloud Dust Mine that operated from around 1952 until 2016. Remnants of the mining site include a wash plant, water tanks, trailers, machinery, vehicles, and concrete structure pads. Potential project effects on the cultural resources and their eligibility recommendations are discussed below.

Site CA LAN 3132H was previously recorded as consisting of two concrete foundations and associated domestic debris and building materials. During the current survey, just one of the concrete pads and one brick was visible. The site is evaluated against the criteria for listing in the California Register below.

Criterion 1 While the structures once located within the boundaries of CA LAN 3132H and visible on historic aerials of the area may have played a role in the development of cattle or pig ranching in the early twentieth century in the Santa Clarita region, the foundation remnants cannot be positively associated with the Haskell, Agajanian, or Kazarian families discussed in Section Historic Setting and who were associated with ranching in the area. Research has not revealed any significant events in national, state, regional, or local history associated with the site. The site is recommended as not eligible for listing under Criterion A.

Criterion 2: Archival research indicates that the site location was part of a homestead land grant issued to John G. Cox in 1915; however, the features identified as part of the site post date it and cannot be directly related to him. No additional records of land ownership were identified during archival research, and the site cannot be directly tied to a specific individual, family, or group. Moreover, the background

6.o EVALUATION RECOMMENDATIONS
CA-LAN-3132H
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 35 ends

research failed to identify any persons who are particularly notable or important to national, state, or local history who are associated with the homesteads in the general vicinity. Therefore, the site is recommended as ineligible for listing under Criterion B.

Criterion 3: The site and its currently identified component features consist of a concrete pad and a single brick fragment which are common and ubiquitous domestic remnants. The site does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, nor does it represent the work of a master or possess high artistic values. Thus, the resource is recommended as ineligible under Criterion C.

Criterion 4: The information and documentation presented in this report and the associated DPR 523 series form exhaust the site's data potential. The concrete pad and brick appear to be limited to the surface with no additional associated artifacts, and the available archival information does not indicate that the site possesses any further potential to yield information important to the community, state, or nation's prehistory or history. Therefore, the resource is recommended as ineligible under Criterion D.

Additionally, much of the material originally recorded at the site in 2003 is no longer visible or present and thus lacks integrity. CA LAN 3231H is recommended ineligible for listing in the California Register and is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a) or a unique archaeological resource as defined by PRC Section 21083.2(g).

Site BlueCloud MBI 01H was recorded during the current study as the ruins of a mining site once owned and operated by the Harris family. Archival research identified that Walter and Betty Harris applied for a mining claim for the area in 1966 (BLM 1966). The site is evaluated against the criteria for listing in the California Register below.

Criterion A: While the Blue Cloud Dust Mine and the remaining machinery and mining locations may have contributed to the local economy in the Santa Clarita region in the second half of the twentieth century, research has not revealed any significant events associated with the mine that are important to national, state, regional, or local history. Therefore, the site is recommended as not eligible for listing under Criterion A.

Criterion B: Archival research indicates that the site was owned and operated by Norman Harris, son of Walter and Betty Harris. While Dr. Harris was a valued member of the Newhall and Santa Clarita community, being a founding member of the Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society, the Blue Cloud Dust Mine is not considered to be what Dr. Harris is most known for, nor is his association with the site particularly notable or important to national, state, or local history. Therefore, the site is recommended as ineligible for listing under Criterion B.

Criterion C: The site and its currently identified component features consist of a wash plant that stands, a Trailmobile dry semi trailer, two rubble piles with associated abandoned equipment, a water tank situated for mining operations, a five course brick retaining wall, a water standpipe with a meter, two concrete pads where structures or equipment may have been, an 1800s wooden carriage donned with a metal water tank, a tractor, a truck, and other refuse. The site does not embody the distinctive characteristics BLUECLOUD-MBI-OlH
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 36 ends

of a type, period, region, or method of construction, nor does it represent the work of a master or possess high artistic values. Thus, the resource is recommended as ineligible under Criterion C.

Criterion D: The information and documentation presented in this report and the associated DPR 523 series form exhaust the site's data potential. The visible ruins of the Blue Cloud Dust Mine site and the available archival information about it do not indicate that the site possesses any further potential to yield information important to the community, state, or nation's prehistory or history. Therefore, the resource is recommended as ineligible under Criterion D.

The site is thus recommended ineligible for listing in the California Register and is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA Section 15064.5(a) or a unique archaeological resource as defined by PRC Section 21083.2(g).

In summary, both sites identified during this investigation within the study area do not meet the criteria for listing in the California Register, and thus are not considered historical resources.

The SCCIC records search, literature review, archival research, and archaeological field survey identified two historic period archaeological sites within the project area: CA LAN 3132H and BlueCloud MBI 01H.

Both sites have been evaluated and are recommended ineligible for inclusion in the California Register.

No historical resources were identified within the project area. Buried site sensitivity is considered low based on the archival research, soils, available resources, and pedestrian survey results. The proposed project is thus considered to have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated under CEQA.

Impacts to unanticipated cultural resources may be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level by implementing the following mitigation measures:

CUL 1: Cultural Resources Monitoring
Archaeological monitoring shall occur in the project area during all soil disturbing and grubbing/grading/excavation/trenching activities, which could impact archaeological resources. The monitor will observe construction activities to determine if cultural resources are present below the surface. The Principal Investigator (PI) will submit a request to the City during construction, requesting a modification to the monitoring program when field conditions occur that could reduce or increase the potential for resources to be present. Such field conditions may include modern disturbance post dating the previous grading/trenching activities, presence of fossil formations, or when native soils are encountered. Ground disturbing activities include, but are not limited to, geotechnical boring, trenching, grading, excavating, and the demolition of building foundations. Monitoring shall be conducted by an archaeological monitor who is working under the guidance of a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (48 Federal Register 44738). The archaeological monitor shall observe ground disturbing activities in all areas with the potential to contain significant cultural deposits. The archaeological monitor shall maintain and submit monitoring logs at the conclusion of monitoring. If discoveries are made during ground disturbing activities, additional work may be required in accordance with the terms specified in the cultural resources monitoring and discovery plan.

7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 37 ends

At the completion of grading, excavation, and ground disturbing activities on the site, a monitoring report shall be submitted to the City that documents monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist within 60 days of completion of monitoring. This report shall document the daily archaeological monitoring results; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the qualified archaeologist. Final monitoring reports will be submitted to the City and the South Central Coastal Information Center. If a federal agency (e.g., the US Army Corps of Engineers) is involved in the project due to a federal nexus, monitoring reports may also be shared with that agency. Any unanticipated archaeological finds and subsequent evaluation or data recovery efforts will be documented in the report.

CUL 2: Evaluation of Unanticipated Finds; Phase II Testing In the event an archaeological resource is unearthed during excavation, all excavations shall be halted within 50 feet of the find. Work shall stop immediately, and the discovery shall be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology (48 Federal Register 44738), pursuant to the procedures set forth at CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60.4. Depending on the nature of the find, the determination of significance may require additional excavation, potentially including the preparation and execution of a Phase II archaeological testing plan. As the lead agency, the City shall make a determination of significance on the basis of the recommendations of the qualified archaeologist.

If the resource is determined not to be significant, then resource specific work shall be completed, and construction may proceed. If the resource is determined to be significant and avoidance is not feasible, then a resource specific archaeological resources treatment plan shall be prepared and executed in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL 3 prior to recommencing ground disturbing activities that may impact the resource.

CUL 3: Treatment of Significant Resources
Avoidance and preservation in place are the preferred treatment for historical resources, but avoidance is not always feasible. In the event that a historical resource is discovered and disturbance to such a resource cannot be avoided, one of the following treatments shall be implemented: avoidance, site capping, creation of conservation easements, or archaeological data recovery.

If avoidance, site capping, or creation of a conservation easement is determined infeasible, then a Phase III data recovery excavation will be required, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and Section 106 36 Code of Federal Regulations 800.13, to document the resources scientifically consequential information. The Phase III data recovery plan shall be prepared in consultation with the consulting tribe(s) if the discovery is associated with a precontact or ethnohistoric context. The Phase III study shall consist of the recovery and analysis of a statistically significant sample of the site through archaeological excavation, radiocarbon dating of organic materials or other kinds of dating, cataloging, specialist analysis, and report writing designed to document the resource in perpetuity.

During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location on site or at the offices of the qualified archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 38 ends

project area for cataloging and analysis during evaluation and analysis will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversight of the process if the discovery is associated with a precontact or ethnohistoric context. The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and non human remains, as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City with evidence of final disposition of the cultural material collection:

Accommodate the process for on site reburial of the discovered items with the consulting tribe(s). This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing and basic recordation have been completed.

A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository in Los Angeles County that meets federal standards per 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 79, and therefore will be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility in Los Angeles County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation.

If more than one Native American tribe is involved with the project and the tribes cannot come to a consensus as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at an appropriate qualified repository determined by the City.

CUL 4: Treatment of Unanticipated Finds of Human Remains If human skeletal remains are found during earth moving activities, work shall be suspended and the Los Angeles County Coroners Office shall be notified. Standard guidelines set by California law provide for the treatment of skeletal material of Native American origin (California Public Resources Code, Sections 5097.98 et seq.; Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5). If the remains are found to be archaeological, then after the coroner releases the site, the qualified professional archaeologist, in consultation with the most likely descendant, shall prepare an archaeological treatment plan in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL 3 that also incorporates the guidance in A Professional Guide for the Preservation and Protection of Native American Remains and Associated Grave Goods, published by the California Native American Heritage Commission.

This report was prepared by Michael Baker International Archaeologist James Daniels. Archaeologists Marcel Young and Epifanio Figueroa conducted the field survey and site recordation.

James Daniels, MA, RPA, is a senior archaeologist with cultural resource management experience in California, Nevada, and North Carolina. His experience includes archaeological surveys, evaluations of historic and prehistoric sites for listing in the California and National Registers, site mitigation data recoveries, mitigation monitoring, and preparation of archaeological resource management reports and •
•
•

8.o PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 39 ends

cultural resources technical reports. As senior archaeologist, he supports projects needing compliance with CEQA, National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, Assembly Bill 52, US Army Corps of Engineers 404 permits, and local cultural resource regulations. He assists with environmental impact statements/reports and alternative mitigation measures for clients, including interpretive signage, informative website design, brochures, and ethnographic studies. He also assists in Native American consultation and coordination of Native American monitoring. James provides advanced technical services for clients, including geophysical surveys with ground penetrating radar, obsidian and ceramic sourcing using portable X ray fluorescence, photogrammetry, and GIS predictive modeling and data collection using Esri Field Maps. James meets the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology and historic preservation.

Marcel Young, BA, has worked in various capacities in cultural resource management since 2013. He is experienced in surveying and conducting recording and evaluations of historic and prehistoric archaeological sites in California. Marcel is versed in conducting fieldwork within frameworks of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, CEQA, and the National Environmental Policy Act. He has participated in projects in several phases of archaeology: Phase I pedestrian, Extended Phase I testing, shovel test surveys, buried site testing, Phase III data recovery, and monitoring.

Epifanio Figueroa, BA, has worked in various capacities in cultural resource management since 2001. He has participated in projects in several phases of archaeology: Phase I pedestrian and shovel test surveys, Phase II buried site testing, Phase III data recovery, and Phase IV monitoring. He completes site identification and recordation, digital survey databases using Survey123, artifact cataloguing, geophysical data, figure development, stratigraphy mapping, and report writing pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and California Environmental Quality Act.

Blow, Ben. 1920. California Highways. San Francisco, California: H. S. Crocker Company.

BLM (Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office). 1880a. Plat Map. Township 5 North, Range 15 West, San Bernardino Meridian. Accessed March 2024.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=286438&sid=datzrwle.svt#surve yDetailsTabIndex=1. . 1880b. Plat Map. Township 5 North, Range 16 West, San Bernardino Meridian. Accessed March 2024.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=286542&sid=fp5smhl2.glt#surve yDetailsTabIndex=1. . 1915. John G. Cox Land Patent. Township 5 North, Range 15 West, San Bernardino Meridian.

Accessed March 2024.
https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/patent/default.aspx?accession=488493&docClass=SER&sid= u4voklf1.of0#patentDetailsTabIndex=1.
g.o REFERENCES
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 40 ends

. 1966. Blue Cloud West Placer Mining Claim. Doc. # 04 66 0297 granted to Walter and Betty Harris.

Accessed March 2024. https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/patent/default.aspx?accession=04 66 0297&docClass=SER&sid=n3xgyc0p.m0x#patentDetailsTabIndex=1. California Highways and Public Works. 1930. "New Location on the Ridge Route Unsurpassed for Mountain Alignment." In California Highways and Public Works, 9 10.

Campbell, R. H., C. J. Willis, P. J. Irvine, and B. J. Swanson. 2016. "Preliminary geologic map of the Los Angeles 30 minute by 60 minute quadrangle, California: Version 2.1." California Geological Survey. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_109250.htm.

CGS (California Geological Society). 2002. "California Geomorphic Provinces Note 36." https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/CGS Notes/CGS Note 36.pdf.

Dibblee, T. W., and H. E. Ehrenspeck. 1996. "Geologic map of the Mint Canyon quadrangle, Los Angeles County California. Scale 1:24,000." Dibblee Geological Foundation. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71700.htm. Fortier, J. 2009. TEA 21 Rural Roadside Inventory: Native American Consultation and Ethnographic Study for Caltrans District 7, Ventura County. Prepared for the California Department of Transportation under contract by Jones & Stokes.

Glassow, Michael A., Lynn H. Gamble, Jennifer E. Perry, and Glenn S. Russell. 2007. Prehistory of the northern California Bight and the adjacent Transverse Ranges. In California Prehistory:
colonization, culture, and complexity, edited by Terry L. Jones and Kathryn A. Klar, 191 213.

Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press.

Grant, Campbell. 1978. "Eastern Coastal Chumash." In Handbook of North American Indians 8: 509 519.

Griffith, Glenn E., James M. Omernik, David W. Smith, Terry D. Cook, Ed Tallyn, Kendra Moseley, and Colleen B. Johnson. 2016. Ecoregions of California. (Reston, VA: U. S. Geological Survey). http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20161021. Guinn, J. M. 1915. A History of California and Extended History of Los Angeles and Environs. Vol. Volume

1. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Record Company.

Historicaerials.com. n.d. Historic and contemporary aerial and topographic views of the APE. Online viewer. Accessed February 2024. https://www.historicaerials.com.

ICF. 2021. Soledad Canyon Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment Report. Los Angeles, California: Prepared for the City of Santa Clarita by ICF.

Kimbro, Edna, Julia Costello, Tewy Ball, and Sarah Peelo. 2010. The California Missions: History, Art, and Preservation. California Archaeology 2 (2): 296 298. https://doi.org/10.1179/cal.2010.2.2.296.

King, T. F. 1967. Test Excavations at MRN_375, the Palo Marin Site in Point Reyes National Seashore. In R. E. Schenk Memorial Archives of California Archaeology, 17. Society for California Archaeology, San Francisco, CA.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 41 ends

King, Chester, and Thomas C. Blackburn. 1978. Tataviam. In Handbook of North American Indians 8: 535 537.

Kyle, Douglas E, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Grace Rensch, Mildred Brooke Hoover, and William Abeloe. 2002. Historic spots in California. Stanford University Press.

Meighan, Clement W. 1954. "A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory." Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10: 215 227.

Messick, Peter and Alice Hale. 2005. Archaeological Investigation for Meadow Peek Project, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 47760, Final Report. Prepared for Land Design Consultants by Greenwood and Associates.

MnDOT (Minnesota Department of Transportation). 2002. Mn/Model Final Report Phases 1 3: A Predictive Model of Precontact Archaeological Sites Location for the State of Minnesota. Final Report Phases 1 3, 2002 MnModel MnDOT (state.mn.us)
Moratto, Michael J. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, San Diego, California.

NPS (National Park Service). 1997. "How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation." National Register Bulletin 15.

OHP (California Office of Historic Preservation). 1995. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources.

Sacramento, CA: Office of Historic Preservation. . 2001a. "California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Historical Resources." In Technical Assistance Series No. 1. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation. . 2001b. "California Register of Historical Resources: Q&A for Local Governments." In Technical Assistance Series No. 4. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation. . 2006. "California Register and National Register: A Comparison (for purposes of determining eligibility for the California Register)." In Technical Assistance Series No. 6. Sacramento, CA:

Department of Parks and Recreation.

Parker, Patricia L. and Thomas F. King. 1998. "National Register Bulletin 38: Guidelines for the Evaluation and Documentation of Traditional Cultural Properties." Washington, DC: US National Park Service. Perkins, Arthur B. 1957. "Rancho San Francisco: A Study of a California Land Grant." The Historical Society of Southern California Quarterly 39 (2): 99 126. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166251. . 1958a. "Mining Camps of the Soledad: Part I." The Historical Society of Southern California Quarterly 40 (2): 149 173. https://doi.org/10.2307/41169334. . 1958b. "Mining Camps of the Soledad: Part II." The Historical Society of Southern California Quarterly 40 (3): 285 303. https://doi.org/10.2307/41169354.

Rawls, James, and Walton Bean. 2011. California: An Interpretive History. 10th edition ed. New York City:

McGraw Hill.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 42 ends

Schwarz, Joel. 1991. "A water odyssey: the story of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 1991."
SCVHistory.com. n.d. Blue Cloud Chinchilla Dust Mine: Bouquet Canyon. scvhistory.com. Accessed March 27, 2024. SCVHistory.com LW2981 | Bouquet Canyon | Blue Cloud Chinchilla Dust Mine. . 2013. Norman Howard Harris: Engineer & Historical Society Leader, 1941 2013. Scvhistory.com.

Accessed March 27, 2024. SCVHistory.com | Obits | Norman Howard Harris, Engineer & Historical Society Leader (1941 2013).

Starr, Kevin. 1990. Material Dreams: Southern California through the 1920s. New York City: Oxford University Press.

Telford, Edward T. 1963. "District VII Progress." In California Highways and Public Works, 20 41. . 1964. "District VII Progress: 430 Miles of Freeway Now Open in Los Angeles Region." In California Highways and Public Works, 13 35.

Triem, Judy, and Mitch Stone. 1996. "National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for Rancho Cumulos." Accessed March 6, 2023.
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=be0412e321e58a5971f49b8 f62f54041d1813181. UCSB (University of California, Santa Barbara). 1928. Aerial photograph: Flight C 300, Frame 207.

Electronic document. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. . 1930 Aerial photograph: Flight C 1001A, Frame A 279 Electronic document. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. . 1940 Aerial photograph: FlightAJX 1940, Frame 18 Electronic document. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. . 1968. Aerial photograph: Flight TG 2445, Frame 9. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. . 1976. Aerial photograph: Flight TG 7600, Frame 4. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/ap_indexes/FrameFinder/. US Department of Agriculture. 2023. Custom Soil Resource Report for Antelope Valley Area, California. USGS (United States Geological Survey). 1900a. Fernando, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1900b. San Fernando, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1903. Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1929. Saugus, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1933. Saugus, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
Blue Cloud Bike Park ___________________________________ Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment

Page 43 ends

. 1941. Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1943. Santa Susana, Calif. 1:62,500 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1952. Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1960. Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1995a. Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1995b. Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 2012a. Mint Canyon, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 2012b. Newhall, Calif. 1:24,000 scale topographic quadrangle. . 1940. San Fernando, California. 1:24,000. Electronic resource map. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#. Valley News. 1965. Voice Opposition to Hog Ranch in Haskell Canyon. Access Newspaper Archive.

Wallace, E. E. 1930. "The Golden State Highway." In California Highways and Public Works, 10 12, 28 29.

Wallace, William J. 1955. "A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology." Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11: 214 230.

Warren, Claude N. 1968. "Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast." In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by Cynthia Irwin Williams, 1 14. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 1. Portales.

Waugh, Georgie. 1999. A Study in the Prehistory of the Santa Clara River Valley Archaeological Data Recovery at CA LAN 2233 Los Angeles County, California. Prepared by the California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA.

Worden, Leon. 1996. "Renaissance for "Black Palm Springs." Santa Clara Valley History.com. https://scvhistory.com/scvhistory/signal/worden/lw072496.htm.

Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL

APPENDIX A
Confidential (Bound Separately)
Records Search Summary
and Map

APPENDIX B
Native American Heritage
Commission
correspondence
March 1, 2024
Laura Miranda
California Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd., Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
[email protected]
Re: Cultural Resources Inventory for the Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Santa Clarita, California Dear Chairperson Miranda,
Michael Baker International is conducting a cultural resources inventory for the proposed Blue Cloud Bike Park Project in Santa Clarita, CA. The cultural resources inventory will be conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The proposed project includes the construction of a mountain bike park in the northern portion of the City that would include approximately 15 miles of four to six foot wide trails. These trails would include design elements such as switchbacks, doubles, step ups, flat cornering, boardwalks, rock gardens/obstacles, lumber elements, and creative ditches and water bars.

The project would also include a dirt jump course with wood ramps and two asphalt pump tracks; bike repair stations and bike racks; 104 parking spaces using current grade on the Haskell Canyon Open Space side of the project site and 42 parking spaces on the Blue Cloud Open Space side of the project site; two concrete vault toilets or portable restrooms; dirt road improvements and gates; a shade structure; two 10,000 gallon water tanks; and other passive recreation park improvements such as benches, picnic tables, trash cans, and tree installations.

Michael Baker International conducted a records search with the South Central Coastal Information Center and did not identify any previously recorded precontact archaeological resources within the project area or a half mile radius of the APE. I am writing to request a search of the Sacred Lands File and to inquire if you have registered any cultural resources, traditional cultural properties, or areas of heritage sensitivity within this proposed project area.

We would also like to request a list of Native American tribes that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area or who may wish to be notified of the investigation. Please submit your response to me via e mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,
James T. Daniels, Jr. MA, RPA
Senior Archaeologist
[email protected]
Attachments: 1. 1:24,000 Scale Location Map of Project Area

2. Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Your Requested Information:

County Los Angeles
USGS Quad Newhall and Mint Canyon
Township and Range T05N R15W Sec.
31 and T05N R16W Sec. 36
Michael Baker

INTERNATIONAL
MBAKERINTL.COM
We Make a Difference
SOSO Avenida Encinas, Suite 260 I Carlsbad, CA 92008
Office: 760-476-9193 I Fax: 760-476-9198 I mbakerintl.com Legend
!1 ii Blue Cloud Bike Park Project Area
c::::I USGS 7.5' Quad
Michael Baker 0.25 0.5
Miles
NEWHALL AND MINT CANYON USGS 7.5-MINUTE TOPO QUAm
T 05 N R 15 W, SECTION 31 AND T 05 N R 16 W SECTION 3E

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

SANTA CLARITA, CA
Record Search Map INTERNATIONALI----------------------------------- Source: Esri, ArcGlS Online, Tustin USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Santo Clarita, California Sacred Lands File & Native American Contacts List Request Native American Heritage Commission
1550 Harbor Blvd, Suite 100
West Sacramento, CA 95691
916-373-3710
916-373-5471 - Fax
[email protected]
Information Below is Required for a Sacred Lands File Search Project: Blue Cloud Bike Park Project
Los Angeles County County: ____________________________ _ Newhall and Mint Canyon
USGS Quadrangle Name: ______________________ _
5N 16W 31
Township: ___ _ Range: ___ _ Section(s): ___ _
SN 15W 36
Michael Baker International
Company/Firm/Agency: _______________________ _
5050 Avenida Encinas Suite 260
Street Address: ---------------------------
Carlsbad, CA
City: __________________ _
(760) 603-6251
Phone: -------------------
Fax: --------------------
[email protected] Email: ------------------- Project Description:
92008
Zip: ________ _
The proposed project includes the construction of a mountain bike park in the northern portion of the City that would include approximately 15 miles of four-to six-foot-wide trails. These trails would include design elements such as switchbacks, doubles, step-ups, flat cornering, boardwalks, rock gardens/obstacles, lumber elements, and creative ditches and water bars. The project would also include a dirt jump course with wood ramps and two asphalt pump tracks; bike repair stations and bike racks; 104 parking spaces using current grade on the Haskell Canyon Open Space side of the project site and 42 parking spaces on the Blue Cloud Open Space side of the project site; two concrete vault toilets or portable restrooms; dirt road improvements and gates; a shade structure; two 10,000 gallon water tanks; and other passive recreation park improvements such as benches, picnic tables, trash cans, and tree installations.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 2 ends

March 18, 2024
Jaems T. Daniels
Michael Baker International
Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Native American Tribal Consultation, Pursuant to the Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014), Public Resources Code Sections 5097.94 (m), 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2 and 21084.3, Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Los Angeles County To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (c), attached is a consultation list of tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the above-listed project. Please note that the intent of the AB 52 amendments to CEQA is to avoid and/or Public Resources Code sections 21080.3.1 and 21084.3(c) require CEQA lead agencies to consult with California Native American tribes that have requested notice from such agencies of proposed projects in the geographic area that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribes on projects for which a Notice of Preparation or Notice of Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration has been filed on or after July 1, 2015. Specifically, Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1 (d) provides:

Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section.

The AB 52 amendments to CEQA law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction prior to receiving requests for American Heritage Commission (NAHC) recommends, but does not require, early consultation as a best practice to ensure that lead agencies receive sufficient information about cultural resources in a project area to avoid damaging effects to tribal cultural resources.

The NAHC also recommends, but does not require that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as:

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:

CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Buffy McQuillen
Yokayo Pomo, Yuki,
Nomlaki

SECRETARY
Sara Dutschke
Miwok

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Wayne Nelson
Luiseño

COMMISSIONER
Isaac Bojorquez
Ohlone-Costanoan

COMMISSIONER
Stanley Rodriguez
Kumeyaay

COMMISSIONER
Laurena Bolden
Serrano

COMMISSIONER
Reid Milanovich
Cahuilla

COMMISSIONER
Vacant

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Raymond C.

Hitchcock
Miwok, Nisenan

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov
mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources, (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)) ("Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resource.") notification of projects in the tribe's areas of traditional and cultural affiliation. The Native

Page 2 of 2 ends

A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites;
Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response; Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate, or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and
If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:

Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code section 6254.10.

3. The result of any Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission was negative.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE.

Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a tribal cultural resource. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our consultation list remains current.

If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address: [email protected]. Sincerely, Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
•
•
•
•
•
Tribe Name Fed (F) Non-Fed (N) Contact Person Contact Address Phone # Fax # Email Address Cultural Affiliation Last Updated Barbareño/Ventureño Band of Mission Indians N Cultural Resource Committee, P.O. Box 364 Ojai, CA, 93024 (805) 746-6685 [email protected] Chumash 6/19/2023 Chumash Council of Bakersfield N Julio Quair, Chairperson 729 Texas Street Bakersfield, CA, 93307 (661) 322-0121 [email protected] Chumash Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation N Gabe Frausto, Chairman P.O. Box 40653 Santa Barbara, CA, 93140 (805) 568-8063 [email protected] Chumash 8/28/2023 Fernandeno Tataviam Band of Mission Indians N Sarah Brunzell, CRM Manager 1019 Second Street San Fernando, CA, 91340 (818) 837-0794 [email protected] Tataviam 5/25/2023 Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation N Christina Swindall Martinez, Secretary P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA, 91723 (844) 390-0787 [email protected] Gabrieleno 8/18/2023 Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation N Andrew Salas, Chairperson P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA, 91723 (844) 390-0787 [email protected] Gabrieleno 8/18/2023 Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians N Anthony Morales, Chairperson P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA, 91778 (626) 483-3564 (626) 286-1262 [email protected] Gabrieleno 12/4/2023 Gabrielino /Tongva Nation N Sandonne Goad, Chairperson 106 1/2 Judge John Aiso St., #231 Los Angeles, CA, 90012 (951) 807-0479 [email protected] Gabrielino 3/28/2023 Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council N Christina Conley, Cultural Resource Administrator P.O. Box 941078 Simi Valley, CA, 93094 (626) 407-8761 [email protected] u Gabrielino 3/16/2023 Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council N Robert Dorame, Chairperson P.O. Box 490 Bellflower, CA, 90707 (562) 761-6417 (562) 761-6417 [email protected] Gabrielino 3/16/2023 Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe N Charles Alvarez, Chairperson 23454 Vanowen Street West Hills, CA, 91307 (310) 403-6048 [email protected] Gabrielino 5/30/2023 Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe N Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resource Director P.O. Box 3919 Seal Beach, CA, 90740 (909) 262-9351 [email protected] Gabrielino 5/30/2023 Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Ann Brierty, THPO 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5259 (951) 572-6004 [email protected] Cahuilla Serrano Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Kern,Los Angeles,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Los Angeles County 3/18/2024 Counties Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura 03/18/2024 11:03 AM 1 of 2 + +
+ +
Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List Los Angeles County 3/18/2024 Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Robert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5110 (951) 755-5177 [email protected] Cahuilla Serrano Northern Chumash Tribal Council N Violet Walker, Chairperson P.O. Box 6533 Los Osos, CA, 93412 (760) 549-3532 [email protected] Chumash 6/5/2023 San Fernando Band of Mission Indians N Donna Yocum, Chairperson P.O. Box 221838 Newhall, CA, 91322 (503) 539-0933 (503) 574-3308 [email protected] Kitanemuk Vanyume Tataviam 5/8/2023 San Manuel Band of Mission Indians F Alexandra McCleary, Senior Manager of Cultural Resources Management 26569 Community Center Drive Highland, CA, 92346 (909) 633-0054 alexandra.mccleary@sanmanuel- nsn.gov Serrano 1/16/2024 Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 [email protected] Cahuilla Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians F Wendy Teeter, Cultural Resources Archaeologist 100 Via Juana Road Santa Ynez, CA, 93460 (805) 325-8630 [email protected] Chumash 7/6/2023 Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians F Kelsie Mendoza, Elders' Council Administrative Assistant 100 Via Juana Road Santa Ynez, CA, 93460 (805) 325-5537 [email protected] Chumash 2/27/2024 Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians F Nakia Zavalla, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 100 Via Juana Road Santa Ynez, CA, 93460 [email protected] Chumash 7/6/2023 Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians F Sam Cohen, Government & Legal Affairs Director 100 Via Juana Road Santa Ynez, CA, 93460 [email protected] Chumash 7/6/2023 Serrano Nation of Mission Indians N Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson P. O. Box 343 Patton, CA, 92369 (909) 578-2598 [email protected] Serrano 10/10/2023 Serrano Nation of Mission Indians N Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson P. O. Box 343 Patton, CA, 92369 (253) 370-0167 [email protected] Serrano 10/10/2023 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-5279 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno 7/14/2023 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-6261 (951) 654-4198 [email protected] Cahuilla Luiseno 7/14/2023 Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Pu Resources Code. This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3.1 for the proposed Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Los Angeles Cou Record: PROJ-2024-001551 Report Type: AB52 GIS Counties: Los Angeles NAHC Group: All Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Kern,Los Angeles,San Luis Obispo,Santa Barbara,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,San Bernardino,Ventura Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 03/18/2024 11:03 AM 2 of 2 + + +
+ + +

APPENDIX C
Confidential (Bound Separately)
Department of Parks and
Recreation
523 Forms

APPENDIX D
BLM GLO Records
4-1003-R.

Los Angeles 012059 and 017168.

ID4r luitrh ~tutra nf l\mrrita, mu all tJJ udyJJm ~.et prt.arnts !Ulllll tJJmt, ~rttling:

WHEREAS, a Certificate of the Register of the Land Office at Los Angeles, California, has been deposited in the General Land Office, whereby it appears that, pursuant to the Act of Congre88 of May 20, 1862, "To Secure Homesteads to Actual Settlers on the Public Domain," and the acts supplemental thereto, the clalm of John G. Cox
has been established and duly consummated, in conformity to law, for the southeast quarter of the north- • east guarter and the Lot one of Section six in Township four north and the east half of the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter, the south hn.lf of the southwest quarter oCthe southeast quarter of the southeast ouarter and the south half of the northeast ouarter of the southeast Quarter of Section thirty-one and the south half of the southwest ouarter of the ~outhwest quarter, the northwest quarter of the ~outhwest ouarter of the southwest quarter,, the south half of the northeast quarter of the f"outhwest quarter of tne southwest ouarter and the southwest auarter of the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of Section thirty-two in Township five north all in~ fifteen west of the San Bernarciino Meridian, California. contl.dnillf,' one hundred sixty-five and eighty-two-hundredth? acres,
according to the Official Plat of the Survey of the said Land, returned to the GENERAL LAND OFFICE by the Surveyor-General:

NOW KNOW YE, That there is, therefore, granted by the UNITED STATES unto the said claimant the tract of Land above described; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said tract of Land, with the appurtenances thereof, unto the said claimant and to the heirs and assigns of the said claimant forever; subject lo any vested and accrued water rights for mining, agricultural, manufacturing, or other purposes, and rights to ditches and reservoirs used in connection with such water rights, as may be recognized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws, and decisions of courts; and there is reserved from the lands hereby granted, a right of way thereon for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States,
(SEAL)
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I, Woodrow Wilson
President of the United States of America, have caused these letters to be made Patent, and the seal of the General Land Office to be hereunto affixed, GIVEN under my hand, at the City of Washington, the THIRTY-FIRST day of AUGUST In the year of our Lord one thousand
nine hundred and f IFTEEN and of the Independence of the United States the one hu_ndred and FORTIETH,
By the President:

By
. 'C.(n,ptJ\.~ 'UJJ..ur...v'
/'),t W (b A • I ~o-J::' Secretary, ,(\.~,
RECORD OF PATENTS: Patent Number ... 4:.884,93 -,~~-:6~ ..

Form 4-10113
(May 1963)
Riverside 05891
~be Wntteb ~tate~ of ~1nertca
a=o all to wbom tbcsc presents .sball come, ~rrcting:
,Y111-:1mAs, In pursuance of the prodsions of the He,·i:;t•d Statutes of the "C"nitecl States, Chapter Six, Tit le Thirty-two, a11d lcgisJation supplemental thcrPto, them i::; now depo:=;itetl i11 the Bun•au of L:u1tl )Iana~cmcnt of the United States a Ccrtificnte of the Lantl Otlice at Riverside, Cu li f orni~, accompanied by other evidence, whereby it appears that
Walter C. Harris and Betty B. Harris
diclon March 2, 1966, duly enter and pa.r for that certain mining claim or premises, known as the "Blue Cloud Yest," "Blue Cloud Center" and "Blue Cloud East" placer mining claims, situate in the Palomas Mining District, Los Angeles County, California, described as follows:

San Bernardino Meridian, California.

T. 5 N., R. 15 W.,
''Blue Cloud West" Placer Mining Claim, embracing:

Sec. 31, Lot l;
"Blue Cloud Center" Placer Mining Claim, embracing:

Sec. 31, NW\NE\;
"Blue Cloud East" Placer Mining Claim, embracing:

Sec. 31, NE,tNE\.

The premises herein granted contain 116.72 acres.
04-66-0Z97
Pa tent Number ----------------------------------
U.S. GO\'ERli"E"T PRll,Tl)'oG OFFICE: 1*3--o---68o4 I 7 Furm 4-Joi,c /May 1963)
Riverside 05891
Xow J~:-;ow n:, That there is tlterefon•i p11r:m:u1t to tl1t, laws afore;;aid. hereby gr:rnted by the t·nited States unto the said Walter C. Harris and Betty B. Harris and to their heirs
To 11An: .\="I> To 1101.1> said 111i11i11g premises, togl!tlH~r with all the rights, pri,·il('ges. in1nnmitil•:-. alld appurtena11ccs of w]iat~oc,·(•r uature ther<'unto I,e1011.ui11g-. unto th<' :-;ai<l grantel' ahon• 11a11tl•il and to their heirs and assigns forever·: subjed, 11c,·e1theless, to the followiug <'Onclitions an<l stipulations:

FmsT. That the grant hereby ma<le is rcstricte<l in it:-; <'Xterio1· limitR to th<' bo11n,laril•s of the said 111i11i11g pre111ises, and to any vei11s or lo<ll•S of quartz or other rrn·k in place hC'aring ~ohl, sih·er~ cinnnlmr, lead, tin, copper, or other rnluablc deposits, which may have been disco\·ere<l within said limits subseq11ent to a11d which were uot k11ow11 to exist on October 26, 1964.

SEcmrn. That should any ,·ein or lode of quartz or other rock in plal'e l1eari11~ gold~ sih-er, cinnahar, lc:ul, ti 11, copper, 01· other Ynluable deposits, be clainwd 01· lrnmrn to exist within the aho\·e-dt>:--l'l'iLed premises at said last•named elate, the same is expressly Pxcepted and <'x<:luded from these prc~ents.

Timm. That the premises hereby conveyed shall be held subject to any vestetl and ac:crued wafer rights for mining, agricultural, manufacturing, or otlu.•r purposes, and rights to ditches arnl reserrnirs used in con11ection with such water rights as may be recognized arnl acknowledged by the local laws, customs, nnd decisions of the courts. And there is l'<'Sern~d from the lands hereby gr:rnte<l n. right•ofway thereon for ditches or canals co11structed by tho authority of tl,c United States.

Fomrru. That in the absence of necessary legislation by Congress, the Legislature of California may lH·ovicle rules for working the mining claim or premises hereby granted, involving ('asements, drainage, nnd other necessary means to the complete development thereof.

FIFTH. There is reserved to the United States all Leasing Act minerals in said Lot 1 of Sec. 31, and the right of the United States, its lessees, permittees, and licensees to enter upon the said Lot 1, prospect for, drill, mine, treat, store, and remove the same, and to use so much of the surface and subsurface of said Lot 1 as may be necessary for such purposes, in accordance with the provisions of the Act of August 13, 1954 (68 Stat. 708). [SEAL)
IN Tr-:STD£ONY " ... m:nEoF, the mHlersignl•d authorized oflicer of the Bureau of Land ~fnnagemcnt, in nccortlance with the pro\'isio11s of the ..\.ct of ,June Ii, 1948 (6:? Stat. 476), ha~, in the n:une of the 'Cnited States, caused these letters to be made P:1tent, and the Seal of the BurC'au to be hereunto aflixed.

G1n:x under my hand, in Sacramento, California, the
TWENTY-NINTH day of APRIL in the year of our
Lord one thousand nine hundred an<l SIXTY-SIX nn<l of the Independence of the uni , .... tates the one hunJ.red and NIUETIETH. /j ~ ~ rt~~:✓ }o UJ~-;:
04-66-0297 Patent Number ---------------------------------- ByC_l~i~f, Branch of Title and Records
Sacramento Land Office
U.S. GOVERS!o'E.,T P!Ul\Tl!IG OFFICE: t,;l--0-688-415
APPENDIX E:

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

Copyright © 2023 by ENGEO Incorporated. This document
may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means
whatsoever, nor may it be quoted or excerpted without the express written consent of ENGEO Incorporated.

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

SUBMITTED TO
Mr. Alireza Sazegari
Hunsaker & associates
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 22
Valencia, CA 91355

PREPARED BY
ENGEO Incorporated
October 25, 2024
ENGEO PROJECT NO.
26461.000.001
ENGEO - Expect Excellence-

GEOTECHNICAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

WATER RESOURCES

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

COASTAL/MARINE GEOTECHNICS
27742 Hancock Parkway Valencia, CA 91355 (661) 257-4004 [email protected] www.engeo.com
Project No.
26461.000.001
October 25, 2024
Mr. Alireza Sazegari
Hunsaker & associates
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 22
Valencia, CA 91355
Subject: Blue Cloud Bike Park
Santa Clarita, California

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Dear Mr. Sazegari:

This geotechnical report presents our findings and recommendations for the improvements planned within the Blue Cloud Bike Park located in Santa Clarita, California. The purpose of this report is to summarize subsurface data, characterize general soil and geologic conditions, and provide design-level recommendations for grading, drainage, foundations, flatwork, and near-surface infiltration.

Based on our findings and from a geotechnical standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed improvements, provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.

If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please call and we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,
ENGEO Incorporated
Jose Cejudo Julia A. Moriarty, GE
jc/thz/cw/au/jam/ar
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence----------------------
• • •
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
i of i October 25, 2024

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................ 1

1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION................................................................... 1

2.0 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................ 1

2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY .................................................................................................. 1

2.2 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY ........................................................................................ 2

2.3 SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE MAP ...................................................................................... 2

2.4 FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................... 3

2.4.1 Borings .............................................................................................................. 3

2.4.2 Percolation Field Tests ....................................................................................... 3

2.5 SURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 3

2.6 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................ 4

2.7 GROUNDWATER........................................................................................................... 4

2.8 SOIL SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING ........................................................... 4

3.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 4

3.1 SEISMIC HAZARDS ....................................................................................................... 4

3.1.1 Ground Rupture ................................................................................................. 4

3.1.2 Ground Shaking ................................................................................................. 4

3.1.3 Liquefaction ....................................................................................................... 5

3.1.4 Ground Lurching and Lateral Spreading ............................................................. 5

3.1.5 Landsliding ........................................................................................................ 5

3.2 EXPANSIVE SOIL .......................................................................................................... 5

3.3 COLLAPSIBLE SOIL ...................................................................................................... 6

3.4 SOIL CORROSION POTENTIAL.................................................................................... 6

3.5 2022 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS ................................................................ 7

3.6 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS................................................................................... 7

4.0 EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................ 8

4.1 DEMOLITION AND GENERAL SITE CLEARING ............................................................ 8

4.2 ACCEPTABLE FILL ........................................................................................................ 8

4.3 FILL PLACEMENT SPECIFICATIONS............................................................................ 8

4.4 SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................................................................................... 9

5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 9

5.1 SHALLOW CONTINUOUS AND SPREAD FOOTINGS ................................................... 9

5.2 MAT FOUNDATIONS ................................................................................................... 10

5.3 PAD MOISTURE CONDITIONING................................................................................ 10

5.4 CONCRETE SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOORS .................................................................... 11

5.5 TRENCH BACKFILL ..................................................................................................... 11

5.6 MOISTURE VAPOR REDUCTION ............................................................................... 11

5.7 LIGHTWEIGHT STRUCTURES .................................................................................... 11

6.0 EXTERIOR FLATWORK .................................................................................... 12

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
ii of ii October 25, 2024

7.0 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................................................... 12

7.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS .............................................................................................. 12

7.2 RIGID PAVEMENTS..................................................................................................... 13

7.3 SUBGRADE AND AGGREGATE BASE COMPACTION ............................................... 13

8.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS ....................................... 14

SELECTED REFERENCES

FIGURES
APPENDIX A Exploration Logs (ENGEO, 2024)
APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Data (ENGEO, 2024)
APPENDIX C Laboratory Test Data (CERCO Analytical, 2024) TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 1 October 25, 2024

1.0 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
ENGEO prepared this geotechnical report to support the improvements planned within the Blue Cloud Bike Park (Site) located in Santa Clarita, California, as outlined in our proposal dated July 1, 2024. We were authorized to conduct the following general scope of services.

Perform two limited subsurface explorations and collect soil samples Perform three shallow boring percolation tests
Perform laboratory testing on select soil samples
Prepare a design-level geotechnical report
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Hunsaker & Associates and their consultants and contractors for design of this project. If any changes are made in the character, design, or layout of the development, we must be contacted to review the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report to evaluate whether modifications are recommended. This document may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means whatsoever, nor may it be quoted or excerpted without our express written consent.

1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The Blue Cloud Bike Park is located within mountain ranges in the Angels National Forest in Santa Clarita, as shown in the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The Site is accessed off the northern end of Blue Cloud Road and Pettinger Canyon Road in Santa Clarita, California.

The existing park Site consists of undeveloped bike paths. The improvements planned within the project Site are to update the two park entrances (Haskell Entrance and Blue Cloud Entrance), including paved access and parking areas, LID basin areas, double vault toilet structures, shade structures, hardscape, and landscape areas.

2.0 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY
The Site is located within the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The Transverse Ranges are characterized by a complex series of east-west-trending mountain ranges, valleys, and quaternary faults extending from Santa Ynez Mountains and Channel Islands eastward through the San Bernardino Mountains. The Site is at the northeastern end of the Ventura Basin of Southern California and near the northernmost portion of Santa Clarita Valley.

The Ventura Basin is a westerly plunging depositional basin produced by tectonic downwarping initiated during the early Miocene epoch, with its axis approximately coinciding with the Santa Clara River.

Figure 3 shows regional mapping by Dibblee, which identifies the planned portions of the Site to be improved in the lower canyon areas as underlain by Mint Canyon Formation (Tmc) and Holocene alluvial deposits (Qa). Mint Canyon Formation consists of middle Miocene fine grained sandstone and local pebbly and interbedded siltstone and claystone, and Holocene alluvial deposits (Qa) consist of alluvial gravel, sand, and clay. Bedrock at the Blue Cloud entrance dips at a low angle to the north. The axis of a syncline traverses the Haskell entrance, so bedrock dips gently to the north at the northern end and dips steeply to the south at the southern end. •
•
•
•

INTRODUCTION

FINDINGS
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 2 October 25, 2024

2.2 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY
The Site is not located within a currently designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known surface expression of active faults is believed to exist within the Site. Therefore, fault rupture through the Site is not anticipated. However, the Southern California Peninsular Ranges are regions of high seismicity, and it is likely that the Site will experience strong seismic ground shaking in the future. The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) (Field et al., 2015) estimates the 30-year probability for a moment magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake in Southern California at approximately 93 percent, considering the known active seismic sources in the region.

Many earthquakes of low magnitude occur every year throughout the region, most of which are concentrated along the San Andreas Fault. Figure 5 shows the approximate location of historic Holocene and Quaternary faults and significant historic earthquake epicenters mapped within the region. Significant earthquakes with moment magnitude 6 or greater have ruptured on the San Andreas Fault, including in the 1812 Wrightwood earthquake (approximate M7.3) and the 1857 Great Fort Tejon earthquake (M7.9). More recently, significant earthquakes in the Southern California region include the 1933 Long Beach earthquake (M6.4), the 1971 San Fernando earthquake (M6.6), the 1992 Landers earthquake (M7.3), and the 1994 Northridge earthquake (M7.3).

To determine nearby active faults that are capable of generating strong seismic ground shaking at the Site, the USGS Unified Hazard disaggregation tool was utilized, with the resulting faults listed below in Table 2.2-1. We disaggregated the hazard associated with a 2,475-year event at the anticipated approximate fundamental period of the buildings, of 0.3 second.

TABLE 2.2-1: Nearby Active Faults*, Latitude: 34.476845 Longitude: -118.501561

FAULT SOURCE APPROXIMATE DISTANCE TO SITE
(miles)

MAXIMUM MOMENT

MAGNITUDE
San Gabriel (3) 5.98 7.38
San Gabriel (2) 6.98 7.51
Holser [2] (1) 8.83 7.57
Northridge Hills (1) 12.46 7.64
Santa Susana [2] (2) 13.44 7.15
Santa Susana [2] (1) 13.60 6.36
Santa Susana [1] (0) 14.04 7.38
Santa Susana [2] (3) 15.41 7.22
Northridge (1) 16.95 7.55
San Andreas (Mojave, south) (1) 22.21 8.02
*Edition: NSHM Conterminous U.S. 2018

2.3 SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE MAP
The California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) completed a Seismic Hazard Zones Map (SHZ) for the Newhall Quadrangle (CDMG, 1997). According to the SHZ map (Figure 4), the areas of the planned Site improvements is within mapped potential liquefaction zones. Hillside portions of the overall bike park are within an earthquake-induced landslide zone.

ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 3 October 25, 2024

2.4 FIELD EXPLORATION
Our field exploration consisted of two hollow-stem auger drilled borings to approximately 9½ feet, and three shallow borehole percolation tests at approximately 5 feet deep within the Site, as shown in the Site Plan, Figures 2A and 2B.

The locations and elevations of our explorations are approximate and were estimated by pacing from features shown in the Site Plan; they should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. We used the field log to develop the report log in Appendix A. The log depicts subsurface conditions at the exploration location for the date of exploration; however, subsurface conditions may vary with time.

2.4.1 Borings
An ENGEO staff engineer observed the drilling and logged the subsurface conditions at the boring locations shown in Figures 2A and 2B. We retained a truck-mounted CME 75 drill rig and crew to advance two borings using an 8-inch-diameter hollow-stem auger. The borings, 1-B1 and 1-B2, were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 9½ feet below existing grade. We obtained soil samples at various intervals in the borings using standard penetration test (SPT) and Modified California driven samplers.

The penetration resistance blow counts were obtained by dropping a 140-pound auto-hammer through a 30-inch free fall. The sampler was driven 18 inches and the number of blows was recorded for each 6 inches of penetration. Unless otherwise indicated, the blows per foot recorded on the boring log represent the accumulated number of blows to drive the last 1 foot of penetration; the blow counts have not been converted using any correction factors. The boring logs are included in Appendix A.

2.4.2 Percolation Field Tests
We performed three percolation tests at the location 1-P1, 1-P2, and 1-P3 shown in Figures 2A and 2B. The test locations and depths were provided by the design team. We performed the testing following procedures in general accordance with the Administrative Manual, Los Angeles County Public Works Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division - GS200.1, dated June 30, 2021 (Manual).

We retained a truck-mounted CME 75 drill rig and crew to advance the three percolation test holes using an 8-inch-diameter hollow-stem auger. We drilled the percolation test holes to a depth of approximately 5 feet below the ground surface and placed a 2-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe with a solid end cap into the hole. We backfilled the annulus with fine gravel and pre-soaked the hole for 20 minutes. We performed the percolation tests by placing water in the pipe and measuring the time for one hour and until a stabilized rate of drop was obtained, as described in the Manual. We did not encounter groundwater during our exploration. The results of the percolation tests are summarized in Section 3.6.

2.5 SURFACE CONDITIONS
According to topographic mapping provided to us by Hunsaker & Associates, the Haskell Entrance is approximately at Elevation 1,450 feet and slopes down to the west. The Blue Cloud Entrance is approximately at Elevation 1,620 feet and slope down to the east. During our recent Site visit on October 9, 2024, we observed that the Site entrance areas generally consist of unpaved parking, unpaved paths, and dry vegetation.

ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 4 October 25, 2024

2.6 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our field exploration at Boring 1-B1 encountered very stiff silt in the upper 5 feet, followed by hard lean clay and very dense clayey sand to 9½ feet below ground surface. Boring 1-B2 encountered very stiff lean clay with varying amounts of sand with in the upper 9½ feet of the soil profile.

2.7 GROUNDWATER
The California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG, 1997) reported that the area has not yet been mapped for historical high groundwater levels within the vicinity of the Site. Our explorations did not encounter groundwater in the maximum explored depth of approximately 9½ feet at the time of exploration.

Fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, irrigation practice, and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made.

2.8 SOIL SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING
We performed laboratory tests on select soil samples collected from the soil borings and bulk samples. Lab tests included moisture density, sulfate, sieve analysis, resistance value (R-value), and plasticity index (PI). Select test results are recorded on the boring logs in Appendix A and laboratory results are provided in Appendix B and Appendix C.

3.0 3.1 SEISMIC HAZARDS
Potential seismic hazards resulting from a nearby moderate to major earthquake can generally be classified as primary and secondary. The primary effect is ground rupture, also called surface faulting. The common secondary seismic hazards include ground shaking, and seismic-induced liquefaction, ground lurching, and landsliding.

In addition, we considered other typical geologic and seismic-related hazards in the region. Based on topographic and lithologic data, the risk of regional subsidence or uplift, tsunamis, flooding, and seiches are considered low to negligible at the Site.

The following sections present a discussion of main hazards as they apply to the Site.

3.1.1 Ground Rupture
Since there are no known active faults crossing the property and the Site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, it is our opinion that ground rupture is unlikely at the Site.

3.1.2 Ground Shaking
A nearby earthquake of moderate to high magnitude could cause considerable ground shaking at the Site, similar to that which has occurred in the past. To mitigate the shaking effects, structures should be designed using sound engineering judgment and the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) requirements, as a minimum. Seismic design provisions of current building codes generally prescribe minimum lateral forces, applied statically to the structure, and combined with the gravity

CONCLUSIONS
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 5 October 25, 2024
forces of dead and live loads. Conformance to the current building code recommendations does not ensure that significant structural damage would not occur in the event of a maximum magnitude earthquake; however, it is reasonable to expect that a well-designed and well-constructed structure will not collapse or cause loss of life in a major earthquake (SEAOC, 1999).

3.1.3 Liquefaction
Soil liquefaction results from loss of strength during cyclic loading, such as imposed by earthquakes. Soil most susceptible to liquefaction is clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-grained sand. The soil layers encountered in the subsurface explorations within the Site generally consisted of stiff to hard lean clay, and silt with interbedded layers of very dense clayey sand layers in the maximum drilled depth of 9½ feet below existing grade. Groundwater was not encountered within the depth of our borings.

For the planned bike park improvements within the alluvial materials, a detailed liquefaction assessment was not performed. However, the impacts associated with potential seismic-induced liquefaction settlements on the planned improvements are considered low.

3.1.4 Ground Lurching and Lateral Spreading
Ground lurching is a phenomenon that can be caused by seismically generated ground motions in soft or liquefiable soil. Ground lurching effects are typically greater where dissimilar soil units are in contact, such as the alluvium-bedrock contacts at the margins of valleys, or where subsurface soil differ in susceptibility to seismic ground motions. In our opinion, due to the lack of nearby steep downslopes or creek banks bordering the planned improvement areas, the risk of ground lurching at the Site is low.

3.1.5 Landsliding
The term landslide describes a wide variety of processes that result in the downward and outward movement of slopes. Slope movement may occur by falling, toppling, sliding, spreading, or flowing. The various typers of landslides can be classified by the mechanics of movement and by the kinds of material involved. Seismic-induced landsliding is a potential hazard within the hillside portions of the overall bike park Site. For the planned bike park improvements, a detailed landslide assessment was not performed since these two areas are not within mapped zones, as shown in Figure 4. The impacts associated with potential seismic-induced landsliding on the planned improvements are low within the low-lying valley areas, and both Sites are not included in the Site Hazard map published by the CGS.

3.2 EXPANSIVE SOIL
Silt and lean clay were encountered in the upper portion of the borings at the Site. Laboratory testing on soil samples yielded PI values between 10 and 16, which generally correspond to low to medium shrink/swell potential with variations in moisture content. However, the explorations indicate that the distribution of potentially expansive soil is highly variable at the Site, both in depth and lateral extent, which is typical for alluvial deposits.

ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 6 October 25, 2024
Expansive soil changes in volume with changes in moisture, varying between shrink and swell, which can cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations. Building damage due to volume changes associated with expansive soil can be reduced by properly blending, moisture conditioning, and compacting fills, subexcavating and rebuilding cut areas with homogeneous, properly moisture-conditioned fills, designing hardscape/pavements to accommodate expansive soil, and supporting structures on properly designed foundations.

3.3 COLLAPSIBLE SOIL
Collapsible native soil forms where alluvial soil is rapidly deposited in semi-arid to arid climates.

The collapsible soil remains in a stable state in the partially saturated condition.

Hydroconsolidation occurs when collapsible soil is wetted and causes rapid settlement. The wetting-induced settlement can result in movement and potential damage to structures.

Collapsible soil is characterized by low-density and low-moisture contents. The other key characteristics of collapsible soil include open structure with high void ratio and high porosity, geologically young deposit, high sensitivity, and low inter-particle bonding strength (Howayek et al., 2011).

Los Angeles County (2013) states that as a general rule, sandy soil with in situ dry density of less than 108 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and a moisture content of less than 8 percent are considered susceptible to hydrocollapse. Based on our review of the test results of the dry densities and moisture contents determined on the native soil samples collected in Borings 1-B1 and 1-B2, the soil tested does not meet these criteria, and in our opinion, the risk of hydrocollapse of the native soil at the planned improvement areas is low.

3.4 SOIL CORROSION POTENTIAL
As part of this study, we obtained representative soil samples and submitted to an accredited analytical lab for determination of pH, resistivity, sulfate, and chloride. The results are included in Appendix C and summarized in the table below.

TABLE 3.4-1: Corrosivity Test Results
SAMPLE

LOCATION
DEPTH
(FEET) pH RESISTIVITY (OHMS-CM)

CHLORIDE
(MG/KG)

SULFATE
(MG/KG)
RV-1 1 8.25 600 N.D. 110
RV-2 1 7.28 1,500 21 21
N.D. none detected above the reporting limit
The CBC references the American Concrete Institute Manual, ACI 318-14 for structural concrete requirements. According to ACI 318-
sulfate exposure class, and there is no requirement for cement type or water-cement ratio; however, a minimum concrete compressive strength of 2,500 pounds per square inch (psi) is specified by the building code.

The laboratory testing included determination of pH, resistivity, sulfate, and chloride. The samples corrosive
metal per NACE Corrosion Basics. If desired to investigate this further, we recommend a corrosion consultant be retained to evaluate if specific corrosion recommendations are advised for the project.
14 Table 19.3.1.1 , these samples are categorized "SO"
tested had relatively low resistivities, indicating that they are considered " "to buried ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 7 October 25, 2024

3.5 2022 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
The 2022 CBC utilizes seismic design criteria established in the ASCE/SEI Standard Minimum (ASCE 7-16). Although
the depth of the borings were less than the required 30 meters for seismic classification for the alluvial materials encountered, we characterized the Site as Site Class D for foundation design.

ASCE 7-16 requires a Site-specific ground-motion hazard analysis for Site Class D sites with a mapped S1 value greater than or equal to 0.2; h -16 and Supplement No. 3 provide an exception to this requirement. A Site-specific ground-motion hazard analysis is not required where the value of the parameter SM1 determined by Equation 11.4-2 and shown in Table 3.5-1 is increased by 50 percent for developing the mapped Risk Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) spectral response, calculating SD1, and evaluating Cs in accordance with Chapter 12 of ASCE 7-16.

In Table 3.5-1 below, we provide the CBC seismic parameters based on the United States in foundation design.

TABLE 3.5-1: 2022 CBC Seismic Design Parameters, Latitude: 34.476845 Longitude: -118.501561

PARAMETER VALUE
Site Class D
Mapped MCER Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods, SS (g) 1.87 Mapped MCER Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-second Period, S1 (g) 0.703 Site Coefficient, Fa 1
Site Coefficient, Fv 1.7*
MCER Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods, SMS (g) 1.87 MCER Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-second Period, SM1 (g) 1.195* Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods, SDS (g) 1.246 Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-second Period, SD1 (g) 0.796* Mapped MCE Geometric Mean (MCEG) Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA (g) 0.791 Site Coefficient, FPGA 1.1
MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration adjusted for Site Class effects, PGAM (g) 0.87 Long period transition-period, TL (sec) 12
*The parameters above should only be used for calculation of Ts, determination of Seismic Design Category, and, when taking the exceptions under Items 1 and 2 of ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.8. (Supplement Number 3 https://ascelibrary.org/doi/epdf/10.1061/9780784414248.sup3).

We recommend that we collaborate with the Structural Engineer-of-Record to further evaluate the effects of taking the exception on the structural design and identify the need for performing additional field exploration, or a Site-specific ground-motion hazard analysis. We can prepare a proposal for these services, if requested.

3.6 PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS
The results of our borehole percolation tests are summarized in Table 3.6-1, which includes the raw field-measured percolation rate measured using the methods provided by the LA County Administrative Manual GS200.1, as well as the infiltration rate calculated using Por We have not applied any reduction factors to the measurements.

II
Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures," owever, Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7
Geological Survey's (USGS') Seismic Design Maps for use chet' s method.

ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 8 October 25, 2024
TABLE 3.6-1: Borehole Percolation Test Result
TEST

LOCATION

FIELD-MEASURED

PERCOLATION RATE
(inch/hour)

CALCULATED INFILTRATION RATE
(Field-Measured Rate Corrected Using Po
(inch/hour)
1-P1 20 0.2
1-P2 45 0.6
1-P3 24 0.3
The percolation rates reported above are based on the conditions at the location, depth, and time of the field test. Actual infiltration rates can be affected by changes in subsurface soil and groundwater conditions, test methodology, time of year, and the rate and depth at which water is applied. Appropriate engineering judgment and design factors should be applied to the use of these test data for stormwater infiltration.

4.0 4.1 DEMOLITION AND GENERAL SITE CLEARING
Excavations below design grades should be cleaned to a firm undisturbed soil surface determined by the geotechnical engineer. This surface should then be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted prior to backfill with compacted engineered fill, as needed. The requirements for backfill materials and placement operations are the same as for engineered fill. Loose or uncontrolled backfilling of depressions resulting from demolition should not be allowed.

4.2 ACCEPTABLE FILL
On-site soil, gravel, and excess soil spoils generated from the Site are suitable for use as engineered fill provided, they are processed to remove debris, particles greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension, and concentrations of organic material exceeding 3 percent by weight.

Pavement or concrete materials, if any, can be reused as engineered fill if desired. These materials should be broken down to less than 3 inches in greatest dimension, but not pulverized, and should be blended with soil materials. If desired to reuse as aggregate base (AB) under pavements or hardscape, it should be separated and broken down to meet AB specifications.

4.3 FILL PLACEMENT SPECIFICATIONS
Once a suitable firm base is achieved, the exposed non-yielding surface should be scarified to an approximate depth of 10 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to provide adequate bonding with the initial lift of engineered fill. Engineered fill should be placed according to the following fill specifications, depending upon location and material.

TABLE 4.3-1: Engineered Fill Compaction Recommendations

FILL AREA TEST

PROCEDURE

MINIMUM

MOISTURE CONTENT

MINIMUM RELATIVE
COMPACTION*
General Fill and Soil Trench Backfill ASTM D1557 At least 2 percentage points above optimum moisture At least 90 percent
Landscape Area Fill
(non-structural) ASTM D1557 At least 3 percentage points above optimum moisture At least 85 percent
Pavement Subgrade and AB ASTM D1557 At least Optimum Moisture At least 95 percent rchet's method)

EARTHWORK RECOMMENDATIONS
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 9 October 25, 2024

FILL AREA TEST

PROCEDURE

MINIMUM

MOISTURE CONTENT

MINIMUM RELATIVE
COMPACTION*
Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) CalTrans -- At least 95 percent
(Wet Density)
* Relative compaction - in-place density of material expressed as a percentage of the maximum density per ASTM D1557, or HMA batch plant provided curve.

4.4 SURFACE DRAINAGE
We recommend that the Site be positively graded to provide for rapid removal of surface water.

Ponding of water should not be allowed near building foundations, pavements, exterior flatwork, or retaining walls. To satisfy minimum LA County requirements, paved surface (concrete) should provide a slope gradient of at least ½ percent away from exterior building walls to allow surface water to drain positively away from the structures. Landscape mounds and hardscape features should be designed so they do not interfere with these requirements. As necessary, sufficient area drains should be provided around the buildings to remove excess surface water rapidly.

5.0 Two single-story double vault restroom buildings are planned, one at each park Site entrance.

Provided the Site is graded as recommended in this report, the buildings may be supported on conventional reinforced mats or shallow footings with slab-on-grade. Shallow footings should be tied together with grade beams.

Site walls, shade structures, and other ancillary structures may be supported on shallow continuous and spread footings or drilled pier-and-grade-beam foundations.

Foundation design parameters for shallow footings, conventional mat foundations, and drilled piers are presented below. Provided our report recommendations are followed and given the proposed construction, we estimate total and differential foundation settlements to be less than approximately 1 and ¾ inches, respectively.

5.1 SHALLOW CONTINUOUS AND SPREAD FOOTINGS
For buildings, structures, or Site walls situated at least 5 feet from tops of slopes/walls or water features, the following minimum dimensions can be used in design of reinforced footings.

TABLE 5.1-1: Minimum Footing Dimensions
FOOTING TYPE *MINIMUM DEPTH
(inches)

MINIMUM WIDTH
(inches)
Continuous 18 12
Isolated 24 18
* below lowest adjacent pad grade
For footings situated less than 5 feet from the top of a slope, the footings should be embedded, as necessary, to achieve at least 5 horizontal feet to the nearest free slope face. If footings are situated less than 5 feet from nearby tops of walls or water features, or if footings are located parallel to utility trenches, the footings should be deepened, as needed, to extend below an imaginary 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane projected downwards from the bottom edge of the footing to the bottom of the wall or trench.

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 10 October 25, 2024
A maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead-plus-live loads can be incorporated into the design for footings bearing on engineered fill or firm, non-yielding native. This value may be increased by one-third for the short-term effects of wind or seismic loading.

The friction factor for sliding resistance may be assumed as 0.35 and passive pressures acting on footing foundations may be assumed as 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) starting at a depth of at least 1 foot below pad grade or that depth necessary to achieve a horizontal distance of 5 feet between the outer base edge of the footing and the nearest free face/retaining wall, whichever is deeper. The passive pressure value may be increased by one-third for wind or seismic loading conditions.

During construction, footing trenches should be cleared of loose materials and debris. In addition, soil exposed in footing excavations should not be allowed to desiccate prior to placing concrete. concrete placement.

5.2 MAT FOUNDATIONS
If desired, a conventionally reinforced structural mat can be used to support the proposed double vault restrooms. The following design parameters and recommendations should be incorporated.

Effective PI of 20
Cantilever distance or unsupported radius of 5 feet
Maximum beam spacing of 15 feet
Subgrade modulus of 180 psi/in
Mat foundations may be designed with an average allowable bearing pressure of 1,000 psf for dead-plus-live loads. At concentrated loading locations, the allowable bearing pressure can be increased to 1,500 psf. The allowable bearing pressures can be increased by one-third for all loads including wind or seismic.

Resistance to lateral loads may be provided by frictional resistance between the foundation concrete and the bearing soil and by passive earth pressure acting against the side of the foundation. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 can be used between concrete and the subgrade.

Passive resistance should be evaluated using a triangular pressure distribution modeled as an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf. The passive pressure value may be increased by one-third for the short-term effects of wind or seismic loading.

5.3 PAD MOISTURE CONDITIONING
Immediately prior to mat foundation construction, the pad subgrade should be moisture conditioned to a moisture content of at least 3 percentage points above optimum and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to placing steel reinforcement and should not be allowed to dry prior to concrete placement.

ENGEO's field representative should observe and approve the footing excavations prior to •
•
•
•
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 11 October 25, 2024

5.4 CONCRETE SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOORS
For footings with a concrete floor slab, we recommend the concrete floor slabs be at least 6 inches thick and reinforced with No. 4 bars spaced 18 inches on center each way as a minimum. The structural engineer should provide final design thickness and additional reinforcement for anticipated structural loads.

The concrete slab should be underlain by at least 6 inches of compacted ¾-inch clean crushed rock over processed subgrade. The crushed rock should have 100 percent passing the ¾-inch sieve and less than 5 percent passing the No. 4 sieve.

5.5 TRENCH BACKFILL
Trenches (utility and plumbing) should be backfilled and compacted in accordance with the Fill Placement Specifications presented in this report.

5.6 MOISTURE VAPOR REDUCTION
When buildings are constructed with concrete slab-on-grade and structural mats, water vapor from beneath the slab will migrate through the slab and into the building. This water vapor can be reduced but not stopped. Vapor transmission can negatively affect floor coverings and lead to increased moisture within a building. When water vapor migrating through the slab would be undesirable, we recommend one or more of the following to reduce, but not stop, water vapor transmission upward through the slab/mat.

Install a moisture vapor retarder system directly beneath the slab/mat that is sealed at all seams and pipe penetrations and connected to all footings. Vapor retarders shall conform to Class A vapor retarder in accordance with ASTM E
Use a concrete water-cement ratio for slabs-on-grade of no more than 0.50.

Provide inspection and testing during concrete placement to check that the proper concrete and water-cement ratio are used.

Moist cure slabs for a minimum of 3 days or use other equivalent curing specified by the structural engineer.

The structural engineer should be consulted as to the use of a layer of clean sand or pea gravel (less than 5 percent passing the U.S. Standard No. 200 Sieve) placed on top of the vapor retarder membrane to assist in concrete curing.

5.7 LIGHTWEIGHT STRUCTURES
Lightweight structures (such as overhead shade and canopy structures, smaller ancillary landscape features, walls, and overhead lighting) may be supported on spread footings or drilled piers. Conventional footings should be designed according to Section 5.1. Soil design criteria for drilled piers are provided below.

Maximum Allowable Skin Friction: 400 psf, ignoring the upper 2 feet in the load computation Minimum Pier Diameter: 12 inches
Minimum Pier Depth: 5 feet
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
17 45 "Standard Specification for Plastic
Water Vapor Retarders used in Contact with Soil or Granular Fill under Concrete Slabs." ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 12 October 25, 2024
Lateral loads may be resisted by passive pressures acting on footing/pier foundations and shear keyways. An equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf may be used to evaluate passive resistance provided that the upper 1 foot of footing/pier embedment is ignored and the area in front of the footing/pier is level for a distance of at least 5 feet at the elevation passive resistance is initiated.

For piers, passive resistance may be applied over two pier diameters. The project structural engineer should design and detail reinforcing steel based on the anticipated structural loads.

During construction, drilled piers should be cleared of loose materials and debris. In addition, soil field representative should observe and approve the excavations prior to concrete placement.

6.0 We understand that planned improvements may consist of pedestrian hardscape and walking paths. The different surfaces that are discussed below should be installed following manufacturer guidelines.

Exterior flatwork includes items such as concrete sidewalks/walkways, steps, and outdoor courtyards not exposed to vehicle traffic. Typical walkways, sidewalks, and steps should be constructed structurally independent of other foundation systems( i.e., steel should not be used to tie exterior flatwork or steps to adjacent foundations). This allows flatwork/slab movement to occur with a minimum of foundation distress.

We recommend a minimum section of 4 inches of concrete over prepared subgrade. To improve slab performance, the slab could be reinforced with rebar or welded wire mesh or underlain by 4 inches of compacted aggregate base. In addition, the flatwork edges could be thickened to at least 8 inches to help control moisture variations in the subgrade. Construct control and construction joints in accordance with ACI and Portland Cement Association guidelines to help control the location of, but not eliminate, minor cracking of concrete hardscape.

During construction, care must be exercised in attaining a high moisture condition of the subgrade soil before concrete placement and adjacent subgrade soil materials should not be allowed to become desiccated prior to completion of landscaping.

7.0 We obtained bulk samples of the surface soil from the planned drive isle and parking areas, and performed R-value tests to provide data for pavement designs. The results of the tests are included in Appendix B and indicate R-values of 8 and 18 for the Haskell entrance (west) and 20 for the Blue Cloud entrance (east).

7.1 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
We developed the following recommended pavement sections using Topic 633 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (including the asphalt factor of safety), presented in the tables below. exposed in excavations should not be allowed to desiccate prior to placing concrete. ENGEO's

EXTERIOR FLATWORK

PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 13 October 25, 2024
TABLE 8.1-1: Haskell Entrance - Recommended HMA Concrete Pavement Sections

TRAFFIC

INDEX R-VALUE

SECTION

HOT MIX ASPHALT
(inches)
CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE
(inches)
4 8 3 6.5
5 8 3 9.5
6 8 3.5 12
7 8 4 15
TABLE 8.1-2: Blue Cloud Entrance - Recommended HMA Concrete Pavement Sections

TRAFFIC

INDEX R-VALUE

SECTION

HOT MIX ASPHALT
(inches)
CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE
(inches)
4 20 3 6
5 20 3 7.5
6 20 3.5 9.5
7 20 4 12
The civil engineer should determine the appropriate traffic indexes based on the estimated traffic loads and frequencies. The minimum pavement section(s) should be confirmed by the civil engineer and local jurisdiction (such as, City or County).

Pavement materials and construction should comply with the specifications and requirements of the Standard Specifications by Caltrans, the local jurisdiction, and our compaction recommendations.

7.2 RIGID PAVEMENTS
We recommend the following minimum design sections for rigid pavements.

Use a minimum section of 6 inches of Portland Cement concrete over 8 inches of Caltrans Class 2 AB
Concrete pavement should have a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 3,500 psi Provide minimum control joint spacing in accordance with Portland Cement Association guidelines
Final design of rigid pavement sections and accompanying reinforcement should be performed based on estimated traffic loads and frequencies.

7.3 SUBGRADE AND AGGREGATE BASE COMPACTION
Compact finish subgrade and aggregate base in accordance with Section 4.3. Aggregate base should meet the requirements for ¾-inch maximum Class 2 AB in accordance with Section 26-1.02B of the latest Caltrans Standard Specifications. •
•
•
ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
Page | 14 October 25, 2024

8.0 This report presents geotechnical recommendations for design of the improvements discussed in Section 1.2 with the Blue Cloud Bike Park Site. If changes occur in the nature or design of the project, we should review this report and provide additional recommendations, if any. It is the responsibility of the owner to transmit the information and recommendations of this report to the appropriate organizations or people involved in design of the project, including but not limited to developers, owners, buyers, architects, engineers, and designers. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are solely professional opinions and are valid for a period of no more than 2 years from the date of report issuance.

We strive to perform our professional services in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices currently employed in the area; there is no warranty, express or implied. There are risks of earth movement and property damage inherent in building on or with earth materials. We are unable to eliminate all risks; therefore, we are unable to guarantee or warrant the results of our services.

This report is based upon field and other conditions discovered at the time of report preparation.

We developed this report with limited subsurface exploration data and assumed that our subsurface exploration data is representative of the actual subsurface conditions across the Site.

If unexpected conditions are encountered, ENGEO must be notified immediately to review these conditions and provide additional and/or modified recommendations, as necessary.

Our services did not include excavation sloping or shoring, or soil volume change factors. In addition, our geotechnical exploration did not include work to determine the existence of possible hazardous materials. If any hazardous materials are encountered during construction, the proper regulatory officials must be notified immediately.

This document must not be subject to unauthorized reuse, that is, reusing without written authorization of ENGEO. Such authorization is essential because it requires ENGEO to evaluate Actual field or other conditions will necessitate clarifications, adjustments, modifications, or other clarifications, adjustments, modifications, or other changes before construction activities -site
construction observation, or if other persons or entities are retained to provide such services, ENGEO cannot be held responsible for any and all claims arising from or resulting from the performance of such services by other persons or entities, and from any and all claims arising from or resulting from clarifications, adjustments, modifications, discrepancies, or other changes necessary to reflect changed field or other conditions.

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
the document's applicability given new circumstances, not the least of which is passage of time. changes to ENGEO's documents. Therefore, ENGEO must be engaged to prepare the necessary commence or further activity proceeds. If ENGEO's scope of services does not include on ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
Hunsaker & Associates Blue Cloud Bike Park
26461.000.001 Geotechnical Report
October 25, 2024
ACI. 2014. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and (ACI 318-14). 2014.

ASCE. 2016. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-16. 2016.

Bryant, W. and Hart, E. 2007. -
Interim Revision 2007, California Department of Conservation.

California Building Code. 2022.

California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG). 1997. Seismic Hazard Zone report for the Newhall 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California. Seismic Hazard Zone Report 04.

Dibblee, T.W., and Minch, J.A. 2008. Geologic Map of the Newhall Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-322, scale 1:24,000.

Field, et al. 2015. Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF3). 2015.

Hunsaker & Associates. 2024. 60% Plans, Blue Cloud Bike Park, Santa Clarita, California.

March 7, 2024.

Howayek, A.E., Huang, P.T., Bisnett, R., Santagata, M.C. 2011. Identification and Behavior of Collapsible Soils, Publication FHWA/IN/JTRP-2011/12, Joint Transportation Research Program, Indiana Department of Transportation and Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.

Los Angeles County Public Works. 2021. Administrative Manual, Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division, Guidelines for Geotechnical Investigation and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration. GS200.1. June 30, 2021.

SEAOC. 1996. Seismic Design Recommendations.

SELECTED REFERENCES
Special Publication 42, "Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California." ENGEO
-Expect Excellence
FIGURE 1: Vicinity Map
FIGURES 2A AND 2B: Site Plan
FIGURE 3: Geologic Map
FIGURE 4: Seismic Hazard Zone Map
FIGURE 5: Regional Faulting and Seismicity Map

FIGURES
>-
~ z
0 u
<L
X
w
w
I
>-
I
ii>
~7 -.
§
! / C: ,__}
, 0
i
V)
~
i!J >-
z ""
>-
<D
~}
Q
I I
~ o.,, ~0-:
...J "''to >-, )>
"' < 2,00(t "'
I ~ . "\\ U J 1 / V
~ ~~ ~ P SOURCE: ENGEO INC ESRI WORLD TOPO;NlAP
iENGEO
Expect Excellence

VICINITY MAP

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
-'-
~ -
-:s:. / ~ . - 'f'ork Rd
r
Sier
/ Sole
G
n
PROJECT NO. : 26461.000.001 IGURE NO.

SCALE: AS SHOWN 1 DRAWN BY: NWC CHECKED BY:JAM
COPYRIGHT @ 2024 BY ENGEO INCORPORATED. TH IS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, NOR MAY IT BE QUOTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF ENGEO INCORPORATED. ~-~~- ---__ ~-~_::---;_~~-,:/ r \~·,_-1\17ff ·\t;/ ____ ,./ j ,03~/ _),?/:;,;•;~/:Y_,/:7/}-,'/i!~,,'.,,~:~- -. --~,>:::_0'j~ < ---- - ,,., --------------- - - -- --~- ✓-- • , 1 ·· 1·1 n , . - -- - -- /, • /// .-1// ,, , .. , , . , __ • ·-:- >::., -- - . -..... ."i.rc·- ,,,.... _.,..,.--..-- --- ...... ~. ,~ ,,--- _,,,..,. ,,.. .,,/1///:f//J./'k -\;_~·-·--- ·-:-... --...-......,:::,-....,......_ -.....,-...."-J00-. ---- ~- ·,:----:=--....... ' ' ~- '1 I '"'\ 1, ;;- - --- • _/ - I • _,, .,,. - .... ' - -- - .... _........ .... .. .... \~- "' ''\"III\ \\>' ·bl...--.. r-•...,;_ - ' _,.. ; □.,. '\ - ·, ~\ \ f. \.\. ·. '- \ ----~---.( --- ----------:?---- , ~,; ~. ~~ \\1 ___ '\'\~\~\\ '~'><1\-.,----:::~- -- , . , ----- - ~- ~~ ~ --~ V'""· ' . \.. -. -.... , :;--.:::....._:7 \ , ' ' ·- - -........ ~ --=~ 1/_::_~=~~,--- -i~\><<:·~-r~;~--------. - ;;--~ ~- ", \>;~~---I'·,,:••,\'--, \ i\\ \ ,-\ -~, -~,: ·-.. '-, \
A
N
, •, I', ' r~ ·., ' ''' / J_ ~
\ \' . \ . \,- f //\\ \' . •, . -"-\ '1 ' , • ' ' \ ' -• ' \ • ' • •, ~-'-, , l ,. -. \ ... , 1/ \ ' ._ \ - -- , , _,• •.,. \ ,-...,___ ... ~ I '- • -.=------,,-, , &, r / ! --;--,_ .:J..~) _\~ ~\ ' \\ \ ,_ \ \~, ~ 1 J• r· ~ ' '·, \ ....... - - 1.'1 ' --.X \, 1 \\. I \\ I ' I' \ ', \ "-;~- "-, \ ,_ __,,~.,,.~,. ...__ J ' \~ _ ,/ , \I \ 1' , 1 \ ', ~ ' . ·'\1456. 6 '' ~~~~ ~) \,\\\~~, )}( l ·1\\ \ U' ' ' ..'·<·-\. \ __ I \ X :':X~ ~ J, ' \ 11 j;\. / \ ', . J •~' I I \ ·7:,> I =;,:::::~~,;;;;.~• ,,,,.~ JJ I I' ~ , \ , ~ ' , , I /\ \ J? ,, \\ \ ,~ '
:~ , ~~~ ~ / ' \ -... 1 1 ~• ~ ' \ I
~ -- :=j~===-----=±=~ ·. ,, ,.._;;_,,~_ ~\ • --'\ °' "·. • i: j .J./ \ \ \ ' I ' "--_ --=--~=-~ I ' • , ', \ ,' ,' • ....___ \ ' ~ \ \, \ \ , , I tl
\ ~ -----,;: 0-:=-==<11,?& \ -....,"' '·, \ \ , / ,' x.- "'\' r-- - " -,-j:_"'\'C', \ ' , ,' ,r· ,.- c'\ 1446 , 1 r-c -- ' 0 1'./ -~,-..::.,, - ' v· • - \ \ \ • I I I ,- --- .----c:__r,_ ' V\-_..:-,-- "-<;- , I ' ' , J \\ X . , ·; //?;-_ ,_..,._ --..,- , , 'v ----~; ·, 1. , ---, i d//// ~-,___- • 1 1._ , ,., , , ' ,,- , . ~ < , - I .J-"c·--:--.·== . \ ',''-.- -- , I ,' •,,.!'!), I '--/' \ l:\o1!~~ ,~_.- '-, \ I \\\ I -..,,,:,;>--er'~ \ ,:-,-J•,I' '\,\;, ·-~~/,,-' 0 ~
50 I
FEET
11 s~- ~~ . 11 I ,~ .,! I "t /-. _,_,,., , ~ _" 1 "''>, ,1\,,'-.1 ,. 1 r ~ / ,,-- 1 '\. l3::,.._ "'-:-... \ "'\:>.._ .._ I , ..._ ~ , -~.J..- •/ , ..1 . - (0 ' -- , • : 1 ~ \ j ,' < \ _\\ '.._
. D X ' '<t' ;· I I ' ) ~ ~- 11 I' \/•"'"- .,_ ' ,- . \ ~ " • r , , 1 h 1 ; / / , / f2 / 1 .\ \ 2 . ! I! r I I l1 1 , i' ! -:- ) I _1 , ,,,.- I I I /' ;' v- i ; • ) I :, ,r I I I ,_ ,' / / ', /__.,, ~ I I -.. / J, I // I ·I •',', ' ----~-------~ ~ .-,' r:--~ '\ I ! I / I ( I I ! I I I !!!! I ! ' ~'>------..-1' ' ,';' 1\ 1
1 _,../ , I / / I / I , / I / ll. )'i' !l,
'', , ; : 1 .' 0r-. ~ - ~-.. _ /_ ~ --;--:/ -- ·•!-,, /, _, I ~ _,,/" I / I II ' / : I '1 :: ; _,: .-- '' Y-..;.,-f ✓ -~~ ~)
--- ------ ___//I i// 1:: \ I \/ ,.-,_ ,~•D -------~::::::::- -- ~ ,1 '/// , 11 / ,':x/' ~ 'J >- l....; , ~ 1 I _--- ~ - -~ / 1 ~ -. ( /, ih , . . 'l-- 0 =---:_-_:>,.}:. -___,;,--- l ~liit\ \''\ \,~- -J_~Q ' ( I I',',,\, , 1 / ~-=--.c.-\ :~ ~ ,.,-§ _',,.;;c-~,----,',)","" I I , \.~ \'\ \ ,\ /'. ~--.:= ,, ' - ·- . ,··, ' , _,..,,, ·\ ' \· t~~J~,_\ \1\1(<[;.-;: ~ --::.,~:__-~_}~ . 1.r (l,, \\\ . . -'-< ,, -- :-'----------, ,_,.,...,=:,,____o, ', ·-::/:=:~;v..·· ·\,\,,; 100
I
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
' ~,~~~:~1~,f ~::i;\:r~-i:~~) ~ '~\: :10-,.,:%~"-::.;~ <-~ ,;./ '"~!:",- ........... -...:i.::;__ ...... , ~-~·- j ... ~ -=~ ,;..__ , __ / ..,,. ~ ·< -J ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
., ♦ Boring (ENGEO, 2024)
0 Percolation Test (ENGEO, 2024)
-.:----.' J ♦ R-Value (ENGEO, 2024)
SITE PLAN PROJECT NO. 26461 .000.001 FIGURE NO.

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK - HASKELL ENTRANCE

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
SCALE: ASSHOWN 2A DRAWN BY: NWC CHECKED BY: JAM
PATH : G: \DRAFTING\PROJECTS\_26000 TO 27999\2646 I \26461.000.001 BLUE CLOUD BIKE\GEOTECHNICAL \GE X\26461000001 _ BLUECLOUDBIKEPARK - GE X.APRX LAYOUT: 02A. SITE PLAN 8 .5 XI I LANDSCAPE USER: NCLOUGH

ORIGINAL FIGURE PR INTED IN COLOR
COPYRIGHT @ 2024 BY ENGEO INCORPORATED. TH IS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, NOR MAY IT BE QUOTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF ENGEO INCORPORATED . ,,/
~ ,, ,
d"J :/--
~

SITE PLAN
.,,,. ,,,.,,,.,,... ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
♦
0 ♦
Boring (ENGEO, 2024)
Percolation Test (ENGEO, 2024)
R-Value (ENGEO, 2024)
PROJECT NO. 26461.000.001 FIGURE NO.

ENGEO BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK - BLUE CLOUD ENTRANCE

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
SCALE: AS SHOWN 2 B
Expect Excellence
PATH : G: \DRAFTING\PROJECTS\_26000 TO 27999\2646 I \26461.000.001 BLUE CLOUD BIKE\GEOTECHNICAL \GE X\26461000001 _ BLUECLOUDBIKEPARK - GE X.APRX LAYOUT: 28. SITE PLAN 8 .5 X 11 LANDSCAPE USER: NCLOUGH DRAWN BY: NWC CHECKED BY: JAM

ORIGINAL FIGURE PR INTED IN COLOR
iENGEO 3 Expect Excellence
r;;:-i Gravel and sand of major
L....=!....J stream channels
r;;:-i Alluvial gravel, sand and
~ clay of valley areas
~ Saugus Formation
~ Castaic Formation
~ Landslide debris I Tmc I Mint Canyon Formation
Older Dissected Surficial Sediments -
r,;::-, Low terrace remnants of alluvial
·~1:..ti'l'H L...:::...J gravel and sand
r,;::-, Alluvial fan and high terrace
L...::!..J deposits of gravel and sand
MAP SYMBOLS - NEWHALL __________ _
MEMBER CONT ACT dashed where Inferred or lndefirrte between units of a formation CONTACT BE1WEEN
SURFICIAL SEDIMENTS located on-)' !fP'O:D'"!l_,. in pia<»s FAULT: Dashed where lndefinffe or inferred, dotted where concealed, queried where existence Is doubtful. Parallel arrows Indicate infened reladve lateral movement. Reladve verdcal movement Is shown by U/0 / U=upthrown side, D=00wnthrown side). Short arrow indicates dip of faun plane. Sawteeth are on upper plate of low angle thrust faun. __ i __ ~ ··· ~ -- ~ -- • ANTICLI E SYNCLINE t arrow on aJdal trace of fold indicates directJon of plunge: dotted where concealed by surlic/al sediments STRIKE AND DIP OF -1....!B 20 --d--so -,- """•"""'::loliat,onor,gn«>u•t1owbanciey STRA TIFrED ROCKS inc/med l~ •I overturned vertical i~ approximate ~cal Sandstono Ccni,tometat• Shalo or Abo,_;/; exp/orato,y o malfctN blld malke, bed i::,'1,::S. oi or gas wells, located OI wets: may lndude .sane Idle. or unit or ur,;, s«tJon) app,oximalel'y .n places converted Of abandoned WfJ/ls

GEOLOGIC MAP

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. : 26461 .000.001
SCALE: AS SHOWN
DRAWN BY:NWC CHECKED BY:JAM
IGURE NO.
3 PATH : G: \DRAFTING\PROJECTS\_26000 TO 27999\26461 \26461.000.001 BLUE CLOUD BIKE\GEOTECHN ICAL \GEX\26461000001 _ BLUECLOUDBIKEPARK - GEX.APRX LAYOUT: 03 . GEOLOGIC 8.5 X 11 PORTRAIT USER: NCLOUGH ORIGINAL FIGURE PR INTED IN COLOR ;ENGEO
6:
0 Expect Excellence

EXPLANATION
c::J PROJECT SITE
Earthquake-Induced Landslide Zones
Areas Where The Previous Occurrence Of Landslide
Movement, Or Local Topographic, Geological, Geotechnical 11 And Subsurface Water Conditions Indicate A Potential For L___J Permanent Ground Displacements Such That Mitigation As Defined In Public Resources Code Section 2693(C) Would
Be Required.

Liquefaction Zones
Areas Where The Historical Occurrence Of Liquefaction, Or Local Geological, Geotechnical And Groundwater Conditions Indicate A Potential For Permanent Ground Displacements Such That Mitigation As Defined In Public Resources Code Section 2693(C) Would Be Required

SEISMIC HAZARD ZONE MAP

BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK

SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. : 26461 .000.001
SCALE: AS SHOWN
DRAWN BY: NWC CHECKED BY: JAM
IGURE NO.
4 u .,,. PA'"'T""H ,- .,.. G,'""'o,..,,R""AF"'T""I N"' G ""P""Ro'""J"'"" Ec'""T"' s .....,,. 2 ""60.,.00,,.....,,. T0,.......,,. 27""'9"'"99,.,....,.2.,.. 6 4"'"6 ... 1 ""2..,. 64""6""1 "'"oo,..,,o"". 0..,. 0 1....,.B L""u"""E ""c""Lo'""u"""o""s""1 K .... E'""G'""E"' oT""Ec""H""N""1c""AL.,....,., GE"'"x ... 2'"'6-4 6""1..,. 00'"'0..,. 00""1.....,.. B L""u E""'c""Lo'""u---D'!,, Bl"'" KE"""P '"' AR""K--.....,,. GE'""x""'A"""PR'""x.._ _____ ....._ __ __.

LAYOUT, 04. SEISM IC HAZARD ZONE MAP 8.5 X 11 PORTRAIT USER, NCLOUGH ORIGINAL FIGURE PR INTED IN COLOR THIS DOCUM ENT f.l AY NOT BE REPRODUCED IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER,

7.5 Santa
Barbara
Channel
•
•
.. ~-- -?
~0
~
15 Santa
Cr u z
Bas in
MILES

IBASE MAP SOURCE
-1~.,
' ..-,n
•

VENTURA
.~TY
•
~ ~-1
, ,, ,,_~ .· •
(~ \ .. . \ .......... :···
..
•
,i,.-i-
~
-..

1...,
• r;fancaSfer:
~ .,IVD-9,
:,.___ <~s t :p"j' -.. ~. ,, •:,~ f:ra_m~lel
, ~ ', -..,,,.,:,: ,r.' ........
~ ... , .. "' ~ ~ ~ ... "' ; :. ,.,,~ .. { ::}..;· ·~ - ,1;!.f.rd*~ " 14~:-: ' ' " #. J:l ~DG ~
'
.
1-/'lls •
~ -II
'
' /'\...~. l ..i '
\ ').. I e Project Site
~ : \';J HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS

EXPLANATION
,. ,c. ~
'ii,~ • • Magnitude 5-6
~-1>~e,9
••1~,~ll s
•· .. ,
/
'. ~
7\
~.., \ <P. •
~ +~~--Ji~ i. .,,'
~
C~ • Magnitude 6-7
♦ Magnitude 7+
;~i W Historic Blind Thrust Fault Zone
QUATERNARY FAULTS 2020
' ., "" ,. ~~~ '
~ .... , .,,l , .?·· , .--,£.$,t ~... ~ - ......... \ •~l' • ~ ~tow, Based on time of most recent surface
deformation
Historical (<150 Years), Well
0 -- Constrained Location
\\ •.. ' " I
•
1< SAN
BE~RDINO
coottrv
'
~~~ · ~t
1 Historical (<150 Years), Moderately
Constrained Location
Historical (<150 Years), Inferred
Location
~ \, (,
Latest Quaternary (<15,000 Years),
-- Well Constrained Location
•
Latest Quaternary (<15,000 Years),
<i Moderately Constrained Location
' •••• Latest Quaternary (<15,000 Years),
Inferred Location
Latest Quaternary (<15,000 Years),
--Inferred Location
Late Quaternary (<130,000 Years),
Moderately Constrained Location
Late Quaternary (<130,000 Years),
Inferred Location
, , Middle And Late Quaternary
a., ;--(<750,000 Years), Well Constrained
,A\ Location
Middle And Late Quaternary
(<750,000 Years), Moderately
Constrained Location
Middle And Late Quaternary
(<750,000 Years), Inferred Location
Undifferentiated Quaternary(<1.6
-- Million Years), Well Constrained
Location
Undifferentiated Quaternary(<1.6
Million Years), Moderately
Constrained Location
" Y ....__ .,... _ !Wl!!!!l!!!!!l!l■■I.: Undifferentiated Quaternary(<1.6 :..t-1,,l'. ·~ ~1111" ""'"'11u TV-::"'.&.-~ ..... " • 'Menifee ..,,,- - -~ • - ·1 M11hon Years), Inferred Location 01'0
~ ""/. • "/ ~ 't, lake,Fo,,<t~ ; w ,
1 'I- c ~ • :,;;c .. , , .,, -,,,,- -..; --. ... / . • __ Class B (Various Age), Well <6. C'-9, . . /. , ~tu • • c., Constrained Location "1'~ v<' .,o "".,Mission v1ej01"j~ , , ), ~ 1-~ANTA 1: "#1, , .. -.,..· ' . {,t, Muri~ • ___ Class B (Various Age), Moderately BARBARA ' '3- "'"'' ·• "< Constrained Location
COUNTY -s-..,1' ~ '.: ~1-0-!l • • • • Class_ B (Various Age), Inferred SANTA B,m~RA,C.OUNT,Y LOS.AN~ kOUNTY <:), .,/1, ;' ?' ' • Location PROJECT NO. : 26461 .000.001 CSU MB, ESRI, GARMIN, NATURAL\IUE, ESRI, GEBCO, GARMIN, NATURALVUE, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS, ESRI, TOMTOM, GARMIN, SAFEGRAPH, GEOTECHNOLOGIES, INC, METl,t,IASA, USGS, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, EPA, NPS, USDA, USFWS, COUNTY OF LOSANGB..ES, CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS, ESRI. TOMTOM, GARMIN, SAFEGRAPH, FAO, METIINASA. USGS, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, EPA. NPS. USF'NS ENGEO REGIONAL FAULTING AND SEISMICITY MAP BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK SCALE: AS SHOWN :OLOR HILLSHADE IMAGE BASED ON THE NATICX'W. ELEVATION IYITASET (NED) AT 30 METER RESOLUTION I.6.G.S. QUATERNARY FAULT DATABASE, 2020
G.S. HISTORIC EARTHQUAKE DATAEL'.SE
PATH: G:\DRAFTING\~ANAGEME NT\GIS\G EX\GEX UPDATE\GIS FIGURE TEMPLATE.APRX LAYOUT: OA. FAULT&SEISMICITY 11 X 17 LANDSCAPE USER: NCLOUGH Expect Excellence SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA DRAWN BY: NWC !CHECKED BY:JAM

KEY TO BORING LOGS

EXPLORATION LOGS
(ENGEO, 2024)

APPENDIX A
Cl
:;;
~ KEY TO BORING LOGS i c,:
0 <">
~ MAJOR TYPES DESCRIPTION f ~ L-----------~-----------.--....----------------------------------1 ~ 8 z ~ GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS WITH GW- Well graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures ~ ~ ~ !Jj MORE THAN HALF LITTLE OR NO FINES j ~ ~ 8 COARSE FRACTION GP - Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures i" ... ls~ ~ :; ~ IS LARGER THAN GM - Silty gravels, gravel-sand and silt mixtures ~- z w :i:: NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE GRAVELS WITH OVER 8 ...J ..... 1:'i g ffi 12 % FINES GC - Clayey gravels, gravel-sand and clay mixtures I= 0 (!)
~ ~ ~ SANDS CLEAN SANDS WITH SW - Well graded sands, or gravelly sand mixtures ~ ~ -' MORE THAN HALF OJ :l: (!)w' ~ COARSE FRACTION LITTLE OR NO FINES SP - Poorly graded sands or gravelly sand mixtures

1.'.i "" IS SMALLER THAN
~ ~ ~ NO. 4 SIEVE SIZE SM - Silty sand, sand-silt mixtures 1------------l-;..,....,.:,.J_ ____ _:_-=----------------------------1 I '"" <3 ~ SANDS WITH OVER
§ u ~ 12 % FINES SC - Clayey sand, sand-clay mixtures
i=L j __ L ________ _i _________ ~~l-----------------------------1 0 ML - Inorganic silt with low to medium plasticity Ii: a:: c,: ww ~ ls~ SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMITS so% oR LESS CL - Inorganic clay with low to medium plasticity ... w:;:; ~
" i
0 !
.g
i
l5 iii ~ w OL - Low plasticity organic silts and clays I 8 00 5 ~ 1-_________________ _
b o enc( 1-----------------------------1.8 i :::, 0 o :a MH - Inorganic silt with high plasticity o ~wzu.o "' Z- 111 <( <C ~ SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN so% CH - Inorganic clay with high plasticity !:: J: ffi <( !i ..... I I " ~ ~ OH - Highly plastic organic silts and clays ~ u.~1------------------- "
~ C.
~
ffi HIGHL y ORGANIC SOILS PT - Peat and other highly organic soils ~ ~ GRAIN SIZES .g:_
~ U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE SIZE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS i .. ~ 200 40 10 4 3/4 " 3" 12" Ill L--~~-----~'.__ ____ ___:.::_ _____ --;-_______ _::_:_.:.._ _______ --r ____ --i ____ -----j ~ SIL TS SAND GRAVEL
" AND COBBLES BOULDERS
~ L-"C~LA~Y_i:>S'_j __ F:....:l:....:N:=E __ _L _ _:M:..:.E:::D::.:l~U.:.:M.:___J _ ___:c:_:o:..:.A_:__R_:__S:..:E=---_J ____ FI_N_E ___ ...J_ ___ c_o_A_R_S_E ___ _..__ ____ --1--------j 1ii
Ii:
rt.
"' c,:
0 ~ 0
:,:
3:
"' 8
u
:::,
0 ~ 0..
...
c,:
...
a,
b
z
~
... "
1:'i
" :::,
u
0 0
Ill
:i:
...
8 !:;:
c,:
0 0..
c,:
0 u "' 8
'-'
1:'i
>-
a,
... "' :::
0 RELATIVE DENSITY

SANDS AND GRAVELS

VERY LOOSE
LOOSE

MEDIUM DENSE
DENSE

VERY DENSE

MOISTURE CONDITION

BLOWS/FOOT
(S.P.T.)1
0-4
4-10
10-30
30-50
OVER 50
DRY
MOIST
WET
Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to touch
Damp but no visible water
Visible freewater
SAMPLER SYMBOLS I Modified California (3-inch O.D.) Sampler bd California (2.5-inch O.D.) Sampler
~ S.P.T. Split Spoon (2-inch O.D.) Sampler
[I] Shelby Tube
D Continuous Core
~ Bag Samples
~ Grab Samples
rJ No Recovery
ENGE.O
-Expect ExcellenceCONSISTENCY

APPROXIMATE SHEAR

SIL TS AND CLAYS

LINE TYPES

VERY SOFT
SOFT

MEDIUM STIFF
STIFF

VERY STIFF
HARD
Solid - Layer Break
STRENGTH (PSF)2
0-250
250-500
500-1,000
1,000-2,000
2,000-4,000
> 4,000
Dashed - Gradational or approximate layer break

GROUND-WATER SYMBOLS
'Sl.. Groundwater level during drilling
_y Stabilized groundwater level
NOTES

1. Standard Penetration Tests (S.P.T.) number of blows for a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2-inch O.D. (1-3/8-inch I.D.) sampler, assuming 60% hammer efficiency

2. Approximate shear strength measured in field at time of drilling in units of pounds per square foot
g
t
Q)
0 5
10 ENGEO SOIL BORING 1-81
Expect Excellence
LATITUDE: 34.476006
Blue Cloud Bike Park
Santa Clarita, California
26461.000.001
DATE DRILLED: 10/09/2024
HOLE DEPTH: 9.5 ft
HOLE DIAMETER: 8 in
g
C:
0 1
Q)
iii
0 :c
C.
e!
(!)
Q)
C.

E
co
(f)
SURFACE ELEV.: 1607 ft(WGS84)
Visual Classification and Remarks
SILT (ML), light gray, very stiff, dry, medium plasticity, fine-grained sand, trace subrounded fine gravel
LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, hard, moist, medium plasticity,
trace fine-grained sand, trace subrounded fine gravel
decrease in subrounded fine gravel, Fe staining
CLAYEY SAND (SC), light gray, very dense, moist,
fine-grained sand
End of boring at 9½ feet below ground surface. No groundwater encountered at the time of drilling.

Cl
0 _J
0 :c
C.
e!
(!)
LONGITUDE: -118. 496294
LOGGED BY/ REVIEWED BY: BJC / THZ
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Martini Drilling
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER TYPE: 140 lb. Auto Trip
~
ii: I ~ .c. _J ~ C Q. ~ a 'ti' IJl
I -S C:
-0 _J c .e: ~ 2 Q) :::::!, ~ 2 .c. > ci5 Q) 0::, z.. a .l!l ~ C: _J ~ ~ Q)- 0 ·;;; C:
t::~ ·e IJl
o Q) (.) C: ~ ·- C. , ::i C: ~ Q) ci5 /Jl~
gz 0 IJl
::> ei u::: ::, la ~ iii 2:- C. Q)
·o 0 Q) E -e .c.
:a: (f) 0 Q) (.) :i::
<(
19 36-26-10 73.1 9.4
41 C
IJl
~
.. - Q)
~ Q) -Q)
o E 0 0
a. t
C:

Q)
Q.

13.8 115.5 3969 7939 >4.5
20 92
50/5
~
.e:

Q)
C:
co
2:
i2
g
t
Q)
0 5
10 ENGEO SOIL BORING 1-82
Expect Excellence
LATITUDE: 34.476121
Blue Cloud Bike Park
Santa Clarita, California
26461.000.001
DATE DRILLED: 10/09/2024
HOLE DEPTH: 9.5 ft
HOLE DIAMETER: 8 in
g
C:
0 l
Q)
iii
0 :c
C.
~
(!)
Q)
C.

E
ro
rJ)
SURFACE ELEV.: 1488 ft(WGS84)
Visual Classification and Remarks
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, very stiff, dry, medium
plasticity, fine- to medium-grained sand
LEAN CLAY WITH SAND (CL), brown, stiff, dry, medium
plasticity, fine- to medium-grained sand
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL), brown, stiff, dry to moist, medium plasticity, fine-grained sand
End of boring at 9½ feet below ground surface. No groundwater encountered at the time of drilling.

LONGITUDE: -118. 505945
LOGGED BY/ REVIEWED BY: BJC / THZ
DRILLING CONTRACTOR: Martini Drilling
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER TYPE: 140 lb. Auto Trip
Cl
0 ..J
0 :c
C.
~
(!)
'(#
. / ~ •':f
~ ~
-0
> 2 Cl) .3 ~ .2
o, t::~
gz
:::>
26 28
11 34
35-19-16
~ ~
1/)
Cl)
C:
u:::
59 71
70 7.7
10,2
9,0 96,5
~
-S
.c
a
C:
~
ci5
~ .c
rJ)
>4,5

LABORATORY TEST DATA
(ENGEO, 2024)

APPENDIX B
.5
100 <O
I
I
90 I
I
80 I
I
70 I
I
60 I
a::
w
z 50
I
I
ii: I
I- 40 z
w
I
I
0 30 a::
w
I
I
a. 20 I
I
10 I
I
0 I
100

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORT
ASTM D1140, Method A
.5 .5 .5 ~ c:: .5 .5 .5 M C\I ~ :;:~ ~~
0 :lj;
I 11 I II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I 11 I 11 I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I 11
I I II I I I 11

II I I I I I I I I II

I I I II
I I II I I I 11
I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I

I I I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I II I It I I I I I I
I I I I II I I I 11 I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I 11

I II I II I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II I I I I 1,
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 11 I I I II
10 1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

SAMPLE ID: [email protected]
DEPTH (ft): 2-3.5
LOCATION: 1-B1
• no s ecification rovided
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
LL= 36
Das =
D30 =
Cu =
Pl: ASTM D4318, Wet Method
Soak time = 180 min
USCS=ML
Dry sample weight= 137.6 g
Largest particle size < No. 4 Sieve
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461.000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce

0.01 Pl= 10
Dso =
D,s =
Cc =
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-26981 www.engeo.com

0.001
.5
100 <O
I
I
90 I
I
80 I
I
70 I
I
60 I
a::
w
z 50
I
I
ii: I
I- 40 z
w
I
I
0 30 a::
w
I
I
a. 20 I
I
10 I
I
0 I
100

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION REPORT
ASTM D1140, Method A
.5 .5 .5 ~ c:: .5 .5 .5 M C\I ~ :;:~ ~~
0 :lj;
I 11 I II I I I II I I I I Ill I I I I I I I I I I ~
I I 11 I 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I 11
I I II I I I 11

II I I I I I I I I I

I I I II
I I II I I I 11
I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I

I I I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I II I It I I I I I I
I I I I II I I I 11 I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I 11

I II I II I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II I I I I 1,
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 11 I I I II
10 1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

SAMPLE ID: [email protected]
DEPTH (ft): 6-7.5
LOCATION: 1-B1
• no s ecification rovided
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
. . LL=
Das =
D30 =
Cu =
USCS=
Soak time = 180 min
Dry sample weight= 233.6 g
Largest particle size ;;, No. 4 Sieve
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461.000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce

0.01 Pl=
Dso =
D,s =
Cc =
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-26981 www.engeo.com

0.001
.5
100 <O
I
I
90 I
I
80 I
I
70 I
I
60 I
a::
w
z 50
I
I
ii: I
I- 40 z
w
I
I
0 30 a::
w
I
I
a. 20 I
I
10 I
I
0 I
100

II I I I I I I I I I

I I I II
I I II I I I 11
I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I

I I I I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I II I It I I I I I I
I I I I II I I I 11 I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I 11

I II I II I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II I I I I 1,
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 11 I I I II
10 1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

SAMPLE ID: [email protected]
DEPTH (ft): 2-3.5
LOCATION: 1-B2
• no s ecification rovided
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
LL= 35
Das =
D30 =
Cu =
Pl: ASTM D4318, Wet Method
Soak time = 180 min
uses= CL
Dry sample weight = 187 g
Largest particle size ;;, No. 4 Sieve
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461.000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce

0.01 Pl= 16
Dso =
D,s =
Cc =
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-26981 www.engeo.com

0.001
.5
100 <O
I
I
90 I
I
80 I
I
70 I
I
60 I
a::
w
z 50
I
I
ii: I
I- 40 z
w
I
I
0 30 a::
w
I
I
a. 20 I
I
10 I
I
0 I
100

II I I I I I I I I

I I I II

I I II I I I
I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I

I I I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I II I It I I I I I I
I I I I II I I I 11 I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I 11

I II I II I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II I I I I 1,
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 11 I I I II
10 1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

SAMPLE ID: [email protected]
DEPTH (ft): 5-5.5
LOCATION: 1-B2
• no s ecification rovided
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
. - LL=
Das =
D30 =
Cu =
USCS=
Soak time = 180 min
Dry sample weight= 520.8 g
Largest particle size ;;, No. 4 Sieve
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461.000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce

0.01 Pl=
Dso =
D,s =
Cc =
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-26981 www.engeo.com

0.001
.5
100 <O
I
I
90 I
I
80 I
I
70 I
I
60 I
a::
w
z 50
I
I
ii: I
I- 40 z
w
I
I
0 30 a::
w
I
I
a. 20 I
I
10 I
I
0 I
100

II I I I I I I I I

W, I I I II

I I II I I I
I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I

I I I I II I I I II
I I I I I I I I II I It I I I I I I
I I I I II I I I 11 I I I I I I I I II I II I I I I
I I I I I I I I 11

I II I II I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I II I I I I 1,
II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 11 I I I II
10 1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE - mm.

SAMPLE ID: [email protected]
DEPTH (ft): 6-7.5
LOCATION: 1-B2
• no s ecification rovided
ENGEO
Expect Excellence
. . LL=
Das =
D30 =
Cu =
USCS=
Soak time = 180 min
Dry sample weight = 394 g
Largest particle size ;;, No. 4 Sieve
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461.000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce

0.01 Pl=
Dso =
D,s =
Cc =
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-26981 www.engeo.com

0.001
80 70
60 50
X
w
C
z 40
~
0 j:: 30
~ a. 20
10 LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
ASTM 04318
Dashed Line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural soils
MH or OH
0 -,~,------1-~ -+----+------,t----t---+--t----+---+--t----+---+--+----t 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00 11 0 120 130 140

LIQUID LIMIT
SAMPLE ID DEPTH (ft) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL Pl
1-B1
1-B2
2-3.5
2-3.5
See Exploration Logs
See Exploration Logs

SAMPLE ID TEST METHOD REMARKS
1-B1
1-B2
ENGEO - Expect ExcellencePl: ASTM D4318, Wet Method
Pl: ASTM D4318, Wet Method
CLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461 .000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/21/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce
36 35
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (925) 866-9000 IF: (888) 279-2698 I www.engeo.com 26 19
10 16

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST REPORT
(ASTM D2166)
Compressive Stress vs. Axial Strain Curve(s)
9000
C
f/)
a. 8000 -f/)
f/)
Q) 7000 _.
....

CJ)
.,,, ~
/ " " 6000 Q)
>
·w 5000 / " f/)
~ Q)
....
a. 4000 E
0 (.) 3000
"O
_.

Q)
2000 (J
Q)
....
....
0 1000 (.)
/
/
./"
/
I 0

0.0 0.5 1.0

BEFORE TEST
Test Moisture Content(%)
Dry Density (pct)
Saturation (%)
Void Ratio
Diameter (in)
Height (in)
Height-To-Diameter Ratio
Unconfined Compressive Strength (psf)
Undrained Shear Strength (psf)
Strain Rate (in/min)
Specific Gravity (ASSUMED)
Strain at Failure(%)
Test Remarks

1.5 2.0
Axial Strain (%)
~ [email protected]'
1-81 5-5.5'

13.77 115.5

79.6 0.47

2.400

5.730

2.39 7939
3969

0.050

2.720

1.92 2.5
ENGEO
PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461 .000.001 PH001
- Expect ExcellenceCLIENT: Hunsaker & Associates
LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
~

3.0 3.5 4.0
Test Date: 10/21/2024
Tested By: K. Paul
Reviewed By: K. Lecce
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 913551 T (925) 866-9000 I www.engeo.com 100
95 90
85 80
75 ~ 70 Ill
.9: 65 w
~ 60 ::::,
en
en 55
w
~ 50 Q.
z 45
0 en 40
z
c(
Q. 35
X
w 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
1000 900 800

R-VALUE TEST REPORT
CTM 301

R-VALUE
700 600 500 400 300
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
100
95 90
85 80
75 70
65 60
55 50
45 40
35 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
200 100 0

SAMPLE ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE LOCATION
RV-01 Very dark grayish brown silty CLAY N/A
w
::::,
...J
~ ~
SPECIMENS 1 2 3
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) 596
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf) 22
R-VALUE 33
MOISTURE CONTENT(%) 14.5
DRY DENSITY (pcf) 121 .3
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf) AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi R-VALUE AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi
ENGEO - Expect ExcellenceCLIENT: Hunsaker and Associates PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461 .000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/15/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce
392 246
9 4
24 18

15.4 16.2
117.6 118.8
5 27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-2698 I www.engeo.com 100
95 90
85 80
75 ~ 70 Ill
.9: 65 w
~ 60 ::::,
en
en 55
w
~ 50 Q.
z 45
0 en 40
z
c(
Q. 35
X
w 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
1000 900 800

R-VALUE TEST REPORT
CTM 301

R-VALUE
700 600 500 400 300
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
100
95 90
85 80
75 70
65 60
55 50
45 40
35 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
200 100 0

SAMPLE ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE LOCATION
RV-02 Very dark grayish brown silty CLAY N/A
w
::::,
...J
~ ~
SPECIMENS 1 2 3
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) 645
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf) 22
R-VALUE 30
MOISTURE CONTENT(%) 14.5
DRY DENSITY (pcf) 116.7
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf) AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi R-VALUE AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi
ENGEO - Expect ExcellenceCLIENT: Hunsaker and Associates PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461 .000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/15/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce
447 288
17 13
22 18

15.3 16.1
118.1 116.6
13 27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-2698 I www.engeo.com 100
95 90
85 80
75 ~ 70 Ill
.9: 65 w
~ 60 ::::,
en
en 55
w
~ 50 Q.
z 45
0 en 40
z
c(
Q. 35
X
w 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
1000 900 800

R-VALUE TEST REPORT
CTM 301

R-VALUE
700 600 500 400 300
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
100
95 90
85 80
75 70
65 60
55 50
45 40
35 30
25 20
15 10
5 0
200 100 0

SAMPLE ID MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE LOCATION
RV-03 Very dark grayish brown clayey SILT N/A
w
::::,
...J
~ ~
SPECIMENS 1 2 3
EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi)
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf)

R-VALUE
MOISTURE CONTENT(%)
DRY DENSITY (pcf)
405
4 11

15.5 119.2
EXPANSION PRESSURE (psf) AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi R-VALUE AT EXUDATION PRESSURE OF 300 psi
ENGEO - Expect ExcellenceCLIENT: Hunsaker and Associates PROJECT NAME: Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
PROJECT NO: 26461 .000.001 PH001
PROJECT LOCATION: Santa Clarita, CA
REPORT DATE: 10/16/2024
TESTED BY: K. Paul
REVIEWED BY: K. Lecce
288
4 8

16.4 118.2
4 TEST RESULT
113
0 6

17.3 116.7
27742 Hancock Parkway I Valencia, CA 91355 IT: (661) 257-4004 IF: (888) 279-2698 I www.engeo.com

LABORATORY TEST DATA
(CERCO, 2024)

APPENDIX C
21 October, 2024
Ms. Tania Zakaria
ENGEO Inc.
27742 Hancock Parkway
Valencia, CA 91355
Job No. 2410041
Cust. No. 13174
Subject: Project No.: 26309.000.001
Project Name: Blue Cloud Bike Park
Corrosivity Analysis - ASTM Test Methods
Dear Ms. Zakaria:

CERCO
analyt i ca l
1100 Willow Pass Court, Suite A
Concord, CA 94520-1006
925 462 2771 Fax. 925 462 2775
www.cercoanalytical.com
Pursuant to your request, CERCO Analytical has analyzed the soil samples submitted on October 15, 2024.

Based on the analytical results, this brief corrosivity evaluation is enclosed for your consideration.

Based upon the resistivity measurements, both samples are classified as "corrosive". All buried iron, steel, cast iron, ductile iron, galvanized steel and dielectric coated steel or iron should be properly protected against corrosion depending upon the critical nature of the structure. All buried metallic pressure piping such as ductile iron firewater pipelines should be protected against corrosion.

The chloride ion concentrations are none detected and 21 mg/kg and are determined to be insufficient to attack steel embedded in a concrete mo1tar coating.

The sulfate ion concentrations are 21 mg/kg and 110 mg/kg and are determined to be insufficient to damage reinforced concrete structures and cement mortar-coated steel at these locations.

The pH of the soils are 8.25 and 7.28, which does not present corrosion problems for buried iron, steel, mortar-coated steel and reinforced concrete structures.

The redox potentials are 120-m V and 190-m V. Both samples are indicative of potentially "moderately corrosive" soils resulting from anaerobic soil conditions.

This corrosivity evaluation is based on general corrosion engineering standards and is non-specific in nature. For specific long-term corrosion control design recommendations or consultation, please call JDH Corrosion Consultants, Inc. at (925) 927-6630.

We appreciate the opportunity of working with you on this project. lf you have any questions, or if you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Very truly yours,
CERCO ANALYTICAL, INC.

J ~ ow~ ,P ~
President
JDH/jdl
Enclosure
Client: ENGEO, Incorporated
Client's Project No.: 26309.000.001
Client's Project Name: Blue Cloud Bike Park
Date Sampled: 9-Oct-24
Date Received:

Matrix:
15-Oct-24
Soil
Authorization: Chain of Custody
Job/Sam.e.Ie No.
2410041-00 l
241004 1-002
Method:

Reporting Limit:

Date Analyzed:
1u$ Wll C~a~son V " 0"
Chemist
Samp_le I.D.

RV-1 @ l'
RV-2@ l'
Redox
(mV)
190
120
ASTM D1498
-
16-0ct-2024
£.H

8.25 7.28
ASTMD4972
-
16-0ct-2024
Conductivity
(uml10s/cm}*
-
-
ASTM DI 125M
-
-
• Results Reported on "As Received" Basis
N.D. - None Detected
Quality Control Summarv - All laboratory quality control parameters were found to be within established limits Resistivity
( I 00% Saturation)
(ohms-cm}
600
1,500
ASTM 057
-
17-0ct-2024
- ~ n ~ l ~ t ~?i
Sulfide
(mg/kg)*
-
-
ASTM D4658M
-
-
1100 Willow Pass Court, Suite A
Concord, CA 94520-1006
925 462 2771 Fax. 925 462 2775
www.cercoanalytical.com
Date of Report: 21-0ct-2024
Chloride
(mglkgl*
N.D.
21 ASTMD4327
15 16-0ct-2024
Sulfate
(Itl_g/kgl*
110
21 ASTM D4327
15 16-0ct-2024
Page No. I
ENGEO
E t Excellence ~
www.engeo.com
APPENDIX F:

HYDROLOGY STUDY
Hydrology Study
for
Blue Cloud Bike Park
City of Santa Clarita
Hunsaker Project No: 0317-001-001
November 15, 2024
Prepared for:

City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 270
Santa Clarita, CA, 91355-2196
Prepared by:

Eumir Ruanto, PE/QSD
Hunsaker and Associates, LA Inc.
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 23
Valencia, CA 91355
Telephone: (661) 294-2211 Fax: (661) 294-9890
Under the supervision of:
__________________________________________________
Jason H. Fukumitsu Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………….…1

1.1 Report Summary

1.2 Project Description

2. METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………....3

3. DESIGN CRITERIA………………………………………………………….…4

4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………….5

5. REFERENCES………………………………………………………….……….6

6. APPENDICES
A. Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (Existing Condition)

1. Existing Capital Storm Hydrologic Summary Table

2. TC Calculation

3. Capital Storm Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (LAR04) Result and Hydrograph
B. Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (Proposed Condition)

1. Proposed Capital Storm Hydrologic Summary Table

2. TC Calculation

3. Capital Storm Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (LAR04) Result and Hydrograph
C. Hydrologic Reference Graphs & Table

1. 50-Year, 24-Hour Isohyet (LACDPW)

2. Los Angeles County Proportion Impervious Data Table
D. Reference Plans:

1. FEMA FIRM Panel 06037C0810G, Effective June 02, 2021

2. Haskell Canyon 341-ML2
E. Technical Memorandum
F. Hydrology Maps:

1. Existing Condition Hydrology Map

2. Proposed Condition Hydrology Map
1 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Report Summary
The purpose of this report is to present the hydrology design and analysis for Blue Cloud Bike Park. The report analyzes existing and proposed development conditions for the Design 2-year clear storm which will serve as the criteria for the design of onsite storm drain drainage devices; the rest of other storm frequencies are also provided as references namely:
50-yr burned & bulked, Clear Frequencies (50, 25, 10, 5 and LID 85th Percentile).

A 24-Hour storm analysis based upon the Los Angeles County Rational and Modified Rational Methods of Hydrology was used for clear, burned, and burned and bulked conditions for the project watershed.

This report is divided into several sections. Section 1 contains the introduction; Section 2 discusses the methodology used in the hydrologic analysis; Section 3 summarizes the design criteria used; Section 4 includes the conclusions and recommendations of this report; Section 5 includes the references, and Section 6 includes the compilation of the calculations and other data/information supporting the analysis.

1.2 Project Description
The proposed project is located in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County and consists of approximately 5 acres of proposed disturbed grading area and an additional of about 5 acres of other activity areas within the adjacent natural terrain. The total property site is about 380 acres within its boundaries, see vicinity map below for reference.

At present, the entire property site is undeveloped and is being used as recreational hiking area with dirt trails. The proposed project site is a small development located on the west end of the property, within the Haskell Canyon Open Space, and just east of the Haskell Canyon.

The watershed tributary to the project site is about 128 acres, draining overland from east to west, and directly discharging into the Haskell Canyon creek. The watersheds natural terrain has elevations ranging from high of 1957 to low of 1448.

The proposed Blue Cloud development is a bike park development consisting of beginner and intermediate pump tracks, roadway/driveway access coming from City Highline Motorway Fire Road, picnic area, parking lot, bike trails and other related bike activity areas, and a small bathroom area located near the east site boundary and adjacent to Blue Cloud Road, serving the existing dirt parking area.
2 The proposed condition drainage watershed follows the existing condition drainage pattern, draining overland from east to west. A concrete J-drain with 2 culvert crossings will convey the drainage flow from the east and north, while a concrete v-ditch will convey the flow from the south. Both of these drainage devices drain directly into the Haskell Canyon creek.

VICINITY MAP
3 2. METHODOLOGY
The project site has a single tributary watershed of about 128 acres. The watershed is delineated based on the proposed site grading and existing topography from the tributary undeveloped areas. The proposed drainage watershed generally follows the natural drainage course. The watershed is then delineated into subareas of less than 40 acres for the hydrology analysis. Two hydrologic methods were used for the drainage analysis - the Rational Method and the Modified Rational Methods included in the Los Angeles County Hydrology Manual.

The time of concentration (Tc) for each subarea was computed using the Los Angeles County approved Time of Concentration calculator (HydroCalc Calculator). The calculator evaluates several hydrologic parameters such as soil type, land use, imperviousness, storm frequency, length and slope of each reach to calculate a time of concentration. This data was used with the Los Angeles County approved LAR04 software application to determine peak flow rates for the design storm event.

Using the times of concentration for each subarea, the Modified Rational Method was then used to calculate the various storm frequencies, 24-Hour peak runoff flow for each subarea.

In addition, the undeveloped tributary areas were further analyzed using a burned coefficient to calculate peak burned runoff rates for the 50-yr burned and bulked storm frequency. No burned coefficients were used for proposed developed areas.

The project’s land use and imperviousness were determined from the Land Use and Proportion Impervious Data provided in the Los Angeles County Hydrology Manual. Soil types and rainfall corresponding to each subarea were obtained from the isohyetal map (see Appendices).

The project site is located in a single debris potential area within the Santa Clara Basin:

DPA- 8. Debris volumes were calculated for each undeveloped subarea based on the debris production rates. The project is located within the Santa Clara River Watershed and its undeveloped areas were analyzed for the debris potential, as well as peak burned and bulked runoff rates.

Bulking effects occur when debris is considered with the peak burned flows. Within the Santa Clara Watershed, DPA- 8, the burned and bulked peak runoff rates were calculated by multiplying the peak burned runoff rates by the appropriate bulking factor.

A summary of the project’s burned and bulk flows, and debris volumes can be found in Hydrologic Summary Tables.
4 3. DESIGN CRITERIA
Los Angeles County requires that several design criteria be followed when using the Rational and Modified Rational Method of Hydrology to determine capital flood flow.

The 50-year, 24-hour rainfall isohyet used in the hydrologic calculations were obtained from the Los Angeles County Hydrology Manual’s Hydrologic Maps, it is 5.5”.

The soil number within the project site were also determined from the hydrologic map as 099.

The project used 1% imperviousness for existing natural or undeveloped areas, and 2% for developed regional parks and recreation areas, as listed on the Proportion Impervious Data table.

The project falls into a single debris potential area in the Santa Clara Basin, DPA-8. The respective debris and bulking factors are 35,500 cy / mi2and 1.360, respectively.

The design criteria used is summarized below:

Hydrology Method: Los Angeles County Flood Control District Rational Method and Modified Rational Method.

Hydrology Modeling Software LAR04
Design Storm: 2-year clear storm frequency
50-Year Isohyet: 5.5”
Soil Types: 099
Land Use and Imperviousness: Natural or undeveloped areas (1%) Developed regional parks and recreation areas (2%)
Debris Potential Zone: DPA-8 (35,500 cy / mi2); area < 0.1 mi2 Peak Bulking Rate: 1.360; DPA-8 (area < 0.1 mi2)
5 4. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The table below summarizes the conditions at the outlet area, pre- and post-development:

Outlet Summary
Pre-Development Post-Development Delta
Area
(Ac)
Q2
(cfs)
Area
(Ac)
Q2
(cfs)
Area
(Ac)
Q2
(cfs)
OUTLET 128.2 36.0 128.2 35.3 0 -0.7
Based upon the hydrologic analysis performed, the 2-year storm post-developed condition has resulted in an overall decrease of 0.7 cfs compared to its pre-development condition, therefore will not pose any adverse impact on downstream offsite properties.

The design storm of 2-year frequency, as the level of flood protection and drainage devices design criteria, was chosen per City of Santa Clarita’s (client) request (see Appendix E:

Technical Memorandum). However, this report provided other storm frequencies, as references.

In addition, (1) the onsite Low Impact development (LID) analysis will be provided under separate report; (2) the analysis and design of the access road/driveway and culvert crossings within the Haskell Canyon will also be provided under separate permit.

Finally, the proposed development will include drainage devices and infrastructures to sufficiently mitigate onsite impacts such as increased velocity --- will provide energy dissipaters consisting of riprap, as necessary, to prevent erosion. Preliminary layouts of the drainage devices are shown on the Proposed Conditions Map. Other detailed calculations and maps can be found in the Appendices.

I
6 5. REFERENCES
i. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Hydrology Manual, January 2006
ii. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Sedimentation Manual, March 2006

6. APPENDICES
A. Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (Existing Condition)

1. Capital Storm Hydrologic Summary Table

2. TC Calculations

3. Storm Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (LAR04)
Result and Hydrograph
2-yr Clear (DESIGN STORM) JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
2-Yr
Depth
(in)
2-Yr Tc
(min)
Q2
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ2
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 2.1285 25 12.1 38.3 12.1
2A 35.8 0.01 98 2.1285 30 9.8 74.1 21.0
3A 8.7 0.01 98 2.1285 20 3.2 82.8 23.8
4A 38.8 0.01 98 2.1285 30 10.6 121.6 34.0
5A 6.6 0.01 98 2.1285 19 2.6 128.2 36.0
50-yr BB JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
50-Yr
Depth
(in)
50-Yr
Tc
(min)
Q50b
(cfs)
Q50bb
(cfs)
DPV
(cy)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ50b
(cfs)
ƩQ50bb
(cfs)
ƩDPV
(cy)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 5.5 9 80.7 109.8

2,124 38.3 80.7
2A 35.8 0.01 98 5.5 12 64.8 88.1

1,986 74.1 138.7
2A 74.1 138.7 187.2 3,850
3A 8.7 0.01 98 5.5 8 19.4 26.4

483 82.8 153.8
3A 82.8 153.8 206.8 4,108
4A 38.8 0.01 98 5.5 14 64.6 87.9

2,152 121.6 217.1
4A 121.6 217.1 286.6 4,940
5A 6.6 0.01 98 5.5 7 15.8 21.4

366 128.2 225.4
5A 128.2 225.4 296.8 5,108
50-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
50-Yr
Depth
(in)
50-Yr
Tc
(min)
Q50
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ50
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 5.5 9 78.4 38.3 78.4
2A 35.8 0.01 98 5.5 12 62.7 74.1 134.2
3A 8.7 0.01 98 5.5 8 18.9 82.8 148.7
4A 38.8 0.01 98 5.5 14 62.5 121.6 209.8
5A 6.6 0.01 98 5.5 7 15.3 128.2 217.6
25-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
25-Yr
Depth
(in)
25-Yr
Tc
(min)
Q25
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ25
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 4.829 10 62.3 38.3 62.3
2A 35.8 0.01 98 4.829 13 49.9 74.1 106.5
3A 8.7 0.01 98 4.829 9 14.9 82.8 118.4
4A 38.8 0.01 98 4.829 16 48.2 121.6 164.8
5A 6.6 0.01 98 4.829 8 11.9 128.2 172.2
10-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
10-Yr
Depth
(in)
10-Yr
Tc
(min)
Q10
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ10
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 3.927 12 44.5 38.3 44.5
2A 35.8 0.01 98 3.927 16 35.4 74.1 76.6
3A 8.7 0.01 98 3.927 10 11.3 82.8 85.8
4A 38.8 0.01 98 3.927 19 34.6 121.6 119.5
5A 6.6 0.01 98 3.927 10 8.6 128.2 125.5
5-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
5-Yr
Depth
(in)
5-Yr Tc
(min)
Q5
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ5
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 3.212 15 29.6 38.3 29.6
2A 35.8 0.01 98 3.212 20 22.9 74.1 50.4
3A 8.7 0.01 98 3.212 13 7.3 82.8 56.6
4A 38.8 0.01 98 3.212 24 22.1 121.6 78.3
5A 6.6 0.01 98 3.212 12 5.8 128.2 82.5
85th Percentile JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
LID
Depth
(in)
LID Tc
(min)
QLID
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQLID
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 98 0.85 30 8.8 38.3 8.8
2A 35.8 0.01 98 0.85 30 8.2 74.1 16.1
3A 8.7 0.01 98 0.85 30 2.0 82.8 18.0
4A 38.8 0.01 98 0.85 30 8.9 121.6 26.4
5A 6.6 0.01 98 0.85 30 1.5 128.2 27.7
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.596
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4842
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4884
Time of Concentration (min) 25.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.1487
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.1487
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.998
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 43472.5092
12 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
10 ~
8 00
~ 6 3:
0 u::::
4~
2~
0 I I I '-
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4622
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.0528
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.0528
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.9231
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 40208.846
10 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)
8 6~
00 ~
3:
0 u:::: 4
2~
ov I I I I '-
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.6619
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.5198
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.5236
Time of Concentration (min) 20.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 3.0153
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 3.0153
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2289
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 9969.706

3.5 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)

3.0 ~

2.5 ~ 2.0
~
3:
0 u:: 1.5

1.0 05
\....._
00 I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4622
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.8114
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.8114
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.0004
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 43578.3024
10 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)
8 6~
00 ~
3:
0 u:::: 4
2~
ov I I I I I I "-..
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.6781
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.5285
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.5322
Time of Concentration (min) 19.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 2.3819
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 2.3819
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.174
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 7577.9166

2.5 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)
2 .. 0
1 5 ~
~
~
3:
0 u:: 1 0

0.5 ~
00 I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.4894
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.8094
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8103
Time of Concentration (min) 9.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 77.255
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 77.255
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 4.1839
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 182251.6223
80 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
70 ~
60 50
'7ii'
ti
i'40
0 u::
30 20
10 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.1745
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7898
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7909
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 61.5675
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 61.5675
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.9071
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 170193.9051
70 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.6311
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.815
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8159
Time of Concentration (min) 8.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 18.6751
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 18.6751
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.9506
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 41408.7232
20 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)
15 '7ii'
ti i' 10 0
u::
5 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.0226
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7803
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7815
Time of Concentration (min) 14.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 61.3276
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 61.3276
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 4.2323
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 184357.4058
70 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.8015
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.8215
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8222
Time of Concentration (min) 7.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 15.203
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 15.203
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.7212
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 31417.2034
16 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)
14 ~
12 10
00 ~ 8 3:
0 u::::
6 4
2 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.0801
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7839
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.785
Time of Concentration (min) 10.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 62.541
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 62.541
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.3935
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 147822.3506
70 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 \
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.8388
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7633
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7646
Time of Concentration (min) 13.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 50.3332
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 50.3332
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.1674
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 137971.8965
60 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)
50 ~
40 '7ii'
ti i' 30 0
u::
20 ~
10 ~
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.1857
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7905
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7916
Time of Concentration (min) 9.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 15.0515
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 15.0515
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.7711
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 33588.6407
16 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)
14 ~
12 10
00 ~ 8 3:
0 u::::
6 4
2 0 \
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.6678
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7467
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7482
Time of Concentration (min) 16.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 48.4174
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 48.4174
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.4294
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 149384.5901
50 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)
40 30 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 20
10 ~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.3101
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7982
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7992
Time of Concentration (min) 8.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 12.1853
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 12.1853
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.5852
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 25489.3607
14 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)
12 ~
10 00 8
~
3:
0 u:::: 6
4 2
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.5526
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7355
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7372
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 43.8361
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 43.8361
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.4579
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 107068.1453
45 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
40 35 ~
30 '7ii' 25 ~
~
3:
.2 20 LL.
15 ~
10 5~
\_
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.3563
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7055
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7075
Time of Concentration (min) 16.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 34.3512
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 34.3512
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.2906
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 99780.235
35 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)
30 ~
25 '7ii' 20
~
3:
0 U:: 15
10 5
I.._
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.6915
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.749
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7505
Time of Concentration (min) 10.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.0446
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.0446
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.5588
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 24339.8255
12 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)
10 ~
8 00
~ 6 3:
0 u::::
4~
2~
0 \..
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.251
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6873
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6894
Time of Concentration (min) 19.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.4654
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.4654
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.479
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 107983.7584
35 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)
30 ~
25 '7ii' 20
~
3:
0 U:: 15
10 5
'--
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.6915
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.749
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7505
Time of Concentration (min) 10.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.3787
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.3787
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.4239
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 18464.6952
9 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)
8 7 ~
6 '7n 5 ~
~
3:
..Q 4 LL.
3~
2 1~
0 \.._
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.1435
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6687
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.671
Time of Concentration (min) 15.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 29.3872
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 29.3872
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.8165
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 79124.9286
30 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
25 ~
20 '7ii'
ti i' 15 0
u::
10 ~
5~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.9989
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6435
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6461
Time of Concentration (min) 20.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 23.1033
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 23.1033
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.6951
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 73837.929
25 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)
20 15 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 10
5~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.223
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6825
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6846
Time of Concentration (min) 13.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.285
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.285
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.4129
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 17986.1744
8 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)
7 ~
6 5
'7n
'ti
i4
0 u::
3 2
1 '- 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.9168
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6184
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6212
Time of Concentration (min) 24.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 22.0991
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 22.0991
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.8316
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 79784.2178
25 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)
20 15 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 10
5~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.2699
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6906
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6927
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.8057
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.8057
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.3134
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 13651.4641
6 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)
5 ~
4 '7n
'ti
i'3
0 u::
2~
1~
'-- 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1085
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 133.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.4488
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.4488
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2906
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 12660.4458
045 Hydrograph (BLUE: 1A)
'\ 040

0.35 ~

0.30 ~ 0.25 ~
~
3:
~ 0.20
015~

0.10 005 v
000 I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 1984.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.137
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.0969
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 169.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3748
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3748
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2717
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 11835.9243
040 Hydrograph (BLUE: 2A)

0.35 ~

0.30 ~

0.25 00
u i 0.20
0 Li::

0.15 0.10

0.05 v
000 I I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 3A
Area (ac) 8.7
Flow Path Length (ft) 1267.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.262
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1171
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 113.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.1101
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.1101
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.066
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 2875.6711

0.12 Hydrograph (BLUE: 3A)
0 10~

0.08 00
u i 0.06
0 Li::

0.04 ~

0.02 ~
ooo v I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.8
Flow Path Length (ft) 2601.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.161
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.0906
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 195.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3798
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3798
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2945
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 12829.594
040 Hydrograph (BLUE: 4A)

0.35 ~

0.30 ~

0.25 00
u i 0.20
0 Li::

0.15 0.10

0.05 000 I I I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/EX BLUE Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 6.6
Flow Path Length (ft) 994.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.157
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1207
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 106.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.086
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.086
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.0501
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 2181.4969

0.09 Hydrograph (BLUE: SA)

0.08 0.07 ~

0.06 ~ 0.05 ~
~
3:
0 0.04 u::::

0.03 ~

0.02 oo, v
000 I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50B INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 50‐YR DESIGN BURN STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 80.74 38.3 80.74 2 1198. .03800 .00 .00 0. 299 9 A28 .01 1 2A 35.8 64.79 74.1 138.65 2 288. .03500 .00 .00 0. 299 12 A28 .01 1 3A 8.7 19.40 82.8 153.79 2 154. .03900 .00 .00 0. 299 8 A28 .01 1 4A 38.8 64.64 121.6 217.10 2 485. .04900 .00 .00 0. 299 14 A28 .01 1 5A 6.6 15.75 128.2 225.37 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 299 7 A28 .01 Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50B INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 50‐YR DESIGN BURN, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 2.84 200 2.95 300 3.10 400 3.27
500 3.51 600 3.77 700 4.09 800 4.56 900 5.23
1000 6.55 1050 13.24 1100 24.36 1110 31.38 1120 40.68
1130 50.74 1131 51.96 1132 53.20 1133 54.64 1134 56.16
1135 57.77 1136 59.28 1137 60.84 1138 62.52 1139 64.46
1140 66.45 1141 68.93 1142 71.75 1143 74.95 1144 78.30
1145 82.28 1146 86.88 1147 92.13 1148 97.34 1149 106.01 1150 119.09 1151 136.43 1152 156.21 1153 178.08 1154 197.68 1155 212.76 1156 221.14 1157 225.37 1158 224.92 1159 219.82 1160 211.29 1161 201.29 1162 188.25 1163 171.18 1164 150.55 1165 129.12 1166 108.53 1167 89.60 1168 74.29 1169 63.60 1170 56.45 1171 50.93 1172 46.54 1173 42.83 1174 39.75
1175 37.13 1176 34.79 1177 32.68 1178 30.86 1179 29.21
1180 27.60 1181 26.17 1182 24.95 1183 23.81 1184 22.79
1185 21.79 1186 20.87 1187 19.96 1188 19.09 1189 18.23
1190 17.48 1191 16.75 1192 16.06 1193 15.39 1194 14.80
1195 14.27 1196 13.69 1197 13.11 1198 12.66 1199 12.22
1200 11.72 1201 11.31 1202 10.84 1203 10.38 1204 10.01
1205 9.63 1206 9.27 1207 8.97 1208 8.59 1209 8.21
1210 7.88 1211 7.57 1212 7.30 1213 7.08 1214 6.88
1215 6.73 1216 6.60 1217 6.49 1218 6.40 1219 6.31
1220 6.22 1221 6.15 1222 6.08 1223 6.00 1224 5.94
1225 5.88 1226 5.83 1227 5.78 1228 5.74 1229 5.70
1230 5.66 1231 5.62 1232 5.57 1233 5.52 1234 5.49
1235 5.45 1236 5.42 1237 5.40 1238 5.36 1239 5.33
1240 5.28 1241 5.25 1242 5.22 1243 5.17 1244 5.14
1245 5.11 1246 5.09 1247 5.07 1248 5.04 1249 4.99
1250 4.98 1251 4.94 1252 4.92 1253 4.89 1254 4.86
1255 4.83 1256 4.82 1257 4.78 1258 4.75 1259 4.74
1260 4.70 1261 4.68 1262 4.66 1263 4.63 1264 4.61
1265 4.59 1266 4.56 1267 4.55 1268 4.53 1269 4.52
1270 4.50 1271 4.48 1272 4.46 1273 4.44 1274 4.41
1275 4.38 1276 4.37 1277 4.36 1278 4.35 1279 4.33
1280 4.32 1281 4.31 1282 4.30 1283 4.26 1284 4.24
1285 4.23 1286 4.22 1287 4.20 1288 4.20 1289 4.18
1290 4.17 1291 4.14 1292 4.11 1293 4.08 1294 4.06
1295 4.04 1296 4.04 1297 4.03 1298 4.01 1299 3.99
1300 3.98 1310 3.84 1320 3.76 1330 3.63 1340 3.49
1350 3.41 1360 3.38 1370 3.27 1380 3.20 1390 3.12
1400 3.06 1420 2.96 1440 2.84 1460 2.69 1500 2.69
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 17.67(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 50‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 78.37 38.3 78.37 2 1198. .03800 .00 .00 0. 99 9 A28 .01 1 2A 35.8 62.72 74.1 134.17 2 288. .03500 .00 .00 0. 99 12 A28 .01 1 3A 8.7 18.85 82.8 148.73 2 154. .03900 .00 .00 0. 99 8 A28 .01 1 4A 38.8 62.46 121.6 209.84 2 485. .04900 .00 .00 0. 99 14 A28 .01 1 5A 6.6 15.32 128.2 217.64 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 7 A28 .01 Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 50‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 1.75 200 1.82 300 1.91 400 2.02
500 2.16 600 2.31 700 2.51 800 2.79 900 3.19
1000 4.08 1050 10.43 1100 21.22 1110 27.90 1120 36.90
1130 46.64 1131 47.81 1132 49.00 1133 50.40 1134 51.87
1135 53.43 1136 54.91 1137 56.43 1138 58.05 1139 59.93
1140 61.86 1141 64.28 1142 67.00 1143 70.12 1144 73.38
1145 77.26 1146 81.74 1147 86.86 1148 91.96 1149 100.41 1150 113.13 1151 130.06 1152 149.41 1153 170.85 1154 190.11 1155 205.01 1156 213.34 1157 217.64 1158 217.28 1159 212.50 1160 204.23 1161 194.53 1162 181.86 1163 165.24 1164 145.12 1165 124.18 1166 104.07 1167 85.53 1168 70.51 1169 59.96 1170 52.91 1171 47.46 1172 43.16 1173 39.52 1174 36.48
1175 33.93 1176 31.64 1177 29.57 1178 27.77 1179 26.18
1180 24.63 1181 23.23 1182 22.04 1183 20.90 1184 19.93
1185 18.97 1186 18.08 1187 17.20 1188 16.36 1189 15.52
1190 14.79 1191 14.08 1192 13.41 1193 12.76 1194 12.19
1195 11.67 1196 11.11 1197 10.53 1198 10.11 1199 9.68
1200 9.21 1201 8.82 1202 8.37 1203 7.93 1204 7.57
1205 7.20 1206 6.85 1207 6.56 1208 6.20 1209 5.85
1210 5.53 1211 5.23 1212 4.97 1213 4.75 1214 4.57
1215 4.42 1216 4.29 1217 4.18 1218 4.08 1219 4.00
1220 3.93 1221 3.87 1222 3.81 1223 3.75 1224 3.70
1225 3.66 1226 3.62 1227 3.58 1228 3.55 1229 3.52
1230 3.49 1231 3.46 1232 3.43 1233 3.40 1234 3.38
1235 3.35 1236 3.33 1237 3.32 1238 3.29 1239 3.27
1240 3.25 1241 3.22 1242 3.21 1243 3.18 1244 3.16
1245 3.14 1246 3.13 1247 3.11 1248 3.09 1249 3.07
1250 3.06 1251 3.04 1252 3.02 1253 3.00 1254 2.99
1255 2.97 1256 2.96 1257 2.94 1258 2.92 1259 2.91
1260 2.89 1261 2.88 1262 2.86 1263 2.85 1264 2.83
1265 2.82 1266 2.80 1267 2.80 1268 2.79 1269 2.78
1270 2.76 1271 2.75 1272 2.74 1273 2.73 1274 2.71
1275 2.69 1276 2.69 1277 2.68 1278 2.67 1279 2.66
1280 2.65 1281 2.65 1282 2.64 1283 2.62 1284 2.61
1285 2.60 1286 2.59 1287 2.58 1288 2.58 1289 2.57
1290 2.56 1291 2.55 1292 2.53 1293 2.51 1294 2.50
1295 2.49 1296 2.49 1297 2.48 1298 2.47 1299 2.46
1300 2.45 1310 2.37 1320 2.31 1330 2.24 1340 2.16
1350 2.10 1360 2.08 1370 2.02 1380 1.98 1390 1.93
1400 1.89 1420 1.83 1440 1.76 1460 1.66 1500 1.66
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 14.17(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A25 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 25‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 62.27 38.3 62.27 2 1198. .03800 .00 .00 0. 99 10 A24 .01 1 2A 35.8 49.85 74.1 106.48 2 288. .03500 .00 .00 0. 99 13 A24 .01 1 3A 8.7 14.88 82.8 118.43 2 154. .03900 .00 .00 0. 99 9 A24 .01 1 4A 38.8 48.24 121.6 164.79 2 485. .04900 .00 .00 0. 99 16 A24 .01 1 5A 6.6 11.93 128.2 172.16 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 8 A24 .01 Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A25 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 25‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 1.50 200 1.56 300 1.64 400 1.73
500 1.85 600 1.98 700 2.15 800 2.39 900 2.73
1000 3.30 1050 5.71 1100 14.01 1110 19.39 1120 27.21
1130 35.72 1131 36.65 1132 37.62 1133 38.68 1134 39.84
1135 41.08 1136 42.38 1137 43.73 1138 45.12 1139 46.51
1140 48.04 1141 49.81 1142 51.78 1143 54.16 1144 56.68
1145 59.70 1146 63.21 1147 67.19 1148 71.36 1149 77.74
1150 87.23 1151 99.84 1152 114.60 1153 130.68 1154 145.56 1155 157.51 1156 166.09 1157 170.64 1158 172.16 1159 170.51 1160 166.15 1161 159.69 1162 152.31 1163 142.84 1164 131.44 1165 118.12 1166 102.88 1167 87.32 1168 72.89 1169 60.29 1170 50.12 1171 42.92 1172 37.95 1173 34.08 1174 30.94
1175 28.13 1176 25.80 1177 23.74 1178 21.88 1179 20.30
1180 18.87 1181 17.65 1182 16.49 1183 15.43 1184 14.43
1185 13.56 1186 12.81 1187 11.99 1188 11.22 1189 10.48
1190 9.72 1191 9.11 1192 8.55 1193 8.04 1194 7.50
1195 7.00 1196 6.50 1197 6.05 1198 5.67 1199 5.35
1200 5.07 1201 4.83 1202 4.63 1203 4.46 1204 4.31
1205 4.18 1206 4.07 1207 3.96 1208 3.87 1209 3.79
1210 3.71 1211 3.65 1212 3.59 1213 3.54 1214 3.49
1215 3.44 1216 3.40 1217 3.36 1218 3.33 1219 3.30
1220 3.26 1221 3.22 1222 3.20 1223 3.17 1224 3.14
1225 3.12 1226 3.09 1227 3.07 1228 3.04 1229 3.02
1230 2.99 1231 2.97 1232 2.95 1233 2.93 1234 2.91
1235 2.88 1236 2.86 1237 2.84 1238 2.83 1239 2.80
1240 2.79 1241 2.77 1242 2.76 1243 2.74 1244 2.71
1245 2.69 1246 2.68 1247 2.66 1248 2.65 1249 2.63
1250 2.62 1251 2.60 1252 2.60 1253 2.58 1254 2.57
1255 2.56 1256 2.55 1257 2.53 1258 2.52 1259 2.51
1260 2.50 1261 2.49 1262 2.47 1263 2.46 1264 2.45
1265 2.45 1266 2.43 1267 2.42 1268 2.41 1269 2.40
1270 2.39 1271 2.37 1272 2.36 1273 2.34 1274 2.34
1275 2.33 1276 2.32 1277 2.31 1278 2.30 1279 2.29
1280 2.28 1281 2.27 1282 2.26 1283 2.25 1284 2.24
1285 2.23 1286 2.22 1287 2.21 1288 2.20 1289 2.19
1290 2.18 1291 2.18 1292 2.17 1293 2.16 1294 2.15
1295 2.15 1296 2.14 1297 2.13 1298 2.12 1299 2.11
1300 2.11 1310 2.03 1320 1.96 1330 1.92 1340 1.89
1350 1.82 1360 1.77 1370 1.73 1380 1.69 1390 1.67
1400 1.64 1420 1.56 1440 1.52 1460 1.42 1500 1.42
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 11.19(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A10 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 10‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 44.52 38.3 44.52 2 1198. .03800 .00 .00 0. 99 12 A20 .01 1 2A 35.8 35.42 74.1 76.57 2 288. .03500 .00 .00 0. 99 16 A20 .01 1 3A 8.7 11.34 82.8 85.79 2 154. .03900 .00 .00 0. 99 10 A20 .01 1 4A 38.8 34.63 121.6 119.50 2 485. .04900 .00 .00 0. 99 19 A20 .01 1 5A 6.6 8.60 128.2 125.50 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 10 A20 .01 Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A10 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 10‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 1.25 200 1.30 300 1.37 400 1.44
500 1.54 600 1.65 700 1.80 800 1.99 900 2.28
1000 2.75 1050 3.35 1100 7.30 1110 11.17 1120 17.35
1130 24.38 1131 25.05 1132 25.78 1133 26.55 1134 27.37
1135 28.28 1136 29.23 1137 30.32 1138 31.53 1139 32.80
1140 34.10 1141 35.45 1142 36.88 1143 38.51 1144 40.23
1145 42.23 1146 44.62 1147 47.34 1148 50.35 1149 54.89
1150 61.32 1151 69.86 1152 79.89 1153 91.05 1154 101.50 1155 110.11 1156 116.61 1157 121.43 1158 124.71 1159 125.50 1160 124.35 1161 121.38 1162 117.32 1163 112.48 1164 107.67 1165 102.24 1166 95.89 1167 88.39 1168 79.51 1169 69.42 1170 59.07 1171 49.36 1172 40.80 1173 33.69 1174 28.50
1175 24.83 1176 22.00 1177 19.58 1178 17.46 1179 15.73
1180 14.25 1181 12.91 1182 11.68 1183 10.60 1184 9.68
1185 8.82 1186 8.03 1187 7.29 1188 6.67 1189 6.12
1190 5.65 1191 5.28 1192 4.97 1193 4.70 1194 4.47
1195 4.28 1196 4.12 1197 3.97 1198 3.85 1199 3.74
1200 3.64 1201 3.55 1202 3.48 1203 3.41 1204 3.35
1205 3.29 1206 3.23 1207 3.19 1208 3.14 1209 3.09
1210 3.05 1211 3.02 1212 2.98 1213 2.94 1214 2.91
1215 2.88 1216 2.85 1217 2.81 1218 2.78 1219 2.75
1220 2.73 1221 2.70 1222 2.68 1223 2.66 1224 2.64
1225 2.62 1226 2.60 1227 2.58 1228 2.56 1229 2.54
1230 2.52 1231 2.51 1232 2.49 1233 2.47 1234 2.46
1235 2.44 1236 2.43 1237 2.41 1238 2.40 1239 2.38
1240 2.37 1241 2.35 1242 2.33 1243 2.32 1244 2.30
1245 2.27 1246 2.26 1247 2.25 1248 2.23 1249 2.22
1250 2.21 1251 2.19 1252 2.18 1253 2.17 1254 2.16
1255 2.15 1256 2.14 1257 2.13 1258 2.11 1259 2.10
1260 2.09 1261 2.08 1262 2.07 1263 2.07 1264 2.06
1265 2.04 1266 2.04 1267 2.03 1268 2.02 1269 2.01
1270 2.00 1271 1.99 1272 1.99 1273 1.97 1274 1.96
1275 1.96 1276 1.95 1277 1.94 1278 1.93 1279 1.92
1280 1.91 1281 1.90 1282 1.90 1283 1.89 1284 1.88
1285 1.87 1286 1.87 1287 1.85 1288 1.85 1289 1.84
1290 1.83 1291 1.83 1292 1.82 1293 1.82 1294 1.81
1295 1.81 1296 1.80 1297 1.79 1298 1.78 1299 1.78
1300 1.77 1310 1.70 1320 1.65 1330 1.61 1340 1.56
1350 1.53 1360 1.48 1370 1.44 1380 1.42 1390 1.39
1400 1.36 1420 1.31 1440 1.27 1460 1.18 1500 1.18
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 8.50(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A5 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 5‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A5 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 5‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 1.00 200 1.04 300 1.09 400 1.15
500 1.23 600 1.32 700 1.44 800 1.59 900 1.82
1000 2.20 1050 2.68 1100 3.41 1110 4.24 1120 7.33
1130 12.58 1131 13.13 1132 13.68 1133 14.29 1134 14.91
1135 15.59 1136 16.29 1137 17.02 1138 17.81 1139 18.69
1140 19.63 1141 20.70 1142 21.86 1143 23.10 1144 24.44
1145 25.85 1146 27.42 1147 29.21 1148 31.13 1149 33.95
1150 37.77 1151 42.88 1152 49.04 1153 55.95 1154 62.55
1155 68.30 1156 72.87 1157 76.51 1158 79.34 1159 81.32
1160 82.46 1161 82.22 1162 81.29 1163 79.53 1164 77.14
1165 74.30 1166 71.60 1167 68.64 1168 65.49 1169 62.11
1170 58.24 1171 53.72 1172 48.68 1173 43.32 1174 37.46
1175 31.55 1176 26.11 1177 21.29 1178 17.16 1179 14.02
1180 11.84 1181 10.13 1182 8.66 1183 7.45 1184 6.63
1185 5.98 1186 5.46 1187 5.04 1188 4.69 1189 4.40
1190 4.15 1191 3.96 1192 3.80 1193 3.65 1194 3.52
1195 3.40 1196 3.30 1197 3.20 1198 3.12 1199 3.04
1200 2.97 1201 2.91 1202 2.86 1203 2.80 1204 2.75
1205 2.70 1206 2.66 1207 2.62 1208 2.59 1209 2.55
1210 2.52 1211 2.49 1212 2.46 1213 2.43 1214 2.40
1215 2.37 1216 2.34 1217 2.32 1218 2.29 1219 2.26
1220 2.24 1221 2.22 1222 2.20 1223 2.18 1224 2.16
1225 2.14 1226 2.12 1227 2.11 1228 2.09 1229 2.07
1230 2.06 1231 2.04 1232 2.02 1233 2.01 1234 1.99
1235 1.98 1236 1.97 1237 1.95 1238 1.94 1239 1.92
1240 1.91 1241 1.89 1242 1.88 1243 1.87 1244 1.86
1245 1.85 1246 1.84 1247 1.84 1248 1.83 1249 1.81
1250 1.80 1251 1.79 1252 1.78 1253 1.77 1254 1.75
1255 1.74 1256 1.73 1257 1.72 1258 1.71 1259 1.70
1260 1.70 1261 1.69 1262 1.68 1263 1.68 1264 1.67
1265 1.66 1266 1.66 1267 1.64 1268 1.63 1269 1.62
1270 1.61 1271 1.60 1272 1.59 1273 1.58 1274 1.58
1275 1.57 1276 1.57 1277 1.57 1278 1.56 1279 1.56
1280 1.55 1281 1.54 1282 1.53 1283 1.52 1284 1.52
1285 1.51 1286 1.50 1287 1.50 1288 1.50 1289 1.49
1290 1.48 1291 1.47 1292 1.47 1293 1.46 1294 1.46
1295 1.45 1296 1.45 1297 1.44 1298 1.44 1299 1.43
1300 1.43 1310 1.38 1320 1.34 1330 1.29 1340 1.26
1350 1.23 1360 1.20 1370 1.16 1380 1.12 1390 1.09
1400 1.08 1420 1.06 1440 1.02 1460 .95 1500 .95
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 6.10(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A2 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 2‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A2 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 2‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 .69 200 .71 300 .75 400 .79
500 .84 600 .91 700 .99 800 1.09 900 1.25
1000 1.50 1050 1.83 1100 2.34 1110 2.50 1120 2.78
1130 3.17 1131 3.21 1132 3.26 1133 3.30 1134 3.36
1135 3.44 1136 3.52 1137 3.62 1138 3.72 1139 3.87
1140 4.05 1141 4.34 1142 4.69 1143 5.12 1144 5.63
1145 6.21 1146 6.90 1147 7.71 1148 8.61 1149 9.85
1150 11.47 1151 13.71 1152 16.47 1153 19.62 1154 22.76
1155 25.58 1156 27.88 1157 29.76 1158 31.36 1159 32.74
1160 33.92 1161 34.85 1162 35.53 1163 35.89 1164 36.02
1165 35.93 1166 35.67 1167 35.27 1168 34.53 1169 33.67
1170 32.65 1171 31.45 1172 30.15 1173 29.01 1174 27.86
1175 26.74 1176 25.64 1177 24.51 1178 23.30 1179 21.97
1180 20.22 1181 18.03 1182 15.55 1183 13.04 1184 10.85
1185 9.09 1186 7.69 1187 6.61 1188 5.77 1189 5.13
1190 4.62 1191 4.21 1192 3.87 1193 3.59 1194 3.35
1195 3.15 1196 2.99 1197 2.84 1198 2.71 1199 2.59
1200 2.49 1201 2.40 1202 2.32 1203 2.26 1204 2.19
1205 2.13 1206 2.08 1207 2.04 1208 1.99 1209 1.95
1210 1.91 1211 1.88 1212 1.85 1213 1.82 1214 1.79
1215 1.76 1216 1.74 1217 1.72 1218 1.69 1219 1.67
1220 1.65 1221 1.63 1222 1.61 1223 1.59 1224 1.58
1225 1.56 1226 1.54 1227 1.53 1228 1.51 1229 1.50
1230 1.48 1231 1.47 1232 1.46 1233 1.45 1234 1.43
1235 1.42 1236 1.41 1237 1.40 1238 1.39 1239 1.38
1240 1.37 1241 1.36 1242 1.35 1243 1.34 1244 1.33
1245 1.32 1246 1.31 1247 1.30 1248 1.29 1249 1.28
1250 1.27 1251 1.27 1252 1.26 1253 1.25 1254 1.24
1255 1.24 1256 1.23 1257 1.22 1258 1.21 1259 1.21
1260 1.20 1261 1.19 1262 1.19 1263 1.18 1264 1.17
1265 1.17 1266 1.16 1267 1.15 1268 1.15 1269 1.14
1270 1.14 1271 1.13 1272 1.13 1273 1.12 1274 1.11
1275 1.11 1276 1.11 1277 1.10 1278 1.10 1279 1.09
1280 1.09 1281 1.08 1282 1.08 1283 1.07 1284 1.07
1285 1.06 1286 1.06 1287 1.05 1288 1.05 1289 1.04
1290 1.04 1291 1.04 1292 1.03 1293 1.03 1294 1.02
1295 1.02 1296 1.01 1297 1.01 1298 1.01 1299 1.01
1300 1.00 1310 .96 1320 .94 1330 .91 1340 .88
1350 .85 1360 .83 1370 .81 1380 .80 1390 .78
1400 .76 1420 .73 1440 .71 1460 .65 1500 .65
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 3.54(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: LID INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 85TH PERCENTILE CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 8.77 38.3 8.77 2 1198. .03800 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 2A 35.8 8.19 74.1 16.13 2 288. .03500 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 3A 8.7 1.99 82.8 17.98 2 154. .03900 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 4A 38.8 8.88 121.6 26.36 2 485. .04900 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 5A 6.6 1.51 128.2 27.72 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: LID INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, EXIST 85TH PERCENTILE CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 5A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .60 100 .62 200 .65 300 .68 400 .72
500 .77 600 .82 700 .90 800 .99 900 1.14
1000 1.37 1050 1.66 1100 2.13 1110 2.26 1120 2.48
1130 2.84 1131 2.88 1132 2.92 1133 2.96 1134 3.00
1135 3.04 1136 3.09 1137 3.13 1138 3.18 1139 3.23
1140 3.29 1141 3.35 1142 3.41 1143 3.51 1144 3.66
1145 3.91 1146 4.26 1147 4.75 1148 5.35 1149 6.17
1150 7.28 1151 8.89 1152 10.91 1153 13.32 1154 15.88
1155 18.28 1156 20.22 1157 21.82 1158 23.13 1159 24.28
1160 25.29 1161 26.16 1162 26.84 1163 27.31 1164 27.60
1165 27.71 1166 27.72 1167 27.63 1168 27.42 1169 27.08
1170 26.65 1171 26.17 1172 25.63 1173 25.01 1174 24.31
1175 23.53 1176 22.63 1177 21.64 1178 20.58 1179 19.31
1180 17.68 1181 15.66 1182 13.58 1183 11.70 1184 10.22
1185 9.04 1186 8.12 1187 7.38 1188 6.72 1189 6.12
1190 5.56 1191 5.04 1192 4.59 1193 4.19 1194 3.84
1195 3.54 1196 3.29 1197 3.08 1198 2.89 1199 2.73
1200 2.59 1201 2.47 1202 2.36 1203 2.27 1204 2.18
1205 2.11 1206 2.04 1207 1.98 1208 1.93 1209 1.88
1210 1.84 1211 1.80 1212 1.76 1213 1.73 1214 1.69
1215 1.66 1216 1.64 1217 1.61 1218 1.59 1219 1.56
1220 1.54 1221 1.52 1222 1.50 1223 1.48 1224 1.47
1225 1.45 1226 1.43 1227 1.42 1228 1.40 1229 1.39
1230 1.37 1231 1.36 1232 1.35 1233 1.34 1234 1.33
1235 1.32 1236 1.31 1237 1.30 1238 1.28 1239 1.27
1240 1.26 1241 1.25 1242 1.24 1243 1.23 1244 1.22
1245 1.21 1246 1.20 1247 1.20 1248 1.19 1249 1.18
1250 1.17 1251 1.16 1252 1.16 1253 1.15 1254 1.14
1255 1.14 1256 1.13 1257 1.12 1258 1.12 1259 1.11
1260 1.10 1261 1.10 1262 1.09 1263 1.09 1264 1.08
1265 1.07 1266 1.07 1267 1.06 1268 1.05 1269 1.05
1270 1.05 1271 1.04 1272 1.04 1273 1.03 1274 1.03
1275 1.02 1276 1.02 1277 1.01 1278 1.01 1279 1.00
1280 1.00 1281 .99 1282 .99 1283 .98 1284 .98
1285 .97 1286 .97 1287 .96 1288 .96 1289 .96
1290 .95 1291 .95 1292 .95 1293 .94 1294 .94
1295 .94 1296 .93 1297 .93 1298 .92 1299 .92
1300 .92 1310 .89 1320 .86 1330 .83 1340 .80
1350 .78 1360 .76 1370 .74 1380 .72 1390 .70
1400 .70 1420 .66 1440 .63 1460 .60 1500 .59
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 3.07(Ac.Ft)
B. Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (Proposed Condition)

1. Capital Storm Hydrologic Summary Table

2. TC Calculations

3. Storm Modified Rational Method of Hydrology (LAR04)
Result and Hydrograph
2-yr Clear (DESIGN STORM) JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
2-Yr
Depth (in)
2-Yr Tc
(min)
Q2
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ2
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 2.1285 25 12.1 38.3 12.1
2A 35.3 0.01 99 2.1285 30 9.6 73.6 21.0
4A 38.4 0.01 99 2.1285 30 10.5 112 31.0
5A 4.1 0.01 99 2.1285 17 1.7 116.1 32.1
6B 7.9 0.01 99 2.1285 30 2.2 7.9 2.2
7B 4.2 0.02 99 2.1285 30 1.2 12.1 3.3
8AB 128.2 35.3
50-yr BB JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
25/50-Yr
Depth (in)
25/50-Yr
Tc (min)
Q50/Q50b
(cfs)
Q50bb
(cfs)
DPV
(cy)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ50b
(cfs)
ƩQ50bb
(cfs)
ƩDPV
(cy)
1A 38.3 0.01 299 5.5 9 80.7 109.8

2,124 38.3 80.7
2A 35.3 0.01 299 5.5 12 63.9 86.9

1,958 73.6 138.6
2A 73.6 138.6 187.1 3,824
4A 38.4 0.01 299 5.5 14 64.0 87.0

2,130 112 200.8
4A 112 200.8 266.0 4,725
5A 4.1 0.01 299 5.5 7 9.8 13.3

227 116.1 205.7
5A 116.1 205.7 272.0 4,807
6B 7.9 0.01 299 5.5 11 15.0 20.4

438 7.9 15.0
7B 4.2 0.02 99 5.5 11 7.8 12.1 22.8
8AB 128.2 226.5 296.0 4,944
50-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
50-Yr
Depth (in)
50-Yr
Tc (min)
Q50
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ50
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 5.5 9 78.4 38.3 78.4
2A 35.3 0.01 99 5.5 12 61.8 73.6 134.2
4A 38.4 0.01 99 5.5 14 61.8 112 194.1
5A 4.1 0.01 99 5.5 7 9.5 116.1 198.8
6B 7.9 0.01 99 5.5 11 14.6 7.9 14.6
7B 4.2 0.02 99 5.5 11 7.8 12.1 22.3
8AB 128.2 219.2
25-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
25-Yr
Depth (in)
25-Yr
Tc (min)
Q25
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ25
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 4.829 10 62.3 38.3 62.3
2A 35.3 0.01 99 4.829 13 49.2 73.6 106.6
4A 38.4 0.01 99 4.829 15 49.5 112 153.8
5A 4.1 0.01 99 4.829 7 8.0 116.1 157.2
6B 7.9 0.01 99 4.829 12 11.5 7.9 11.5
7B 4.2 0.02 99 4.829 12 6.1 12.1 17.7
8AB 128.2 173.7
`
10-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
10-Yr
Depth (in)
10-Yr
Tc (min)
Q10
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ10
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 3.927 12 44.5 38.3 44.5
2A 35.3 0.01 99 3.927 16 34.9 73.6 76.6
4A 38.4 0.01 99 3.927 19 34.3 112 109.9
5A 4.1 0.01 99 3.927 9 5.6 116.1 112.9
6B 7.9 0.01 99 3.927 15 8.1 7.9 8.1
7B 4.2 0.02 99 3.927 15 4.3 12.1 12.5
8AB 128.2 124.7
5-yr Clear JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
5-Yr
Depth (in)
5-Yr Tc
(min)
Q5
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQ5
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 3.212 15 29.6 38.3 29.6
2A 35.3 0.01 99 3.212 19 23.4 73.6 51.0
4A 38.4 0.01 99 3.212 23 22.5 112 72.9
5A 4.1 0.01 99 3.212 11 3.8 116.1 75.3
6B 7.9 0.01 99 3.212 18 5.4 7.9 5.4
7B 4.2 0.02 99 3.212 18 2.9 12.1 8.3
8AB 128.2 83.2
85th Percentile JUNCTION
Subarea Node Area
(ac) Imp Soil Type
LID
Depth (in)
LID Tc
(min)
QLID
(cfs)
Ʃarea
(ac)
ƩQLID
(cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 0.85 30 8.8 38.3 8.8
2A 35.3 0.01 99 0.85 30 8.1 73.6 16.2
4A 38.4 0.01 99 0.85 30 8.8 112 24.4
5A 4.1 0.01 99 0.85 30 0.9 116.1 25.2
6B 7.9 0.01 99 0.85 30 1.8 7.9 1.8
7B 4.2 0.02 99 0.85 30 1.0 12.1 2.8
8AB 128.2 27.8
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.596
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4842
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4884
Time of Concentration (min) 25.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.1487
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.1487
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.998
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 43472.5092
12 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
10 ~
8 00
~ 6 3:
0 u::::
4~
2~
0 I I I '-
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4622
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.9263
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.9263
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.9102
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 39647.27
9 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)
8 7 ~
6 '7n 5~
~
3:
..Q 4 LL.
3~
2 1~
ov I I I I I I ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4622
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.7102
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.7102
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.9901
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 43129.0416
10 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)
8 6 ~
00 ~
3:
0 u:::: 4
2 ~
ov I I I I I ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.7145
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.5482
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.5517
Time of Concentration (min) 17.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.6161
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.6161
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.1085
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 4726.7084

1.8 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)

1.6 1.4 ~

1.2 ~ 1.0 ~ ~
3:
0 0.8 u::

0.6 ~
04 0.2 ~
'---
00 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4622
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.9977
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.9977
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2037
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 8872.9018

2.0 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)

1.5 ~
't i' 1.0 0
u::
05 oo v I I I I I I '-.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 2-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (2-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 2.1285
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.5471
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.4578
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.4666
Time of Concentration (min) 30.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.0722
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 1.0722
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.1139
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 4962.1654

1.2 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)

1.0 ~

0.8 '7ii'
't i' 0.6
0 u::

0.4 ~

0.2 ~
oo v I I I I I " 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.4894
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.8094
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8103
Time of Concentration (min) 9.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 77.255
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 77.255
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 4.1839
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 182251.6223
80 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
70 ~
60 50
'7ii'
ti
i'40
0 u::
30 20
10 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.1745
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7898
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7909
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 60.7077
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 60.7077
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.8525
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 167816.8952
70 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.0226
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7803
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7815
Time of Concentration (min) 14.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 60.6953
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 60.6953
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 4.1886
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 182456.814
70 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.8015
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.8215
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8222
Time of Concentration (min) 7.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.4443
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 9.4443
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.448
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 19516.7476
10 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)
8 6 ~
00 ~
3:
0 u:::: 4
2 ~
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.2653
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7954
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7965
Time of Concentration (min) 11.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 14.2535
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 14.2535
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.8624
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 37566.2691
16 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)
14 ~
12 10
00 ~ 8 3:
0 u::::
6 4
2 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 50-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (50-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.2653
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7954
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7975
Time of Concentration (min) 11.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.5878
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.5878
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.4712
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 20526.2049
8 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)
7 ~
6 5
'7n
'ti
i4
0 u::
3 2
1 0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.0801
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7839
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.785
Time of Concentration (min) 10.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 62.541
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 62.541
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.3935
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 147822.3506
70 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
60 ~
50 '7n 40
~
3:
0 U:: 30
20 10
0 \
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.8388
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7633
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7646
Time of Concentration (min) 13.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 49.6302
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 49.6302
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.1232
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 136044.9147
50 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)
40 30 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 20
10 ~
\
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.7191
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7517
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7531
Time of Concentration (min) 15.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 49.7194
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 49.7194
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 3.395
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 147886.1806
50 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)
40 30 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 20
10 ~
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 2.4597
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.8075
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.8085
Time of Concentration (min) 7.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.1531
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 8.1531
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.3637
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 15841.1973
9 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)
8 7 ~
6 '7n 5 ~
~
3:
..Q 4 LL.
3~
2 1~
0 \
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.9092
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7701
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7714
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.6349
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 11.6349
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.6993
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 30460.3247
12 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)
10 ~
8 00
~ 6 3:
0 u::::
4~
2~
0 \.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 25-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (25-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 4.829
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.9092
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7701
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7727
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 6.196
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 6.196
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.3832
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 16694.2891
7 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)
6~
5 U) 4
~
3:
0 u:: 3
2 1
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.5526
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7355
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7372
Time of Concentration (min) 12.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 43.8361
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 43.8361
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.4579
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 107068.1453
45 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
40 35 ~
30 '7ii' 25 ~
~
3:
.2 20 LL.
15 ~
10 5~
\_
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.3563
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7055
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7075
Time of Concentration (min) 16.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.8715
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.8715
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.2586
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 98386.6563
35 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)
30 ~
25 '7ii' 20
~
3:
0 U:: 15
10 5
I.._
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.251
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6873
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6894
Time of Concentration (min) 19.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.1204
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 33.1204
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 2.4534
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 106870.5238
35 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)
30 ~
25 '7ii' 20
~
3:
0 U:: 15
10 5
'---
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.7774
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7573
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7587
Time of Concentration (min) 9.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.5292
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.5292
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2634
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 11475.3719
6 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)
5 ~
4 '7n
'ti
i'3
0 u::
2~
1~
0 \.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.398
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7128
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7146
Time of Concentration (min) 15.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.8928
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 7.8928
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.5058
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 22032.9596
8 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)
7 ~
6 5
'7n
'ti
i4
0 u::
3 2
1 \...
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 10-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.927
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.398
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.7128
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7165
Time of Concentration (min) 15.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 4.2072
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 4.2072
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2786
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 12135.1904

4.5 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)

4.0 3.5 ~

3.0 ~ 2.5 ~
~
3:
0 2 .. 0 Li::

1.5 ~

1.0 0.5 ~
I.._
00 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.1435
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6687
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.671
Time of Concentration (min) 15.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 29.3872
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 29.3872
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.8165
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 79124.9286
30 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
25 ~
20 '7ii'
ti i' 15 0
u::
10 ~
5~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.0232
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6479
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6504
Time of Concentration (min) 19.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 23.4928
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 23.4928
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.6724
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 72849.2627
25 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)
20 15 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 10
5~
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.9354
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6241
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6268
Time of Concentration (min) 23.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 22.5147
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 22.5147
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 1.8139
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 79013.9634
25 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)
20 15 ~
'7ii'
~
3:
0 u:: 10
5~
'--
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.3229
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6998
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.7018
Time of Concentration (min) 11.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 3.8064
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 3.8064
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.1948
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 8485.8931

4.0 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)

3.5 ~

3.0 2.5
00 u i 2 .. 0 0
Li::

1.5 1.0

0.5 '- 00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.0496
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6524
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6549
Time of Concentration (min) 18.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.4303
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 5.4303
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.3744
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 16309.0646
6 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)
5 ~
4 '7n
'ti
i'3
0 u::
2~
1~
'--
0 ' 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
50-yr Rainfall Depth (in) 5.5
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 5-yr
Fire Factor 0
LID False
Output Results
Modeled (5-yr) Rainfall Depth (in) 3.212
Peak Intensity (in/hr) 1.0496
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.6524
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.6574
Time of Concentration (min) 18.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 2.8979
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 2.8979
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2072
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 9024.5655

3.0 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)

2.5 ~
2 .. 0
~
't i' 1.5 0
u::

1.0 ~

0.5 ~
00 '
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 1A
Area (ac) 38.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1583.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.239
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1085
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 133.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.4488
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.4488
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2906
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 12660.4458
045 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 1A)
'\ 040

0.35 ~

0.30 ~ 0.25 ~
~
3:
~ 0.20
015~

0.10 005 v
000 I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 2A
Area (ac) 35.3
Flow Path Length (ft) 1919.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.141
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.098
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 165.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3738
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3738
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2679
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 11670.3867
040 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 2A)

0.35 ~

0.30 ~

0.25 00
u i 0.20
0 Li::

0.15 0. 10

0.05 v
000 I I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 4A
Area (ac) 38.4
Flow Path Length (ft) 2544.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.165
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.0913
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 192.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3787
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.3787
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.2915
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 12697.1049
040 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 4A)

0.35 ~

0.30 ~

0.25 00
u i 0.20
0 Li::

0.15 0. 10

0.05 000 I I I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 5A
Area (ac) 4.1
Flow Path Length (ft) 893.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.169
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1252
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 98.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0555
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0555
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.0311
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 1355.1417

0.06 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 5A)

0.05 ~ \

0.04 00
u i 0.03
0 Li::

0.02 ~

0.01 ~
ooo v I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 6B
Area (ac) 7.9
Flow Path Length (ft) 1944.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.185
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.01
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1001
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.108
Time of Concentration (min) 158.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0854
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0854
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.06
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 2611.6991

0.09 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 6B)

0.08 0.07 ~

0.06 ~ 0.05 ~
~
3:
0 0.04 u::::

0.03 ~

0.02 0.01 v
000 I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Peak Flow Hydrologic Analysis
File location: C:/Users/eumirr/Documents/BLUE PR Report.pdf Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input Parameters
Project Name BLUE PR
Subarea ID 7B
Area (ac) 4.2
Flow Path Length (ft) 1223.0
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft) 0.043
85th Percentile Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85
Percent Impervious 0.02
Soil Type 99
Design Storm Frequency 85th percentile storm
Fire Factor 0
LID True
Output Results
Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall Depth (in) 0.85 Peak Intensity (in/hr) 0.1042
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu) 0.1
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd) 0.116
Time of Concentration (min) 145.0
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0508
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs) 0.0508
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft) 0.0342
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft) 1491.2643

0.06 Hydrograph (BLUE PR: 7B)

0.05 ~

0.04 00
u i 0.03
0 Li::

0.02 ~
oo, v
000 I I I I I
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time (minutes)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A2 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 2‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 12.11 38.3 12.11 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 25 A11 .01 1 2A 35.3 9.62 73.6 21.00 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 30 A11 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 20.90 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A11 .00 1 4A 38.4 10.47 112.0 30.98 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 30 A11 .01 1 5A 4.1 1.71 116.1 32.13 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 17 A11 .01 1 6B 7.9 2.15 7.9 2.15 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A11 .01 1 7B 4.2 1.16 12.1 3.31 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A11 .02 1 8AB 12.1 3.31 128.2 35.26 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A11 .00

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 2‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 .69 200 .71 300 .76 400 .80
500 .85 600 .91 700 .99 800 1.10 900 1.26
1000 1.52 1050 1.86 1100 2.38 1110 2.55 1120 2.83
1130 3.25 1131 3.30 1132 3.35 1133 3.39 1134 3.47
1135 3.54 1136 3.61 1137 3.69 1138 3.80 1139 4.00
1140 4.25 1141 4.64 1142 5.10 1143 5.61 1144 6.18
1145 6.83 1146 7.60 1147 8.47 1148 9.40 1149 10.891150 12.77 1151 15.08 1152 17.72 1153 20.58 1154 23.13 1155 25.40 1156 27.37 1157 29.07 1158 30.60 1159 31.92
1160 33.10 1161 34.01 1162 34.66 1163 35.07 1164 35.26
1165 35.25 1166 34.95 1167 34.49 1168 33.93 1169 33.25
1170 32.50 1171 31.85 1172 31.11 1173 30.29 1174 29.40
1175 28.39 1176 27.26 1177 25.97 1178 24.61 1179 22.76
1180 20.49 1181 17.64 1182 14.59 1183 11.75 1184 9.36
1185 7.53 1186 6.20 1187 5.26 1188 4.58 1189 4.08
1190 3.70 1191 3.40 1192 3.16 1193 2.97 1194 2.81
1195 2.68 1196 2.56 1197 2.46 1198 2.37 1199 2.29
1200 2.22 1201 2.16 1202 2.11 1203 2.06 1204 2.02
1205 1.98 1206 1.94 1207 1.90 1208 1.87 1209 1.84
1210 1.81 1211 1.78 1212 1.76 1213 1.73 1214 1.71
1215 1.69 1216 1.67 1217 1.65 1218 1.63 1219 1.61
1220 1.60 1221 1.58 1222 1.56 1223 1.54 1224 1.53
1225 1.51 1226 1.49 1227 1.48 1228 1.47 1229 1.46
1230 1.45 1231 1.44 1232 1.42 1233 1.42 1234 1.40
1235 1.39 1236 1.38 1237 1.37 1238 1.36 1239 1.35
1240 1.34 1241 1.33 1242 1.32 1243 1.31 1244 1.30
1245 1.30 1246 1.29 1247 1.28 1248 1.27 1249 1.26
1250 1.25 1251 1.24 1252 1.23 1253 1.23 1254 1.23
1255 1.22 1256 1.21 1257 1.20 1258 1.19 1259 1.18
1260 1.18 1261 1.17 1262 1.17 1263 1.16 1264 1.16
1265 1.15 1266 1.14 1267 1.14 1268 1.13 1269 1.13
1270 1.12 1271 1.12 1272 1.11 1273 1.11 1274 1.10
1275 1.09 1276 1.09 1277 1.09 1278 1.08 1279 1.08
1280 1.08 1281 1.07 1282 1.07 1283 1.06 1284 1.05
1285 1.05 1286 1.04 1287 1.04 1288 1.04 1289 1.03
1290 1.03 1291 1.03 1292 1.02 1293 1.02 1294 1.01
1295 1.01 1296 1.01 1297 1.01 1298 1.00 1299 1.00
1300 .99 1310 .96 1320 .93 1330 .90 1340 .87
1350 .85 1360 .82 1370 .81 1380 .79 1390 .78
1400 .75 1420 .72 1440 .71 1460 .62 1500 .60
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 3.50(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50B INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 50‐YR DESIGN BURN STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 80.74 38.3 80.74 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 299 9 A28 .01 1 2A 35.3 63.89 73.6 138.59 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 299 12 A28 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 137.97 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 299 99 A28 .00 1 4A 38.4 63.97 112.0 200.76 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 299 14 A28 .01 1 5A 4.1 9.78 116.1 205.70 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 299 7 A28 .01 1 6B 7.9 15.02 7.9 15.02 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 299 11 A28 .01 1 7B 4.2 7.75 12.1 22.77 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 11 A28 .02 1 8AB 12.1 22.77 128.2 226.54 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A28 .00

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50B INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 50‐YR DESIGN BURN, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 2.80 200 2.92 300 3.07 400 3.24
500 3.47 600 3.73 700 4.06 800 4.52 900 5.18
1000 6.51 1050 13.32 1100 24.30 1110 31.34 1120 40.33
1130 51.01 1131 52.11 1132 53.31 1133 54.80 1134 56.29
1135 57.86 1136 59.30 1137 60.83 1138 62.48 1139 64.40
1140 66.34 1141 68.94 1142 71.93 1143 75.50 1144 79.07
1145 83.37 1146 88.09 1147 93.32 1148 98.42 1149 108.21 1150 121.84 1151 139.27 1152 159.43 1153 181.67 1154 199.67 1155 213.61 1156 221.97 1157 226.45 1158 226.54 1159 222.59 1160 213.50 1161 202.18 1162 187.60 1163 168.05 1164 144.50 1165 122.85 1166 102.93 1167 84.12 1168 69.26 1169 59.97 1170 54.29 1171 49.55 1172 45.88 1173 42.37 1174 39.32
1175 37.13 1176 34.95 1177 32.85 1178 30.92 1179 29.14
1180 27.52 1181 26.02 1182 24.77 1183 23.60 1184 22.45
1185 21.36 1186 20.49 1187 19.59 1188 18.66 1189 17.82
1190 17.14 1191 16.34 1192 15.64 1193 15.05 1194 14.44
1195 13.85 1196 13.31 1197 12.72 1198 12.18 1199 11.76
1200 11.26 1201 10.80 1202 10.38 1203 9.94 1204 9.55
1205 9.21 1206 8.82 1207 8.52 1208 8.10 1209 7.75
1210 7.43 1211 7.16 1212 6.93 1213 6.74 1214 6.58
1215 6.45 1216 6.35 1217 6.26 1218 6.18 1219 6.10
1220 6.02 1221 5.95 1222 5.90 1223 5.82 1224 5.77
1225 5.73 1226 5.69 1227 5.64 1228 5.60 1229 5.58
1230 5.53 1231 5.48 1232 5.43 1233 5.40 1234 5.37
1235 5.34 1236 5.31 1237 5.29 1238 5.24 1239 5.21
1240 5.16 1241 5.14 1242 5.11 1243 5.06 1244 5.04
1245 5.01 1246 5.00 1247 4.96 1248 4.92 1249 4.89
1250 4.87 1251 4.85 1252 4.81 1253 4.79 1254 4.77
1255 4.73 1256 4.72 1257 4.68 1258 4.66 1259 4.64
1260 4.62 1261 4.59 1262 4.56 1263 4.55 1264 4.51
1265 4.50 1266 4.47 1267 4.46 1268 4.45 1269 4.44
1270 4.42 1271 4.40 1272 4.38 1273 4.36 1274 4.31
1275 4.29 1276 4.29 1277 4.29 1278 4.27 1279 4.26
1280 4.25 1281 4.23 1282 4.21 1283 4.18 1284 4.16
1285 4.16 1286 4.15 1287 4.14 1288 4.14 1289 4.11
1290 4.09 1291 4.05 1292 4.02 1293 4.00 1294 3.98
1295 3.97 1296 3.97 1297 3.96 1298 3.93 1299 3.91
1300 3.89 1310 3.78 1320 3.70 1330 3.56 1340 3.43
1350 3.36 1360 3.34 1370 3.21 1380 3.16 1390 3.07
1400 3.02 1420 2.92 1440 2.80 1460 2.48 1500 2.48
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 17.51(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 50‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 78.37 38.3 78.37 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 9 A28 .01 1 2A 35.3 61.84 73.6 134.15 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 12 A28 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 133.56 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A28 .00 1 4A 38.4 61.82 112.0 194.08 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 14 A28 .01 1 5A 4.1 9.52 116.1 198.83 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 7 A28 .01 1 6B 7.9 14.55 7.9 14.55 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 11 A28 .01 1 7B 4.2 7.75 12.1 22.30 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 11 A28 .02 1 8AB 12.1 22.30 128.2 219.22 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A28 .00

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A50 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 50‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 1.76 200 1.83 300 1.92 400 2.02
500 2.17 600 2.32 700 2.52 800 2.81 900 3.21
1000 4.11 1050 10.65 1100 21.28 1110 28.06 1120 36.74
1130 46.79 1131 47.92 1132 49.16 1133 50.73 1134 52.18
1135 53.71 1136 55.12 1137 56.61 1138 58.21 1139 60.08
1140 61.97 1141 64.48 1142 67.22 1143 70.35 1144 73.75
1145 78.29 1146 83.14 1147 88.27 1148 93.28 1149 102.86 1150 116.19 1151 133.05 1152 152.57 1153 174.71 1154 192.52 1155 206.12 1156 214.30 1157 218.89 1158 219.22 1159 215.48 1160 206.65 1161 195.70 1162 181.53 1163 162.33 1164 139.15 1165 118.33 1166 98.74 1167 80.09 1168 65.64 1169 56.75 1170 51.12 1171 46.23 1172 42.88 1173 39.62 1174 36.60
1175 33.98 1176 31.77 1177 29.69 1178 27.80 1179 26.06
1180 24.49 1181 23.04 1182 21.83 1183 20.69 1184 19.57
1185 18.51 1186 17.66 1187 16.80 1188 15.90 1189 15.09
1190 14.43 1191 13.66 1192 12.98 1193 12.41 1194 11.82
1195 11.25 1196 10.73 1197 10.15 1198 9.63 1199 9.22
1200 8.74 1201 8.29 1202 7.89 1203 7.46 1204 7.09
1205 6.76 1206 6.39 1207 6.10 1208 5.70 1209 5.36
1210 5.06 1211 4.80 1212 4.58 1213 4.41 1214 4.27
1215 4.15 1216 4.06 1217 3.98 1218 3.91 1219 3.84
1220 3.78 1221 3.73 1222 3.69 1223 3.64 1224 3.60
1225 3.57 1226 3.54 1227 3.51 1228 3.48 1229 3.46
1230 3.43 1231 3.40 1232 3.37 1233 3.35 1234 3.34
1235 3.31 1236 3.29 1237 3.28 1238 3.25 1239 3.23
1240 3.20 1241 3.19 1242 3.17 1243 3.14 1244 3.12
1245 3.11 1246 3.10 1247 3.08 1248 3.06 1249 3.03
1250 3.02 1251 3.01 1252 2.99 1253 2.97 1254 2.96
1255 2.94 1256 2.93 1257 2.90 1258 2.89 1259 2.88
1260 2.87 1261 2.85 1262 2.83 1263 2.82 1264 2.80
1265 2.79 1266 2.78 1267 2.77 1268 2.77 1269 2.76
1270 2.74 1271 2.73 1272 2.72 1273 2.71 1274 2.68
1275 2.67 1276 2.67 1277 2.67 1278 2.65 1279 2.65
1280 2.64 1281 2.63 1282 2.62 1283 2.60 1284 2.59
1285 2.59 1286 2.58 1287 2.57 1288 2.57 1289 2.55
1290 2.54 1291 2.52 1292 2.50 1293 2.49 1294 2.48
1295 2.47 1296 2.47 1297 2.46 1298 2.45 1299 2.43
1300 2.43 1310 2.36 1320 2.31 1330 2.22 1340 2.14
1350 2.10 1360 2.08 1370 2.01 1380 1.98 1390 1.92
1400 1.89 1420 1.83 1440 1.76 1460 1.53 1500 1.53
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 14.13(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A25 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 25‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 62.27 38.3 62.27 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 10 A24 .01 1 2A 35.3 49.15 73.6 106.63 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 13 A24 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 105.91 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A24 .00 1 4A 38.4 49.54 112.0 153.75 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 15 A24 .01 1 5A 4.1 7.96 116.1 157.24 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 7 A24 .01 1 6B 7.9 11.52 7.9 11.52 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 12 A24 .01 1 7B 4.2 6.14 12.1 17.66 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 12 A24 .02 1 8AB 12.1 17.66 128.2 173.67 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A24 .00

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A25 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 25‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 1.50 200 1.57 300 1.65 400 1.74
500 1.85 600 1.99 700 2.16 800 2.41 900 2.75
1000 3.32 1050 5.83 1100 14.17 1110 19.72 1120 27.35
1130 35.77 1131 36.77 1132 37.73 1133 38.75 1134 39.91
1135 41.09 1136 42.35 1137 43.66 1138 45.07 1139 46.91
1140 48.47 1141 50.36 1142 52.49 1143 54.88 1144 57.39
1145 60.63 1146 64.18 1147 68.12 1148 72.21 1149 80.14
1150 91.12 1151 104.55 1152 119.28 1153 135.46 1154 149.93 1155 161.64 1156 168.72 1157 172.47 1158 173.67 1159 172.29 1160 168.50 1161 161.94 1162 153.61 1163 142.60 1164 128.35 1165 111.46 1166 94.74 1167 78.50 1168 64.00 1169 53.17 1170 45.84 1171 40.61 1172 37.41 1173 33.94 1174 30.71
1175 27.83 1176 25.32 1177 23.16 1178 21.30 1179 19.66
1180 18.25 1181 16.91 1182 15.79 1183 14.72 1184 13.73
1185 12.88 1186 11.93 1187 11.16 1188 10.36 1189 9.62
1190 8.99 1191 8.44 1192 7.88 1193 7.38 1194 6.78
1195 6.31 1196 5.86 1197 5.46 1198 5.10 1199 4.80
1200 4.56 1201 4.37 1202 4.24 1203 4.11 1204 4.01
1205 3.90 1206 3.82 1207 3.74 1208 3.67 1209 3.61
1210 3.56 1211 3.51 1212 3.47 1213 3.43 1214 3.38
1215 3.35 1216 3.32 1217 3.29 1218 3.26 1219 3.21
1220 3.18 1221 3.16 1222 3.14 1223 3.11 1224 3.08
1225 3.05 1226 3.03 1227 3.01 1228 2.99 1229 2.97
1230 2.94 1231 2.93 1232 2.90 1233 2.88 1234 2.85
1235 2.83 1236 2.82 1237 2.80 1238 2.79 1239 2.77
1240 2.76 1241 2.74 1242 2.72 1243 2.69 1244 2.67
1245 2.66 1246 2.65 1247 2.63 1248 2.61 1249 2.60
1250 2.59 1251 2.58 1252 2.56 1253 2.55 1254 2.54
1255 2.53 1256 2.53 1257 2.51 1258 2.50 1259 2.49
1260 2.48 1261 2.47 1262 2.45 1263 2.44 1264 2.43
1265 2.42 1266 2.40 1267 2.39 1268 2.38 1269 2.38
1270 2.35 1271 2.34 1272 2.33 1273 2.32 1274 2.32
1275 2.31 1276 2.29 1277 2.29 1278 2.28 1279 2.27
1280 2.26 1281 2.24 1282 2.25 1283 2.23 1284 2.22
1285 2.21 1286 2.20 1287 2.18 1288 2.18 1289 2.17
1290 2.17 1291 2.16 1292 2.15 1293 2.15 1294 2.14
1295 2.13 1296 2.11 1297 2.11 1298 2.10 1299 2.10
1300 2.10 1310 2.02 1320 1.95 1330 1.92 1340 1.88
1350 1.81 1360 1.76 1370 1.72 1380 1.68 1390 1.67
1400 1.63 1420 1.56 1440 1.51 1460 1.31 1500 1.31
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 11.15(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A10 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 10‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 44.52 38.3 44.52 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 12 A20 .01 1 2A 35.3 34.92 73.6 76.60 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 16 A20 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 76.32 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A20 .00 1 4A 38.4 34.27 112.0 109.94 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 19 A20 .01 1 5A 4.1 5.64 116.1 112.87 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 9 A20 .01 1 6B 7.9 8.13 7.9 8.13 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 15 A20 .01 1 7B 4.2 4.33 12.1 12.46 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 15 A20 .02 1 8AB 12.1 12.46 128.2 124.72 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A20 .00

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A10 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 10‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 1.25 200 1.31 300 1.37 400 1.44
500 1.54 600 1.66 700 1.81 800 2.00 900 2.29
1000 2.77 1050 3.40 1100 7.47 1110 11.43 1120 17.56
1130 24.44 1131 25.11 1132 25.86 1133 26.64 1134 27.47
1135 28.41 1136 29.31 1137 30.38 1138 31.54 1139 32.71
1140 33.93 1141 35.25 1142 36.65 1143 38.20 1144 39.78
1145 41.83 1146 44.09 1147 46.96 1148 50.71 1149 55.85
1150 62.47 1151 70.82 1152 80.56 1153 92.16 1154 102.44 1155 110.68 1156 116.83 1157 121.32 1158 123.76 1159 124.72 1160 123.90 1161 121.77 1162 118.78 1163 115.46 1164 110.24 1165 103.90 1166 96.03 1167 86.80 1168 76.39 1169 66.24 1170 56.49 1171 47.35 1172 39.49 1173 34.34 1174 29.25
1175 25.17 1176 21.85 1177 19.14 1178 16.92 1179 15.05
1180 13.49 1181 12.09 1182 10.86 1183 9.73 1184 8.76
1185 7.89 1186 7.12 1187 6.41 1188 5.78 1189 5.28
1190 4.91 1191 4.63 1192 4.40 1193 4.20 1194 4.04
1195 3.91 1196 3.79 1197 3.69 1198 3.60 1199 3.51
1200 3.45 1201 3.38 1202 3.32 1203 3.27 1204 3.21
1205 3.16 1206 3.11 1207 3.07 1208 3.04 1209 3.00
1210 2.97 1211 2.94 1212 2.90 1213 2.87 1214 2.84
1215 2.80 1216 2.77 1217 2.74 1218 2.71 1219 2.69
1220 2.67 1221 2.65 1222 2.63 1223 2.61 1224 2.59
1225 2.58 1226 2.56 1227 2.54 1228 2.52 1229 2.50
1230 2.48 1231 2.47 1232 2.46 1233 2.44 1234 2.43
1235 2.41 1236 2.39 1237 2.38 1238 2.37 1239 2.35
1240 2.33 1241 2.31 1242 2.30 1243 2.27 1244 2.25
1245 2.24 1246 2.23 1247 2.21 1248 2.21 1249 2.19
1250 2.18 1251 2.17 1252 2.16 1253 2.15 1254 2.14
1255 2.12 1256 2.11 1257 2.10 1258 2.09 1259 2.08
1260 2.08 1261 2.06 1262 2.05 1263 2.05 1264 2.04
1265 2.03 1266 2.02 1267 2.01 1268 2.00 1269 1.99
1270 1.98 1271 1.98 1272 1.96 1273 1.95 1274 1.95
1275 1.94 1276 1.93 1277 1.92 1278 1.91 1279 1.90
1280 1.90 1281 1.89 1282 1.88 1283 1.88 1284 1.87
1285 1.85 1286 1.84 1287 1.83 1288 1.83 1289 1.83
1290 1.82 1291 1.82 1292 1.81 1293 1.81 1294 1.80
1295 1.79 1296 1.78 1297 1.77 1298 1.77 1299 1.76
1300 1.75 1310 1.69 1320 1.64 1330 1.60 1340 1.56
1350 1.52 1360 1.47 1370 1.43 1380 1.42 1390 1.39
1400 1.35 1420 1.30 1440 1.26 1460 1.09 1500 1.09
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 8.45(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: A5 INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 5‐YR CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 29.60 38.3 29.60 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 15 A16 .01 1 2A 35.3 23.36 73.6 51.04 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 19 A16 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 50.86 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A16 .00 1 4A 38.4 22.52 112.0 72.94 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 23 A16 .01 1 5A 4.1 3.81 116.1 75.29 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 11 A16 .01 1 6B 7.9 5.42 7.9 5.42 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 18 A16 .01 1 7B 4.2 2.89 12.1 8.31 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 18 A16 .02 1 8AB 12.1 8.31 128.2 83.20 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A16 .00

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 5‐YR CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 1.00 200 1.04 300 1.10 400 1.16
500 1.24 600 1.33 700 1.44 800 1.60 900 1.83
1000 2.22 1050 2.71 1100 3.45 1110 4.42 1120 7.94
1130 13.09 1131 13.65 1132 14.15 1133 14.79 1134 15.42
1135 16.07 1136 16.79 1137 17.56 1138 18.39 1139 19.29
1140 20.22 1141 21.30 1142 22.42 1143 23.64 1144 24.86
1145 26.30 1146 27.85 1147 29.62 1148 31.50 1149 34.61
1150 38.43 1151 43.19 1152 49.29 1153 57.35 1154 63.74
1155 68.87 1156 73.46 1157 77.78 1158 81.00 1159 82.80
1160 83.20 1161 82.83 1162 81.84 1163 80.23 1164 78.28
1165 76.18 1166 73.78 1167 70.41 1168 66.58 1169 62.20
1170 57.16 1171 51.52 1172 45.71 1173 39.64 1174 34.30
1175 28.76 1176 23.22 1177 18.32 1178 14.50 1179 11.80
1180 9.76 1181 8.17 1182 6.93 1183 6.03 1184 5.40
1185 4.92 1186 4.56 1187 4.26 1188 4.03 1189 3.82
1190 3.66 1191 3.52 1192 3.40 1193 3.29 1194 3.20
1195 3.11 1196 3.03 1197 2.96 1198 2.90 1199 2.85
1200 2.80 1201 2.75 1202 2.71 1203 2.67 1204 2.62
1205 2.59 1206 2.55 1207 2.52 1208 2.49 1209 2.46
1210 2.43 1211 2.40 1212 2.37 1213 2.34 1214 2.32
1215 2.30 1216 2.27 1217 2.25 1218 2.22 1219 2.20
1220 2.19 1221 2.17 1222 2.15 1223 2.13 1224 2.11
1225 2.09 1226 2.07 1227 2.06 1228 2.04 1229 2.03
1230 2.01 1231 1.99 1232 1.98 1233 1.97 1234 1.96
1235 1.94 1236 1.93 1237 1.91 1238 1.89 1239 1.88
1240 1.87 1241 1.86 1242 1.85 1243 1.84 1244 1.84
1245 1.83 1246 1.82 1247 1.81 1248 1.80 1249 1.78
1250 1.77 1251 1.75 1252 1.74 1253 1.73 1254 1.72
1255 1.71 1256 1.71 1257 1.70 1258 1.69 1259 1.69
1260 1.68 1261 1.67 1262 1.66 1263 1.65 1264 1.64
1265 1.63 1266 1.62 1267 1.61 1268 1.60 1269 1.59
1270 1.58 1271 1.58 1272 1.58 1273 1.57 1274 1.57
1275 1.57 1276 1.55 1277 1.55 1278 1.54 1279 1.54
1280 1.52 1281 1.52 1282 1.51 1283 1.51 1284 1.50
1285 1.50 1286 1.49 1287 1.48 1288 1.48 1289 1.47
1290 1.46 1291 1.46 1292 1.46 1293 1.45 1294 1.45
1295 1.44 1296 1.43 1297 1.43 1298 1.42 1299 1.42
1300 1.41 1310 1.39 1320 1.33 1330 1.27 1340 1.26
1350 1.23 1360 1.19 1370 1.15 1380 1.11 1390 1.09
1400 1.08 1420 1.05 1440 1.01 1460 .87 1500 .87
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 6.05(Ac.Ft)
Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: LID INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE: C:\civild\scr_soilx_34.dat BLUE CLOUD, PROP 85TH PERCENTILE CLEAR STORM DAY 4

SUBAREA SUBAREA TOTAL TOTAL CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV CONTROL SOIL RAIN PCT LOCATION AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) AREA(Ac) Q(CFS) TYPE LNGTH(Ft) SLOPE SIZE(Ft) Z Q(CFS) NAME TC ZONE IMPV 1 1A 38.3 8.77 38.3 8.77 2 1132. .04000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 2A 35.3 8.08 73.6 16.15 5 530. .03600 20.00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 3A .0 .00 73.6 16.09 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 99 A 4 .00 1 4A 38.4 8.79 112.0 24.42 5 507. .03400 20.00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 5A 4.1 .94 116.1 25.21 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 6B 7.9 1.81 7.9 1.81 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .01 1 7B 4.2 .97 12.1 2.78 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 30 A 4 .02 1 8AB 12.1 2.78 128.2 27.80 0 0. .00000 .00 .00 0. 99 0 A 4 .00

Program Package Serial Number: 2061
11/13/24 FILE: LID INPUT DATA: English Units RAINFALL SOIL FILE: English (In) OUTPUT DATA: English Units PAGE 2 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT PROG F0601M
MODIFIED RATIONAL METHOD HYDROLOGY ‐ STORM YEAR = 50 SOIL DATA FILE:

BLUE CLOUD, PROP 85TH PERCENTILE CLEAR, OUTLET HYD
HYDROGRAPH AT 1 8A STORM DAY 4 REDUCTION FACTOR = 1.000TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q TIME Q 0 .00 100 .62 200 .65 300 .68 400 .73
500 .77 600 .83 700 .90 800 .99 900 1.15
1000 1.38 1050 1.69 1100 2.16 1110 2.30 1120 2.55
1130 2.94 1131 2.98 1132 3.02 1133 3.06 1134 3.11
1135 3.15 1136 3.20 1137 3.25 1138 3.30 1139 3.36
1140 3.42 1141 3.49 1142 3.56 1143 3.74 1144 4.00
1145 4.42 1146 4.97 1147 5.62 1148 6.32 1149 7.47
1150 8.95 1151 10.83 1152 13.02 1153 15.43 1154 17.60
1155 19.54 1156 21.13 1157 22.52 1158 23.70 1159 24.78
1160 25.71 1161 26.49 1162 27.09 1163 27.49 1164 27.72
1165 27.80 1166 27.80 1167 27.67 1168 27.40 1169 27.05
1170 26.61 1171 26.12 1172 25.52 1173 24.88 1174 24.14
1175 23.31 1176 22.34 1177 21.31 1178 20.21 1179 18.66
1180 16.74 1181 14.46 1182 12.41 1183 10.57 1184 9.16
1185 8.05 1186 7.16 1187 6.38 1188 5.67 1189 5.04
1190 4.49 1191 4.03 1192 3.64 1193 3.33 1194 3.07
1195 2.86 1196 2.68 1197 2.53 1198 2.40 1199 2.30
1200 2.21 1201 2.12 1202 2.05 1203 1.99 1204 1.94
1205 1.88 1206 1.84 1207 1.80 1208 1.76 1209 1.73
1210 1.70 1211 1.67 1212 1.64 1213 1.62 1214 1.59
1215 1.57 1216 1.54 1217 1.53 1218 1.51 1219 1.49
1220 1.47 1221 1.45 1222 1.44 1223 1.43 1224 1.41
1225 1.40 1226 1.38 1227 1.37 1228 1.35 1229 1.34
1230 1.33 1231 1.32 1232 1.31 1233 1.30 1234 1.29
1235 1.28 1236 1.27 1237 1.26 1238 1.25 1239 1.23
1240 1.23 1241 1.22 1242 1.21 1243 1.20 1244 1.19
1245 1.18 1246 1.18 1247 1.17 1248 1.16 1249 1.15
1250 1.15 1251 1.14 1252 1.13 1253 1.13 1254 1.12
1255 1.12 1256 1.11 1257 1.10 1258 1.10 1259 1.09
1260 1.09 1261 1.08 1262 1.07 1263 1.06 1264 1.05
1265 1.05 1266 1.05 1267 1.05 1268 1.04 1269 1.04
1270 1.03 1271 1.02 1272 1.02 1273 1.01 1274 1.01
1275 1.01 1276 1.00 1277 1.00 1278 .99 1279 .99
1280 .98 1281 .97 1282 .97 1283 .96 1284 .96
1285 .96 1286 .96 1287 .96 1288 .95 1289 .95
1290 .94 1291 .94 1292 .93 1293 .93 1294 .93
1295 .92 1296 .92 1297 .91 1298 .91 1299 .91
1300 .90 1310 .88 1320 .85 1330 .82 1340 .79
1350 .77 1360 .75 1370 .74 1380 .71 1390 .70
1400 .70 1420 .66 1440 .63 1460 .57 1500 .54
TOTAL VOLUME THIS HYDROGRAPH = 3.03(Ac.Ft)
C. Hydrologic Reference Graphs & Table

1. 50-Year, 24-Hour Isohyet (LACDPW)

2. Los Angeles County Proportion Impervious Data Table

3. Los Angeles County Debris Production Rates for Santa Clara Basin

4. Los Angeles County Peak Bulking Factors for Santa Clara Basin

"
"

"
""
"
"

" $

!"
!
!"
!" !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!"
!
!
!
!
!"
#

!
$ !

HYDROLOGY APPENDIX D
Proportion Impervious Data
Code Land Use Description % Impervious
1111 High-Density Single Family Residential 42
1112 Low-Density Single Family Residential 21
1121 Mixed Multi-Family Residential 74
1122 Duplexes, Triplexes and 2-or 3-Unit Condominiums and Townhouses 55 1123 Low-Rise Apartments, Condominiums, and Townhouses 86 1124 Medium-Rise Apartments and Condominiums 86
1125 High-Rise Apartments and Condominiums 90
1131 Trailer Parks and Mobile Home Courts, High-Density 91 1132 Mobile Home Courts and Subdivisions, Low-Density 42 1140 Mixed Residential 59
1151 Rural Residential, High-Density 15
1152 Rural Residential, Low-Density 10
1211 Low- and Medium-Rise Major Office Use 91
1212 High-Rise Major Office Use 91
1213 Skyscrapers 91
1221 Regional Shopping Center 95
1222 Retail Centers (Non-Strip With Contiguous Interconnected Off-Street 96 1223 Modern Strip Development 96
1224 Older Strip Development 97
1231 Commercial Storage 90
1232 Commercial Recreation 90
1233 Hotels and Motels 96
1234 Attended Pay Public Parking Facilities 91
1241 Government Offices 91
1242 Police and Sheriff Stations 91
1243 Fire Stations 91
1244 Major Medical Health Care Facilities 74
1245 Religious Facilities 82
1246 Other Public Facilities 91
1247 Non-Attended Public Parking Facilities 91
1251 Correctional Facilities 91
1252 Special Care Facilities 74
1253 Other Special Use Facilities 86
1261 Pre-Schools/Day Care Centers 68
1262 Elementary Schools 82
1263 Junior or Intermediate High Schools 82
1264 Senior High Schools 82
1265 Colleges and Universities 47
1266 Trade Schools and Professional Training Facilities 91 1271 Base (Built-up Area) 65
1271.01 Base High-Density Single Family Residential 42
1271.02 Base Duplexes, Triplexes and 2-or 3-Unit Condominiums and T 55

HYDROLOGY APPENDIX D
Code Land Use Description % Impervious
1271.03 Base Government Offices 91
1271.04 Base Fire Stations 91
1271.05 Base Non-Attended Public Parking Facilities 91
1271.06 Base Air Field 45
1271.07 Base Petroleum Refining and Processing 91
1271.08 Base Mineral Extraction - Oil and Gas 10
1271.09 Base Harbor Facilities 91
1271.10 Base Navigation Aids 47
1271.11 Base Developed Local Parks and Recreation 10
1271.12 Base Vacant Undifferentiated 1
1272 Vacant Area 2
1273 Air Field 45
1274 Former Base (Built-up Area) 65
1275 Former Base Vacant Area 2
1276 Former Base Air Field 91
1311 Manufacturing, Assembly, and Industrial Services 91 1312 Motion Picture and Television Studio Lots 82
1313 Packing Houses and Grain Elevators 96
1314 Research and Development 91
1321 Manufacturing 91
1322 Petroleum Refining and Processing 91
1323 Open Storage 66
1324 Major Metal Processing 91
1325 Chemical Processing 91
1331 Mineral Extraction - Other Than Oil and Gas 10
1332 Mineral Extraction - Oil and Gas 10
1340 Wholesaling and Warehousing 91
1411 Airports 91
1411.01 Airstrip 10
1412 Railroads 15
1412.01 Railroads-Attended Pay Public Parking Facilities 91 1412.02 Railroads-Non-Attended Public Parking Facilities 91 1412.03 Railroads-Manufacturing, Assembly, and Industrial Services 91 1412.04 Railroads-Petroleum Refining and Processing 91
1412.05 Railroads-Open Storage 66
1412.06 Railroads-Truck Terminals 91
1413 Freeways and Major Roads 91
1414 Park-and-Ride Lots 91
1415 Bus Terminals and Yards 91
1416 Truck Terminals 91
1417 Harbor Facilities 91
1418 Navigation Aids 47
1420 Communication Facilities 82
1420.01 Communication Facilities-Antenna 2

HYDROLOGY APPENDIX D
Code Land Use Description % Impervious
1431 Electrical Power Facilities 47
1431.01 Electrical Power Facilities-Powerlines (Urban) 2 1431.02 Electrical Power Facilities-Powerlines (Rural) 1 1432 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities 15
1433 Liquid Waste Disposal Facilities 96
1434 Water Storage Facilities 91
1435 Natural Gas and Petroleum Facilities 91
1435.01 Natural Gas and Petroleum Facilities-Manufacturing, Assembly, and In 91 1435.02 Natural Gas and Petroleum Facilities-Petroleum Refining and Processing 91 1435.03 Natural Gas and Petroleum Facilities-Mineral Extraction – Oil and Gas 10 1435.04 Natural Gas and Petroleum Facilities-Vacant Undifferentiated 1 1436 Water Transfer Facilities 96
1437 Improved Flood Waterways and Structures 100
1440 Maintenance Yards 91
1450 Mixed Transportation 90
1460 Mixed Transportation and Utility 91
1460.01
Mixed Utility and Transportation-Improved Flood Waterways and Structures 100
1460.02 Mixed Utility and Transportation-Railroads 15
1460.03 Mixed Utility and Transportation-Freeways and Major Roads 91 1500 Mixed Commercial and Industrial 91
1600 Mixed Urban 89
1700 Under Construction (Use appropriate value) 91
1810 Golf Courses 3
1821 Developed Local Parks and Recreation 10
1822 Undeveloped Local Parks and Recreation 2
1831 Developed Regional Parks and Recreation 2
1832 Undeveloped Regional Parks and Recreation 1
1840 Cemeteries 10
1850 Wildlife Preserves and Sanctuaries 2
1850.01 Wildlife-Commercial Recreation 90
1850.02 Wildlife-Other Special Use Facilities 86
1850.03 Wildlife-Developed Local Parks and Recreation 10 1860 Specimen Gardens and Arboreta 15
1870 Beach Parks 10
1880 Other Open Space and Recreation 10
2110 Irrigated Cropland and Improved Pasture Land 2
2120 Non-Irrigated Cropland and Improved Pasture Land 2 2200 Orchards and Vineyards 2
2300 Nurseries 15
2400 Dairy, Intensive Livestock, and Associated Facilities 42 2500 Poultry Operations 62
2600 Other Agriculture 42
2700 Horse Ranches 42

HYDROLOGY APPENDIX D
Code Land Use Description % Impervious
3100 Vacant Undifferentiated 1
3200 Abandoned Orchards and Vineyards 2
3300 Vacant With Limited Improvements (Use appropriate value) 42 3400 Beaches (Vacant) 1
4100 Water, Undifferentiated 100
4200 Harbor Water Facilities 100
4300 Marina Water Facilities 100
4400 Water Within a Military Installation 100
SEDIMENTATION APPENDIX B B-2 Li.I __J w Q: ::, 0 (/) Cl'. Li.I n. (/) 0 a:: () (D :::, () z Li.I )-<t: Cl'. z 0 )-() :::> 0 0 a:: n. (/) Cl'. CD Li.I 0 200000 I -
100000
90000
~ -
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000

0.1 -
I I
I
I I
-

0.2 I I
1 I
-
. .

I I
.. -
-
I

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.80.9 l
. .
- ·
.

I
..

I
2 5 10

DRAINAGE AREA IN SQUARE MILES
..
,
I
I
I
•
I
-
20 ill
H
1111111
--
I
50 100
Los Angeles County
Department of Public Work

DEBRIS PRODUCTION RATES
for Santa Clara Basin
SEDIMENTATION APPENDIX B B-5 1.65 I "- 1.60 I'- r-. ~ " 1.55 1.50 .... 1,45 ~ " Q:: 0 1.40 f-u <{ LL c.., 1..35 -
z - ,_ ~ _J
::) 1.30
m ~ <{ ~
w 1.25
Q.
-

1.20 1, 15

1. 10

1.05 1.00 0. i
"'
I
~
I
I I
I .- I
I
I
I ~
-

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0. 7 0.8 0.9 I 2 5

DRAINAGE AREA IN SQUARE MI LE S
-
I
10 20
I
'
H
I
50 10
Los Angeles County
Department of Public Wark

PEAK BULKING FACTORS
for San ta
Claro Basin
D. Reference Plans

1. FEMA FIRM Panel 06037C0810G, Effective June 02, 2021

2. Haskell Canyon 341-ML2
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
Ü

SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT

SPECIAL FLOOD

HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A, V, A99
With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mile Zone X
Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard Zone X
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes. Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance

17.5 Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Effective LOMRs
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.

The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 11/7/2024 at 7:41 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.

This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.

Legend

OTHER AREAS OF

FLOOD HAZARD

OTHER AREAS

GENERAL

STRUCTURES
OTHER

FEATURES

MAP PANELS
8 B 20.2
The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
1:6,000
118°30'42"W 34°28'52"N
118°30'4"W 34°28'23"N
Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023
FEMA
c:::::::::J
1111111
-~-~~;;.:i.:;
·-,sr--~, .. )';T,'[_: t: ~7
;~ '~ •
:',s:;';t/ 'r,--;
~
I
]>
(/)
;,c
fT7
r
r
0 ]>
z
,<
0 z
cp
E. Technical Memorandum
Technical Memorandum
Date: November 11th, 2024
To: JEFF MORRISON, CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

RONIL SANTA ANA, CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

From: Alireza Sazegari
Hunsaker & Associates Los Angeles, Inc.

Cc: Jason H. Fukumitsu, PE (H&A), Tim Garrett (Avid Trails) Re: Blue Cloud Mountain Bike Park, City of Sant Clarita Design Criteria for Drainage and protection system Against flooding – 2-Year Storm Event

1. Introduction
Per the client’s request, City of Santa Clarita, this memorandum outlines the design criteria for the drainage and flood protection system to address a 2-year storm event for Blue Cloud Mountain Bike Park. This system is aimed at managing stormwater effectively for the chosen option.

2. Design Criteria Overview
The drainage and flood protection system will be designed to accommodate rainfall and stormwater runoff expected during a 2-year return period storm event.

A 2-year storm event is defined by the probability of occurring once every two years or having a 50% probability of occurring in any given year. This criterion was chosen per client’s request for the project and will protect the site against low intensity storm events.

3. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Analysis
• Rainfall Intensity: Based on local meteorological data, the rainfall intensity for a 2-year storm event will be utilized. This data is sourced from Los Angeles County Hydrology Map.
• Runoff Coefficients: Land use, soil type, and slope data specific to the site will determine the runoff coefficients. For impervious surfaces, higher coefficients will be applied to reflect increased runoff. • Design Flow Calculations: Flow rates will be calculated using the Modified Rational Method or an appropriate hydrologic model that considers the 2-year rainfall intensity.

4. Drainage System Design Parameters
2 • Drainage Devices Capacity: All conveyance systems (Drainage devices, pipes, culverts) will be sized to handle peak flows from the 2-year storm event.
• Inlet Structures: Inlets will be designed to capture surface runoff efficiently to prevent ponding and local flooding based on a 2-year event.

5. Flood Protection Measures
All protective structures will include a minimum 6 inch of freeboard height to account for uncertainties and prevent overflowing during the 2-year storm event.

6. Maintenance and Monitoring
Regular maintenance, including inspections and cleaning of drainage inlets, pipes, and basins, need to be planned to ensure system functionality.

7. Conclusion
The outlined criteria provide a comprehensive approach to managing drainage and minimizing flood risk for a 2-year storm event. This design aims to meet client’s (City of Santa Clarita) request and will provide reliable protection against low storm impacts.

Attachments:
• Email from City’s Project Manager, Mr. Jeff Morrison, requesting the 2- year storm event be used for design criteria.

From: Jeff Morrison <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 3:13 PM
To: Alireza Sazegari
Cc: Tim Garrett; Jay Hoeschler
Subject: RE: Final Plans
Ronil reviewed the plans and talked with Ali, he said we can design to the minimum, so let’s proceed with the 2 year option.

Thank you.
__________________________
Jeff Morrison
Open Space and Trails Administrator
City of Santa Clarita
Phone: (661) 286-4041
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.santa-clarita.com
From: Alireza Sazegari <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 11:03 AM
To: Jeff Morrison <[email protected]>
Cc: Tim Garrett <[email protected]>; Jay Hoeschler <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Final Plans
CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Sorry guys for the late response. We are working on the plans and currently trying to get them out by mid-November. I know earlier I we will try to aim for first week of November but there was more work than expected after we ran the hydrology. On the bright side we figured out a way around it and are working on it.

Regarding the meeting I’m open tomorrow before 11 and after 2.

Thank you,

Alireza Sazegari
Sr. Project Manager
E-mail: [email protected]
Hunsaker & Associates, Los Angeles, Inc.
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 23
Valencia, CA 91355
Main: 661.294.2211 Ext.215
Direct: 661.705.2215
Cell: 661.202.5410
Fax: 661.294.9890
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. n -

 Think before you print

From: Jeff Morrison <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 8:53 AM
To: Jay Hoeschler <[email protected]>
Cc: Tim Garrett <[email protected]>; Alireza Sazegari <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Final Plans

Hello,

Where we at on those plans and specs?

Thank you.

__________________________
Jeff Morrison
Open Space and Trails Administrator
City of Santa Clarita
Phone: (661) 286-4041
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.santa-clarita.com
From: Jay Hoeschler <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2024 12:31 PM
To: Jeff Morrison <[email protected]>
Cc: Tim Garrett <[email protected]>; Alireza Sazegari <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Final Plans

CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Hi Jeff,

When we last checked with Hunsaker, Ali suggested final package will be first week of November, as they just got the geo report late last week.

Ali, can you verify final delivery?

Thanks,
Jay.

On Oct 28, 2024, at 7:55 AM, Jeff Morrison <[email protected]> wrote:

How we doing? Last week, hope its going to be a happy Halloween….

Let me know.

Thank you.

__________________________
Jeff Morrison
Open Space and Trails Administrator
City of Santa Clarita
Phone: (661) 286-4041
Email: [email protected]
Web: www.santa-clarita.com

Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here.

F. Hydrology Maps

1. Existing Condition Hydrology Map

2. Proposed Condition Hydrology Map
50-yr BB
Subarea Node Area Imp (ac)
1A 38.3 0.01
2A 35.8 0.01
2A
3A 8.7 0.01
3A
4A 38.8 0.01
4A
SA 6.6 0.01
5A
50-yr Clear
Subarea Node Area Imp 1~ 1
1A 38.3 0.01
2A 35.8 0.01
3A 8.7 0.01
4A 38.8 0.01
5A 6.6 0.01
REFERENCE STORM FREQUENCIES=
JUNCTION 25-yr Clear
Soil 50-Yr 50-Yr Tc Qsati Q!Dbb DPV Iaraa IQ5Cb IOsabti SDPV Subarea Node ...... Type Depth {ln) (m in) \cfs) (cfs) (cy) (ac) (cf5 ) \Cfs) (cy) 99 5.5 9 80.7 109.8 2,124 38.3 &J.7 1A
99 5.5 12 64.8 88.1 1,986 74.1 138.7 2A

74.1 138.7 187.2 3,850 3A
99 5.5 8 19.4 26.4 483 82.8 153.8 4A

82.8 153.8 200.8 4,108 5A
99 5.5 14 64.6 87.9 2,152 121.6 217.1
121.6 217.1 286.6 4,940 10-yr Clear
99 5.5 7
Soil 50-Yr 50-YrTc
Type Depth \in)
99 99
99 99
99 I
I
to I
~:

Cl1
I
I

5.5 5.5

5.5 1471.4
X
I
\
1467.7
X
\
\
\
\min)
9 12
8 14
7 15.8
o.,
(cfsl

78.4 62.7

18.9 62.5

15.3 1467.2
X
1460.7
X
1456.7
X

21.4 366

JUNCTION
Iarin1
{ac)

38.3 74.1

32.8 121 .6
128.2
I050
(cfs l

78.4 134.2
148.7
209.8
217.6
1467.3
X
51 X
14 08
X
128.2
128.2

59. X
57_7
X
0 ,[/ 0 ct
225.4
225.4
•
Q .s o x 1458.7
X
457.4
X
0 1457.6
145Q
X
X
293.8 5,108
's
?s .Jo
7s :?o
)"S, /0 , 00
1457.2
X
.-- '
1455.5
X
Subarea
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
\ EXISTING CONDITION:
1470.5
X
1456.6
X
\
1467.3
X
----
T\
~
a
a ~ I I '
LA=128.2 AC
m2=36.0 CFS
'
1452.6
X
1453.2 0
1456.9
X
Q
f:

I
I
I
I
\
\
\
~ t'l"i
t;
:;..\
\
~
438.9
X
X
X

50. X
14 4.9
454.6
X
0 1432.7
X
1450.6
X
1448.0
X
1447.4
X
1441.3
X
0 1440.9
X
0 0
1444.9
X
1443.3
X
_J
w 0
----- e
1435.4
X 0
Node
1441.2
X
(ac)

38.3 35.8

8.7 38.8

6.6 Areo
{ac)
38 3

35.8 8.7

38.8 6.6
Imp Soi l
Type

0.01 99

0.0 1 99

0.01 99

0.0 1 99
Imp
Soil
Type

0.01 99

0.01 99
25-Yr 25-Yr Tc Q,,
Depth (in) (m in) (cfs)

4.829 10 62.3

4.829 13 49.9

4.829 9 14.9

4.829 16 48.2

4.829 8 11.9
10-Yr 10-Yr Tc Q,o
Depth ! 1'1) (min) (cfs)

3.927 12 44.5

3.927 16 35.4

3.927 10 11.3

3.927 19 34.6

3.927 10 8.6
l
SA

6.6 Ac \
Tc = 191/....-___,_-
1480
1470
\
1472.6
X

JUNCTION
rare a ro25
(ac) {cfs)

38.3 62.3

74.1 106.5

82.8 118.4
121.6 164.8
128.2 172.2

JUNCTION
Iarea IQ10
fac) (cfs )

38.3 44.5

74.1 76.6

82.8 85 .8
121.6 119.5
128.2 125.5
0 S,o
1550
iss0
5-yr Clear
Subarea Node
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
85th Percentile
Subarea Node
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
1540
\530
.._<';)1-0
7 ·~· (ac)

38.3 35.8

8.7 38.8

6.6 ......
{ac)

38.3 35.8

8.7 38.8
68 Soil Imp Type

0.01 99

0.01 gg

0.01 99

0.01 gg
Soil Imp Type

0.01 0.01

0.01 1486.8
X
99 99
99 99
99 JUNCTION
5-V, 5-Yr Tc o, Iarea IQ;
Depth (in) {min) {cfs) 1ac) {cfs)

3.212 15 29.6 38.3 2'9.6

3.212 2iJ 22.9 74.1 50.4

3.212 13 7.3 82. 8 "3.6

3.272 24 22.1 12 1.6 78.3

3.212 12 58 128.2 82.5

I JUNCTION
LI D LID Tc Guo Iarea IGuC<
Depth (in) (m in) (cfs) (ac) {cfs)

0.85 30 8.8 38.3 8.8

0.85 30 8.2 74.1 16. 1

0.85 30 2.0 82.8 18.0

0.85 3() SQ 121 6 26.4

0.85 30 1 5 128.2 27.7
________/
1656.4
4A

38.8 Ac
Tc= 30
14 1492.

12.9 X
1507
1480.
5 .9

7.1 X
LEGEND=
I
I
···-···-···-···- ·

5.5 -----
- - -
0 556.8
X
's,o ___ -.___
0 1489.3
X
3A
,
19 a
s -
""
1490.9

8.7 Ac
Tc= 20

TRACT BOUNDARY
7soo

DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

SUBAREA BOUNDARY

TIME OF CONCENTRATION PATH

ISOHYET

DEBRIS POTENTIAL AREA (DPA)

MAIN CONVEYANCE
1502.6
X
1515.2
669.2
1550
1540
1530
's<o
528F

28.4 AC
Tc= 11
1570.1
X
/i
1532.7• /;·
0 / y
h'
/
I

0. o9
I
J

SUBAREA NODE

ACREAGE
1575.9
X
2A

35.8 Ac
Tc = 30~ ) ------1-Y

TIME OF CONCENTRATION
1577
X
588.4
X .------
>oo
'690 __ ,
'6ao
1670
~-- __ _
1660
7650 --- 1640
16Jo
is20
A"~--,610
,
~ 0
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA=

1. 50-YR, 24-HR ISOHYETS: 5.5"

2. SOIL NUMBER: 99

3. DESIGN STORM: 2-YR, 24-HR, CLEAR STORM

4. PERCENT IMPERVIOUS VALUES:

Undeveloped Natural Areae: ,~

5. DPA - 8, 35,500 CT PER SQ Ml

6. BULKING FOR DPA 8: 1.36 FOR THE FIRST 0.1 SQ Ml
1 1.
1A

38.3 Ac
1900
~
1675.4
X
1890
1600
1610
\
\
2-YR DESIGN STORM=
2-yr Clear (DESIGN STORM)
Subarea Node Area Imp Soil 2-Yr 2-Yr Tc Q,
(ac) Type Depth (in) (m in) {cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 2.1285 25 12.1
2A 35.8 0.01 99 2.1285 30 9.8
3A B.7 0.0·1 99 2.1285 20 3.2
4A 38.3 0.01 99 2.1285 30 10.6
5A 6.6 0.01 99 2.1285 19 2.6
SI

JUNCTION
Iarea IQ,
iac) {cfs]

36.3 12.1

74.1 21.0

82.8 23.8
121.6 34.0
128.2 36.0

VICINITY MAP
r,c 1:J ':C.~1,
-HOfAAS P.l";F L4f: I/ I) 7
.6
1676.B
X
1624.7
X
1 oo·
1'' J/' rJ'
INCHES
X
;v-, \
603
X
100·
[
C
C

SOIL CLASSIFICATION AREA

PROPOSED WATERSHED BOUNDARY

FEMA FLOODZONE
,--------..--..----,---------------,------.------,-----,-----=-------------,--------r-::-,.,,.,.,-:,====-=----------..----------------------------.-::,=,-------1" DESIGNED: OWNER/DEVELOPER: PLANS PREPARED BY: SCALE: t" = JOO' ~ ER

CAPITAL FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY
DRAFTED:

CHECKED,
JHF NO. REVISIONS DATE BY

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

PARK PLANNING AND OPEN SPACE
PROJECT MANAGER: JEFF MORRISON
23920 VALENCIA BLVD. SUITE. 270
SANTA CLARITA, CA 91355-2196
HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES CITY OF SANTA CLARITA t-DA-TE-, -----,,.

L O S A N C E L F. S, I N C ///08/2024 I
BLUE CLOUD MOUNTAIN BIKE PARK 1-cJOc:;-B,,-No-. - 03- 17--0-0l--O-Ol-li 1---------1" EXISTING CONDITIONS
PLANNING ■ ENGINEERING ■ SURVEYING
26074 Avenue Hall, Ste 23 ■ Valencia • G\ 91355
PH: (661) 294·2211 FX: (661) 2949890
SHEET

HYDROLOGY STUDY MAP
JASON H. FUKUMITSU DATE IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA OF 1 SHEET ~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-------~-~--~------------~~--~--~---------------~-------~----------------~---------------------------~-------~"

50..vr BB
Subarea Node Area Imp
Soil
(ac ) Type
1A 38.3 0.01 gg
2A 35.3 0.01 99
2A
OA 38.4 0.01 gg
4A
5A 4.1 0.01 99
5A
68 7.9 0.01 99
78 4.2 0.02 99
M B
50-yr Clear
Subarea Node "'·· \ac) Imp
Soil
Type
1A 38.3 0.01 99
2A 35.3 0.01 99
4'. 38.4 0.01 99
5A 4.1 0.01 99
6B 7.9 0.01 99
7B 4.2 0.02 99
BAB
REFERENCE STORM FREQUENCIES:

JUNCTION 25-yr Clear
25(50-Yr 25150-Yr Q50l'Q50b Oso~b DPY Iarea IQ;ob IQ;obb LDPV Depth (in) Tc (minj (cfs ) (cfs) (cy) (ac) (cfs ) {cfs ) (C)'') Subarea Node ... ,. \ac)

5.5 g 8D.7 109.8 2,124 38.3 80.7 1A 38.3
55 12 63.9 86.9 1,958 73.6 138.6 2A 35.3

73.6 136.6 187.1 3,824 4A 38.4

5.5 14 64.0 87.0 2,130 112 200.8 5A 4 1
112 200.8 266.0 4,725 6B 7.9

5.5 7 9.8 13.3 227 116.1 205.7 7,B 4.2 '116.1 205.7 272.0 4,807

5.5 11 15.0 20.4 438 7.9 15.0 BAB

5.5 11 7.8 12. 1 22.8 10-yr Clear
50-Yr
Depth (in)

5.5 5.5

5.5 55

5.5 5.5
I
I
to I
~:

Cl1
I
I
I
\
\
50-Yr Tc
(m in)
9 12
14 7
11 11
1471.4
X
1467.7
X
Q""
{cf$)

78.4 61.8

61.8 95

14.6 7.8
1467.2
X
1460.7
X
128.2
JUNCllON
Iarea
{ac)

38.3 73.6
112
116.1

7.9 12.1
128.2
IO!la
{cfs J

78.4 134.2
194.1
198.8

14.6 22.3
219.2
1467.3
X
51 X
14 0 8
X
226.5 296.0 4,944

59. X

57.1 X
0 0
Q .6
o x
0 1458.7
X
1457.6
X
1457.2
X
Subaraa
1A
2A
4A
5A
6B
78 \
\
1456.7
X 457.4
X
145Q V----- '
','~ ,-E-X-IS-T~IN_G_C_O_N~D-1-TI_O_N_: --,l4S,lS
LA=128.2 AC .----
8 --1.A...L..llB..:L...j m2=36. o cFs
PROPOSED CONDITION:
= ---.--t LA=128.2 AC
:::==::::.1467.3
X
m2=35.3 CFS
1456. 9
X
\
r:
1453.2
X
14 4.9
0 454.6
X
1450.6
X
1452.6
X
1447.4
X
0 1441.3
X
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
"438.9
X
X
0 1432.7
_J
w
1435.4
X
1440.9
X
0 Node
8AB
"''" (ac )

38.3 35.3

38.4 4.1

7.9 4.2
0 1444 9
X
1443.3
X
Imp
Soi l
Type

0.01 99

0.02 99
Imp
Soi l
Type

0.01 gg

0.01 99

0.02 99
1441.2
X
25-Yr
Depth (in)

4.829

4.829
10-Yr
Depth (in)

3.927

3.92.7 3.927

3.927
25-Yr Tc a,.
(m in) (cfs)
10 62.3
13 49.2
15 49.5
7 8.0
12 11.5
12 6. 1
10-Yr Tc 0,e
(m in) (cfs )
12 44.5
16 34.9
19 34.3
9 5.6
15 8.1
15 4.3
SA
JUNCTION 5-yr Clear --, JUNCTION
Iorea I020
(ac) {cfs)
Subarea Node Area Imp
Soi l 5-Yr 5-Yr Tc Q, I area EQ,
(ac) Type Depth (ln) (ml1 ) (cfs ) {ac) (cfs)

38.3 62.3 1A 38.3 0.01 99 3.212 15 29.6 38.3 29.6

73.6 100.6 2A 35.3 0.01 99 3.212 19 23.4 73.6 51.0
112 153.8 4A 38.4 0.01 99 3.212 23 22.5 112 72.9
116. 1 157.2 SA 4.1 0.01 99 3.212 11 3.8 116.1 75.3

7.9 11.5 66 7.9 0.01 99 3.212 18 5.4 7.9 5.4

12.1 17.7 7B 4.2 0.02 99 3.2·12 18 2.9 12. 1 8.3
128.2 173.7 BAB 128.2 83.2
JUNCTION 85th Percentil e JUNCTION
Iorea IQ, D
1:ac) {cfs)
Subarea Node Area Soil LI D LID Tc QLlll I orea IQLID Imp (ac ) Type Depth (ln) (m l1 ) {cfs ) {ac) (cfs )

38.3 44.5 1A 38.3 0.01 99 0.85 30 8.8 38.3 8.8

73.6 76.6 2A 35.3 0.01 99 0.85 30 8. 1 73.6 16.2
112 109.9 4A 38 .4 0.01 99 0.85 30 8.8 112 24.4
116.1 112.9 SA 4.1 0.01 99 0.85 30 0.9 116.1 25.2 u ~ ,•:.M ___ , 7.9 8.1

12.1 12.5
f--i"iB-t---t-,7;'.os-fio'i.oi1t-99ii:-t---io;';.asisf-+-'s3os--+--c1;'.ai<-+ -i7s'.9,--lf-1s'.si-i...-~---,60o 128.2 124.7
7B 4.2 0.02 99 0.85 30 ·1.0 12. 1 2.8 \t\.i:::::::::::::::

BAB 128.2 27.8 1,630
'
0 S>o
1560
iss0
.-_-.'.540 / _// -------·

4.17 Ac
Tc= 3
I
:;
1 2 2
I
I 1500 -.,.-
I
1'1490
1472.6
X
LEGEND=
. ···-···-.. ,-... -.

5.5 -----
- - -
1 §.56.4
4A

38.4 Ac
Tc= 30
r;--_.Y.-,
I~\._

12.9 X
556.8
68 °:C " '
\J7'9.9~A~c~==~··· 'i i
Tc= 3

TRACT BOUNDARY

DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

SUBAREA BOUNDARY

TIME OF CONCENTRATION PATH

ISOHYET

DEBRIS POTENTIAL AREA (DPA)

MAIN CONVEYANCE
1668.8
w,40
1,e,50
\660
1670
1515.2
669.2 -
1550
1540
1530
's<o
15 .1
.. ,r-;;,50 :Q
,500 '
,510
0 1570.1
528F~--- SUBAREA NODE

28.4 AC ACREAGE
Tc= 11 +--- TIME OF CONCENTRATION

BAB CONFLUENCE NODE
>oo
'690 __ ,
'6ao
1670
~-- __ _
1660
7650
1640
16Jo
is20
--✓
A"~--,0,0
588.4
X ~~
DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA=

1. 50-YR, 24-HR ISOHYETS: 5.5"

2. SOIL NUMBER: 99

3. DESIGN STORM: 2-YR, 24-HR, CLEAR STORM

4. PERCENT IMPERVIOUS VALUES:

Undeveloped Natural Areas: 1,C:

Developed Reglonol Porks ond Recreation: 2"

5. DPA - 8, 35,500 CY PER SQ Ml

6. BULKING FOR DPA 8: 1.36 FOR THE FIRST 0. 1 SQ Ml
1A

38.3 Ac
1900
1675.4
X
···-......:,c ... = - \5'o0 ••• ,
1600
161 O
1890
\
·\.
2-YR DESIGN STORM=

2..yr Clear (DESIGN STORM) JUNCllON
Subarea Node Are, Imp Soil 2-Yr 2-Yr Tc a, :Eare a ,Q,
(ac) Type De pth (in) (m in) (cfs) (ac) (cfs)
1A 38.3 0.01 99 2. 1285 25 12. 1 38.3 12.1
ZA 35.3 0.01 99 2. 1285 30 9 6 73.6 21.0
4A 38.4 0.01 99 2. 1285 30 10.5 112 31.0
5A 4.1 .01 99 2. 1285 17 1.7 116.1 32 .1
69 7.9 0.01 99 2.1285 30 2.2 7.9 2.2
79 4.2 .02 99 2. 1285 30 1 .2 12.1 3.3
8A8 128.2 35.3
SI

VICINITY MAP
~JCT J ~C/\L[
TIICf,1AS GIJIC[ 445·/ )-7
1676.B
X
1624.7
X
100'
FEET
50' O'
Y.i' D"
INCHES
100'
C
C
----,FEMA----

SOIL CLASSIFICATION AREA

PROPOSED WATERSHED BOUNDARY
FEMA FLOODZONE ,--------..--..----,--------------,----r----.-----:-----=-----------.--------...,.,.,,.,.,-:,====-=----------..----------------------------..-:,=,-------1" DESIGNED: OWNER/DEVELOPER: PLANS PREPARED BY: SCALE: t" = JOO' ~

CAPITAL FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY
ER
DRAFTED:

SC
JHF NO. REVISIONS DATE BY

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

PARK PLANNING AND OPEN SPACE
PROJECT MANAGER: JEFF MORRISON
23920 VALENCIA BLVD. SUITE. 270
SANTA CLARITA, CA 91355-2196
HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES CITY OF SANTA CLARITA t-DA-TE-, -----,,.

L O S A N C E L F. S, I N C l l/l l/2024 I
BLUE CLOUD MOUNTAIN BIKE PARK 1-cJOc;;-B,,-No-. - 03- 17--0-0l--O-Ol-li 1---------1" PROPOSED CONDITIONS
PLANNING ■ ENGINEERING ■ SURVEYING
26074 Avenue Hall, Ste 23 ■ Valencia , G\ '11355
PH: (661) 294·2211 FX: (661) 2'14'1890
SHEET

NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS

SANTA CLARITA BLUE CLOUD BIKE PARK PROJECT

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Lead Agency:

City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355‐2196
Prepared by:

Vista Environmental
1021 Didrickson Way
Laguna Beach, California 92651
949 510 5355
Greg Tonkovich, INCE
Project No. 23002
April 3, 2024
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Noise Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives................................................................................. 1

1.2 Site Location and Study Area ..................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Proposed Project Description .................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... 2

1.5 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project ......................................................................... 3

2.0 Noise Fundamentals................................................................................................................ 5

2.1 Noise Descriptors....................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Tone Noise ................................................................................................................................. 5

2.3 Noise Propagation...................................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Ground Absorption .................................................................................................................... 6

3.0 Ground‐Borne Vibration Fundamentals................................................................................... 7

3.1 Vibration Descriptors................................................................................................................. 7

3.2 Vibration Perception.................................................................................................................. 7

3.3 Vibration Propagation................................................................................................................ 7

4.0 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................... 8

4.1 Federal Regulations ................................................................................................................... 8

4.2 State Regulations....................................................................................................................... 9

4.3 Local Regulations ..................................................................................................................... 10

5.0 Existing Noise Conditions....................................................................................................... 13

5.1 Noise Measurement Equipment.............................................................................................. 13

5.2 Noise Measurement Results.................................................................................................... 13

6.0 Modeling Parameters and Assumptions................................................................................. 16

6.1 Construction Noise................................................................................................................... 16

6.2 Vibration .................................................................................................................................. 17

7.0 Impact Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 18

7.1 CEQA Thresholds of Significance.............................................................................................. 18

7.2 Generation of Noise Levels in Excess of Standards ................................................................. 18

7.3 Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration .................................................................... 21

7.4 Aircraft Noise ........................................................................................................................... 21

8.0 References............................................................................................................................. 23 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Noise Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED

APPENDICES
Appendix A – Field Noise Measurements Photo Index
Appendix B – Field Noise Measurements Printouts
Appendix C – RCNM Model Construction Noise Calculation Printouts Appendix D – Onsite Noise Sources Reference Noise Measurements Printouts Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Noise Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Page iii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Proposed Site Plan and Study Area.............................................................................................. 4 Figure 2 – Field Noise Monitoring Locations .............................................................................................. 15

LIST OF TABLES
Table A – FTA Project Effects on Cumulative Noise Exposure ...................................................................... 8 Table B – FTA Construction Noise Criteria .................................................................................................... 9 Table C – Existing (Ambient) Noise Level Measurements........................................................................... 14 Table D – Construction Equipment Noise Emissions and Usage Factors.................................................... 16 Table E – Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ................................................................. 17 Table F – Construction Noise Levels at the Nearby Receptors................................................................... 19 Table G – Operational Noise Levels at the Nearby Sensitive Receptors..................................................... 20 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Noise Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Page iv

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ANSI   American National Standards Institute
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA   California Environmental Quality Act
City   City of Santa Clarita
CNEL   Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB   Decibel
dBA   A‐weighted decibels
DOT   Department of Transportation
FHWA   Federal Highway Administration
FTA   Federal Transit Administration
EPA   Environmental Protection Agency
Hz   Hertz
Ldn   Day‐night average noise level
Leq   Equivalent sound level
Lmax   Maximum noise level
ONAC   Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control
OSB   Oriented Strand Board
OSHA   Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PPV   Peak particle velocity
RMS   Root mean square
SEL   Single Event Level or Sound Exposure Level
STC   Sound Transmission Class
VdB   Vibration velocity level in decibels

Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Noise Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita

Page 1 ends

Santa Clarita City CouncilJuly 14, 2026

Santa Clarita City Council
July 14, 2026