Ncil20250709 — Santee City Council, July 9, 2025 (part 5 of 6)

Fire Approval: Date: Engineering
Approval: Date:

PW Approval: Date: Other ( ): Date:

To request an inspection: (619) 258-4100 x149

DEH-9098 (Rev. 11/17)
Request #
County of San Diego

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
P.O. BOX 129261, SAN DIEGO, CA 92112-9261
(858) 505-6700 FAX (858) 505-6848
www.sdcdeh.org

PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST FOR THE SITE ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION (SAM) PROGRAM

AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DIVISION (HMD)
Requestor Name: Alicia Jansen E-Mail: [email protected] Phone: ( 909 ) 255-8213 FAX: ( 909 ) 335-6120
Company Name: Stantec Consulting
Mailing Address: 735 E. Carnegie Drive, Suite 280, San Bernardino, CA 92408 (You may attach a business card/overprint with business card if preferred) Additional information may be accessed from the DEH website, www.sdcdeh.org. Fax or email your completed form to the Public Records Program at (858) 505-6848 or [email protected].

The following information is required. Separate forms are needed for each address or parcel number. 10939 & 11009 Summit Avenue, Santee, CA 92071 or
Exact Address (Street, City and Zip Code) Assessor Parcel Number Optional information (establishment permit number, business name, etc.):

Please indicate the purpose of your search by checking all that apply:

Hazardous Materials Permit & Underground Storage Tank Files (HMD/UST) Other (specify):

OFFICE USE ONLY BELOW THIS LINE
Files reviewed by: of Date:

Files copied for: of Date:

Request cancelled by: Date:

Photocopies Cost E-mailed / picked up / mailed on By
A search for DEH records checked above has been conducted and the following apply:

HMD/UST files for the permit number(s) listed below are available. #_ _ #_ _ #_ _ #_ _ #__ _
No SAM/HMD/UST records were found / purged for the address/APN you requested.

Signature - DEH Representative Date
DEH complies fully with the California Public Records Act and the Federal Freedom of Information Act. Please be advised that photocopy and/or scanned file fees may apply.
7/18/23-RECEIVED 7/17/23
Printed on Recycled Paper
July 18, 2023
Alicia Jansen
Stantec
[email protected]
PR4-071723-05
10939 & 11009 Summit Ave., Santee
Dear Requestor:

On, July 17, 2023, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received your email of July 17, 2023, requesting records under the Public Records Act. After a thorough review of our files, no site records were found pertaining to the sites/facilities referenced above.

A large number of our records are available on EnviroStor, an online database that provides non-confidential, public access to DTSCs data management system. It tracks our cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known or suspected contamination issues. EnviroStor is available 24/7, 365 days a year. The data reflects the latest updates as they are entered in the system.

Access it from your computer or smartphone, the local library – anywhere Internet access is available. Just go to www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov. You will find a step-by-step tour of EnviroStor under the "How to Use EnviroStor" menu on the website.

If you have any questions or would like further information regarding your request, please contact me via email at: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Jone Barrio
Jone Barrio
Regional Records Coordinator
DTSC - Administration/Cypress

APPENDIX G

INTERVIEW FORMS

OWNER QUEST IO
ASSESSMENT NNAIRE FOR PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL () Stantec
This que ti . . s onna1re outli . . . . . . . ~atenals (ASTM) M nes those respons1b1ht1es discussed in Section 6 of the American Society of Testing & Site Assessment . Pthod E 1_527-13 and E 1527-21 "Standard Practice for Conducting Environmental to assist our er s. ase I Environmental Site Assessment Process.· Staniec is requesting this information Liability Relief ien~ satisfy ?ne of the Landowner Liability Protections (LLPs) offered by the Business an Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002
Please complete ti - . . return the f ~15 questionnaire to the best of your ability. Upon completion o! the questionnaire, please questionnair~rm via email to [email protected]. Should you have questions while completing this • please contact Alicia Jansen @ 909.255-8213. Thank you.

CONTACT INFORMATI ON
PROPERTY OWNER:

Name: G ELALD O)u,i / I 1 'µ
City f&#Ji; State: _.LA:_
TENANTS:

Name: ---~---- - City ______ , State:

Address: _.£..!0__!..9~3_1'_5_ 4_1U._'/H._~_r_1t_ll_l3... __ _ q,~7/ Phone# I.Rl9- 2})lj,-z?f~ Zip code:

Address: --- ~-~-.;:----- - ----- -
Zip code: ___ _

PROPERTY INFORMATION UESTIONS
~ --------
What is the Current Use of the Property? _£~· =..!:E:~~...1:./'-"]),:::_::: 6=..:iv_C=-.c.¤'-_______ _ What are the Past Uses of Property? --~11~---------------- Do You Have Any Previous Environmental Reports? Yes __ _ No X Copies Sent to Buyer? Yes __ No
Please List the subject of Reports:. _____________________ _ Do you have any knowledge of environmental liens against the proper½ that are filed or recorded under federal, tribal, state of local law? Yes__ No If Yes, Explain __________________________ _
Do you have any knowledge of activity and land use limitations (such as land use restrictions, engineering controls, or institutional controls) th'at are in place on the site or that have been filed or recorded in a registry under federal, tribal, state of local law? Yes No )< If Yes, Explain, __________________________ _
Do you have specialized knowledge or experience related to the property or nearby properties? For example, are you involved in the same line of business as the current or former occupants of the property or an adjoining • p1 o
busin perty so that you . . ess? Yes would ,have spec1al1zed knowledge of the chemicals and processes used by this type of If Yes i:-, . - No -L
•-.,am
Do you have k . . . the Propert ? ~owledge of any Recognized Environmental Cond1t1ons (RECs) associated with products unde~ co ~e term RE~ means the presence or likely presence of any haza_rdous substances or petroleum on the propr:>rt
O
n_ditions that md1cate an existing release, past release, or a material threat of a release into structures subst - Y r mto the ground, groundwater or surface water of the property. The term includes hazardous ances vr petr I • . .th I y V 0 eum products even under conditions in compliance wi aws. es -- No /\.

If Yes, Explain
------- - --------------------
Does the purch~~ price of the property reasonably reflect the !air market value of the property? Yes _ __,__ 'I(_ No___ If No, is lower purchase pnce due to known or perceived contamination at the property?
Explain: ____________________________ _
To the best of your knowledge, are there currently or have there been storage tanks (above or underground) located or used on the Property? Yes__ No ---Xlf Yes, Explain {location, size. contents, age. etc) To the best of your knowledge, are there currently or have there been petroleum products and/or hazardous substances used or stored on the Property? Yes __k_ No __ _ If Yes, Explain {location. size. contents. age. etc.) ) {;" £° 6 ft l , B l+fl/2.. € l > o F (}L.D c,/l s ,o[?EO g y JZ.(:AJ'TcP- fll-Ul Louc;,1./-. I 1-1-(tlJ 1-11111 (:;c/tc.Te[) . .:I: Hf1-D r # 2- P.:>A/2./2Glf: c:,f ~,l £oMoV~ l}!'~ X, I 1/--z... Yll .. L.,c:_,4{IOIV Nl:Y.:T ro G-at?-.A Ge, To the best of your knowledge, are you aware of any spill½! chemicals or petroleum products that have taken place at the Property? Yes __ No
If Yes, Explain (location. size. contents. age. etc.)
To the best of your knowledge, do you know of any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the Property? Yes ___ .No _)L
If Yes, Explain. ___________________________ _
To the best of your knowledge, are you aware of any obvious indications of contamination at the Property? No ._XYes __ _
If Yes, Explain ____________________________ _
To the best of your knowledge, do you kn.ow of any environm~ntal cl,~nups or environmental issues that have taken place near or adjacent to the Property · No -4- Yes_ If Yes, Explain, ___________________________ _
Who provides water to the Property? _________ _
Who provides sewer services to the Property? ______ _
Private Well? _ __,X...._ __ _
Private Septic? )( ---...__ __
~~J!L,

SIGNATURE
Signature of Person Completing Form:

Printed Name of Person Completing Form: __ ="--= 6 !::=-_,_/2.==- /.t-"-'l.=.t::IJ::........i.CX~....iU~L,' ..L)!.. { ,~• ~Jl)~----- Date: &3-/~ -2<
Affiliation with the Prop;;: L~E ~/3.fZ.6
Years Affiliated with Property: f'.l f /Lt? X o '/12.-5 ----~--"-'--"'----------- Ye a rs You Owned the Property {if applicable):

Ye a rs You Operated at the Property {if applicable) ------------- :
-------------
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]

CITY OF SANTEE

PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP)

STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP)
FOR

SUMMIT AVENUE
TM-2023-0003
10939 Summit Avenue
Santee, CA 92071
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER(S):
378-190-01
ENGINEER OF WORK:

Shavger Rekani PE
___________________________________________________________________________________ Shavger Rekani PE 90893, 3/26
PREPARED FOR:

Warmington Residential
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, California 92626
PDP SWQMP PREPARED BY:

RICK
5620 Friars Rd, San Diego, CA 92110
(619) 291-0707
PLANS PREPARED BY:

RICK Engineering Company
5620 Friars Rd, San Diego, CA 92110
(619) 291-0707
DATE OF SWQMP:

October 27, 2023
January 29, 2024
April 15, 2024
October 15, 2024
December 19, 2024
Revised March 17, 2025
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Page intentionally blank
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronym Sheet
PDP SWQMP Preparer's Certification Page
PDP SWQMP Project Owner's Certification Page
Submittal Record
Project Vicinity Map
FORM I-1 Applicability of Permanent, Post-Construction Storm Water BMP Requirements FORM I-2 Project Type Determination Checklist (Standard Project or PDP) FORM I-3B Site Information Checklist for PDPs
FORM I-4 Source Control BMP Checklist for All Development Projects FORM I-5 Site Design BMP Checklist for All Development Projects FORM I-6 Summary of PDP Structural BMPs
Attachment 1: Backup for PDP Pollutant Control BMPs
Attachment 1a: DMA Exhibit
Attachment 1b: Tabular Summary of DMAs and Design Capture Volume Calculations Attachment 1c: Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening (when applicable) Attachment 1d: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition (when applicable) Attachment 1e: Pollutant Control BMP Design Worksheets / Calculations Attachment 2: Backup for PDP Hydromodification Control Measures Attachment 2a: Hydromodification Management Exhibit
Attachment 2b: Management of Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Attachment 2c: Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving Channels Attachment 2d: Flow Control Facility Design
Attachment 3: Structural BMP Maintenance Plan
Attachment 3a: B Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds and Actions Attachment 3b: Draft Maintenance Agreement (when applicable) Attachment 4: Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Storm Water BMPs PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

ACRONYMS
APN Assessor's Parcel Number
BMP Best Management Practice
HMP Hydromodification Management Plan
HSG Hydrologic Soil Group
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
N/A Not Applicable
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
PDP Priority Development Project
PE Professional Engineer
SC Source Control
SD Site Design
SDRWQCB San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SWQMP Storm Water Quality Management Plan
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

SWQMP PREPARER'S

CERTIFICATION PAGE
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003

PREPARER'S CERTIFICATION
I hereby declare that I am the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water best management practices (BMPs) for this project, and that I have exercised responsible charge over the design of the BMPs as defined in Section 6703 of the Business and Professions Code, and that the design is consistent with the PDP requirements of the City of Santee BMP Design Manual, which is a design manual for compliance with local City of Santee and regional MS4 Permit (California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order No. R9-2015-0100) requirements for storm water management.

I have read and understand that the [City Engineer] has adopted minimum requirements for managing urban runoff, including storm water, from land development activities, as described in the BMP Design Manual. I certify that this PDP SWQMP has been completed to the best of my ability and accurately reflects the project being proposed and the applicable BMPs proposed to minimize the potentially negative impacts of this project's land development activities on water quality. I understand and acknowledge that the plan check review of this PDP SWQMP by the [City Engineer] is confined to a review and does not relieve me, as the Engineer in Responsible Charge of design of storm water BMPs for this project, of my responsibilities for project design. ________________________________________________________ Engineer of Work's Signature, PE Number & Expiration Date Shavger Rekani, PE# 90893, Exp. 3/26
________________________________________________________ Print Name
RICK______________________________
Company
3/14/2025
Date
Engineer's Seal:

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Page intentionally blank
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

SWQMP PROJECT OWNER'S

CERTIFICATION PAGE
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003

PROJECT OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
This PDP SWQMP has been prepared for Warmington Residential by RICK. The PDP SWQMP is intended to comply with the PDP requirements of the City of Santee BMP Design Manual, which is a design manual for compliance with local City of Santee and regional MS4 Permit (California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region Order No. R9-2015-0100) requirements for storm water management.

The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan. Once the undersigned transfers its interests in the property, its successor-ininterest shall bear the aforementioned responsibility to implement the best management practices (BMPs) described within this plan, including ensuring on-going operation and maintenance of structural BMPs. A signed copy of this document shall be available on the subject property into perpetuity. _______________________________________________________ Project Owner's Signature
________________________________________________________ Print Name
Warmington Summit
________________________________________________________ Company
3/14/2025
____________________________
Date
Matthew Esquivel
Warmington Residential CA, INC.

SUBMITTAL RECORD
Use this Table to keep a record of submittals of this PDP SWQMP. Each time the PDP SWQMP is resubmitted, provide the date and status of the project. In column 4 summarize the changes that have been made or indicate if response to plancheck comments is included. When applicable, insert response to plancheck comments behind this page.

Submittal
Number
Date Project Status Summary of Changes
1 10/27/2023 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Initial Submittal
2 1/29/2024 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Second Submittal – Address minor
report comments and clarification on
non-vegetated channel northwest of
project not included in project.
3 4/15/2024 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Third Submittal – Address 2nd
Submittal Comments from City of
Santee.
4 10/15/2024 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Fourth Submittal – Minor changes to
site plan.
5 12/19/2024 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Fifth Submittal – Address submittal
comments received. Addition of
biofiltration basin.
6 3/17/2025 Preliminary Design /
Planning/ CEQA
Final Design
Sixth Submittal – Address submittal
comments received. Addition of
proposed culvert.

X
X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

SUMMIT AVENUE
Revision Page
March 17, 2025
This PDPSWQMP presents a revision to the December 19, 2024 report pursuant to the City of Santee plan check comments received January 20, 2025. The following text identifies the plan check comments along with the responses in bold.

City of Santee Engineering Comments (John Keane & Claire Singh)

8. In the Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP), page 59, please remove from the exhibit “not part of project improvements”. It is anticipated that the public improvements will be made in this area and that the existing CMP will be removed and replaced within the area that is identified as not being disturbed. Please revise the exhibit to show the replacement of the CMP and installation of public improvements to the northern property line. Approval of the proposed design will occur after final engineering has been submitted for review.

Noted; “not part of project improvements" has been removed. Replacement of CMP pipe and proposed culvert shown on exhibit.

9. SWQMP Page 61 appears to have the wrong project area and shows two parcels as part of the project scope.

Project area boundary has been moved accordingly to the appropriate location to show only the project's parcel in the project area.

10. SWQMP Page 99, please show the existing 36” CMP and headwall.

Noted; Pre-project Hydromodification Management Exhibit has been updated to show the existing 36” CMP and headwall.

11. SWQMP Page 100, the exhibit does not show full frontage improvements to the northern property line. Revise the exhibit to show this correctly.

Noted; Post-project Hydromodification Management Exhibit has been updated to show full frontage improvements.

12. SWQMP Page 101, same comment as page 61.

Project area boundary has been moved accordingly to the appropriate location to show only the project's parcel in the project area.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

SUMMIT AVENUE
Revision Page
December 19, 2024
This PDPSWQMP presents a revision to the October 15, 2024 report pursuant to the City of Santee plan check comments received November 25, 2024. The following text identifies the plan check comments along with the responses in bold.

City of Santee Engineering Storm Water Comments (Emily Stein & John Keane) 1a. Page 1: APN Number not apart of project.

APN Number has been removed.
1b. Project proposes the use of a proprietary BMP (modular wetlands system). Please provide detailed justification of the selection of a proprietary BMP and how the project is planning to comply with retention requirements in accordance to the City of Santee’s BMP Design Manual. It is unclear how the project will meet retention requirements.

An additional biofiltration basin has been added to the project to comply with requirements in accordance with the City of Santee BMP Design Manual. The City of Santee does not have a retention worksheet as part of its BMP Design Manual, so worksheet B-5.2 and B-5.6 from the City of San Diego have been included. In addition to the retention provided by the proposed biofiltration basin, the DMA exhibit has identified areas that will be reserved for impervious area dispersion.

2. Storm Water Quality Management Plan:
a. Page 54 of 134 (DMA Exhibit):
i. Pervious versus impervious areas are not clear. Exhibit indicates that only the street/road is impervious, however, the buildings and driveways should also be indicated as impervious. Suggest color Coordinating pervious/impervious areas.

Impervious areas have been revised to be inclusive of the building and driveways.
ii. All inlets to be equipped with Full Trash Capture (FTC) devices. Please call out all inlets as containing FTC devices.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
After review of the memorandum titled, “Full Capture Device Installation Planning for Compliance with the Statewide Trash Control Policy” dated January 17, 2019 and prepared by DMax, it appears that the public inlets downstream of our project site has not been identified as needed a FTC device. Additionally, it states for years 7 through 10 that the City of Santee would pass an ordinance requiring private properties to install BMPs on their property to address private PLUs. If this ordinance has been passed, please provide a copy for reference. The memorandum includes exhibits that define a strategy for full compliance and this site has not been identified for the placement of a full trash capture device within the private property. For the maintenance of the vault, a connector pipe screen has been proposed at the most downstream inlet tributary to the underground vault to prevent debris build up.
iii. Identify/call out location(s) of access manholes and/or inspection port(s) associated with the vault.

Access manholes and inspection ports will be provided during final engineering when project specific details are provided by the underground vault vendor.
iv. Add details/cutsheets of all makes/models of FTC devices to the exhibit.

Can include as a second page if they cant fit into
Standard details for the proposed connector pipe screen have been included on the 2nd sheet of the DMA Exhibit.
b. Attachment 1d: Include results of second exploratory excavation and testing in the SWQMP.

Updated Geotechnical Form I-8 has been included in the SWQMP. c. Attachment 3a: Include depth of sediment/debris accumulation for which would trigger maintenance action for the vault, MWS, and FTC devices.

Maintenance of the vault, MWS, and FTC device is based on a monthly frequency and storm event size, not based on sediment or debris accumulation. For details regarding maintenance, reference the Operations and Maintenance Procedures Table provided in Attachment 3A of the PDP SWQMP.
d. Attachment 4a: Plans sheets are missing from the SWQMP. Please include.

Latest plan sheets have been included in Attachment 4 of SWQMP.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

3. Plan Sheets:
a. Call out/identify locations(s) of full trash capture devices and indicate make/model.

Proposed ADS Flexstorm Connector Pipe Screen (CPS) has been called out on plans.
b. Include BMP details/cutsheets for stormwater pollution prevention signage, vault, MWS, tree well, brow ditches, and FTC devices.

Noted; details of proposed stormwater devices and elements have been included on plan sheets.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

SUMMIT AVENUE
Revision Page
April 15, 2024
This PDPSWQMP presents a revision to the January 29, 2024 report pursuant to the City of Santee plan check comments received March 15, 2024. The following text identifies the plan check comments along with the responses in bold.

City of Santee Engineering Storm Water Comments (Emily Stein & John Keane) 1a. Storm Water Intake Form: Resubmit form with the following edits: Check “no” for Redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface that support the use of automotive repair shops and retail gasoline.

Storm Water Intake Form updated.
2a. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 22: Check box “No” for Redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface that support the use of automotive repair shops and retail gasoline outlets.

Priority Determination Forn updated.
2b. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 23: Update parcel area to 4.65 acres.

Parcel Area Updated.
2c. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 25: Add discussion of non-vegetated channel.

Suggest inserting map showing location of non-vegetated channel (suggest sheet 6 of the grading plans).

Non-vegetated channel discussion added under “additional information” on page 25.

Reference to sheet 6 made in explanation.
2d. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 28: Update pre-project drainage area from 10 acres to 4.65 in two locations on page 28.

The correct pre-project drainage area is 10 acres, therefore no change. 10 Acres is inclusive of both on-site and off-site pre-project drainage flows, tributary to POC-1. 4.65 Acres is only the parcel area and does not include off site drainage to POC-1.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
2e. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 38, SD-1: Per the regional MS4 permit, the City of Santee is required to oversee that new development projects preserve natural drainage corridors. Suggest updating to Yes because natural drainage along the northern perimeter of the site is to be protected in place.

Form I-5 updated.
2f. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 38, SD-2: Per the regional MS4 permit, the City of Santee is required to have new development projects implement the conservation of natural areas (e.g. trees, vegetation, & soils). Suggest updating to Yes due to the northern portion of the site remaining undisturbed by the project.

Form I-5 updated.
2g. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Pages 41 & 42: Provide name, mailing address, phone number, and email address for the owner and maintenance provider for each BMP.

No permanent owner has been named yet as this project is still in entitlements. HOA should suffice.
2h. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 43: Fill out Form I-6 for the Tree Well.

Form I-6 updated to include Tree Well (BMP-2).
2i. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 44: Page can be deleted unless there is a fourth BMP that is being proposed as part of this project.

Extra page from I-6 Form deleted.
2j i. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Update exhibit to include a DMA for the northern portion of the parcel. Suggest identifying it as self-mitigating.

Exhibit updated to add a Self-mitigating DMA to northern area within parcel. 2j ii. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Add a site map showing pre-developed conditions to this sheet or include it as a separate sheet behind it.

For pre-developed conditions, refer to the pre-project hydromodification exhibit in Attachment 2A of the PDP SWQMP. It is not typical to have pre-existing conditions for a DMA Exhibit.
2j iv. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Color-coordinate/update exhibit to differentiate between pervious and impervious features.

Impervious hatch added to exhibit to identify impervious area. Pervious areas remain unhatched.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
2j v. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Zoom-out the exhibit to show how flows leaving the site will connect with the curb inlet located at the intersection of Summit Ave and Princess Joann Rd (per page 28 of the SWQMP). Can be a separate page.

A drainage path exhibit has been provided after the DMA Exhibit. 2j vi. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Call out/identify locations of all full trash capture devices. Currently, the exhibit only calls out one.

Only one trash capture device is proposed – at the most downstream curb inlet prior to entering the Storm Trap Vault. Pipe screen or equivalent callout added. 2j vii. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Call out/identify location(s) of trash enclosure(s).

No trash enclosures are proposed. Individual trash bins are used. Waste Management Service Will Serve Letter provided in PDP SWQMP Attachment 1C for reference. 2j viii. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Identify/call out location(s) of access manholes and/or inspection port(s) associated with the vault.

Project specific details for vault that designate access manholes and inspection ports will be provided in final engineering submittal.
2j ix. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Call out/identify locations of pet waste stations. Include details of the pet waste stations to the sheet including make, model, example signage, etc.

Pet Waste Station symbol and callout added to DMA exhibit. Locations were determined per the BMLA Conceptual Landscape Plan, dated 1/29/2024. Pet Waste Station details (make, model, example signage, etc.) to be provided in Final Engineering. 2j x. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Add details of each BMP (vault, MWS, tree well, full trash capture device) to the sheet.

Preliminary MWS Detail and Tree Well Detail added to DMA Exhibit. Vault Detail and Trash Capture Device Detail to be provided in future submittal. 2j xi. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Page 24 of the SWQMP indicates that type A and D soils are present. Update note on DMA Exhibit to indicate that type A & D soils have been identified on site.

Notes updated to note both type A and type B soils.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
2j xii. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Add a note about the non-vegetated channel to the “Notes” section on the exhibit.

Discussion of non-vegetated channel added to DMA Exhibit Notes. 2j xiii. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Add a brow ditch icon to the legend.

Brow ditch icon added to legend.
2jxiv. Storm Water Quality Management Plan: Page 48 (DMA Exhibit): Add a note about the HOA being responsible for maintenance of the pet waste stations.

Note 10 added to DMA Exhibit - "HOA to be Responsible for Maintenance of the Pet Waste Stations".
2k. Page 51: Update table to include northern portion of the parcel (self-mitigating area).

Table updated to include DMA-2 (Self Mitigating Area).
2l. Page 51: Page 55: Move Design Capture Volume worksheets to section Attachment 1E.

Design Capture Volume worksheets moved to Attachment 1E. 2m. Page 68: Shows a modular wetland system that has chambers that are 6’9” deep. Suggest replacing with a shallower model as chambers greater than 5 feet deep are challenging to inspect and maintain because to enter them requires confined space certification.

The modular wetland proposed is project specific and specified by ConTech. The MWS-L6-8-7-5-V-HC Model best suites our project and meets design constraints, therefore no change to the model is implemented.
2o. i. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Update exhibit to include a DMA for the northern portion of the parcel. Suggest identifying it as self-mitigating.

Self-Mitigating Area callout added.
2o. ii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Add a site map showing pre-developed conditions to this sheet or include as a separate sheet behind it.

A Pre-Project Hydromodification Exhibit which shows pre-developed conditions was already included in submittal, on page 78. Please refer to exhibit. 2o. iii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Color-coordinate/update exhibit to differentiate between pervious and impervious features.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Impervious area hatch was already shown and called out on hydromodification exhibit and legend. Please refer to exhibit.
2o. iv. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Zoom-out the exhibit to show how flows leaving the site will connect with the curb inlet located at the intersection of Summit Ave and Princess Joann Rd (per page 28 of the SWQMP). Can be a separate page.

A drainage path exhibit has been provided after the Post-Project Hydromodification Exhibit.
2o. v. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Call out/identify locations of all full trash capture devices. Currently, the exhibit only calls out one.

Only one trash capture device is proposed – at the most downstream curb inlet prior to entering the Storm Trap Vault. Pipe screen or equivalent callout added. 2o. vi. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Call out/identify location(s) of trash enclosure(s).

No trash enclosures are proposed. Individual trash bins are used. Waste Management Service Will Serve Letter provided in PDP SWQMP for reference. 2o. vii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Identify/call out location(s) of access manholes and/or inspection port(s) associated with the vault.

Project specific details for vault that designate access manholes and inspection ports will be provided in final engineering submittal.
2o. viii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Call out/identify locations of pet waste stations.

Include details of the pet waste stations to the sheet including make, model, example signage, etc.

Pet Waste Station symbol and callout added to Hydromodification Exhibit. Locations were determined per the BMLA Conceptual Landscape Plan, dated 1/29/2024. Pet Waste Station details (make, model, example signage, etc.) to be provided in Final Engineering. 2o. ix. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Add details of each BMP (vault, MWS, tree well, full trash capture device) to the sheet.

Preliminary MWS Detail and Tree Well Detail added to Hydromodification Exhibit. Vault Detail and Trash Capture Device Detail to be provided in future submittal. 2o. x. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Page 24 of the SWQMP indicates that type A and D soils are present. Update note on DMA Exhibit to indicate that type A & D soils have been identified on site.

Notes updated to note both type A and type B soils.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
2o. xi. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): Add a note about the non-vegetated channel to the “Notes” section on the exhibit.

Discussion of non-vegetated channel added to Hydromodification Exhibit Notes. 2o. xii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): xii. Add a brow ditch icon to the legend.

Brow ditch icon added to legend.
2o. xiii. Page 79 (Hydromodification Exhibit): xiii. Add a note about the HOA being responsible for maintenance of the pet waste stations.

Notes updated to discuss HOA being responsible for maintenance of pet waste stations.

2. p. Page 81 shows the project area as including the parcel to the north of the project. Update the project area boundary to only include APN # 378-190-0100.

CCSYA Exhibit Project Area Updated.

2. q. Attachment 3a: Additional maintenance actions/indicators information is required for all BMPs utilized for this project (including the vault, MWS, tree well, and full trash capture devices. Suggest including fact sheets from Appendix E of Santee’s BMP Design Manual. Also include literature for each device that describe accumulation of sediment (depth of sediment accumulation) and floatables which would trigger maintenance action.

Specifications of the Storm Water vault and trash capture device will be provided in final engineering. Additional Fact Sheets from Santee BMP Design Manual Appendix E are added.

2. r. Attachment 4a: Plans sheets are missing from the SWQMP.

Plan sheets added to Attachment 4.
5a. A discussion of the tree well was not located within the Drainage Study. Please add discussion of tree well to page 1, section 1.2, Post-Project Condition.

Discussion of Tree Well added to Page 1, Section 1.2, under Post Project Condition. 6a. Only describes one boring/exploratory excavation from which stormwater infiltration testing was conducted. Per Santee’s BMP Design Manual, a minimum of two exploratory excavations shall be conducted. Please conduct one additional excavation and repeat infiltration testing.

Additional boring and excavation conducted on 4/20/24, and percolation test on 4/22/2024. 6b. Please update Page 30-31 of the document under the “Preliminary Infiltration Rate” section to include language that clearly supports full, partial, or no infiltration conditions for the project site.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Geotechnical Forms updated.

City of Santee Engineering Comments (John Keane & Claire Singh) 4a. Provide a Structural BMP Summary Information sheet (Form 1-6 Page 3 of 4) for the proposed tree well located on Summit Avenue. Indicate the maintenance mechanism for this BMP.

Form I-6 updated to include the Tree Well (GS-1).

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR

SUMMIT AVENUE
Revision Page
January 29, 2024
This PDPSWQMP presents a revision to the October 27, 2023 report pursuant to the City of Santee plan check comments received December 15, 2023. The following text identifies the plan check comments along with the responses in bold.

City of Santee Comments

1. (Page 1) Missing TM-2023-0003.

Permit Number added.

2. (Page 5) Missing EOW Signature.

Signature provided in later submittal, closer to approval.

3. (Page 5) Missing EOW Seal.

Stamp provided in later submittal, closer to approval.

4. (Page 5) Missing TM-2023-0003.

Permit Number added.

5. (Page 7) Missing Project Owner's signature.

Signature provided in later submittal, closer to approval.

6. (Page 7) Missing Permit Application Number.

Permit Number added.

12. (Page 12) Remove 11009 Summit Avenue from project address. 11009 Summit Avenue removed from project address.

13. (Page 15) Priority Determination Form must be consistent with the Storm Water Intake Form. See redlines for the intake form and update both documents.

Priority Determination Form updated to match Storm Water Intake Form.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

14. (Page 17) Remove 11009 Summit Avenue from project address. 11009 Summit Avenue removed from project address.

15. (Page 17) Remove 378-180-10 from APN list.

APN for 11009 Summit Avenue removed.

16. (Page 17) Site Design Checklist areas are inconsistent with drainage study and plans sheets.

Area to be disturbed updated to 2.6 acres (2.1 impervious + 0.5 pervious).

17. (Page 18) Approximate depth to ground water should be consistent with findings from the geotechnical investigation report.

Confirmed with geotechnical report that ground water depth was not encounter of depths greater than 20 feet.

18. (Page 20) Description of Existing Site Drainage Patterns – Sheet 6 of 7 of the plans (VTTM) shows a non-vegetated channel in the northwest zone of the parcel. Update to include a narrative about the non-vegetated channel and how flows might impact the site.

Narrative updated to discuss that the natural drainage swale is outside of the project bounds and not a part of this project.

18. (Page 21) Description of Proposed Site Development – Is this including 10939 & 11009 Summit Avenue? If so, modify description to only include 10939 Summit Ave.

Project description includes all improvements of this specific project only, no additional improvements are noted.

19. (Page 22) Description of Proposed Site Drainage Patterns – Provide more details/specs on the vault. Show cross section and in/out elevations.

See Civil Sheets provided in Attachment 4 of this report for MWS and HMP Storage facility details.

19. (Page 24) Form I-3B – Also add Phosphorus, Total Dissolved Solids, Nitrogen, Cadmium, Benthic Community Effects, Dissolved Oxygen, Toxicity
Pollutant/Stressors added to Form I3-B.

20. (Page 30) Form I-4 – Check box for SC-6 Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal.

No trash storage areas proposed, therefore SC-5 does not apply.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

21. (Page 32) Site Design BMP Checklist – Under SD-1, discuss existing natural drainage swale and how the project will address this.

Natural drainage swale is outside of the project bounds and not a part of this project.

22. (Page 33) Form I-5 – Justify why SD-6 Runoff Collection is not applicable.

Justification added to SD-6 applicability.

23. (Page 33) Form I-5 – Justify why SD-8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation is not applicable.

Justification added to SD-8 applicability.

24. (Page 34) Summary of PDP Structural BMPs – Areas discussed do not match, Drainage Study says 2.4 acres.

The drainage study narrative has been updated and removes the discussion of 2.4 acres to avoid confusion. DMA areas and drainage areas are discussing different things; drainage area is related to drainage, while DMA area is related to treatment.

25. (Page 35) Form I-6 – Add mailing address, phone number, and email address for final owner and maintenance provider
HOA is called out to maintain and fund the maintenance of the BMPs. No mailing address, phone number, or email address is provided since it’s the future HOA of the property.

26. (Page 36) Form I-6 – Add mailing address, phone number, and email address for final owner and maintenance provider
HOA is called out to maintain and fund the maintenance of the BMPs. No mailing address, phone number, or email address is provided since it’s the future HOA of the property.

27. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – "Zoom out" the exhibit to show the DMA(s) that encumber the entire parcel.

Scale changed from 20 to 40 scale to show the entire parcel.

28. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Update exhibit to include the non-vegetated channel featured on sheet 6 of 7 of the VTTM plans.

Existing non-vegetated channel is now called out on plans, noting "protect in place, not part of project improvements".

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

29. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Call out/identify as having an ADS full trash capture device or equivalent.

Item called out is sidewalk underdrain which drains from the modular wetland unit. No trash capture device is necessary.

30. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Call out each storm drain inlet as having a drainage insert, full trash capture device, or equivalent.

Trash capture insert proposed at one location which captures and treats all onsite flows.

Trash capture at each individual inlet would be excessive as treatment can happen at the most downstream point. Additionally, one trash capture insert would be easier to maintain.

31. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Identify location of tree wells. Update language throughout the SWQMP to include discussions of tree wells.

Tree well location called out and PDP SWQMP updated to discuss proposed tree well.

32. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Call out/identify responsible party for maintenance of the brow ditches.

HOA called out for the maintenance of brow ditches.

33. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Call out/identity location(s) of inspection/maintenance ports.

Inspection/maintenance ports to be called out in final engineering.

34. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Add note about responsible party for maintenance of drainage inserts, full trash capture devices, tree well, and brow ditches.

Note 8 added to drainage management exhibit discussing HOA or responsible party will maintain the trash capture inserts, tree wells, and brow ditches into perpetuity.

35. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Add a note about no critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected in proximity to this project.

See Note 3 added on DMA Exhibit.

36. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Suggest making the DMA exhibit a multi-page exhibit. Include the pre-project exhibit from the drainage study to show existing topography and impervious areas, existing site drainage network. Also include the demolition plan to demonstrate proposed demolition.

For existing site features and existing topography, reference the HMP Pre-project Exhibit in Attachment 2A of the PDP SWQMP.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

37. (Page 40) DMA Exhibit – Add BMP details of the vault, MWS, drainage inserts, full trash capture devices, etc. to this sheet. Include dimensions, model numbers, etc.

BMP Vault detail is added to sheet after DMA exhibit.

38. (Page 42) DMA Summary Table – Summary of DMA Areas are inconsistent.

Areas updated to total 2.6 Acres.

39. (Page 42) Form I-8 – Conclusions about full, partial, or no infiltration conditions should be supported by methods and results from infiltration testing - should be described/included in geotechnical report. Update responses in form I-8 per results from infiltration testing.

Geotechnical report added to Attachment 1D. Form I-8 updated by geotechnical engineer.

40. (Page 49) Form I-8 – Add narrative to Criteria 3.

Narrative updated, form I-8 updated by geotechnical engineer.

41. (Page 49) Form I-8 – Add narrative to Criteria 4.

Narrative updated, form I-8 updated by geotechnical engineer.

42. (Page 51) Form I-8 – Add narrative to Criteria 7.

Narrative updated, form I-8 updated by geotechnical engineer.

43. (Page 51) Form I-8 – Add narrative to Criteria 8.

Narrative updated, form I-8 updated by geotechnical engineer.

44. (Page 53) Boring Location Map – This is an old site plan. Update exhibit.

Boring location map updated with new site plan.

45. (Page 56) BMP Cross-Section – Specify what type of vault.

R-Tank Underground Stormwater Storage call out added to cross section.

46. (Page 56) BMP Cross-Section – Provide elevations.

Elevations added to basin cross section.

47. (Page 58) Contech MWS Detail – Complete this information to make it project specific.

Site specific biofiltration information form updated by Contech.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub

48. (Page 63) Green Street Detail – Where is the tree well proposed? In the R/W? Call out on plans.

Tree well called out on DMA Exhibit.

49. (Page 68) Hydromodification Post Project Exhibit – Add notes about the following to the exhibit: hydro-logic soil group; depth to groundwater; critical coarse sediment yield areas.

Notes added to exhibit.

50. (Page 68) Hydromodification Post Project Exhibit – Depict the non-vegetated channel as seen in the VTTM sheets.

The non-vegetated channel is not part of project improvements and outside project's boundary. Callout has been added accordingly.

PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Applicability of Permanent, Post-Construction
Storm Water BMP Requirements
(Storm Water Intake Form for all Development Permit Applications) Form I-1
Model BMP Design
Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Identification
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003 Date: 3/14/2025 Project Address:
10939 Summit Avenue, Santee, CA 92071
Determination of Requirements
The purpose of this form is to identify permanent, post-construction requirements that apply to the project. This form serves as a short summary of applicable requirements, in some cases referencing separate forms that will serve as the backup for the determination of requirements.

Answer each step below, starting with Step 1 and progressing through each step until reaching "Stop".

Upon reaching a Stop, do not complete further Steps beyond the Stop.

Refer to BMP Design Manual sections and/or separate forms referenced in each step below.

Step Answer Progression
Step 1: Is the project a "development
project"?
See Section 1.3 of the BMP Design
Manual for guidance.

Yes Go to Step 2.

No Stop.

Permanent BMP requirements do not apply.

No SWQMP will be required. Provide
discussion below.

Discussion / justification if the project is not a "development project" (e.g., the project includes only interior remodels within an existing building):

Step 2: Is the project a Standard
Project, Priority Development Project
(PDP), or exception to PDP definitions?
To answer this item, see Section 1.4 of
the BMP Design Manual in its entirety
for guidance, AND complete Form I-2,
Project Type Determination.

Standard
Project
Stop.

Only Standard Project requirements apply,
including Standard Project SWQMP.

PDP Standard and PDP requirements apply,
including PDP SWQMP.

Go to Step 3.

Exception
to PDP
definitions
Stop.

Standard Project requirements apply, and any
additional requirements specific to the type of
project. Provide discussion and list any
additional requirements below. Prepare
Standard Project SWQMP.

X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-1 Page 2, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015
[Step 2 Continued from Page 1] Discussion / justification, and additional requirements for exceptions to PDP definitions, if applicable:

Step 3 (PDPs only). Is the project
subject to earlier PDP requirements
due to a prior lawful approval?
See Section 1.10 of the BMP Design
Manual for guidance.

Yes Consult the [City Engineer] to determine
requirements. Provide discussion and identify
requirements below.

Go to Step 4.

No BMP Design Manual PDP requirements apply.

Go to Step 4.

Discussion / justification of prior lawful approval, and identify requirements (not required if prior lawful approval does not apply):

Step 4 (PDPs only). Do
hydromodification control
requirements apply?
See Section 1.6 of the BMP Design
Manual for guidance.

Yes PDP structural BMPs required for pollutant
control (Chapter 5) and hydromodification
control (Chapter 6).

Go to Step 5.

No Stop.

PDP structural BMPs required for pollutant
control (Chapter 5) only.

Provide brief discussion of exemption to
hydromodification control below.

Discussion / justification if hydromodification control requirements do not apply:

Step 5 (PDPs subject to
hydromodification control
requirements only). Does protection
of critical coarse sediment yield areas
Yes Management measures required for
protection of critical coarse sediment yield
areas (Chapter 6.2).

Stop.
x
x
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
apply based on review of WMAA
Potential Critical Coarse Sediment
Yield Area Map?
See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design
Manual for guidance.

No Management measures not required for
protection of critical coarse sediment yield
areas.

Provide brief discussion below.

There are no critical coarse sediment yield
areas on the project site. Critical coarse
sediment protection measures are not
required if the project does not impact any
yield areas. Attachment 2B provides a map
showing the absence of critical coarse
sediment yield areas on the project site.

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Priority Determination Form
Form I-2
Model BMP Design Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Information
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003 Date: 3/14/2025 Project Address:
10939 Summit Avenue, Santee, CA 92071
Project Type Determination: Standard Project or Priority Development Project (PDP) The project is (select one): New Development Redevelopment The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is: _94,090_ ft2 (__2.2__) acres Is the project in any of the following categories, (a) through (f)? Yes

(a) New development projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces (collectively over the entire project site). This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land.

Yes

(b) Redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site on an existing site of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces). This includes commercial, industrial, residential, mixed-use, and public development projects on public or private land.

Yes

(c) New and redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), and support one or more of the following uses:
(i) Restaurants. This category is defined as a facility that sells prepared foods and drinks for consumption, including stationary lunch counters and refreshment stands selling prepared foods and drinks for immediate consumption (Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code 5812). (ii) Hillside development projects. This category includes development on any natural slope that is twenty-five percent or greater.
(iii) Parking lots. This category is defined as a land area or facility for the temporary parking or storage of motor vehicles used personally, for business, or for commerce.
(iv) Streets, roads, highways, freeways, and driveways. This category is defined as any paved impervious surface used for the transportation of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, and other vehicles.

X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-2 Page 2, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015
Yes

(d) New or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface (collectively over the entire project site), and discharging directly to an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA). “Discharging directly to” includes flow that is conveyed overland a distance of 200 feet or less from the project to the ESA, or conveyed in a pipe or open channel any distance as an isolated flow from the project to the ESA (i.e. not commingled with flows from adjacent lands).

Note: ESAs are areas that include but are not limited to all Clean Water Act Section 303(d) impaired water bodies; areas designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance by the State Water Board and San Diego Water Board; State Water Quality Protected Areas; water bodies designated with the RARE beneficial use by the State Water Board and San Diego Water Board; and any other equivalent environmentally sensitive areas which have been identified by the Copermittees. See BMP Design Manual Section 1.4.2 for additional guidance.

Yes

(e) New development projects, or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, that support one or more of the following uses:
(i) Automotive repair shops. This category is defined as a facility that is categorized in any one of the following SIC codes: 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532- 7534, or 7536-7539.
(ii) Retail gasoline outlets (RGOs). This category includes RGOs that meet the following criteria: (a) 5,000 square feet or more or (b) a projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 100 or more vehicles per day.

Yes

(f) New or redevelopment projects that result in the disturbance of one or more acres of land and are expected to generate pollutants post construction.

Note: See BMP Design Manual Section 1.4.2 for additional guidance.

Does the project meet the definition of one or more of the Priority Development Project categories (a) through (f) listed above?
No – the project is not a Priority Development Project (Standard Project).

Yes – the project is a Priority Development Project (PDP).

The following is for redevelopment PDPs only:

The area of existing (pre-project) impervious area at the project site is: ___27,450___ ft2 (A) The total proposed newly created or replaced impervious area is _94,090_ ft2 (B) Percent impervious surface created or replaced (B/A)*100: __100__% The percent impervious surface created or replaced is (select one based on the above calculation):
less than or equal to fifty percent (50%) – only new impervious areas are considered PDP OR
greater than fifty percent (50%) – the entire project site is a PDP X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Site Design Checklist
For PDPs
Form I-3B (PDPs)
Model BMP Design Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Summary Information
Project Name Summit Avenue
Project Address 10939 Summit Avenue, Santee, CA 92071
Assessor's Parcel Number(s) (APN(s)) 378-190-01
Permit Application Number TM-2023-0003
Project Hydrologic Unit Select One:

Santa Margarita 902
San Luis Rey 903
Carlsbad 904
San Dieguito 905
Penasquitos 906
San Diego 907
Pueblo San Diego 908
Sweetwater 909
Otay 910
Tijuana 911
Project Watershed
(Complete Hydrologic Unit, Area, and Subarea
Name with Numeric Identifier)
San Diego Hydrologic Unit
Lower San Diego Hydrologic Area
Santee Hydrologic Subarea (907.12)
Parcel Area
(total area of Assessor's Parcel(s) associated
with the project)
__4.65_ Acres (____202,554__ Square Feet)
Area to be Disturbed by the Project
(Project Area) _2.7_ Acres (___117,612___ Square Feet)
Project Proposed Impervious Area
(subset of Project Area) __2.2_ Acres (__94,090___ Square Feet) Project Proposed Pervious Area
(subset of Project Area) __0.5_ Acres (___23,522____ Square Feet) Note: Proposed Impervious Area + Proposed Pervious Area = Area to be Disturbed by the Project.

This may be less than the Parcel Area.

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 2 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Description of Existing Site Condition
Current Status of the Site (select all that apply):

Existing development
Previously graded but not built out
Demolition completed without new construction
Agricultural or other non-impervious use
Vacant, undeveloped/natural
Description / Additional Information:

The existing site is located in a rural location, with existing residential structures and undeveloped area.

Existing Land Cover Includes (select all that apply):

Vegetative Cover
Non-Vegetated Pervious Areas
Impervious Areas
Description / Additional Information:

Underlying Soil belongs to Hydrologic Soil Group (select all that apply):

NRCS Type A
NRCS Type B
NRCS Type C
NRCS Type D
Approximate Depth to Groundwater (GW):

GW Depth < 5 feet
5 feet < GW Depth < 10 feet
10 feet < GW Depth < 20 feet
GW Depth > 20 feet
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Existing Natural Hydrologic Features (select all that apply):

Watercourses
Seeps
Springs
Wetlands
None
Description / Additional Information:

An existing non-vegetated channel is located at the northwest corner of the project area but will be protected in place and is not part of the project’s improvements. Reference sheet 6 of the Grading Plan or the DMA exhibit in Attachment 1A of this PDP SWQMP.

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 3 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Description of Existing Site Drainage Patterns
How is storm water runoff conveyed from the site? At a minimum, this description should answer:
(1) whether existing drainage conveyance is natural or urban; The existing drainage conveyance onsite is natural, with no existing inlets or storm drains to convey flows. Water sheet flows off the site and street flows to a curb inlet near the intersection of Summit Avenue and Princess Joann Road.
(2) Is runoff from offsite conveyed through the site? if yes, quantify all offsite drainage areas, design flows, and locations where offsite flows enter the project site, and summarize how such flows are conveyed through the site,
Approximately 7.4 acres with 6.3 cfs of offsite flows are conveyed through the existing site. The project location is downstream of an existing hillside. The hillside is pervious area with natural vegetation.
(3) Provide details regarding existing project site drainage conveyance network, including any existing storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, storm water treatment facilities, natural or constructed channels;
An existing non-vegetated channel is located at the northwest corner of the project area but will be protected in place and is not part of the project’s improvements. (4) Identify all discharge locations from the existing project site along with a summary of conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide summary of the pre-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the existing runoff discharge locations; The pre-project drainage area equals 10.0 acres. Based on available data, it is anticipated that peak flows from a 100-year, 6-hour storm event will equal 16.3 CFS for the pre-project site. The postproject drainage area equals 10.0 acres. Mitigated peak flows in the post-project condition are expected to be less than pre project flows.
(5) Describe existing site drainage patterns;
The pre-project site drains generally southwest to a single point of compliance (POC). The POC is located at the southwest corner of the property, at the edge of Summit Avenue. After leaving the project site, runoff from Basin 100 flows south along the curb and gutter on Summit Avenue and joins flows on Princess Joann Road. Flows on Princess Joann Road are collected by a curb inlet that drains to the Woodglen Vista Channel. Flows from the channel discharge to the San Diego River, which ultimately flows west and discharges to the Pacific Ocean.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 4 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Description of Proposed Site Development
Project Description / Proposed Land Use and/or Activities:

The proposed project is a 2.7 acre redevelopment project that proposes the construction of multifamily dwellings with 50 units, a recreation and park area, a residential street with street parking, water quality elements, and street improvements with green street elements.

List/describe proposed impervious features of the project (e.g., buildings, roadways, parking lots, courtyards, athletic courts, other impervious features):

The project’s impervious features include multifamily dwellings, residential street with parking, and street improvements.

List/describe proposed pervious features of the project (e.g., landscape areas):

The project’s pervious features include landscaped areas, park area, a biofiltration basin, and a tree well for green street improvements.

Does the project include grading and changes to site topography? Yes
No
Description / Additional Information:

The site will be mass graded for the proposed development.

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 5 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Description of Proposed Site Drainage Patterns
Does the project include changes to site drainage (e.g., installation of new storm water conveyance systems)?
Yes
No
If yes, provide details regarding the proposed project site drainage conveyance network, including storm drains, concrete channels, swales, detention facilities, storm water treatment facilities, natural or constructed channels, and the method for conveying offsite flows through or around the proposed project site. Identify all discharge locations from the proposed project site along with a summary of the conveyance system size and capacity for each of the discharge locations. Provide a summary of pre- and post-project drainage areas and design flows to each of the runoff discharge locations. Reference the drainage study for detailed calculations.

The proposed drainage system will collect surface flows via grate and curb storm drain inlets and conveyed to an underground vault for detention. A portion of the residential development will be routed to a proposed biofiltration basin via roof drains, then also conveyed to the underground vault.

The vault is drained to a modular wetland system located at the southwest corner of the property to treat runoff, then discharged to the point of compliance (POC) on Summit Avenue. The pre-project drainage area equals 10.0 acres. Based on available data, it is anticipated that peak flows from a 100- year, 6-hour storm event will equal 16.3 CFS for the pre-project site. The post-project drainage area equals 10.0 acres. Mitigated peak flows in the post-project condition are expected to be less than pre project flows.

Describe proposed site drainage patterns:

Drainage patterns for the proposed condition will remain similar to drainage patterns in the pre-project condition. In the post-project condition, there’s four DMAs and one POC location. Two DMAs (DMA’s 1 and 2) are treated via biofiltration basin and Modular Wetland, then discharged from the site at the point of compliance (POC) on Summit Avenue. DMA-3 is for offsite area that’s routed around our site and tributary to POC-1. The fourth DMA (GS-1) is for the street improvements and frontage improvements along the project site. Drainage from GS-1 is treated via a green streets tree well, then discharged to POC-1. After run off leaves the site, flows are conveyed along the curb and gutter on Summit Avenue to a curb inlet located at the intersection of Princess Joann Road and Summit Avenue.

Flows from the curb inlet are conveyed to the San Diego River, which then discharges to the Pacific Ocean.

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 6 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Identify whether any of the following features, activities, and/or pollutant source areas will be present (select all that apply):

On-site storm drain inlets
Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps
Interior parking garages
Need for future indoor & structural pest control
Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use
Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Food service
Refuse areas
Industrial processes
Outdoor storage of equipment or materials
Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning
Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance
Fuel Dispensing Areas
Loading Docks
Fire Sprinkler Test Water
Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water
Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots
Description / Additional Information:

X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 7 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Identification and Narrative of Receiving Water and Pollutants of Concern Runoff from the project site enters a curb inlet at the intersection of Summit Avenue and Princess Joann Road and flows to the San Diego River. After entering the San Diego River, runoff is discharged to the Pacific Ocean.

List any 303(d) impaired water bodies within the path of storm water from the project site to the Pacific Ocean (or bay, lagoon, lake or reservoir, as applicable), identify the pollutant(s)/stressor(s) causing impairment, and identify any TMDLs and/or Highest Priority Pollutants from the WQIP for the impaired water bodies:
303(d) Impaired Water Body Pollutant(s)/Stressor(s)
TMDLs / WQIP Highest Priority
Pollutant
San Diego River Indicator bacteria, Phosphorus,
Total Dissolved Solids, Nitrogen,
Cadmium, Benthic Community
Effects, Dissolved Oxygen, and
Toxicity
Indicator bacteria.

Identification of Project Site Pollutants*
*Identification of project site pollutants is only required if flow-thru treatment BMPs are implemented onsite in lieu of retention or biofiltration BMPs (note the project must also participate in an alternative compliance program unless prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements is demonstrated)
Identify pollutants expected from the project site based on all proposed use(s) of the site (see BMP Design Manual Appendix B.6):

Pollutant
Not Applicable to the
Project Site
Expected from the
Project Site
Also a Receiving Water
Pollutant of Concern
Sediment
Nutrients
Heavy Metals
Organic Compounds
Trash & Debris
Oxygen Demanding
Substances
Oil & Grease
Bacteria & Viruses
Pesticides
Form I-3B Page 8 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Hydromodification Management Requirements
Do hydromodification management requirements apply (see Section 1.6 of the BMP Design Manual)? Yes, hydromodification management flow control structural BMPs required.

No, the project will discharge runoff directly to existing underground storm drains discharging directly to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean.

No, the project will discharge runoff directly to conveyance channels whose bed and bank are concrete-lined all the way from the point of discharge to water storage reservoirs, lakes, enclosed embayments, or the Pacific Ocean.

No, the project will discharge runoff directly to an area identified as appropriate for an exemption by the WMAA for the watershed in which the project resides.

Description / Additional Information (to be provided if a 'No' answer has been selected above):

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas*
*This Section only required if hydromodification management requirements apply Based on the maps provided within the WMAA, do potential critical coarse sediment yield areas exist within the project drainage boundaries?
Yes
No, No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on WMAA maps If yes, have any of the optional analyses presented in Section 6.2 of the BMP Design Manual been performed?

6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic Landscape Units (GLUs) Onsite

6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity to Coarse Sediment

6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Onsite No optional analyses performed, the project will avoid critical coarse sediment yield areas identified based on WMAA maps
If optional analyses were performed, what is the final result? No critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected based on verification of GLUs onsite Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist but additional analysis has determined that protection is not required. Documentation attached in Attachment 2.b of the SWQMP.

Critical coarse sediment yield areas exist and require protection. The project will implement management measures described in Sections 6.2.4 and 6.2.5 as applicable, and the areas are identified on the SWQMP Exhibit.

Discussion / Additional Information:

X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 9 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Flow Control for Post-Project Runoff*
*This Section only required if hydromodification management requirements apply List and describe point(s) of compliance (POCs) for flow control for hydromodification management (see Section 6.3.1). For each POC, provide a POC identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit and a receiving channel identification name or number correlating to the project's HMP Exhibit.

There is 1 point of compliance (POC-1) that is located at the southwest corner of the property along Summit Avenue.

No, the low flow threshold is 0.1Q2 (default low flow threshold) Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.1Q2
Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.3Q2
Yes, the result is the low flow threshold is 0.5Q2
If a geomorphic assessment has been performed, provide title, date, and preparer:

Discussion / Additional Information: (optional)
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-3B Page 10 of 10, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Other Site Requirements and Constraints
When applicable, list other site requirements or constraints that will influence storm water management design, such as zoning requirements including setbacks and open space, or local codes governing minimum street width, sidewalk construction, allowable pavement types, and drainage requirements.

N/A
Optional Additional Information or Continuation of Previous Sections As Needed This space provided for additional information or continuation of information from previous sections as needed.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Source Control BMP Checklist
for All Development Projects
(Standard Projects and Priority Development Projects)
Form I-4
Model BMP Design
Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Identification
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003
Source Control BMPs
All development projects must implement source control BMPs SC-1 through SC-6 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E of the Model BMP Design Manual for information to implement source control BMPs shown in this checklist.

Answer each category below pursuant to the following.
• "Yes" means the project will implement the source control BMP as described in Chapter 4 and/or Appendix E of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification is not required. • "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion / justification must be provided.
• "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project has no outdoor materials storage areas).

Discussion / justification may be provided.

Source Control Requirement Applied?
SC-1 Prevention of Illicit Discharges into the MS4 Yes No N/A Discussion / justification if SC-1 not implemented:

SC-2 Storm Drain Stenciling or Signage Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SC-2 not implemented:

SC-3 Protect Outdoor Materials Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SC-3 not implemented:

Not anticipated for site.

SC-4 Protect Materials Stored in Outdoor Work Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SC-4 not implemented:

Not anticipated for site.

X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-4 Page 2 of 2, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Source Control Requirement Applied?
SC-5 Protect Trash Storage Areas from Rainfall, Run-On, Runoff, and Wind Dispersal
Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SC-5 not implemented:

SC-6 Additional BMPs Based on Potential Sources of Runoff Pollutants (must answer for each source listed below)
On-site storm drain inlets
Interior floor drains and elevator shaft sump pumps
Interior parking garages
Need for future indoor & structural pest control
Landscape/Outdoor Pesticide Use
Pools, spas, ponds, decorative fountains, and other water features Food service
Refuse areas
Industrial processes
Outdoor storage of equipment or materials
Vehicle and Equipment Cleaning
Vehicle/Equipment Repair and Maintenance
Fuel Dispensing Areas
Loading Docks
Fire Sprinkler Test Water
Miscellaneous Drain or Wash Water
Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Discussion / justification if SC-6 not implemented. Clearly identify which sources of runoff pollutants are discussed. Justification must be provided for all "No" answers shown above.

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Site Design BMP Checklist
for All Development Projects
(Standard Projects and Priority Development Projects)
Form I-5
Model BMP Design
Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Identification
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003
Site Design BMPs
All development projects must implement site design BMPs SD-1 through SD-8 where applicable and feasible. See Chapter 4 and Appendix E of the Model BMP Design Manual for information to implement site design BMPs shown in this checklist.

Answer each category below pursuant to the following.
• "Yes" means the project will implement the site design BMP as described in Chapter 4 and/or Appendix E of the Model BMP Design Manual. Discussion / justification is not required. • "No" means the BMP is applicable to the project but it is not feasible to implement. Discussion / justification must be provided.
• "N/A" means the BMP is not applicable at the project site because the project does not include the feature that is addressed by the BMP (e.g., the project site has no existing natural areas to conserve).

Discussion / justification may be provided.

Site Design Requirement Applied?
SD-1 Maintain Natural Drainage Pathways and Hydrologic Features Yes No N/A Discussion / justification if SD-1 not implemented:

SD-2 Conserve Natural Areas, Soils, and Vegetation Yes No N/A Discussion / justification if SD-2 not implemented:

SD-3 Minimize Impervious Area Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SD-3 not implemented:

SD-4 Minimize Soil Compaction Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SD-4 not implemented:

SD-5 Impervious Area Dispersion Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SD-5 not implemented:

X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-5 Page 2 of 2, Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Site Design Requirement Applied?
SD-6 Runoff Collection Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SD-6 not implemented:

Rain barrels or permeable pavements not proposed; therefore runoff collection is not applicable to project.

SD-7 Landscaping with Native or Drought Tolerant Species Yes No N/A Discussion / justification if SD-7 not implemented:

SD-8 Harvesting and Using Precipitation Yes No N/A
Discussion / justification if SD-8 not implemented:

Harvest and use is not feasible for project. Reference Worksheet B.3-1 (Form I-7) in Attachment 1c of this report for the Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Checklist.

X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Summary of PDP Structural BMPs
Form I-6 (PDPs)
Model BMP Design Manual
[August 31, 2015]
Project Identification
Project Name: Summit Avenue
Permit Application Number: TM-2023-0003
PDP Structural BMPs
All PDPs must implement structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control (see Chapter 5 of the BMP Design Manual). Selection of PDP structural BMPs for storm water pollutant control must be based on the selection process described in Chapter 5. PDPs subject to hydromodification management requirements must also implement structural BMPs for flow control for hydromodification management (see Chapter 6 of the BMP Design Manual). Both storm water pollutant control and flow control for hydromodification management can be achieved within the same structural BMP(s).

PDP structural BMPs must be verified by the local jurisdiction at the completion of construction. This may include requiring the project owner or project owner's representative and engineer of record to certify construction of the structural BMPs (see Section 1.12 of the BMP Design Manual). PDP structural BMPs must be maintained into perpetuity, and the local jurisdiction must confirm the maintenance (see Section 7 of the BMP Design Manual).

Use this form to provide narrative description of the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the project site in the box below. Then complete the PDP structural BMP summary information sheet (page 3 of this form) for each structural BMP within the project (copy the BMP summary information page as many times as needed to provide summary information for each individual structural BMP).

PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Describe the general strategy for structural BMP implementation at the site. This information must describe how the steps for selecting and designing storm water pollutant control BMPs presented in Section 5.1 of the BMP Design Manual were followed, and the results (type of BMPs selected). For projects requiring hydromodification flow control BMPs, indicate whether pollutant control and flow control BMPs are integrated or separate.

The site consists of four drainage management areas. DMA-1, which includes the majority of the proposed development that drains to the Modular Wetland System, DMA-2, which includes a portion of the residential development that drains to a biofiltration basin via roof drains, GS-1 which includes the street and frontage improvements that drain a green streets tree well, and DMA-3 which comprises of the remaining parcel area that’s considered self-mitigating. DMA-1 is 2.4 acres and requires both flow control and pollutant control BMPs. DMA-2 is 0.1 acres that also requires flow control and pollutant control BMPs. GS-1 is 0.2 acres and proposes a tree well per GS-1.00, designed for pollutant control and additional treatment of flows from the project site. DMA-3 is 2.0 acres and is considered self-mitigating, therefore no additional treatment is necessary. DMA-1 drains to an underground vault for HMP storage, which is then conveyed to a modular wetland unit for water quality treatment. DMA-2 drains to the proposed biofiltration basin for water quality treatment, then is conveyed to the underground vault for HMP storage. Since the vault is tributary to the modular wetland unit, drainage from DMA-2 is routed through the MWS for conveyance to the POC. GS-1 is treated for water quality through the tree well, and then discharged through a sidewalk underdrain onto Summit Avenue. The total drainage area is 4.7 acres.
(Continue on page 2 as necessary.)
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-6 Page 1 of 3 (Copy as many as needed) , Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Structural BMP Summary Information
(Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP) Structural BMP ID No. BMP – 1A
Construction Plan Sheet No.

Type of structural BMP:

Retention by harvest and use (HU-1)
Retention by infiltration basin (INF-1)
Retention by bioretention (INF-2)
Retention by permeable pavement (INF-3)
Partial retention by biofiltration with partial retention (PR-1) Biofiltration (BF-1)
Biofiltration with Nutrient Sensitive Media Design (BF-2) Proprietary Biofiltration (BF-3) meeting all requirements of Appendix F Flow-thru treatment control with prior lawful approval to meet earlier PDP requirements (provide BMP type/description in discussion section below)
Flow-thru treatment control included as pre-treatment/forebay for an onsite retention or biofiltration BMP (provide BMP type/description and indicate which onsite retention or biofiltration BMP it serves in discussion section below)
Flow-thru treatment control with alternative compliance (provide BMP type/description in discussion section below)
Detention pond or vault for hydromodification management Other (describe in discussion section below)
Purpose:

Pollutant control only
Hydromodification control only
Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP
Other (describe in discussion section below)
Who will certify construction of this BMP?
Provide name and contact information for the
party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if
required by the [City Engineer] (See Section 1.12 of
the BMP Design Manual)
RICK Engineering Company
Shavger Rekani PE
(619) 291-0707
Who will be the final owner of this BMP? HOA
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? HOA
What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? HOA
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-6 Page 2 of 3 (Copy as many as needed) , Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Structural BMP Summary Information
(Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP) Structural BMP ID No. BMP – 1B
Construction Plan Sheet No.

Type of structural BMP:

Pollutant control only
Hydromodification control only
Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP
Other (describe in discussion section below)
Who will certify construction of this BMP?
Provide name and contact information for the
party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if
required by the [City Engineer] (See Section 1.12 of
the BMP Design Manual)
RICK Engineering Company
Shavger Rekani PE
(619) 291-0707
Who will be the final owner of this BMP? HOA
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? HOA
What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? HOA
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-6 Page 3 of 3 (Copy as many as needed) , Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Structural BMP Summary Information
(Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP) Structural BMP ID No. BMP – 2
Construction Plan Sheet No.

Type of structural BMP:

Pollutant control only
Hydromodification control only
Combined pollutant control and hydromodification control Pre-treatment/forebay for another structural BMP
Other (describe in discussion section below)
Who will certify construction of this BMP?
Provide name and contact information for the
party responsible to sign BMP verification forms if
required by the [City Engineer] (See Section 1.12 of
the BMP Design Manual)
RICK Engineering Company
Shavger Rekani PE
(619) 291-0707
Who will be the final owner of this BMP? HOA
Who will maintain this BMP into perpetuity? HOA
What is the funding mechanism for maintenance? HOA
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Form I-6 Page 3 of 3 (Copy as many as needed) , Form Template Date: August 31, 2015 Structural BMP Summary Information
(Copy this page as needed to provide information for each individual proposed structural BMP) Structural BMP ID No. BMP – 3
Construction Plan Sheet No.

Type of structural BMP:

BACKUP FOR PDP POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPS
This is the cover sheet for Attachment 1.

Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:

Attachment
Sequence
Contents Checklist
Attachment 1a DMA Exhibit (Required)
See DMA Exhibit Checklist on the back of
this Attachment cover sheet.

Included
Attachment 1b Tabular Summary of DMAs Showing DMA
ID matching DMA Exhibit, DMA Area, and
DMA Type (Required)*
*Provide table in this Attachment OR on
DMA Exhibit in Attachment 1a
Included on DMA Exhibit in
Attachment 1a
Included as Attachment 1b, separate
from DMA Exhibit
Attachment 1c Form I-7, Harvest and Use Feasibility
Screening Checklist (Required unless the
entire project will use infiltration BMPs)
Refer to Appendix B.3-1 of the BMP
Design Manual to complete Form I-7.

Included
Not included because the entire
project will use infiltration BMPs
Attachment 1d Form I-8, Categorization of Infiltration
Feasibility Condition (Required unless the
project will use harvest and use BMPs)
Refer to Appendices C and D of the BMP
Design Manual to complete Form I-8.

Included
Not included because the entire
project will use harvest and use BMPs
Attachment 1e Pollutant Control BMP Design
Worksheets / Calculations (Required)
Refer to Appendices B and E of the BMP
Design Manual for structural pollutant
control BMP design guidelines
Included
X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the DMA Exhibit:

The DMA Exhibit must identify:

Underlying hydrologic soil group
Approximate depth to groundwater
Existing natural hydrologic features ( watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected
Existing topography and impervious areas
Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite Proposed demolition
Proposed grading
Proposed impervious features
Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness Drainage management area (DMA) boundaries, DMA ID numbers, and DMA areas (square footage or acreage), and DMA type (i.e., drains to BMP, self-retaining, or self-mitigating) Potential pollutant source areas and corresponding required source controls (see Chapter 4, Appendix E.1, and Form I-3B)
Structural BMPs (identify location, type of BMP, and size/detail) X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Attachment 1A
S
UMM
IT AVE
X
525
X
X
5 3
0 X X X X
535
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
555
X
X
560
560
X
X
565
565
570
570
X
575
580
OF THE PET WASTE STATIONS.

10. HOA TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE
INTO PERPETUITY.

DETENTION VAULT, AND MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM

INSERT, TREE WELL, BROW DITCH, STORM WATER

9. HOA TO MAINTAIN THE TRASH CAPTURE
SAN DIEGO GREEN STREET STANDARDS GS-1.00

8. TREE WELL DESIGN PROPOSED PER COUNTY OF
IMPROVEMENTS.

PROTECTED IN PLACE. NOT PART OF PROJECT

7. EXISTING NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL TO BE
PROJECT AREA WILL BE DEMOLISHED.

6. ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE

5. 85TH PERCENTILE STORM EVENT = 0.52 IN.

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

IN BORINGS UP TO 19.5 FEET, PER

4. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED
TO BE PROTECTED IN PROXIMITY TO PROJECT.

3. NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS
HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ON SITE.

2. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPES "A" AND "D"
FEBRUARY 2016.

CITY OF SANTEE BMP DESIGN MANUAL DATED

STORM WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE

SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT ADDRESS THE PERMANENT

1. SIZES OF THE POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPs
NOTES
SC-2
SC-1
SC-6
SD-3
SD-4
SD-5
SD-7
SC-6
SC-6
SD-3
SD-4
SD-5
SD-7
SC-6
SC-6
SC-6
DMA-1
BMP-1A
SD-3
SD-4
SD-5
SD-7
POC-1
BMP-1B SC-6 BMP-3

2.0 AC
DMA-3

0.2 AC
SC-6
SC-2
SC-1
BMP-2

0.1 AC

2.4 AC
SC-6 SC-6
(CPS) OR EQUIVALENT

CONNECTOR PIPE SCREEN

INSTALL ADS FLEXSTORM
D9-A4 D9-A4 D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
D9-A6
LOCATION PER GS-1.00

PROPOSED TREE WELL
530
535
535
535
535
535
535
GS-1
PER RSD D-25

CURB OUTLET

PROPOSED
DMA-2

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL,
540 540 540
540
540
X
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

PONDING DEPTH

WATER QUALITY
9" ASTM NO. 57 STONE
3" ASTM NO. 33 SAND
3" NON-FLOATING MULCH
NTS
3" ASTM NO. 8 STONE
24" X 24" BROOKS BOX

OR EQUIVALENT
BMP-2

BIOFILTRATION BASIN CROSS-SECTION
3" DEAD STORAGE
6" PERFORATED PVC

UNDERDRAIN PIPE

IMPERMEABLE LINER

PER GEOTECHNICAL

RECOMMENDATIONS

BASIN FG ELEV
6"
MEDIA
18" BIOFILTRATION SOIL
& FREEBOARD
6" CONVEYANCE
SD-4

MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION

MAINTAINED BY HOA

BROW DITCHES TO BE
AREA

SELF-MITIGATING
LOCATION (TYP.)

WASTE STATION

PROPOSED PET
(6,210 SF TOTAL)

DISPERSION

IMPERVIOUS AREA
(4,314 SF TOTAL)

DISPERSION AREA

PERVIOUS
SC-1
SC-2

STORM DRAIN STENCILING / SIGNAGE
SD-5
SD-7

TOLERANT SPECIES

LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE / DROUGHT
SC-6

IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION

ADDITIONAL BMP'S
SD-3

MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA
TO THE MS4

PREVENTION OF ILLICIT DISCHARGES
LEGEND:

CONTROL

SITE DESIGN/SOURCE
XXX
X.X AC
17-MAR-2025 18:01
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\19877_swqmp_01.dgn POC

BASIN X DMA ID

DMA AREA

DMA BOUNDARY

SUMMIT AVENUE
FOR

DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT EXHIBIT

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - EXHIBIT FOR PDP SWQMP ONLY

POC/BMP ID

GREEN STREET ELEMENT
BMP
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 40'
40 20 40 80 120
c 2024
Rick
Engineering Com
pany

IMPERVIOUS AREA

LOCATION

PET WASTE STATION
AREA

PERVIOUS DISPERSION

TO PERVIOUS AREA

IMPERVIOUS AREA DIRECTED
DATE: MARCH 14, 2025
5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
J-19877
SC-2
SC-1
11-MAR-2025 17:50
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\19877_swqmp_02.dgn

SUMMIT AVENUE
FOR

DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT EXHIBIT

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - EXHIBIT FOR PDP SWQMP ONLY
c 2024 RickEngineering Company
5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
J-19877
DATE: MARCH 14, 2025
552 550
548
526
524
528
532
530 534 544
546
538
522
520
516
560
562
564
566
506
500
498
570
488
574
576
582
584
586
588
590
592
594
596
598
600
602
604
486
606
608
610
484
618
508
622
504
558
572
514
580
496
540
536
492
490
518
578
502
568
542
556
512
510
494
554
584
564
518
492
508
572
562
498
494
524
508
592
564
494
528
514
570
552
536
552
490
554
492
504
558
556
568
560
568
580
566
500
486
566
586
514
496
556
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community Date of Exhibit: 3/11/2025
DigitalGlobe Aerial Image: 2017
Drainage Path Exhibit
Summit Ave
0 120 240 360
Scale in Feet
North
[
\\ cp .rickeng.co m \p rojec ts\ C 19500\ 19877_W a rm ingto nSum m it\ G IS\ 19877_H ydro lo gy.m xd J-19877 Project Area Drainage Path
Existing Curb
Inlet
Outfall to Existing
Concrete Culvert
StormTrap Underground
Stormwater Storage 531.00 ft 529.25 ft Top of Weir = 531.00 ft Top of Vault = 532.25 ft Attachment 1B
DMA ID

TRIBUTARY AREA
(SQ FT)
AREA
(ACRES)

IMPERVIOUS
AREA (ACRES) %IMPERVIOUS HSG

IMPERVIOUS
RUNOFF
FACTOR

PERVIOUS
RUNOFF
FACTOR

AREA WEIGHTED

RUNOFF FACTOR
DCV (Cubic
Feet) TREATED BY

POLLUTANT

CONTROL TYPE

DRAINS TO
(POC ID)
DMA-1 104544 2.4 1.9 80% D 0.90 0.35 0.79 3579 BMP-1A & 1B PROP. BIOFILTRATION POC-1 DMA-2 4356 0.1 0.3 80% D 0.90 0.35 0.79 149 BMP-2 BIOFILTRATION BASIN POC-1 DMA-3 87120 2.0 0.0 0% D 0.90 0.35 0.35 1321 SELF MITIGATING - POC-1 GS-1 8712 0.2 0.3 80% D 0.90 0.35 0.79 298 BMP-3 (GS-1.00) TREE WELL POC-1 SUM 204732 4.7 2.5 5348

NO OF DMA

TOTAL DMA

AREA (ACRES)
TOTAL

IMPERVIOUS

AREA (ACRES)
% IMP

AREA WEIGHTED
RUNOFF

COEFFICIENT

TOTAL DCV
(CUBIC FEET)

TOTAL AREA
TREATED (ACRES) NO. OF POCS
4 4.7 2.5 60% 0.68 5348 4.7 1
TABULAR SUMMARY OF DMAs, (SUMMIT AVENUE)

SUMMARY OF DMA INFORMATION (MUST MATCH PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND SWQMP NARRATIVE) \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\WaterQuality\19877_Drainage_WQ.xlsx Attachment 1C
13 February 2016
Worksheet 0-2. Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening
Harvest and Use Feasibility Screening Worsksheet B.3-1

1. Is there a demand for harvested water (check all that apply) at the project site that is reliably present during the wet season?
Toilet and urinal flushing
Landscape irrigation
Other:______________

2. If there is a demand; estimate the anticipated average wet season demand over a period of 36 hours. Guidance for planning level demand calculations for toilet/urinal flushing and landscape irrigation is provided in Section B.3.2.
[Provide a summary of calculations here]

3. Calculate the DCV using worksheet B-2.1.
[Provide a results here]
3a. Is the 36-hour demand
greater than or equal to the
DCV?
Yes / No
3b. Is the 36-hour demand greater
than 0.25DCV but less than the full
DCV?
Yes / No
3c. Is the 36-hour
demand less than

0.25DCV?
Yes
Harvest and use appears to be
feasible. Conduct more detailed
evaluation and sizing
calculations to confirm that
DCV can be used at an adequate
rate to meet drawdown criteria.

Harvest and use may be feasible.

Conduct more detailed evaluation and
sizing calculations to determine
feasibility. Harvest and use may only
be able to be used for a portion of the
site, or (optionally) the storage may
need to be upsized to meet long term
capture targets while draining in
longer than 36 hours.

Harvest and use is
considered to be
infeasible.
x
x

9.3 gal/person/day * 150 people = (1,395 gal/day) * 1.5 days = 2,092.5 gal/36 hours Moderate plant water use = 1,470 gal/acre * 2.5 acres = 3,675 gal/36 hours Total Demand = 5,767.5 gallons = 771 cubic feet DCV = 3,728 cubic feet DMA-1 11 February 2016
Worksheet 0-1. DCV
Design Capture Volume Worksheet B-2.1
1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= inches 2 Area tributary to BMP (s) A= acres
3 Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) C= unitless
4 Street trees volume reduction TCV= cubic-feet
5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= cubic-feet
6 Calculate DCV =
(3630 x C x d x A) – TCV - RCV DCV= cubic-feet

0.52 2.5 0.79 0
0 3,728 DMA-1
11 February 2016
Worksheet 0-1. DCV
Design Capture Volume Worksheet B-2.1
1 85th percentile 24-hr storm depth from Figure B.1-1 d= inches 2 Area tributary to BMP (s) A= acres
3 Area weighted runoff factor (estimate using Appendix B.1.1 and B.2.1) C= unitless
4 Street trees volume reduction TCV= cubic-feet
5 Rain barrels volume reduction RCV= cubic-feet
6 Calculate DCV =
(3630 x C x d x A) – TCV - RCV DCV= cubic-feet

0.52 0.4 0.79 0
0 596 GS-1
Appendix B: Storm Water Pollutant Control Hydrologic Calculations and Sizing Methods 6 June 2015
Figure 0-1: 85th Percentile 24-hour Isopluvial Map
DEPTH = 0.52 in
Attachment 1D
29 February 2016
Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Form I-8 Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
1 Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.
2 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.

No Yes
The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space and therefore the infiltration rate is considered to be less than 0.5 inches per hour.

The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space. Areas at the site could be designed for infiltration without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards.
30 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 2 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
3 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.
4 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.

Part 1
Result
*
If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are “Yes” a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration
If any answer from row 1-4 is “No”, infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a “full infiltration” design.

Proceed to Part 2
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate findings Yes Yes No
Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area of groundwater contamination and/or soil pollution. Groundwater is greater than 10 feet below existing ground surface.

Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area of groundwater contamination and/or soil pollution. Groundwater is greater than 10 feet below existing ground surface. 31 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 3 of 4
Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
5 Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 6 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2.

Provide basis:

Yes
The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area as well as be underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium and granitic bedrock. The compacted fill, older alluvium, and granitic bedrock possess litlle void space. Areas at the site could be designed for infiltration rates less than 0.5 inches per hour.

The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space. Areas at the site could be designed for infiltration without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards. No
32 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 4 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
7 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 8 Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Part 2
Result*
If all answers from row 1-4 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible.

The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration.

If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration. *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate findings Yes Yes
No
Infiltration
Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area of groundwater contamination and/or soil pollution. Groundwater is greater than 10 feet below existing ground surface.

Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area which would impact downstrean water rights.
33 February 2016
Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate
Worksheet Form I-9
Factor Category Factor Description
Assigned
Weight (w)
Factor
Value (v)
Product (p)
p = w x v
A
Suitability
Assessment
Soil assessment methods 0.25
Predominant soil texture 0.25
Site soil variability 0.25
Depth to groundwater / impervious
layer

0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p
B Design
Level of pretreatment/ expected
sediment loads 0.5
Redundancy/resiliency 0.25
Compaction during construction 0.25
Design Safety Factor, SB = p
Combined Safety Factor, Stotal= SA x SB
Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, Kobserved
(corrected for test-specific bias)
Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, Kdesign = Kobserved / Stotal Supporting Data
Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms:
3 3
3 3

0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 3
3 3
3 1.5 0.75 0.75 3
9 Test location map and test form attached. 0.075 in/hr 0.45 in/hr

BORING LOCATION MAP
Base Map Reference: Rick Engineering Company, Vesting Tentative Tract 2023-XX/DR 2023-XX, November 3, 2023 500 La Terraza Blvd. Suite M
Escondido, California 92025
PHONE: (858) 649-3707

COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SAN DIEGO Warmington - Summit Avenue Project
Santee, California
DATE: January 2024
J.N.: 23-248
Figure 2
N
PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC.
5 B-1
B-2
Approximate Location of Geotechnical
Boring, Showing Total Depth and Depth
to Kgr
Approximate Location of Percolation
Test Boring Showing Total Depth
and Depth to Kgr
Estimated Depth of Remedial Removals

EXPLANATION
Quaternary Older Alluvium,
Circled Where Buried
Kgr Granitic Bedrock, Circled Where Buried
Qoal
Qoal
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 5’
TD 10.5’
Kgr @ 5’
B-1
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 7’
Kgr
SITE
B-5
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 5’
B-4
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 8’
B-3
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 7’
B-2
TD 10.5’
Kgr @ 5’
Kgr
Kgr
Kgr
Kgr
NAP
Qoal
Qoal
Qoal Qoal
Qoal
Kgr
5 5
5 2
3 Approximate Location
of Existing Well
Approximate Location
of Existing Septic System
NAP
NAP
D D’
C
C’
D D’
Cross-Section Locations
Modified from Rick
Engineering
Sheet 5 of 7, dated
October 31, 2023
Total Depth of Boring, Dt (ft): 9
Diameter of Hole, D (in): 8
Diameter of Pipe, d (in): 3
Agg. Correction (% Voids): 40
Pre-soak depth (ft): 5-9
1st Reading 2nd Reading
25 5.00 5.62 7.44 3.36 5.59
25 5.00 5.45 5.40 4.63 3.97
30 5.00 5.52 6.24 4.81 3.86
30 5.00 5.48 5.76 5.21 3.54
30 5.00 5.46 5.52 5.43 3.39
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.45 5.40 5.56 3.31
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
Percolation Rate: 5.68 Minutes/Inch

3.23 gal/day/ft2
Infiltration Rate: 0.45 Inches/Hour*
(Porchet Method)
r = D / 2
Ho = Dt - Do
Hf = Dt - Df
DH = ΔD = Ho - Hf
Havg = (Ho + Hf) / 2
*Raw Number, Does Not Include a Factor of Safety
Reference: San Diego County BMP Design Manual, Appendix D, effective January 1, 2019 DATE: Aug, 2023
J.N.: 23-248 Figure 1
Warmington Residential
Santee, California

PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY
PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC.

COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SAN DIEGO Test Number: B-1
40880 County Center Drive, Suite M
Temecula, CA 92591
PHONE: (951) 600-9271
Perc. Rate
(gal/day/ft^2)
Deep Percolation Test Method
Time
Interval
(min)
Depth to Water Surface
Dw (ft)
Change
in Head
(in)
Perc.

Rate
(min/in)
where Infiltration Rate, It = DH (60r) / Dt (r + 2Havg ) 29 February 2016
Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Form I-8 Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
1 Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.

No No
The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space and therefore the infiltration rate is considered to be less than 0.5 inches per hour.

The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space. Areas at the site could not be designed for infiltration without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards.
30 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 2 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
3 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability.

Proceed to Part 2
*To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate findings Yes NoNo
Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area of groundwater contamination and/or soil pollution. Groundwater is greater than 10 feet below existing ground surface.

Infiltration should not be allowed due to presence of nearby Woodglen Vista Creek. .
31 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 3 of 4
Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated?
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
5 Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D.

Provide basis:

No
The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area as well as be underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium and granitic bedrock. The compacted fill, older alluvium, and granitic bedrock possess litlle void space. Areas at the site could be designed for infiltration rates less than 0.5 inches per hour.

The site will be graded such that compacted fill will cover the majority of the area and underlain by relatively impermeable older alluvium and granitic bedrock. The compacted fill and granitic bedrock possess little void space. Areas at the site should not be designed for infiltration without increasing due to risk of geotechnical hazards. No 32 February 2016
Form I-8 Page 4 of 4
Criteria Screening Question Yes No
7 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 8 Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3.

Provide basis:

Part 2
Result*
If all answers from row 1-4 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible.

The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration.

If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration. *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by Agency/Jurisdictions to substantiate findings NoNo
No
Infiltration
Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area of groundwater contamination and/or soil pollution. Groundwater is greater than 10 feet below existing ground surface. However, infiltration may initiate perched groundwater creating a shallow water table and/or associated storm water pollutants.

Based on Appendix C.3 screening, the site is not known to be in an area which would impact downstrean water rights. However, nearby Woodglen Vista Creek may be impacted.

COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SAN DIEGO Warmington - Summit Avenue Project
Santee, California
DATE: April 2024
J.N.: 23-248
Figure 2
N
PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC.
5 B-1
B-6
Approximate Location of Geotechnical
Boring, Showing Total Depth and Depth
to Kgr
Approximate Location of Percolation
Test Boring Showing Total Depth
and Depth to Kgr
Estimated Depth of Remedial Removals

EXPLANATION
Quaternary Older Alluvium,
Circled Where Buried
Kgr Granitic Bedrock, Circled Where Buried
Qoal
Qoal
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 5’
TD 10.5’
Kgr @ 5’
B-1
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 7’
Kgr
SITE
B-5
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 5’
B-4
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 8’
B-3
TD 19.5’
Kgr @ 7’
B-2
TD 10.5’
Kgr @ 5’
Kgr
Kgr
Kgr
Kgr
NAP
Qoal
Qoal
Qoal Qoal
Qoal
Kgr
5 5
5 2
3 Approximate Location
of Existing Well
Approximate Location
of Existing Septic System
NAP
NAP
D D’
C
C’
D D’
Cross-Section Locations
Modified from Rick
Engineering
Sheet 5 of 7, dated
October 31, 2023
B-6
TD 10.0’
Kgr @ 3.5’
Diameter of Hole, D (in): 8
Diameter of Pipe, d (in): 3
Agg. Correction (% Voids): 40
Pre-soak depth (ft): 5-9
1st Reading 2nd Reading
25 5.00 5.62 7.44 3.36 5.59
25 5.00 5.45 5.40 4.63 3.97
30 5.00 5.52 6.24 4.81 3.86
30 5.00 5.48 5.76 5.21 3.54
30 5.00 5.46 5.52 5.43 3.39
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.45 5.40 5.56 3.31
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
30 5.00 5.44 5.28 5.68 3.23
Percolation Rate: 5.68 Minutes/Inch

PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY
PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC.

COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SAN DIEGO 40880 County Center Drive, Suite M
Temecula, CA 92591
PHONE: (951) 600-9271
Perc. Rate
(gal/day/ft^2)
Deep Percolation Test Method
Time
Interval
(min)
Depth to Water Surface
Dw (ft)
Change
in Head
(in)
Perc.

Rate
(min/in)
where Infiltration Rate, It = DH (60r) / Dt (r + 2Havg ) Test Number: B-2
Total Depth of Boring, Dt (ft): 10.5
Total Depth of Boring, Dt (ft): 10
Diameter of Hole, D (in): 8
Diameter of Pipe, d (in): 3
Agg. Correction (% Voids): 40
Pre-soak depth (ft): 5-10
1st Reading 2nd Reading
25 6.04 6.62 6.96 3.59 5.26
25 6.05 6.52 5.64 4.43 4.21
30 6.08 6.65 6.84 4.39 4.35
30 6.05 6.62 6.84 4.39 4.31
30 6.10 6.58 5.76 5.21 3.64
30 6.00 6.51 6.12 4.90 3.78
30 6.06 6.53 5.64 5.32 3.52
30 6.05 6.52 5.64 5.32 3.51
30 6.00 6.48 5.76 5.21 3.54
30 6.02 6.49 5.64 5.32 3.48
30 6.10 6.59 5.88 5.10 3.72
30 6.05 6.51 5.52 5.43 3.43
30 6.00 6.48 5.76 5.21 3.54
30 6.00 6.48 5.76 5.21 3.54
Percolation Rate: 5.21 Minutes/Inch

3.54 gal/day/ft2
Infiltration Rate: 0.49 Inches/Hour*
(Porchet Method)
r = D / 2
Ho = Dt - Do
Hf = Dt - Df
DH = ΔD = Ho - Hf
Havg = (Ho + Hf) / 2
*Raw Number, Does Not Include a Factor of Safety
Reference: San Diego County BMP Design Manual, Appendix D, effective January 1, 2019 DATE: April, 2024
J.N.: 23-248
Test Number: B-6
40880 County Center Drive, Suite M
Temecula, CA 92591
PHONE: (951) 600-9271
Perc. Rate
(gal/day/ft^2)
Deep Percolation Test Method
Time
Interval
(min)
Depth to Water Surface
Dw (ft)
Change
in Head
(in)
Perc.

Rate
(min/in)
where Infiltration Rate, It = DH (60r) / Dt (r + 2Havg ) Figure 2
Warmington Residential
Santee, California

PERCOLATION TEST SUMMARY
PETRA GEOSCIENCES, INC.

COSTA MESA TEMECULA VALENCIA PALM DESERT CORONA SAN DIEGO Attachment 1E
R-Tank Underground
Stormwater Storage 531.00 ft 529.25 ft Top of Weir = 531.00 ft Top of Vault = 532.25 ft

SUMMIT AVENUE
J-19877
12/18/2024
Water Quality - Mod Wetland - BMP Sizing Calculations
DMA/BMP Name BMP Type
Drainage
Management
Area
(acres)
Drainage
Management
Area
(ft2
)
% Impervious
Impervious
Area
(ft2
)
Pervious Area
(ft2
)
Runoff Factor
85th Percentile
Storm Event
(in)
Design
Capture
Volume (c.f.)
Biofiltration
Area Provided
(ft2
)
Biofiltration
Area
Required
(ft2
)
DCV Multiplier
Volume
Provided
(ft3)
Volume
Required
(ft3)
MWS Model Name
DMA-1 Biofiltration - Mod
Wetlands 2.4 104544 80% 83635 20909 0.79 0.52 3,579 - - 1.25 6,188 4,474 MWS-L-6-8-7-5-VHC DMA-2 Biofiltration Basin 0.1 4356 80% 3485 871 0.79 0.52 149 178 103 1.25 - - - DMA-3 Self Mitigating Area 2.0 78408 0% 0 78408 0.35 0.52 1,321 - - 1.25 - - - GS-1 Tree Well 0.2 17424 80% 13939 3485 0.79 0.52 298 - - 1.25 - - - Notes:

1. The required and provided Water Quality volumes are based on the 2013 MS4 permit and the City of Santee BMP Design Manual

2. Runoff Factors for pervious and impervious areas were determined from Table 0-1: " Runoff Factors for Surfaces Draining to BMPs - Pollutant Control BMPs" from the City of Santee BMP Design Manual

3.The DCV multiplier was found using Section B.4.2 Percent Capture Method and Figure 0-1 Percent Capture Nomgraph from the City of Santee BMP Design Manual Project Name
BMP ID
1 204732 sq. ft.
2 0.68
3 0.52 inches
4 6033 cu. ft.
5 0 in/hr.
6 2
7 0 in/hr.
10 139 cu. ft.

When Line 8 > 8% =

0.0000013 x Line 83 - 0.000057 x Line 82 + 0.0086 x Line 8 - 0.014 When Line 8 ≤ 8% = 0.023
Target volume retention [Line 9 x Line 4]
Reliable infiltration rate, for biofiltration BMP sizing [Line 5 / Line 6] 8 Average annual volume reduction target (Figure B.5-2)

3.5 9
Fraction of DCV to be retained (Figure B.5-3)

0.023
%
When Line 7 > 0.01 in/hr. = Minimum (40, 166.9 x Line 7 +6.62) When Line 7 ≤ 0.01 in/hr. = 3.5%
Factor of safety
Area draining to the BMP
Summit Avenue
Sizing Method for Volume Retention Criteria Worksheet B.5-2 Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) 85th percentile 24-hour rainfall depth
Design capture volume [Line 1 x Line 2 x (Line 3/12)]
Volume Retention Requirement
Measured infiltration rate in the DMA
Note:

When mapped hydrologic soil groups are used enter 0.10 for NRCS Type D soils and for NRCS Type C soils enter 0.30
When in no infiltration condition and the actual measured infiltration rate is unknown enter 0.0 if there are geotechnical and/or groundwater hazards identified in Appendix C 12/19/2024 Version 1.0 - June 2017
Project Name
BMP ID
1 sq. ft.
2 3 sq. ft.
4 sq. ft.
5 sq. ft.

Identification 1 4 5
6 4314
7 6210
10 sq. ft.
11 sq. ft.
12 13
14 cu. ft.
15 cu. ft.

Identification
1 cu. ft.
2 cu. ft.
3 cu. ft.
4 cu. ft.
5 cu. ft.
cu. ft.
17 Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met
Site Design BMP
Is Line 11 ≥ Line 4? Volume Retention Performance Standard is Met Site Design Type Credit
Sum of volume retention benefits from other site design BMPs (e.g. trees; rain barrels etc.). [sum of Line 16 Credits for Id’s 1 to 5]
Provide documentation of how the site design credit is calculated in the PDP SWQMP. 0 16
Is Line 16 ≥ Line 15?
Volume retention required from other site design BMPs
[(1-Line 13) x Line 14] -4.17
Volume Retention for No Infiltration Condition Worksheet B.5-6 204732

0.68 Area draining to the biofiltration BMP
Adjusted runoff factor for drainage area (Refer to Appendix B.1 and B.2) Required area for Evapotranspiration [Line 3 x 0.03]
Biofiltration BMP Footprint
3 0 0
Impervious to Pervious Area ratio
[Line 7/Line 6]
Effective Credit Area
If (Line 8 >1.5, Line 6, Line 7/1.5]
Target Volume Retention [Line 10 from Worksheet B.5.2] 139 Summit Avenue
Landscape area that meet the requirements in SD-B and
SD-F Fact Sheet (sq. ft.)
Impervious area draining to the landscape area (sq. ft.) 139218
4177
178
Landscape Area (must be identified on DS-3247)
2 4140
4318
Effective impervious area draining to the BMP [Line 1 x Line 2] Fraction of the performance standard met through the BMP footprint and/or landscaping [Line 11/Line 4] 1.03
Volume Retention Performance Standard
Sum of Landscape area [sum of Line 9 Id’s 1 to 5]
Provided footprint for evapotranspiration [Line 5 + Line 10] 0 8 1.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
9 4140 0
12/19/2024 Version 1.0 - June 2017

STANDARD DETAIL

STORMWATER BIOFILTRATION SYSTEM
MWS-L-6-8-7'-5"-V-HC

FOR PATENT INFORMATION, GO TO
www.ContechES.com/IP

SITE SPECIFIC DATA

PLAN VIEW

ELEVATION VIEW

RIGHT END VIEW

LEFT END VIEW

GENERAL NOTES

INSTALLATION NOTES
Green Streets
Standard Drawings
County of San Diego
Department of Public Works
Revised March 2021
Green Streets Standard Drawings
ERRATA
Original Drawings (October 2019)
UPDATE #1 (MARCH 2021):
• UPDATED THE DESIGN OF CONCRETE FOOTINGS AND STEEL REINFORCEMENT FOR ELEMENTS ADJACENT TO UNCOMPACTED BMPs;
• REDUCED MAXIMUM CHECK DAM INTERVALS WHEN USED AS A STRUCTURAL ELEMENT;
• CLARIFIED SOIL DEPTHS FOR BIOFILTRATION BASINS AND TREE WELLS; • REVISED CALLOUTS TO BE CONSISTENT ON ALL SHEETS;
• MISCELLANEOUS FORMATTING REVISIONS FOR CLARITY.
• UPDATED BMP STANDARDS WITH PARKING RESTRICTIONS.
• UPDATED ALL REBAR CALLOUTS TO USE A #4 REBAR INSTEAD OF A #3. • UPDATED THE DEFINITION OF STRUCTURAL SOILS.
• ADDED DEEPENED SHEAR KEY AND REBAR TO VARIOUS SIDEWALK AND CURB DETAILS.

SAN DIEGO COUNTY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

GREEN STREET STANDARD DRAWINGS

NUMBER TITLE
GS-1 TREE WELL
GS-1.00 TREE WELL GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE
GS-1.01 SMALL TREE WELL
GS-1.02 LARGE TREE WELL
GS-1.03 TREE WELL ADJACENT TO RIGHT-OF-WAY
GS-1.04a TREE WELL WITHOUT STRUCTURAL SOIL
GS-1.04b TREE WELL WITHOUT STRUCTURAL SOIL
GS-1.05 TREE WELL SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE TYPES
GS-2 DISPERSION AREA
GS-2.00 DISPERSION AREA GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE
GS-2.01 DISPERSION AREA ADJACENT TO ROADWAY
GS-2.02 DISPERSION AREA WITH STEP OUT ZONE
GS-2.03 DISPERSION AREA ADJACENT TO RIGHT-OF-WAY
GS-2.04 CURB EXTENSION ADJACENT TO SIDEWALK
GS-2.05 CURB EXTENSION ADJACENT TO PLANTER STRIP
GS-2.06 OPEN DISPERSION AREA
GS-2.07 DISPERSION SWALES
GS-2.08 DISPERSION AREA FILTER STRIP
GS-3 BIOFILTRATION
GS-3.00 BIOFILTRATION GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE
GS-3.01 BIOFILTRATION PLANTER ADJACENT TO ROADWAY
(12” MAX PONDING DEPTH)
GS-3.02 BIOFILTRATION PLANTER ADJACENT TO ROADWAY
(PONDING DEPTH>12”)
GS-3.03 BIOFILTRATION ADJACENT TO ROADWAY (WITH STEP OUT ZONE) GS-3.04 BIOFILTRATION ADJACENT TO RIGHT-OF-WAY
GS-3.05 CURB EXTENSION ADJACENT TO SIDEWALK W/ BIOFILTRATION GS-3.06 CURB EXTENSION ADJACENT TO PLANTING STRIP W/ BIOFILTRATION GS-3.07 BIOFILTRATION IN OPEN AREA
GS-3.08 PARKING LOT BIOFILTRATION BASIN
GS-3.09 CURB BULBOUT WITH BIOFILTRATION
GS-3.10 BIOFILTRATION SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE TYPES
GS-4 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT
GS-4.00 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE
GS-4.01 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS
GS-4.02 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS W/ UNDERDRAIN
GS-4.03 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE TYPES
GS-5 MISCELLANEOUS
GS-5.01 DISPERSION AREA CURB CUT
GS-5.02 BIOFILTRATION BASIN CURB CUT
GS-5.03 CURB CUT WITH FLUME
GS-5.04a SIDEWALK UNDERDRAIN
GS-5.04b SIDEWALK UNDERDRAIN
GS-5.05 TYPICAL STEP OUT ZONES
GS-5.06 SPLASH PAD
GS-5.07 GRAVITY WALL
GS-5.08 INLET AND OUTLET DETAILS FOR CURB

EXTENSIONS & BULBOUTS
GS-5.09 CLEANOUTS & OBSERVATION WELLS

ADJACENT TO CHECK DAMS
GS-5.10 CLEANOUTS, OBSERVATION WELLS, & OVERFLOW

RISERS ADJACENT TO BMP LIMITS
GS-5.11 PERMEABLE PAVEMENT CLEANOUTS AND OBSERVATION WELLS GS-5.12 DOWNSTREAM STORMWATER FACILITY
CONNECTION DETAIL (L≤10)
GS-5.13 DOWNSTREAM STORMWATER FACILITY
CONNECTION DETAIL (L>10)
GS-5.14a CONCRETE CHECK DAM
GS-5.14b CONCRETE CHECK DAM
GS-5.15 IMPERMEABLE LINER FASTENING DETAIL
DESIGN NOTES:

GS-1.00

TREE WELL

GENERAL DESIGN GUIDANCE

SECTION A-A
PLAN

DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
3/15/21
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
ATTACHMENT 2

BACKUP FOR PDP HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL MEASURES
This is the cover sheet for Attachment 2.

Mark this box if this attachment is empty because the project is exempt from PDP hydromodification management requirements.

Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:

Attachment
Sequence
Contents Checklist
Attachment 2a Hydromodification Management Exhibit
(Required)
Included
See Hydromodification Management
Exhibit Checklist on the back of this
Attachment cover sheet.

Attachment 2b Management of Critical Coarse Sediment
Yield Areas (WMAA Exhibit is required,
additional analyses are optional)
See Section 6.2 of the BMP Design
Manual.

Exhibit showing project drainage
boundaries marked on WMAA Critical
Coarse Sediment Yield Area Map
(Required)
Optional analyses for Critical Coarse
Sediment Yield Area Determination

6.2.1 Verification of Geomorphic
Landscape Units Onsite

6.2.2 Downstream Systems Sensitivity
to Coarse Sediment

6.2.3 Optional Additional Analysis of
Potential Critical Coarse Sediment
Yield Areas Onsite
Attachment 2c Geomorphic Assessment of Receiving
Channels (Optional)
See Section 6.3.4 of the BMP Design
Manual.

Not performed
Included
Submitted as separate stand-alone
document
Attachment 2d Flow Control Facility Design, including
Structural BMP Drawdown Calculations
and Overflow Design Summary
(Required)
See Chapter 6 and Appendix G of the
BMP Design Manual
Included
Submitted as separate stand-alone
document
Attachment 2e Vector Control Plan (Required when
structural BMPs will not drain in 96
hours)
Included
Not required because BMPs will drain
in less than 96 hours
X
X
X
X
X
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the Hydromodification Management Exhibit:

The Hydromodification Management Exhibit must identify:

Underlying hydrologic soil group
Approximate depth to groundwater
Existing natural hydrologic features ( watercourses, seeps, springs, wetlands) Critical coarse sediment yield areas to be protected
Existing topography
Existing and proposed site drainage network and connections to drainage offsite Proposed grading
Proposed impervious features
Proposed design features and surface treatments used to minimize imperviousness Point(s) of Compliance (POC) for Hydromodification Management Existing and proposed drainage boundary and drainage area to each POC (when necessary, create separate exhibits for pre-development and post-project conditions) Structural BMPs for hydromodification management (identify location, type of BMP, and size/detail) Note: Please Reference Attachment 1A to find specified information.

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Attachment 2A
Reference Attachment 1A for HMP Specifications
S
UMM
IT AVE
525
X
530
5 3
0 X X
535
535
535
540
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
545
545
545
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
550
550
550
X
X
X
X
X
X
555
555
X
X
X
560
560
560
X
X
X
X
X
565
565
565
565
565
565
X
570
X
575
580
X
585
590
X
595
600
605
X
610
PET WASTE STATIONS.

10. HOA TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE
AND MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INTO PERPETUITY.

WELL, BROW DITCH, STORM WATER DETENTION VAULT,

9. HOA TO MAINTAIN THE TRASH CAPTURE INSERT, TREE
DIEGO GREEN STREET STANDARDS GS-1.00

8. TREE WELL DESIGN PROPOSED PER COUNTY OF SAN
IN PLACE. NOT PART OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS.

7. EXISTING NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL TO BE PROTECTED
AREA WILL BE DEMOLISHED.

6. ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE PROJECT

5. 85TH PERCENTILE STORM EVENT = 0.52 IN.

BORINGS UP TO 19.5 FEET, PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

4. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN
PROTECTED IN PROXIMITY TO PROJECT.

3. NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS TO BE
BEEN IDENTIFIED ON SITE.

2. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPES "A" AND "D" HAVE
DESIGN MANUAL DATED FEBRUARY 2016.

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SANTEE BMP

THIS EXHIBIT ADDRESS THE PERMANENT STORM WATER

1. SIZES OF THE POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPs SHOWN ON
NOTES
X.X AC
LEGEND:

SUB BASIN AREA
POC

IMPERVIOUS AREA

DMA-X POC/DMA ID
BMP

SITE DESIGN/SOURCE CONTROL
SC-1
SC-2
SD-4

STORM DRAIN STENCILING / SIGNAGE
PREVENTION OF ILLICIT DISCHARGES TO THE MS4
SD-5
SD-7

IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION

TOLERANT SPECIES

LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE / DROUGHT
SD-3

MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA

MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION
SC-6

ADDITIONAL BMP'S
12-MAR-2025 09:45
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\19877_hmp_pre01.dgn 0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50'
50 25 50 100 150
(PRE-PROJECT)

SUMMIT AVENUE
FOR

EXHIBIT

HYDROMODIFICATION MANAGEMENT

MAJOR DRAINAGE BOUNDARY

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - EXHIBIT FOR PDP SWQMP ONLY
c 2024
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
DATE: MARCH 14, 2025
5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
POC-1

10.0 AC
DMA-1

BROW DITCH

LOCATION

PET WASTE STATION
J-19877
(POST-PROJECT)

SUMMIT AVENUE
FOR

EXHIBIT

HYDROMODIFICATION MANAGEMENT
S
UMM
IT AVE
525
X
5 3
0 X X X
535
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
550
550
X
X
X
X
X
X
555
555
X
X
560
560
560
X
X
X
X
X
565
565
565
X
570
X
575
580
X
585
590
595
600
605
X
610
PET WASTE STATIONS.

10. HOA TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE
AND MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INTO PERPETUITY.

WELL, BROW DITCH, STORM WATER DETENTION VAULT,

9. HOA TO MAINTAIN THE TRASH CAPTURE INSERT, TREE
DIEGO GREEN STREET STANDARDS GS-1.00

8. TREE WELL DESIGN PROPOSED PER COUNTY OF SAN
IN PLACE. NOT PART OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS.

7. EXISTING NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL TO BE PROTECTED
AREA WILL BE DEMOLISHED.

6. ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE PROJECT

5. 85TH PERCENTILE STORM EVENT = 0.52 IN.

BORINGS UP TO 19.5 FEET, PER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT.

4. DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED IN
PROTECTED IN PROXIMITY TO PROJECT.

3. NO CRITICAL COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS TO BE
BEEN IDENTIFIED ON SITE.

2. HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP TYPES "A" AND "D" HAVE
DESIGN MANUAL DATED FEBRUARY 2016.

QUALITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SANTEE BMP

THIS EXHIBIT ADDRESS THE PERMANENT STORM WATER

1. SIZES OF THE POLLUTANT CONTROL BMPs SHOWN ON
NOTES
X.X AC
LEGEND:

SUB BASIN AREA
POC

IMPERVIOUS AREA

DMA-X POC/DMA ID
BMP

SITE DESIGN/SOURCE CONTROL
SC-1
SC-2
SD-4

STORM DRAIN STENCILING / SIGNAGE
PREVENTION OF ILLICIT DISCHARGES TO THE MS4
SD-5
SD-7

IMPERVIOUS AREA DISPERSION

TOLERANT SPECIES

LANDSCAPING WITH NATIVE / DROUGHT
SD-3

MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS AREA

MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION
SC-6

ADDITIONAL BMP'S
17-MAR-2025 18:08
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\19877_hmp_post01.dgn 0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50'
50 25 50 100 150

MAJOR DRAINAGE BOUNDARY

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - EXHIBIT FOR PDP SWQMP ONLY
c 2024
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
DATE: MARCH 14, 2025
5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
BMP-1A
DMA-1

2.4 AC

7.5 AC
BMP-1B

STORAGE VAULT

PROPOSED
SYSTEM

MODULAR WETLAND

PROPOSED
POC-1

OFFSITE
SC-2
SC-1
SC-2
SC-1
SC-2
SC-1
SD-6
SD-6
SD-6 SD-6
SD-6
SD-6 SD-6 SD-6
SD-7
SD-5
SD-4
SD-3
SD-7
SD-5
SD-4
SD-3

STREET ELEMENT

PROPOSED GREEN
AREA

SELF-MITIGATING
LOCATION (TYP.)

WASTE STATION
PROPOSED PET 0.1 AC
DMA-2
(CPS) OR EQUIVALENT

CONNECTOR PIPE SCREEN

INSTALL ADS FLEXSTORM

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL,
D9-A4 D9-A4 D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
D9-A6
530
5 53
535
535
535
535
535
SD-7
SD-5
SD-4
SD-3
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

BROW DITCH

LOCATION

PET WASTE STATION
J-19877
552 550
548
526
524
528
532
530 534 544
546
538
522
520
516
560
562
564
566
506
500
498
570
488
574
576
582
584
586
588
590
592
594
596
598
600
602
604
486
606
608
610
484
618
508
622
504
558
572
514
580
496
540
536
492
490
518
578
502
568
542
556
512
510
494
554
584
564
518
492
508
572
562
498
494
524
508
592
564
494
528
514
570
552
536
552
490
554
492
504
558
556
568
560
568
580
566
500
486
566
586
514
496
556
Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community Date of Exhibit: 3/11/2025
DigitalGlobe Aerial Image: 2017
Drainage Path Exhibit
Summit Ave
0 120 240 360
Scale in Feet
North
[
\\ cp .rickeng.co m \p rojec ts\ C 19500\ 19877_W a rm ingto nSum m it\ G IS\ 19877_H ydro lo gy.m xd J-19877 Project Area Drainage Path
Existing Curb
Inlet
Outfall to Existing
Concrete Culvert
Attachment 2B
SANDAG & SanGIS
Legend
Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas
Project Area
Date of Exhibit: 4/9/2024
DigitalGlobe Aerial Image: See Lower Right of Image
Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas Exhibit
0 300 600
Scale in Feet [
North
Warmington Summit
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\GIS\19877_CCSYA_Exhibit_portrait.mxd Jn - 19877

PROJECT AREA
Attachment 2D

PRE-PROJECT SWMM MODEL CONFIGURATION
[TITLE]
;;Project Title/Notes
19877

SUMMIT AVENUE
Pre-Project
[OPTIONS]
;;Option Value
FLOW_UNITS CFS
INFILTRATION GREEN_AMPT
FLOW_ROUTING KINWAVE
LINK_OFFSETS DEPTH
MIN_SLOPE 0
ALLOW_PONDING NO
SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO
START_DATE 01/03/1973
START_TIME 12:00:00
REPORT_START_DATE 01/03/1973
REPORT_START_TIME 12:00:00
END_DATE 09/26/2008
END_TIME 16:00:00
SWEEP_START 01/01
SWEEP_END 12/31
DRY_DAYS 0
REPORT_STEP 01:00:00
WET_STEP 00:15:00
DRY_STEP 04:00:00
ROUTING_STEP 0:01:00
INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL
NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH
FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION H-W
VARIABLE_STEP 0.75
LENGTHENING_STEP 0
MIN_SURFAREA 12.557
MAX_TRIALS 8
HEAD_TOLERANCE 0.005
SYS_FLOW_TOL 5
LAT_FLOW_TOL 5
MINIMUM_STEP 0.5
THREADS 1
[EVAPORATION]
;;Data Source Parameters
;;-------------- ----------------
MONTHLY .06 .08 .11 .16 .18 .21 .21 .20 .16 .12 .08 .06 DRY_ONLY NO
[RAINGAGES]
;;Name Format Interval SCF Source
;;-------------- --------- ------ ------ ----------
SANTEERAINGAGE INTENSITY 1:00 1.0 TIMESERIES Santee
[SUBCATCHMENTS]
;;Name Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen SnowPack ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---------------- DMA_1 SANTEERAINGAGE POC1 10 0 272 25 0
[SUBAREAS]
;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- DMA_1 0.012 .15 0.05 .1 25 OUTLET
[INFILTRATION]
;;Subcatchment Suction Ksat IMD
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
DMA_1 9 .025 0.33
[OUTFALLS]
;;Name Elevation Type Stage Data Gated Route To
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- -------- ---------------- POC1 0 FREE NO
[TIMESERIES]
;;Name Date Time Value
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Santee FILE "\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\Hydromodification\RAIN GAGE\santee.dat" [REPORT]
;;Reporting Options

INPUT NO

CONTROLS NO

SUBCATCHMENTS ALL

NODES ALL

LINKS ALL
[TAGS]
[MAP]
DIMENSIONS -3652.482 0.000 13652.482 10000.000
Units None
[COORDINATES]
;;Node X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
POC1 7998.847 3033.449
[VERTICES]
;;Link X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
[Polygons]
;;Subcatchment X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
DMA_1 8059.777 7456.940
DMA_1 8059.777 7456.940
DMA_1 8647.416 7416.413
DMA_1 8647.416 7416.413
DMA_1 8677.812 5734.549
DMA_1 6600.811 5785.208
DMA_1 6590.679 7568.389
[SYMBOLS]
;;Gage X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
SANTEERAINGAGE 4037.487 9625.127
EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.1 (Build 5.1.012) -------------------------------------------------------------- 19877

SUMMIT AVENUE
Pre-Project

********************************************************* NOTE: The summary statistics displayed in this report are based on results found at every computational time step, not just on results from each reporting time step.
*********************************************************

****************
Analysis Options
****************
Flow Units ............... CFS
Process Models:

Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES
RDII ................... NO
Snowmelt ............... NO
Groundwater ............ NO
Flow Routing ........... NO
Water Quality .......... NO
Infiltration Method ...... GREEN_AMPT
Starting Date ............ 01/03/1973 12:00:00
Ending Date .............. 09/26/2008 16:00:00
Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0
Report Time Step ......... 01:00:00
Wet Time Step ............ 00:15:00
Dry Time Step ............ 04:00:00

************************** Volume Depth
Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches
************************** --------- -------
Total Precipitation ...... 389.917 467.900
Evaporation Loss ......... 16.199 19.439
Infiltration Loss ........ 322.758 387.310
Surface Runoff ........... 58.329 69.995
Final Storage ............ 0.000 0.000
Continuity Error (%) ..... -1.890

************************** Volume Volume
Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal
************************** --------- ---------
Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000
Wet Weather Inflow ....... 58.329 19.008
Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000
RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000
External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000
External Outflow ......... 58.329 19.008
Flooding Loss ............ 0.000 0.000
Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000
Exfiltration Loss ........ 0.000 0.000
Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000
Final Stored Volume ...... 0.000 0.000
Continuity Error (%) ..... 0.000

***************************
Subcatchment Runoff Summary
***************************

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total Total Total Total Total Peak Runoff
Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff
Subcatchment in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DMA_1 467.90 0.00 19.44 387.31 70.00 19.01 7.36 0.150

Analysis begun on: Wed Oct 25 16:21:25 2023
Analysis ended on: Wed Oct 25 16:21:37 2023
Total elapsed time: 00:00:12

POST-PROJECT SWMM MODEL CONFIGURATION
[TITLE]
;;Project Title/Notes
19877

SUMMIT AVENUE
Post-Project
[OPTIONS]
;;Option Value
FLOW_UNITS CFS
INFILTRATION GREEN_AMPT
FLOW_ROUTING KINWAVE
LINK_OFFSETS DEPTH
MIN_SLOPE 0
ALLOW_PONDING NO
SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO
START_DATE 01/03/1973
START_TIME 12:00:00
REPORT_START_DATE 01/03/1973
REPORT_START_TIME 12:00:00
END_DATE 09/26/2008
END_TIME 16:00:00
SWEEP_START 01/01
SWEEP_END 12/31
DRY_DAYS 0
REPORT_STEP 01:00:00
WET_STEP 00:15:00
DRY_STEP 04:00:00
ROUTING_STEP 0:01:00
RULE_STEP 00:00:00
INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL
NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH
FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION H-W
VARIABLE_STEP 0.75
LENGTHENING_STEP 0
MIN_SURFAREA 12.557
MAX_TRIALS 8
HEAD_TOLERANCE 0.005
SYS_FLOW_TOL 5
LAT_FLOW_TOL 5
MINIMUM_STEP 0.5
THREADS 1
[EVAPORATION]
;;Data Source Parameters
;;-------------- ----------------
MONTHLY .06 .08 .11 .16 .18 .21 .21 .20 .16 .12 .08 .06 DRY_ONLY NO
[RAINGAGES]
;;Name Format Interval SCF Source
;;-------------- --------- ------ ------ ----------
SANTEERAINGAGE INTENSITY 1:00 1.0 TIMESERIES Santee
[SUBCATCHMENTS]
;;Name Rain Gage Outlet Area %Imperv Width %Slope CurbLen SnowPack ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---------------- DMA_1 SANTEERAINGAGE BMP-1 2.5 80 156 2 0
OFFSITE SANTEERAINGAGE POC1 7.5 0 218 25 0
DMA-2 SANTEERAINGAGE BMP-1 0.1 25 111 0.5 0
[SUBAREAS]
;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- DMA_1 0.012 .15 0.05 .1 25 OUTLET
OFFSITE 0.012 0.15 0.05 0.1 25 OUTLET
DMA-2 0.012 0.15 0.05 0.1 25 OUTLET
[INFILTRATION]
;;Subcatchment Param1 Param2 Param3 Param4 Param5
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- DMA_1 9.0 .025 0.33
OFFSITE 9.0 0.025 0.33
DMA-2 3.5 0.5 0.25
[OUTFALLS]
;;Name Elevation Type Stage Data Gated Route To
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ---------------- -------- ---------------- POC1 0 FREE NO
[STORAGE]
;;Name Elev. MaxDepth InitDepth Shape Curve Type/Params SurDepth Fevap Psi Ksat IMD ;;-------------- -------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ---------------------------- --------- -------- -------- -------- BMP-1 0 10 0 TABULAR SC_1 0 0
[OUTLETS]
;;Name From Node To Node Offset Type QTable/Qcoeff Qexpon Gated ;;-------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- --------------- ---------------- ---------- -------- RC_1 BMP-1 POC1 0 TABULAR/DEPTH RC_1 NO
[CURVES]
;;Name Type X-Value Y-Value
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
RC_1 Rating 0.00 0.039
RC_1 0.04 0.041
RC_1 0.08 0.043
RC_1 0.13 0.044
RC_1 0.17 0.046
RC_1 0.21 0.047
RC_1 0.25 0.049
RC_1 0.29 0.050
RC_1 0.33 0.052
RC_1 0.38 0.053
RC_1 0.42 0.055
RC_1 0.46 0.056
RC_1 0.50 0.057
RC_1 0.54 0.058
RC_1 0.58 0.060
RC_1 0.63 0.061
RC_1 0.67 0.062
RC_1 0.71 0.063
RC_1 0.75 0.064
RC_1 0.79 0.066
RC_1 0.83 0.067
RC_1 0.88 0.068
RC_1 0.92 0.069
RC_1 0.96 0.070
RC_1 1.00 0.071
RC_1 1.04 0.072
RC_1 1.08 0.073
RC_1 1.13 0.074
RC_1 1.17 0.075
RC_1 1.21 0.076
RC_1 1.25 0.077
RC_1 1.29 0.078
RC_1 1.33 0.079
RC_1 1.38 0.080
RC_1 1.42 0.080
RC_1 1.46 0.081
RC_1 1.50 0.082
RC_1 1.54 0.083
RC_1 1.58 0.084
RC_1 1.63 0.085
RC_1 1.67 0.086
RC_1 1.71 0.087
RC_1 1.75 0.087
RC_1 1.79 0.088
RC_1 1.83 0.089
RC_1 1.88 0.090
RC_1 1.92 0.091
RC_1 1.96 0.091
RC_1 2.00 0.092
RC_1 2.04 0.093
RC_1 2.08 0.094
RC_1 2.13 0.095
RC_1 2.17 0.095
RC_1 2.21 0.096
RC_1 2.25 0.097
RC_1 2.29 0.098
RC_1 2.33 0.098
RC_1 2.38 0.099
RC_1 2.42 0.100
RC_1 2.46 0.101
RC_1 2.50 0.101
RC_1 2.54 0.116
RC_1 2.58 0.141
RC_1 2.63 0.174
RC_1 2.67 0.213
RC_1 2.71 0.257
RC_1 2.75 0.305
RC_1 2.79 0.358
RC_1 2.83 0.450
RC_1 2.88 0.491
RC_1 2.92 0.528
RC_1 2.96 0.563
RC_1 3.00 0.595
RC_1 3.04 0.625
RC_1 3.08 0.653
RC_1 3.13 0.680
RC_1 3.17 0.706
RC_1 3.21 0.731
RC_1 3.25 0.755
RC_1 3.29 0.778
RC_1 3.33 0.801
RC_1 3.38 0.823
RC_1 3.42 0.844
RC_1 3.46 0.864
RC_1 3.50 0.884
RC_1 3.54 0.904
RC_1 3.58 0.923
RC_1 3.63 0.942
RC_1 3.67 0.960
RC_1 3.71 0.978
RC_1 3.75 0.996
RC_1 3.79 1.013
RC_1 3.83 1.030
RC_1 3.88 1.046
RC_1 3.92 1.063
RC_1 3.96 1.079
RC_1 4.00 1.095
RC_1 4.04 1.110
RC_1 4.08 1.126
RC_1 4.13 1.141
RC_1 4.17 1.156
RC_1 4.21 1.171
RC_1 4.25 1.185
RC_1 4.29 1.302
RC_1 4.33 1.503
RC_1 4.38 1.758
RC_1 4.42 2.058
RC_1 4.46 2.397
RC_1 4.50 2.769
RC_1 4.54 3.173
RC_1 4.58 3.605
RC_1 4.63 4.065
RC_1 4.67 4.549
RC_1 4.71 5.058
RC_1 4.75 5.590
RC_1 4.79 6.144
RC_1 4.83 6.719
RC_1 4.88 7.314
RC_1 4.92 7.929
RC_1 4.96 8.563
RC_1 5.00 9.216
;
SC_1 Storage 0 2350
SC_1 5 2350
[TIMESERIES]
;;Name Date Time Value
;;-------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Santee FILE "\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\Hydromodification\RAIN GAGE\santee.dat" [REPORT]
;;Reporting Options

SUBCATCHMENTS ALL

NODES ALL

LINKS ALL
[TAGS]
[MAP]
DIMENSIONS -3652.482 0.000 13652.482 10000.000
Units None
[COORDINATES]
;;Node X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
POC1 9163.783 2583.622
BMP-1 8564.014 4705.882
[VERTICES]
;;Link X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
[Polygons]
;;Subcatchment X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
DMA_1 8059.777 7456.940
DMA_1 8059.777 7456.940
DMA_1 8647.416 7416.413
DMA_1 8647.416 7416.413
DMA_1 8677.812 5734.549
DMA_1 6600.811 5785.208
DMA_1 6590.679 7568.389
OFFSITE 7064.591 4555.940
DMA-2 9923.511 6822.369
;;Storage Node X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
BMP-1 8564.014 4705.882
[SYMBOLS]
;;Gage X-Coord Y-Coord
;;-------------- ------------------ ------------------
SANTEERAINGAGE 4037.487 9625.127
EPA STORM WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL - VERSION 5.2 (Build 5.2.4) ------------------------------------------------------------ 19877

SUMMIT AVENUE
Post-Project

****************
Analysis Options
****************
Flow Units ............... CFS
Process Models:

Rainfall/Runoff ........ YES
RDII ................... NO
Snowmelt ............... NO
Groundwater ............ NO
Flow Routing ........... YES
Ponding Allowed ........ NO
Water Quality .......... NO
Infiltration Method ...... GREEN_AMPT
Flow Routing Method ...... KINWAVE
Starting Date ............ 01/03/1973 12:00:00
Ending Date .............. 09/26/2008 16:00:00
Antecedent Dry Days ...... 0.0
Report Time Step ......... 01:00:00
Wet Time Step ............ 00:15:00
Dry Time Step ............ 04:00:00
Routing Time Step ........ 60.00 sec

************************** Volume Depth
Runoff Quantity Continuity acre-feet inches
************************** --------- -------
Total Precipitation ...... 393.816 467.900
Evaporation Loss ......... 23.421 27.826
Infiltration Loss ........ 258.457 307.078
Surface Runoff ........... 114.774 136.365
Final Storage ............ 0.000 0.000
Continuity Error (%) ..... -0.720

************************** Volume Volume
Flow Routing Continuity acre-feet 10^6 gal
************************** --------- ---------
Dry Weather Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000
Wet Weather Inflow ....... 114.774 37.401
Groundwater Inflow ....... 0.000 0.000
RDII Inflow .............. 0.000 0.000
External Inflow .......... 0.000 0.000
External Outflow ......... 114.673 37.368
Flooding Loss ............ 0.000 0.000
Evaporation Loss ......... 0.000 0.000
Exfiltration Loss ........ 0.000 0.000
Initial Stored Volume .... 0.000 0.000
Final Stored Volume ...... 0.000 0.000
Continuity Error (%) ..... 0.088

********************************
Highest Flow Instability Indexes
********************************
All links are stable.

*************************
Routing Time Step Summary
*************************
Minimum Time Step : 59.00 sec
Average Time Step : 60.00 sec
Maximum Time Step : 60.00 sec
% of Time in Steady State : 0.00
Average Iterations per Step : 1.00
% of Steps Not Converging : 0.00

***************************
Subcatchment Runoff Summary
***************************

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total Total Total Total Imperv Perv Total Total Peak Runoff Precip Runon Evap Infil Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff Coeff Subcatchment in in in in in in in 10^6 gal CFS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DMA_1 467.90 0.00 64.30 75.25 316.40 16.03 332.43 22.57 2.47 0.710 OFFSITE 467.90 0.00 15.81 383.77 0.00 71.46 71.46 14.55 5.62 0.153 DMA-2 467.90 0.00 17.31 350.49 102.16 0.51 102.68 0.28 0.05 0.219

******************
Node Depth Summary
******************

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Reported
Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Max Depth
Node Type Feet Feet Feet days hr:min Feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POC1 OUTFALL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00:00 0.00
BMP-1 STORAGE 0.03 4.44 4.44 1388 05:01 4.43

*******************
Node Inflow Summary
*******************

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Maximum Lateral Total Flow
Lateral Total Time of Max Inflow Inflow Balance
Inflow Inflow Occurrence Volume Volume Error
Node Type CFS CFS days hr:min 10^6 gal 10^6 gal Percent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POC1 OUTFALL 5.62 7.61 1388 05:01 14.6 37.4 0.000
BMP-1 STORAGE 2.50 2.50 1827 09:01 22.8 22.8 0.144

*********************
Node Flooding Summary
*********************

No nodes were flooded.

**********************
Storage Volume Summary
**********************

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Average Avg Evap Exfil Maximum Max Time of Max Maximum
Volume Pcnt Pcnt Pcnt Volume Pcnt Occurrence Outflow
Storage Unit 1000 ft³ Full Loss Loss 1000 ft³ Full days hr:min CFS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BMP-1 0.066 0.3 0.0 0.0 10.423 44.4 1388 05:01 2.19

***********************
Outfall Loading Summary
***********************

----------------------------------------------------------- Flow Avg Max Total
Freq Flow Flow Volume
Outfall Node Pcnt CFS CFS 10^6 gal
----------------------------------------------------------- POC1 4.41 0.10 7.61 37.365
----------------------------------------------------------- System 4.41 0.10 7.61 37.365

********************
Link Flow Summary
********************

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maximum Time of Max Maximum Max/ Max/
|Flow| Occurrence |Veloc| Full Full
Link Type CFS days hr:min ft/sec Flow Depth
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- RC_1 DUMMY 2.19 1388 05:01

*************************
Conduit Surcharge Summary
*************************

No conduits were surcharged.

Analysis begun on: Wed Dec 18 15:31:24 2024
Analysis ended on: Wed Dec 18 15:31:50 2024
Total elapsed time: 00:00:26
BMP-1A
5 1
-0.5

1.5 0.6
2 2.5
4 0.6

4.25 4
3 h (in) h (ft)
Underdrain
Orifices
Midflow
Orifice (1st) Overflow
Weir
Total Flow
(cfs)
Effective
Surface Area
(ft2)
Porosity (N/A)
Incremental
Volume
(ft3)
Cumulative
Volume
(ft3)

0.0 0.00 0.039 0.000 0.000 0.039 2350 0.00 98 0

0.5 0.04 0.041 0.000 0.000 0.041 2350 0.00 98 98

1.0 0.08 0.043 0.000 0.000 0.043 2350 0.00 98 196

1.5 0.13 0.044 0.000 0.000 0.044 2350 0.00 98 294

2.0 0.17 0.046 0.000 0.000 0.046 2350 0.00 98 392

2.5 0.21 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.047 2350 0.00 98 490

3.0 0.25 0.049 0.000 0.000 0.049 2350 0.00 98 588

3.5 0.29 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 2350 0.00 98 685

4.0 0.33 0.052 0.000 0.000 0.052 2350 0.00 98 783

4.5 0.38 0.053 0.000 0.000 0.053 2350 0.00 98 881

5.0 0.42 0.055 0.000 0.000 0.055 2350 0.00 98 979

5.5 0.46 0.056 0.000 0.000 0.056 2350 0.00 98 1077

6.0 0.50 0.057 0.000 0.000 0.057 2350 0.00 98 1175

6.5 0.54 0.058 0.000 0.000 0.058 2350 0.00 98 1273

7.0 0.58 0.060 0.000 0.000 0.060 2350 0.00 98 1371

7.5 0.63 0.061 0.000 0.000 0.061 2350 0.00 98 1469

8.0 0.67 0.062 0.000 0.000 0.062 2350 0.00 98 1567

8.5 0.71 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.063 2350 0.00 98 1665

9.0 0.75 0.064 0.000 0.000 0.064 2350 0.00 98 1763

9.5 0.79 0.066 0.000 0.000 0.066 2350 0.00 98 1860

10.0 0.83 0.067 0.000 0.000 0.067 2350 0.00 98 1958

10.5 0.88 0.068 0.000 0.000 0.068 2350 0.00 98 2056

11.0 0.92 0.069 0.000 0.000 0.069 2350 0.00 98 2154

11.5 0.96 0.070 0.000 0.000 0.070 2350 0.00 98 2252

12.0 1.00 0.071 0.000 0.000 0.071 2350 0.00 98 2350

12.5 1.04 0.072 0.000 0.000 0.072 2350 0.00 98 2448

13.0 1.08 0.073 0.000 0.000 0.073 2350 0.00 98 2546

13.5 1.13 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.074 2350 0.00 98 2644

14.0 1.17 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.075 2350 0.00 98 2742

14.5 1.21 0.076 0.000 0.000 0.076 2350 0.00 98 2840

15.0 1.25 0.077 0.000 0.000 0.077 2350 0.00 98 2938

15.5 1.29 0.078 0.000 0.000 0.078 2350 0.00 98 3035

16.0 1.33 0.079 0.000 0.000 0.079 2350 0.00 98 3133

16.5 1.38 0.080 0.000 0.000 0.080 2350 0.00 98 3231
Weir Overflow
Upper Weir Inv (ft) =
B (ft) =
Cs =
BMP A Rating and Storage Table
Mid-flow Orifice (1st)
Num. of Orifices =
Orifice Invert (ft) =
Orifice Diameter (in) =
Cg =
Cg =
BMP-1A (Stage-Storage-Discharge Rating Curve)
Storage Characteristics
Depth (ft) =
Width (ft) =
Length (ft) =
Low Flow Orifice (Underdrain)
Num. of Orifices =
Orifice Invert (ft) =
Orifice Diameter (in) =

17.0 1.42 0.080 0.000 0.000 0.080 2350 0.00 98 3329

17.5 1.46 0.081 0.000 0.000 0.081 2350 0.00 98 3427

18.0 1.50 0.082 0.000 0.000 0.082 2350 0.00 98 3525

18.5 1.54 0.083 0.000 0.000 0.083 2350 0.00 98 3623

19.0 1.58 0.084 0.000 0.000 0.084 2350 0.00 98 3721

19.5 1.63 0.085 0.000 0.000 0.085 2350 0.00 98 3819

20.0 1.67 0.086 0.000 0.000 0.086 2350 0.00 98 3917

20.5 1.71 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.087 2350 0.00 98 4015

21.0 1.75 0.087 0.000 0.000 0.087 2350 0.00 98 4113

21.5 1.79 0.088 0.000 0.000 0.088 2350 0.00 98 4210

22.0 1.83 0.089 0.000 0.000 0.089 2350 0.00 98 4308

22.5 1.88 0.090 0.000 0.000 0.090 2350 0.00 98 4406

23.0 1.92 0.091 0.000 0.000 0.091 2350 0.00 98 4504

23.5 1.96 0.091 0.000 0.000 0.091 2350 0.00 98 4602

24.0 2.00 0.092 0.000 0.000 0.092 2350 0.00 98 4700

24.5 2.04 0.093 0.000 0.000 0.093 2350 0.00 98 4798

25.0 2.08 0.094 0.000 0.000 0.094 2350 0.00 98 4896

25.5 2.13 0.095 0.000 0.000 0.095 2350 0.00 98 4994

26.0 2.17 0.095 0.000 0.000 0.095 2350 0.00 98 5092

26.5 2.21 0.096 0.000 0.000 0.096 2350 0.00 98 5190

27.0 2.25 0.097 0.000 0.000 0.097 2350 0.00 98 5288

27.5 2.29 0.098 0.000 0.000 0.098 2350 0.00 98 5385

28.0 2.33 0.098 0.000 0.000 0.098 2350 0.00 98 5483

28.5 2.38 0.099 0.000 0.000 0.099 2350 0.00 98 5581

29.0 2.42 0.100 0.000 0.000 0.100 2350 0.00 98 5679

29.5 2.46 0.101 0.000 0.000 0.101 2350 0.00 98 5777

30.0 2.50 0.101 0.000 0.000 0.101 2350 0.00 98 5875

30.5 2.54 0.102 0.007 0.000 0.116 2350 0.00 98 5973

31.0 2.58 0.103 0.019 0.000 0.141 2350 0.00 98 6071

31.5 2.63 0.103 0.035 0.000 0.174 2350 0.00 98 6169

32.0 2.67 0.104 0.054 0.000 0.213 2350 0.00 98 6267

32.5 2.71 0.105 0.076 0.000 0.257 2350 0.00 98 6365

33.0 2.75 0.105 0.100 0.000 0.305 2350 0.00 98 6463

33.5 2.79 0.106 0.126 0.000 0.358 2350 0.00 98 6560

34.0 2.83 0.107 0.172 0.000 0.450 2350 0.00 98 6658

34.5 2.88 0.108 0.192 0.000 0.491 2350 0.00 98 6756

35.0 2.92 0.108 0.210 0.000 0.528 2350 0.00 98 6854

35.5 2.96 0.109 0.227 0.000 0.563 2350 0.00 98 6952

36.0 3.00 0.110 0.243 0.000 0.595 2350 0.00 98 7050

36.5 3.04 0.110 0.257 0.000 0.625 2350 0.00 98 7148

37.0 3.08 0.111 0.271 0.000 0.653 2350 0.00 98 7246

37.5 3.13 0.112 0.284 0.000 0.680 2350 0.00 98 7344

38.0 3.17 0.112 0.297 0.000 0.706 2350 0.00 98 7442

38.5 3.21 0.113 0.309 0.000 0.731 2350 0.00 98 7540

39.0 3.25 0.113 0.321 0.000 0.755 2350 0.00 98 7638

39.5 3.29 0.114 0.332 0.000 0.778 2350 0.00 98 7735

40.0 3.33 0.115 0.343 0.000 0.801 2350 0.00 98 7833

40.5 3.38 0.115 0.354 0.000 0.823 2350 0.00 98 7931

41.0 3.42 0.116 0.364 0.000 0.844 2350 0.00 98 8029

41.5 3.46 0.117 0.374 0.000 0.864 2350 0.00 98 8127

42.0 3.50 0.117 0.384 0.000 0.884 2350 0.00 98 8225

42.5 3.54 0.118 0.393 0.000 0.904 2350 0.00 98 8323

43.0 3.58 0.118 0.402 0.000 0.923 2350 0.00 98 8421

43.5 3.63 0.119 0.411 0.000 0.942 2350 0.00 98 8519

44.0 3.67 0.120 0.420 0.000 0.960 2350 0.00 98 8617

44.5 3.71 0.120 0.429 0.000 0.978 2350 0.00 98 8715

45.0 3.75 0.121 0.437 0.000 0.996 2350 0.00 98 8813

45.5 3.79 0.122 0.446 0.000 1.013 2350 0.00 98 8910

46.0 3.83 0.122 0.454 0.000 1.030 2350 0.00 98 9008

46.5 3.88 0.123 0.462 0.000 1.046 2350 0.00 98 9106

47.0 3.92 0.123 0.470 0.000 1.063 2350 0.00 98 9204

47.5 3.96 0.124 0.478 0.000 1.079 2350 0.00 98 9302

48.0 4.00 0.124 0.485 0.000 1.095 2350 0.00 98 9400

48.5 4.04 0.125 0.493 0.000 1.110 2350 0.00 98 9498

49.0 4.08 0.126 0.500 0.000 1.126 2350 0.00 98 9596

49.5 4.13 0.126 0.507 0.000 1.141 2350 0.00 98 9694

50.0 4.17 0.127 0.515 0.000 1.156 2350 0.00 98 9792

50.5 4.21 0.127 0.522 0.000 1.171 2350 0.00 98 9890

51.0 4.25 0.128 0.529 0.000 1.185 2350 0.00 98 9988

51.5 4.29 0.128 0.536 0.102 1.302 2350 0.00 98 10085

52.0 4.33 0.129 0.542 0.289 1.503 2350 0.00 98 10183

52.5 4.38 0.130 0.549 0.530 1.758 2350 0.00 98 10281

53.0 4.42 0.130 0.556 0.817 2.058 2350 0.00 98 10379

53.5 4.46 0.131 0.562 1.141 2.397 2350 0.00 98 10477

54.0 4.50 0.131 0.569 1.500 2.769 2350 0.00 98 10575

54.5 4.54 0.132 0.575 1.890 3.173 2350 0.00 98 10673

55.0 4.58 0.132 0.582 2.309 3.605 2350 0.00 98 10771

55.5 4.63 0.133 0.588 2.756 4.065 2350 0.00 98 10869

56.0 4.67 0.133 0.594 3.228 4.549 2350 0.00 98 10967

56.5 4.71 0.134 0.600 3.723 5.058 2350 0.00 98 11065

57.0 4.75 0.135 0.606 4.243 5.590 2350 0.00 98 11163

57.5 4.79 0.135 0.613 4.784 6.144 2350 0.00 98 11260

58.0 4.83 0.136 0.618 5.346 6.719 2350 0.00 98 11358

58.5 4.88 0.136 0.624 5.929 7.314 2350 0.00 98 11456

59.0 4.92 0.137 0.630 6.532 7.929 2350 0.00 98 11554

59.5 4.96 0.137 0.636 7.154 8.563 2350 0.00 98 11652

60.0 5.00 0.138 0.642 7.794 9.216 2350 0.00 98 11750
WQ PONDING DEPTH = 2.5'

DOWNSTREAM BIOFILTRATION BMP
DESIGN FLOW RATE = 0.101 CFS
WQ STORAGE = 5,875 CU. FT.
5,875 CU. FT. > (1.25 x DCV)
5,875 CU. FT. > (1.25 x 3,728 CU. FT)
5,875 CU. FT. > 4,660 CU. FT.

ADEQUATE POLLUANT CONTROL IS PROVIDED

DISCHARGE
h (ft)
Incremental
storage
volume
(ft3)
Cumulative
storage volume
(ft3)
Total Flow
(cfs)
Incremental
Drawdown Time
(hr)
Cumulative
Drawdown Time
(hr)

0.000 98 0 0.039 0.00 0.00

0.042 98 98 0.041 0.68 0.68

0.083 98 196 0.043 0.65 1.33

0.125 98 294 0.044 0.63 1.96

0.167 98 392 0.046 0.60 2.56

0.208 98 490 0.047 0.58 3.14

0.250 98 588 0.049 0.56 3.71

0.292 98 685 0.050 0.55 4.25

0.333 98 783 0.052 0.53 4.78

0.375 98 881 0.053 0.52 5.30

0.417 98 979 0.055 0.50 5.81

0.458 98 1,077 0.056 0.49 6.30

0.500 98 1,175 0.057 0.48 6.78

0.542 98 1,273 0.058 0.47 7.25

0.583 98 1,371 0.060 0.46 7.71

0.625 98 1,469 0.061 0.45 8.16

0.667 98 1,567 0.062 0.44 8.60

0.708 98 1,665 0.063 0.43 9.04

0.750 98 1,763 0.064 0.43 9.46

0.792 98 1,860 0.066 0.42 9.88

0.833 98 1,958 0.067 0.41 10.29

0.875 98 2,056 0.068 0.41 10.70

0.917 98 2,154 0.069 0.40 11.10

0.958 98 2,252 0.070 0.39 11.49

1.000 98 2,350 0.071 0.39 11.88

1.042 98 2,448 0.072 0.38 12.26

1.083 98 2,546 0.073 0.38 12.63

1.125 98 2,644 0.074 0.37 13.00

1.167 98 2,742 0.075 0.37 13.37

1.208 98 2,840 0.076 0.36 13.73

1.250 98 2,938 0.077 0.36 14.09

1.292 98 3,035 0.078 0.35 14.44

1.333 98 3,133 0.079 0.35 14.79

1.375 98 3,231 0.080 0.34 15.13

1.417 98 3,329 0.080 0.34 15.47

1.458 98 3,427 0.081 0.34 15.81

1.500 98 3,525 0.082 0.33 16.14

1.542 98 3,623 0.083 0.33 16.47

1.583 98 3,721 0.084 0.33 16.79

1.625 98 3,819 0.085 0.32 17.12

1.667 98 3,917 0.086 0.32 17.44

1.708 98 4,015 0.087 0.32 17.75

1.750 98 4,113 0.087 0.31 18.06

1.792 98 4,210 0.088 0.31 18.37

1.833 98 4,308 0.089 0.31 18.68

1.875 98 4,406 0.090 0.30 18.99

1.917 98 4,504 0.091 0.30 19.29

1.958 98 4,602 0.091 0.30 19.59

2.000 98 4,700 0.092 0.30 19.88

2.042 98 4,798 0.093 0.29 20.17

2.083 98 4,896 0.094 0.29 20.47

2.125 98 4,994 0.095 0.29 20.75

2.167 98 5,092 0.095 0.29 21.04

2.208 98 5,190 0.096 0.28 21.33

2.250 98 5,288 0.097 0.28 21.61

2.292 98 5,385 0.098 0.28 21.89

2.333 98 5,483 0.098 0.28 22.16

2.375 98 5,581 0.099 0.28 22.44

2.417 98 5,679 0.100 0.27 22.71

2.458 98 5,777 0.101 0.27 22.98

2.500 98 5,875 0.101 0.27 23.25

2.542 98 5,973 0.116 0.25 23.51

2.583 98 6,071 0.141 0.21 23.72

2.625 98 6,169 0.174 0.17 23.89

2.667 98 6,267 0.213 0.14 24.03

2.708 98 6,365 0.257 0.12 24.15

2.750 98 6,463 0.305 0.10 24.24

2.792 98 6,560 0.358 0.08 24.32

2.833 98 6,658 0.450 0.07 24.39

2.875 98 6,756 0.491 0.06 24.45

2.917 98 6,854 0.528 0.05 24.50

2.958 98 6,952 0.563 0.05 24.55

3.000 98 7,050 0.595 0.05 24.60

3.042 98 7,148 0.625 0.04 24.64

3.083 98 7,246 0.653 0.04 24.69

3.125 98 7,344 0.680 0.04 24.73

3.167 98 7,442 0.706 0.04 24.77

3.208 98 7,540 0.731 0.04 24.80

3.250 98 7,638 0.755 0.04 24.84

3.292 98 7,735 0.778 0.04 24.88

3.333 98 7,833 0.801 0.03 24.91

3.375 98 7,931 0.823 0.03 24.94

3.417 98 8,029 0.844 0.03 24.98

3.458 98 8,127 0.864 0.03 25.01

3.500 98 8,225 0.884 0.03 25.04

3.542 98 8,323 0.904 0.03 25.07

3.583 98 8,421 0.923 0.03 25.10
BMP 1A - VAULT CALCULATED

STORAGE DRAWDOWN TIME

WQ DRAWDOWN TIME
=23.25 HR

3.625 98 8,519 0.942 0.03 25.13

3.667 98 8,617 0.960 0.03 25.16

3.708 98 8,715 0.978 0.03 25.19

3.750 98 8,813 0.996 0.03 25.21

3.792 98 8,910 1.013 0.03 25.24

3.833 98 9,008 1.030 0.03 25.27

3.875 98 9,106 1.046 0.03 25.29

3.917 98 9,204 1.063 0.03 25.32

3.958 98 9,302 1.079 0.03 25.35

4.000 98 9,400 1.095 0.03 25.37

4.042 98 9,498 1.110 0.02 25.39

4.083 98 9,596 1.126 0.02 25.42

4.125 98 9,694 1.141 0.02 25.44

4.167 98 9,792 1.156 0.02 25.47

4.208 98 9,890 1.171 0.02 25.49

4.250 98 9,988 1.185 0.02 25.51

4.292 98 10,085 1.302 0.02 25.54

4.333 98 10,183 1.503 0.02 25.55

4.375 98 10,281 1.758 0.02 25.57

4.417 98 10,379 2.058 0.01 25.59

4.458 98 10,477 2.397 0.01 25.60

4.500 98 10,575 2.769 0.01 25.61

4.542 98 10,673 3.173 0.01 25.62

4.583 98 10,771 3.605 0.01 25.63

4.625 98 10,869 4.065 0.01 25.63

4.667 98 10,967 4.549 0.01 25.64

4.708 98 11,065 5.058 0.01 25.64

4.750 98 11,163 5.590 0.01 25.65

4.792 98 11,260 6.144 0.00 25.65

4.833 98 11,358 6.719 0.00 25.66

4.875 98 11,456 7.314 0.00 25.66

4.917 98 11,554 7.929 0.00 25.67

4.958 98 11,652 8.563 0.00 25.67

5.000 98 11,750 9.216 0.00 25.67
Summit Avenue
19877
12/18/2024
[POC 1 ]
Peak Flow Frequency Summary
HMP Flow Frequency Range Based on: SWMM - Weibull
Return Period Pre-development Qpeak
(cfs)
Post-project - Mitigated Q
(cfs) Check
Low-Flow = 0.1*Q2 0.287 0.239 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.048 cfs 2-year 2.867 2.387 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.48 cfs
3-year 4.020 3.578 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.443 cfs
4-year 4.443 4.005 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.438 cfs
5-year 4.892 4.266 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.625 cfs
6-year 5.034 4.372 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.662 cfs
7-year 5.591 5.132 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.46 cfs
8-year 6.155 5.641 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.514 cfs
9-year 6.669 5.895 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.775 cfs
10-year 6.864 6.050 Okay! -> Decreased by 0.813 cfs
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\WaterRes\Hydromodification\19877_PostProcess.xlsm Q10 (6.864 cfs)
Q5 (4.892 cfs)
Q2 (2.867 cfs)
QLow-Flow (0.287 cfs)

0.000

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

7.000

8.000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Peak Flow (cfs)
Storm Return Period in Years
Peak Flow Frequency Curves
Pre-development Qpeak
Post-project Mitigated Qpeak
Summit Avenue
19877
12/18/2024
[POC 1]
Low-flow Threshold: 10%

0.1xQ2 (Pre): 0.2867 cfs
Q10 (Pre): 6.864 cfs
# of Intervals between flow bins: 99
Incremental Q (Pre): 0.06643 cfs
Total Hourly Data: 313203 hours The proposed BMP: PASSED Flow Frequency Range Based on: SWMM - Weibull
Beginning of
Interval
(Flow Bin)
Pre-develop. Flow
(cfs)
Pre-develop.

Hours
Pre-develop.
% Time Exceeding
Post-project
Hours
Post-project
% Time Exceeding Percentage Pass/Fail
1 0.287 695 2.22E-03 759 2.42E-03 109% Pass^
2 0.353 619 1.98E-03 652 2.08E-03 105% Pass^
3 0.420 551 1.76E-03 557 1.78E-03 101% Pass^
4 0.486 475 1.52E-03 484 1.55E-03 102% Pass^
5 0.552 429 1.37E-03 416 1.33E-03 97% Pass
6 0.619 380 1.21E-03 359 1.15E-03 94% Pass
7 0.685 338 1.08E-03 315 1.01E-03 93% Pass
8 0.752 299 9.55E-04 282 9.00E-04 94% Pass
9 0.818 269 8.59E-04 257 8.21E-04 96% Pass
10 0.885 247 7.89E-04 235 7.50E-04 95% Pass
11 0.951 233 7.44E-04 213 6.80E-04 91% Pass
12 1.018 217 6.93E-04 199 6.35E-04 92% Pass
13 1.084 198 6.32E-04 188 6.00E-04 95% Pass
14 1.150 187 5.97E-04 175 5.59E-04 94% Pass
15 1.217 170 5.43E-04 155 4.95E-04 91% Pass
16 1.283 155 4.95E-04 145 4.63E-04 94% Pass
17 1.350 143 4.57E-04 132 4.21E-04 92% Pass
18 1.416 129 4.12E-04 121 3.86E-04 94% Pass
19 1.483 115 3.67E-04 115 3.67E-04 100% Pass^
20 1.549 103 3.29E-04 101 3.22E-04 98% Pass
21 1.615 95 3.03E-04 91 2.91E-04 96% Pass
22 1.682 83 2.65E-04 77 2.46E-04 93% Pass
23 1.748 79 2.52E-04 73 2.33E-04 92% Pass
24 1.815 76 2.43E-04 71 2.27E-04 93% Pass
25 1.881 69 2.20E-04 70 2.23E-04 101% Pass^
26 1.948 64 2.04E-04 63 2.01E-04 98% Pass
27 2.014 58 1.85E-04 55 1.76E-04 95% Pass
28 2.080 57 1.82E-04 48 1.53E-04 84% Pass
29 2.147 55 1.76E-04 46 1.47E-04 84% Pass
30 2.213 53 1.69E-04 42 1.34E-04 79% Pass
31 2.280 50 1.60E-04 41 1.31E-04 82% Pass
32 2.346 47 1.50E-04 39 1.25E-04 83% Pass
33 2.413 43 1.37E-04 35 1.12E-04 81% Pass
34 2.479 40 1.28E-04 32 1.02E-04 80% Pass
35 2.546 37 1.18E-04 28 8.94E-05 76% Pass
36 2.612 34 1.09E-04 26 8.30E-05 76% Pass
37 2.678 33 1.05E-04 26 8.30E-05 79% Pass
38 2.745 30 9.58E-05 24 7.66E-05 80% Pass
39 2.811 29 9.26E-05 23 7.34E-05 79% Pass
40 2.878 25 7.98E-05 20 6.39E-05 80% Pass
41 2.944 25 7.98E-05 20 6.39E-05 80% Pass
42 3.011 22 7.02E-05 20 6.39E-05 91% Pass
43 3.077 21 6.70E-05 19 6.07E-05 90% Pass
44 3.143 20 6.39E-05 18 5.75E-05 90% Pass
45 3.210 18 5.75E-05 17 5.43E-05 94% Pass
46 3.276 18 5.75E-05 17 5.43E-05 94% Pass
47 3.343 18 5.75E-05 17 5.43E-05 94% Pass
48 3.409 17 5.43E-05 17 5.43E-05 100% Pass^
49 3.476 17 5.43E-05 16 5.11E-05 94% Pass
50 3.542 16 5.11E-05 15 4.79E-05 94% Pass
51 3.608 15 4.79E-05 14 4.47E-05 93% Pass
52 3.675 15 4.79E-05 14 4.47E-05 93% Pass
Summit Avenue
19877
12/18/2024
[POC 1]
Flow Frequency Range Based on: SWMM - Weibull
Beginning of
Interval
(Flow Bin)
Pre-develop. Flow
(cfs)
Pre-develop.

Hours
Pre-develop.
% Time Exceeding
Post-project
Hours
Post-project
% Time Exceeding Percentage Pass/Fail
53 3.741 15 4.79E-05 14 4.47E-05 93% Pass
54 3.808 15 4.79E-05 14 4.47E-05 93% Pass
55 3.874 15 4.79E-05 13 4.15E-05 87% Pass
56 3.941 13 4.15E-05 11 3.51E-05 85% Pass
57 4.007 13 4.15E-05 10 3.19E-05 77% Pass
58 4.074 13 4.15E-05 9 2.87E-05 69% Pass
59 4.140 12 3.83E-05 9 2.87E-05 75% Pass
60 4.206 11 3.51E-05 9 2.87E-05 82% Pass
61 4.273 10 3.19E-05 7 2.23E-05 70% Pass
62 4.339 9 2.87E-05 6 1.92E-05 67% Pass
63 4.406 9 2.87E-05 5 1.60E-05 56% Pass
64 4.472 9 2.87E-05 5 1.60E-05 56% Pass
65 4.539 8 2.55E-05 5 1.60E-05 63% Pass
66 4.605 8 2.55E-05 5 1.60E-05 63% Pass
67 4.671 8 2.55E-05 5 1.60E-05 63% Pass
68 4.738 8 2.55E-05 5 1.60E-05 63% Pass
69 4.804 8 2.55E-05 5 1.60E-05 63% Pass
70 4.871 7 2.23E-05 5 1.60E-05 71% Pass
71 4.937 6 1.92E-05 5 1.60E-05 83% Pass
72 5.004 6 1.92E-05 5 1.60E-05 83% Pass
73 5.070 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
74 5.136 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
75 5.203 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
76 5.269 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
77 5.336 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
78 5.402 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
79 5.469 5 1.60E-05 5 1.60E-05 100% Pass^
80 5.535 5 1.60E-05 4 1.28E-05 80% Pass
81 5.601 5 1.60E-05 4 1.28E-05 80% Pass
82 5.668 5 1.60E-05 4 1.28E-05 80% Pass
83 5.734 5 1.60E-05 4 1.28E-05 80% Pass
84 5.801 5 1.60E-05 4 1.28E-05 80% Pass
85 5.867 4 1.28E-05 4 1.28E-05 100% Pass^
86 5.934 4 1.28E-05 4 1.28E-05 100% Pass^
87 6.000 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
88 6.067 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
89 6.133 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
90 6.199 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
91 6.266 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
92 6.332 4 1.28E-05 3 9.58E-06 75% Pass
93 6.399 4 1.28E-05 2 6.39E-06 50% Pass
94 6.465 4 1.28E-05 2 6.39E-06 50% Pass
95 6.532 4 1.28E-05 2 6.39E-06 50% Pass
96 6.598 4 1.28E-05 2 6.39E-06 50% Pass
97 6.664 4 1.28E-05 1 3.19E-06 25% Pass
98 6.731 4 1.28E-05 1 3.19E-06 25% Pass
99 6.797 4 1.28E-05 1 3.19E-06 25% Pass
100 6.864 3 9.58E-06 1 3.19E-06 33% Pass

0.000

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

7.000

8.000

1.0E-06 1.0E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-03 1.0E-02 1.0E-01 1.0E+00 Flow (cfs)
% Time Exceeding
Flow Duration Exceedance Curves
Pre-development Qpeak
Post-project Mitigated Qpeak
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
ATTACHMENT 3
Structural BMP Maintenance Information
This is the cover sheet for Attachment 3.

Indicate which Items are Included behind this cover sheet:

Attachment
Sequence
Contents Checklist
Attachment 3a Structural BMP Maintenance Thresholds
and Actions (Required)
Included
See Structural BMP Maintenance
Information Checklist on the back of this
Attachment cover sheet.

Attachment 3b Draft Maintenance Agreement (when
applicable)
Included
Not Applicable
X
ATTACHMENT 3B TO BE INCLUDED DURING FINAL ENGINEERING
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included in the Structural BMP Maintenance Information Attachment:

Preliminary Design / Planning / CEQA level submittal:

Attachment 3a must identify:

Typical maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s) based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual
Attachment 3b is not required for preliminary design / planning / CEQA level submittal.

Final Design level submittal:

Attachment 3a must identify:

Specific maintenance indicators and actions for proposed structural BMP(s). This shall be based on Section 7.7 of the BMP Design Manual and enhanced to reflect actual proposed components of the structural BMP(s)
How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt posts, or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds)
Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable
Maintenance thresholds specific to the structural BMP(s), with a location-specific frame of reference (e.g., level of accumulated materials that triggers removal of the materials, to be identified based on viewing marks on silt posts or measured with a survey rod with respect to a fixed benchmark within the BMP)
Recommended equipment to perform maintenance
When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management
Attachment 3b: For private entity operation and maintenance, Attachment 3b shall include a draft maintenance agreement in the local jurisdiction's standard format (PDP applicant to contact the [City Engineer] to obtain the current maintenance agreement forms).

X
X
Attachment 3A

INSPECTION

FREQUENCY

MAINTENANCE

FREQUENCY MAINTENANCE METHOD INCLUDED IN O&M MANUAL
SHEET

NUMBER(S)

LANDSCAPED
AREAS
MONTHLY (NOTE: INSPECTOR SHALL

CHECK FOR THE FOLLOWING
MAINTENANCE INDICATORS:

EROSION IN THE FORM OF RILLS OR

GULLIES, PONDING WATER, BARE

AREAS, BURROWS, MOUNDS, AND
TRASH.)

1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION; AND

2. ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH.

1. FILL AND COMPACT AREAS OF RUTS, RILLS, OR
GULLIES;

2. RE-SEED AND/OR PLANT SLOPES AND AREAS OF
EXPOSED SOILS; AND

3. ROUTINE MOWING AND TRIMMING AND TRASH
REMOVAL.

YES
OUTLET

PROTECTION

1. MONTHLY;

2. WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER EACH
"SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENT" AND

3. WITHIN 24 HOURS FOLLOWING

CONSTRUCTION IN IMMEDIATE AREA

OF OUTLET PROTECTION

1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION;

2. WHEN DISTURBED OR MISSING

ROCKS (RIP RAP), OR SOIL EROSION

BELOW AND/OR ADJACENT TO OUTLET
PROTECTION ARE OBSERVED.

1. REMOVE TRASH, DEBRIS AND LEAVES. REPAIR ANY
DAMAGE TO ROOF DRAINS; 2. IMMEDIATELY REPOSITION
ALL DISPLACED ENERGY DISSIPATER; AND 3. IF SOIL
EROSION IS FOUND, EXTEND ENERGY DISSIPATER (I.E.

LANDSCAPE ROCKS AND/OR SPLASH PADS);

REPOSITION OR INCREASE LIMITS OF ENERGY
DISSIPATER TO COVER ERODED AREA.

YES

EFFECTIVE

IRRIGATION
SYSTEM

MONTHLY WHEN BROKEN SPRINKLER HEADS, RAIN

SHUTOFF DEVICES, AND FLOW
REDUCERS ARE OBSERVED; OR

RUNNING SPRINKLERS IN RAIN ARE
OBSERVED.

REPAIR OR REPLACE THE BROKEN AND/OR
MALFUNCTIONING PARTS OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM.

YES
TRASH

STORAGE
AREAS
WEEKLY 1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION;

2. STANDING WATER IN TRASH
STORAGE AREA.

3. LOOSE TRASH OR DEBRIS.

4. LEAKED OR SPILLED MATERIALS.

5. COMPROMISED FENCE, SCREEN,
GATE, WALL, BIN. LID OR ROOF AWNING
(WHERE APPLICABLE).

6. CRACKED OR OTHERWISE

COMPROMISED PAVING OR OTHER

FLAWED FLOOR SURFACE (AS
APPLICABLE).

1. IF STANDING WATER IS OBSERVED IN THE AREA,

DETERMINE THE WATER SOURCE AND REMOVE THE
SOURCE. ALLOW STANDING WATER TO EVAPORATE. IF
WATER DOES NOT EVAPORATE IN 48 HOURS,
REDISTRIBUTE THE WATER TO LANDSCAPED AREA(S).

DO NOT DRAIN WATER TO STORM DRAIN SYSTEM;

2. REMOVE AND PROPERLY DISPOSE LOOSE TRASH,
DEBRIS, AND LEAKED OR SPILLED MATERIALS. USE

APPROPRIATE SPILL CLEANUP MATERIAL AS

NECESSARY TO REMOVE ALL LEAKED AND SPILLED

MATERIALS INCLUDING MATERIALS ADHERED TO
PAVEMENT. IDENTIFY AND REMOVE OR REPAIR THE
SOURCE OF ANY LEAKED OR SPILLED MATERIALS; AND

3. REPAIR THE FOLLOWING AS APPLICABLE:

COMPROMISED FENCE, SCREEN, GATE, WALL, BIN, LID

OR ROOF AWNING, CRACKED OR COMPROMISED
PAVING OR OTHER FLOOR SURFACE.

YES

PREVENTIVE

STENCILING

AND SIGNAGE

ANNUALLY WHEN FULLY OR PARTIALLY ERASED
SIGNS ARE OBSERVED; WHEN DUMPING

OF TRASH ARE OBSERVED AT PUBLIC

ACCESS POINTS, BUILDING ENTRANCES,
PUBLIC PARKS, ETC.

1. REPLACE OR REPAINT THE STENCILS AND SIGNAGE
SO THAT THEY ARE LEGIBLE; AND

2. MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE PLACED AT ALL
REQUIRED LOCATIONS (I.E.- ALL INLETS).

YES

MODULAR

WETLAND
SYSTEM
(BMP-1B)

1. MINIMUM TWICE A YEAR (ON OR
BEFORE SEPTEMBER 15TH AND

FOLLOWING THE RAINY SEASON
AFTER MAY 1ST); AND

2. AFTER EACH "SIGNIFICANT RAIN
EVENT"

AS NEEDED BASED ON INSPECTION

FINDINGS

1. ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TO REMOVE THE

ACCUMULATED MATERIALS IN THE SCREENING FILTER,

SEPARATION CHAMBER, AND PERIMETER FILTER
(BIOMEDIA GREEN) AND REPLACE FILTER MEDIA

PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED SERVICE PROVIDER PER

MANUFACTUER'S GUIDELINES AND CONDITIONS
DEFINED IN THE WASHINGTON ECOLOGY T.A.P.E.

CERTIFICATION.

2. IF INSPECTION INDICATES INTERNAL COMPONENTS
ARE DAMAGED, ADDITIONAL NON‐ROUTINE

MAINTENANCE WILL BE REQUIRED TO REPAIR OR
REPLACE DAMAGED PARTS AS APPLICABLE.

YES

DETENTION
VAULT
(BMP-1A)

1.TWICE PER YEAR (ON OR BEFORE
SEPTEMBER 30TH AND FOLLOWING
THE RAINY SEASON AFTER MAY 1ST)

2. AFTER EACH "SIGNIFICANT RAIN
EVENT"

1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION; AND

2. ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH

AND FOLLOWING THE RAINY SEASON
AFTER MAY 1ST

1. REMOVE ACCUMULATED MATERIALS SUCH AS TRASH,
DEBRIS AND SEDIMENTS;

2. MAINTAIN INLET AND OUTLET PIPES TO AVOID
CLOGGING.

YES

CONNECTOR

PIPE SCREEN
(CPS)
(VAULT PRE

TREATMENT)

1. IMMEADIATELY FOLLOWING

CONSTRUCTION

2. INSPECT MONTHLY. IF CATCH
BASIN IS MORE THAN 25% FULL OR

MORE IN ONE MONTH, INCREASE

INSPECTION FREQUENCY TO
MONTHLY PLUS AFTER EVERY 0.1-
INCH OR LARGER STORM EVENT.

1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION 1. REMOVE TRASH AND DEBRIS IN FRONT OF SCREEN BY HAND OR USING A STANDARD VACUUM TRUCK.

YES

BIOFILTRATION
BASIN
(BMP-2)

1. TWICE A YEAR (ON OR BEFORE
SEPTEMBER 15TH AND FOLLOWING
THE RAINY SEASON AFTER MAY 1ST);
AND

2. AFTER EACH "SIGNIFICANT RAIN
EVENT"
(NOTE: INSPECTOR SHALL CHECK

FOR THE FOLLOWING MAINTENANCE
INIDICATORS: EROSION IN THE FORM

OF RILLS OR GULLIES, PONDING

WATER, BARE AREAS, DEAD

VEGETATION, ANIMAL BURROWS,

HOLES, MOUNDS, AND TRASH)

1. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTION; AND

2. ON OR BEFORE SEPTEMBER 30TH

AND FOLLOWING THE RAINY SEASON
AFTER MAY 1ST;
AND

3. AFTER EACH "SIGNIFICANT RAIN
EVENT"2

1. REPLACE MULCH IN AREAS OF RUTS, RILLS, OR

GULLIES

2. RE-SEED AND/OR PLANT SLOPES AND AREAS OF

EXPOSED SOILS

3. ROUTINE MAINTENANCE TO REMOVE ACCUMULATED

MATERIALS SUCH AS TRASH AND DEBRIS

4. NON-ROUTINE MAINTENANCE WILL BE REQUIRED TO

BACKWASH AND CLEAR UNDERDRAINS IF INSPECTION

INDICATES UNDERDRAINS ARE CLOGGED

5. DEPENDING ON POLLUTANT LOADS, SOILS MAY NEED
TO BE REPLACED EVERY 5 TO 10 YEARS.

6. THE RISER STRUCTURE SHOULD BE MAINTAINED TO

AVOID CLOGGING AND ANY LEAKAGE THROUGH
BOLTHOLES.

YES

TREE WELL
(BMP-3)

1.INSPECT MONTHLY AND AFTER
EVERY 0.5-INCH OR LARGER STORM
EVENT. IF STANDING WATER IS

OBSERVED, INCREASE INSPECTION
FREQUENCY TO AFTER EVERY 0.1-
INCH OR LARGER STORM EVENT.

1. MAINTENANCE WHEN NEEDED. 1. ROUTINE ACTIONS AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN TREE HEALTH; 2. REMOVE DEAD OR DISEASED TREE.

REPLACE PER ORIGINAL PLANS; 3. LOOSEN OR REPLACE

SOILS SURROUNDING THE TREE TO RESTORE
DRAINAGE; 4. DISPERSE ANY STANDING WATER FROM
THE TREE WELL TO NEARBY LANDSCAPING; 5. MAKE

REPAIRS AS APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE DRAINAGE
INTO THE TREE WELL.

YES
NOTES:

SITE DESIGN
SOURCE

CONTROL

1. REFER TO THE "PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PDP) STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWQMP) SUMMIT AVENUE", DATED OCTOBER 27, 2022 OR ANY REVISIONS THEREOF FOR MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION.

2. A SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENT CONSIDERED WHENEVER THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE REPORTS 0.50" OF RAIN IN 48 HOURS FOR THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.

3. DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF NORMAL OPERATION, ALL BMPS SHOULD BE INSPECTED ONCE BEFORE AUGUST 31 AND THEN MONTHLY FROM SEPTEMBER THROUGH MAY. THE MINIMUM INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE FREQUENCY SHOULD BE DETERMINED BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE FIRST YEAR INSPECTIONS.

SITE DESIGN, SOURCE CONTROL AND POLLUTANT CONTROL BMP OPERATION & MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE DETAILS STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND DISCHARGE CONTROL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT APPROVAL NO.:

O&M RESPONSIBLE PARTY DESIGNEE:

STRUCTURAL
BMP

BMP DESCRIPTION

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

PROCEDURES WARMINGTON SUMMIT
JN-19877
BF-1
Biofiltration

BMP MAINTENANCE FACT SHEET
FOR
STRUCTURAL BMP BF-1 BIOFILTRATION
Biofiltration facilities are vegetated surface water systems that filter water through vegetation, and soil or engineered media prior to discharge via underdrain or overflow to the downstream conveyance system.

Biofiltration facilities have limited or no infiltration. They are typically designed to provide enough hydraulic head to move flows through the underdrain connection to the storm drain system. Typical biofiltration components include:
• Inflow distribution mechanisms (e.g., perimeter flow spreader or filter strips) • Energy dissipation mechanism for concentrated inflows (e.g., splash blocks or riprap) • Shallow surface ponding for captured flows
• Side slope and basin bottom vegetation selected based on climate and ponding depth • Non-floating mulch layer
• Media layer (planting mix or engineered media) capable of supporting vegetation growth • Filter course layer consisting of aggregate to prevent the migration of fines into uncompacted native soils or the aggregate storage layer
• Aggregate storage layer with underdrain(s)
• Impermeable liner or uncompacted native soils at the bottom of the facility • Overflow structure
Normal Expected Maintenance
Biofiltration requires routine maintenance to: remove accumulated materials such as sediment, trash or debris; maintain vegetation health; maintain infiltration capacity of the media layer; replenish mulch; and maintain integrity of side slopes, inlets, energy dissipators, and outlets. A summary table of standard inspection and maintenance indicators is provided within this Fact Sheet.

Non-Standard Maintenance or BMP Failure
If any of the following scenarios are observed, the BMP is not performing as intended to protect downstream waterways from pollution and/or erosion. Corrective maintenance, increased inspection and maintenance, BMP replacement, or a different BMP type will be required.
• The BMP is not drained between storm events. Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to vegetation health, and surface ponding longer than approximately 96 hours following a storm event poses a risk of vector (mosquito) breeding. Poor drainage can result from clogging of the media layer, filter course, aggregate storage layer, underdrain, or outlet structure. The specific cause of the drainage issue must be determined and corrected. • Sediment, trash, or debris accumulation greater than 25% of the surface ponding volume within one month. This means the load from the tributary drainage area is too high, reducing BMP function or clogging the BMP. This would require pretreatment measures within the tributary area draining to the BMP to intercept the materials. Pretreatment components, especially for sediment, will extend the life of components that are more expensive to replace such as media, filter course, and aggregate layers. • Erosion due to concentrated storm water runoff flow that is not readily corrected by adding erosion control blankets, adding stone at flow entry points, or minor re-grading to restore proper drainage according to the original plan. If the issue is not corrected by restoring the BMP to the original plan and grade, the [City Engineer] shall be contacted prior to any additional repairs or reconstruction.

BF-1 Page 1 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Other Special Considerations
Biofiltration is a vegetated structural BMP. Vegetated structural BMPs that are constructed in the vicinity of, or connected to, an existing jurisdictional water or wetland could inadvertently result in creation of expanded waters or wetlands. As such, vegetated structural BMPs have the potential to come under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, SDRWQCB, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. This could result in the need for specific resource agency permits and costly mitigation to perform maintenance of the structural BMP. Along with proper placement of a structural BMP, routine maintenance is key to preventing this scenario.

BF-1 Page 2 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
SUMMARY OF STANDARD INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION The property owner is responsible to ensure inspection, operation and maintenance of permanent BMPs on their property unless responsibility has been formally transferred to an agency, community facilities district, homeowners association, property owners association, or other special district.

Maintenance frequencies listed in this table are average/typical frequencies. Actual maintenance needs are site-specific, and maintenance may be required more frequently.

Maintenance must be performed whenever needed, based on maintenance indicators presented in this table. The BMP owner is responsible for conducting regular inspections to see when maintenance is needed based on the maintenance indicators. During the first year of operation of a structural BMP, inspection is recommended at least once prior to August 31 and then monthly from September through May. Inspection during a storm event is also recommended. After the initial period of frequent inspections, the minimum inspection and maintenance frequency can be determined based on the results of the first year inspections.

Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency Accumulation of sediment, litter, or debris Remove and properly dispose of accumulated materials, without damage to the vegetation or compaction of the
media layer.
• Inspect monthly. If the BMP is 25% full* or more in
one month, increase inspection frequency to monthly
plus after every 0.1-inch or larger storm event.
• Remove any accumulated materials found at each
inspection.

Obstructed inlet or outlet structure Clear blockage. • Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger storm event.
• Remove any accumulated materials found at each
inspection.

Damage to structural components such as weirs, inlet or outlet structures
Repair or replace as applicable • Inspect annually.
• Maintenance when needed.

Poor vegetation establishment Re-seed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation per original plans.
• Inspect monthly.
• Maintenance when needed.

Dead or diseased vegetation Remove dead or diseased vegetation, re-seed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation per original plans.
• Inspect monthly.
• Maintenance when needed.

Overgrown vegetation Mow or trim as appropriate. • Inspect monthly. • Maintenance when needed.
2/3 of mulch has decomposed, or mulch has been
removed
Remove decomposed fraction and top off with fresh
mulch to a total depth of 3 inches.
• Inspect monthly.
• Replenish mulch annually, or more frequently when
needed based on inspection.
*“25% full” is defined as ¼ of the depth from the design bottom elevation to the crest of the outflow structure (e.g., if the height to the outflow opening is 12 inches from the bottom elevation, then the materials must be removed when there is 3 inches of accumulation – this should be marked on the outflow structure).

BF-1 Page 3 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
SUMMARY OF STANDARD INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION (Continued from previous page) Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency Erosion due to concentrated irrigation flow Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas and adjust the irrigation system.
• Inspect monthly.
• Maintenance when needed.

Erosion due to concentrated storm water runoff flow Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas, and make appropriate corrective measures such as adding erosion
control blankets, adding stone at flow entry points, or minor re-grading to restore proper drainage according
to the original plan. If the issue is not corrected by
restoring the BMP to the original plan and grade, the
[City Engineer] shall be contacted prior to any additional repairs or reconstruction.
• Inspect after every 0.5-inch or larger storm event. If erosion due to storm water flow has been observed,
increase inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch
or larger storm event.
• Maintenance when needed. If the issue is not
corrected by restoring the BMP to the original plan
and grade, the [City Engineer] shall be contacted prior to any additional repairs or reconstruction.

Standing water in BMP for longer than 24 hours
following a storm event
Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours
following a storm event may be detrimental to
vegetation health
Make appropriate corrective measures such as adjusting
irrigation system, removing obstructions of debris or
invasive vegetation, clearing underdrains, or
repairing/replacing clogged or compacted soils.
• Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger
storm event. If standing water is observed, increase
inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger
storm event.
• Maintenance when needed.

Presence of mosquitos/larvae
For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult
mosquitos, see
http://www.mosquito.org/biology
If mosquitos/larvae are observed: first, immediately
remove any standing water by dispersing to nearby
landscaping; second, make corrective measures as
applicable to restore BMP drainage to prevent standing
water.

If mosquitos persist following corrective measures to
remove standing water, or if the BMP design does not
meet the 96-hour drawdown criteria due to release
rates controlled by an orifice installed on the
underdrain, the [City Engineer] shall be contacted to
determine a solution. A different BMP type, or a Vector Management Plan prepared with concurrence from the
County of San Diego Department of Environmental
Health, may be required.
• Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger
storm event. If mosquitos are observed, increase
inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger
storm event.
• Maintenance when needed.

Underdrain clogged Clear blockage. • Inspect if standing water is observed for longer than 24-96 hours following a storm event.
• Maintenance when needed.

BF-1 Page 4 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
References
American Mosquito Control Association.
http://www.mosquito.org/
California Storm Water Quality Association (CASQA). 2003. Municipal BMP Handbook. https://www.casqa.org/resources/bmp-handbooks/municipal-bmp-handbook County of San Diego. 2014. Low Impact Development Handbook. http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/susmp/lid.html San Diego County Copermittees. 2016. Model BMP Design Manual, Appendix E, Fact Sheet BF-1. http://www.projectcleanwater.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=250&Itemid=220 BF-1 Page 5 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Page Intentionally Blank for Double-Sided Printing
BF-1 Page 6 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

Property / Development Name: Responsible Party Name and Phone Number:

Property Address of BMP: Responsible Party Address:

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION PAGE 1 of 5 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Accumulation of sediment, litter, or debris
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Remove and properly dispose of
accumulated materials, without damage
to the vegetation
☐ If sediment, litter, or debris accumulation
exceeds 25% of the surface ponding
volume within one month (25% full*),
add a forebay or other pre-treatment
measures within the tributary area
draining to the BMP to intercept the
materials.
☐ Other / Comments:

Poor vegetation establishment
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Re-seed, re-plant, or re-establish
vegetation per original plans
☐ Other / Comments:
*“25% full” is defined as ¼ of the depth from the design bottom elevation to the crest of the outflow structure (e.g., if the height to the outflow opening is 12 inches from the bottom elevation, then the materials must be removed when there is 3 inches of accumulation – this should be marked on the outflow structure).

BF-1 Page 7 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION PAGE 2 of 5 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Dead or diseased vegetation
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Remove dead or diseased vegetation, reseed, re-plant, or re-establish vegetation per original plans
☐ Other / Comments:

Overgrown vegetation
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Mow or trim as appropriate
☐ Other / Comments:
2/3 of mulch has decomposed, or mulch has
been removed
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Remove decomposed fraction and top off
with fresh mulch to a total depth of 3
inches
☐ Other / Comments:

BF-1 Page 8 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION PAGE 3 of 5 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Erosion due to concentrated irrigation flow
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas and
adjust the irrigation system
☐ Other / Comments:

Erosion due to concentrated storm water runoff
flow
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Repair/re-seed/re-plant eroded areas,
and make appropriate corrective
measures such as adding erosion
control blankets, adding stone at flow
entry points, or minor re-grading to
restore proper drainage according to
the original plan
☐ If the issue is not corrected by restoring
the BMP to the original plan and grade,
the [City Engineer] shall be contacted
prior to any additional repairs or
reconstruction
☐ Other / Comments:

BF-1 Page 9 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION PAGE 4 of 5 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Obstructed inlet or outlet structure
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Clear blockage
☐ Other / Comments:

Underdrain clogged (inspect underdrain if
standing water is observed for longer than 24-96
hours following a storm event)
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Clear blockage
☐ Other / Comments:

Damage to structural components such as weirs,
inlet or outlet structures
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Repair or replace as applicable
☐ Other / Comments:

BF-1 Page 10 of 11
January 12, 2017
BF-1
Biofiltration
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR BF-1 BIOFILTRATION PAGE 5 of 5 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Standing water in BMP for longer than 24-96
hours following a storm event*
Surface ponding longer than approximately 24
hours following a storm event may be
detrimental to vegetation health
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Make appropriate corrective measures
such as adjusting irrigation system,
removing obstructions of debris or
invasive vegetation, clearing
underdrains, or repairing/replacing
clogged or compacted soils
☐ Other / Comments:

Presence of mosquitos/larvae
For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult
mosquitos, see
http://www.mosquito.org/biology
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Apply corrective measures to remove
standing water in BMP when standing
water occurs for longer than 24-96
hours following a storm event.**
☐ Other / Comments:
*Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to vegetation health, and surface ponding longer than approximately 96 hours following a storm event poses a risk of vector (mosquito) breeding. Poor drainage can result from clogging of the media layer, filter course, aggregate storage layer, underdrain, or outlet structure. The specific cause of the drainage issue must be determined and corrected. **If mosquitos persist following corrective measures to remove standing water, or if the BMP design does not meet the 96-hour drawdown criteria due to release rates controlled by an orifice installed on the underdrain, the [City Engineer] shall be contacted to determine a solution. A different BMP type, or a Vector Management Plan prepared with concurrence from the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health, may be required.

BF-1 Page 11 of 11
January 12, 2017
Appendix E: BMP Design Fact Sheets
77 February 2016
E.14 BF-3 Proprietary Biofiltration
Systems
The purpose of this fact sheet is to help explain the potential role of proprietary BMPs in meeting biofiltration requirements, when full retention of the DCV is not feasible. The fact sheet does not describe design criteria like the other fact sheets in this appendix because this information varies by BMP product model.

Criteria for Use of a Proprietary BMP as a Biofiltration BMP A proprietary BMP may be acceptable as a “biofiltration BMP” under the following conditions:
(1) The BMP meets the minimum design criteria listed in Appendix F, including the pollutant treatment performance standard in Appendix F.1; (2) The BMP is designed and maintained in a manner consistent with its performance certifications (See explanation in Appendix F.2); and
(3) The BMP is acceptable at the discretion of the City Engineer. The City Engineer has no obligation to accept any proprietary biofiltration BMP.

Guidance for Sizing a Proprietary BMP as a Biofiltration BMP Proprietary biofiltration BMPs must meet the same sizing guidance as non-proprietary BMPs. Sizing is typically based on capturing and treating 1.50 times the DCV not reliably retained. Guidance for sizing biofiltration BMPs to comply with requirements of this manual is provided in Appendix F.2.

SD-1
Tree Wells

BMP MAINTENANCE FACT SHEET
FOR
SITE DESIGN BMP SD-1 TREE WELLS
Tree wells as site design BMPs are trees planted in configurations that allow storm water runoff to be directed into the soil immediately surrounding the tree. The tree may be contained within a planter box or structural cells. The surrounding area will be graded to direct runoff to the tree well. There may be features such as tree grates, suspended pavement design, or shallow surface depressions designed to allow runoff into the tree well. Typical tree well components include:
• Trees of the appropriate species for site conditions and constraints • Available growing space based on tree species, soil type, water availability, surrounding land uses, and project goals
• Entrance/opening that allows storm water runoff to flow into the tree well (e.g., a curb opening, tree grate, or surface depression)
• Optional suspended pavement design to provide structural support for adjacent pavement without requiring compaction of underlying layers
• Optional root barrier devices as needed; a root barrier is a device installed in the ground, between a tree and the sidewalk, intended to guide roots down and away from the sidewalk in order to prevent sidewalk lifting from tree roots
• Optional tree grates; to be considered to maximize available space for pedestrian circulation and to protect tree roots from compaction related to pedestrian circulation; tree grates are typically made up of porous material that will allow the runoff to soak through • Optional shallow surface depression for ponding of excess runoff • Optional planter box drain
Normal Expected Maintenance
Tree health shall be maintained as part of normal landscape maintenance. Additionally, ensure that storm water runoff can be conveyed into the tree well as designed. That is, the opening that allows storm water runoff to flow into the tree well (e.g., a curb opening, tree grate, or surface depression) shall not be blocked, filled, re-graded, or otherwise changed in a manner that prevents storm water from draining into the tree well. A summary table of standard inspection and maintenance indicators is provided within this Fact Sheet.

Non-Standard Maintenance or BMP Failure
Tree wells are site design BMPs that normally do not require maintenance actions beyond routine landscape maintenance. The normal expected maintenance described above ensures the BMP functionality. If changes have been made to the tree well entrance / opening such that runoff is prevented from draining into the tree well (e.g., a curb inlet opening is blocked by debris or a grate is clogged causing runoff to flow around instead of into the tree well, or a surface depression has been filled so runoff flows away from the tree well), the BMP is not performing as intended to protect downstream waterways from pollution and/or erosion. Corrective maintenance will be required to restore drainage into the tree well as designed.

Surface ponding of runoff directed into tree wells is expected to infiltrate/evapotranspirate within 24-96 hours following a storm event. Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours following a storm event may be detrimental to vegetation health, and surface ponding longer than approximately 96 hours following a storm event poses a risk of vector (mosquito) breeding. Poor drainage can result from clogging or compaction of the soils surrounding the tree. Loosen or replace the soils to restore drainage.

SD-1 Page 1 of 6
January 12, 2017
SD-1
Tree Wells
Other Special Considerations
Site design BMPs, such as tree wells, installed within a new development or redevelopment project are components of an overall storm water management strategy for the project. The presence of site design BMPs within a project is usually a factor in the determination of the amount of runoff to be managed with structural BMPs (i.e., the amount of runoff expected to reach downstream retention or biofiltration basins that process storm water runoff from the project as a whole). When site design BMPs are not maintained or are removed, this can lead to clogging or failure of downstream structural BMPs due to greater delivery of runoff and pollutants than intended for the structural BMP. Therefore, the [City Engineer] may require confirmation of maintenance of site design BMPs as part of their structural BMP maintenance documentation requirements. Site design BMPs that have been installed as part of the project should not be removed, nor should they be bypassed by re-routing roof drains or re-grading surfaces within the project. If changes are necessary, consult the [City Engineer] to determine requirements.

SD-1 Page 2 of 6
January 12, 2017
SD-1
Tree Wells
SUMMARY OF STANDARD INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS The property owner is responsible to ensure inspection, operation and maintenance of permanent BMPs on their property unless responsibility has been formally transferred to an agency, community facilities district, homeowners association, property owners association, or other special district.

Maintenance frequencies listed in this table are average/typical frequencies. Actual maintenance needs are site-specific, and maintenance may be required more frequently.

Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Action Typical Maintenance Frequency Tree health Routine actions as necessary to maintain tree health. • Inspect monthly. • Maintenance when needed.

Dead or diseased tree Remove dead or diseased tree. Replace per original plans.
• Inspect monthly.
• Maintenance when needed.

Standing water in tree well for longer than 24 hours
following a storm event
Surface ponding longer than approximately 24 hours
following a storm event may be detrimental to tree
health
Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage.
• Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger
storm event. If standing water is observed, increase
inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger
storm event.
• Maintenance when needed.

Presence of mosquitos/larvae
For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult
mosquitos, see
http://www.mosquito.org/biology
Disperse any standing water from the tree well to
nearby landscaping. Loosen or replace soils surrounding the tree to restore drainage (and prevent standing
water).
• Inspect monthly and after every 0.5-inch or larger
storm event. If mosquitos are observed, increase
inspection frequency to after every 0.1-inch or larger
storm event.
• Maintenance when needed
Entrance / opening to the tree well is blocked such that storm water will not drain into the tree well (e.g., a curb inlet opening is blocked by debris or a grate is clogged causing runoff to flow around instead of into the tree
well; or a surface depression is filled such that runoff drains away from the tree well)
Make repairs as appropriate to restore drainage into the tree well.
• Inspect monthly.
• Maintenance when needed.

SD-1 Page 3 of 6
January 12, 2017
SD-1
Tree Wells
References
American Mosquito Control Association.
http://www.mosquito.org/
County of San Diego. 2014. Low Impact Development Handbook. http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/watersheds/susmp/lid.html San Diego County Copermittees. 2016. Model BMP Design Manual, Appendix E, Fact Sheet SD-1. http://www.projectcleanwater.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=250&Itemid=220 SD-1 Page 4 of 6
January 12, 2017
SD-1
Tree Wells
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

Property / Development Name: Responsible Party Name and Phone Number:

Property Address of BMP: Responsible Party Address:

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS PAGE 1 of 2 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Dead or diseased tree
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Remove dead or diseased tree
☐ Replace per original plans
☐ Other / Comments:

SD-1 Page 5 of 6
January 12, 2017
SD-1
Tree Wells
Date: Inspector: BMP ID No.:

Permit No.: APN(s):

INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CHECKLIST FOR SD-1 TREE WELLS PAGE 2 of 2 Threshold/Indicator Maintenance Recommendation Date Description of Maintenance Conducted Presence of mosquitos/larvae
For images of egg rafts, larva, pupa, and adult
mosquitos, see
http://www.mosquito.org/biology
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Disperse any standing water from the tree
well to nearby landscaping
☐ Loosen or replace soils surrounding the
tree to restore drainage (and prevent
standing water)
☐ Other / Comments:

Entrance / opening to the tree well is blocked
such that storm water will not drain into the
tree well (e.g., a curb inlet opening is blocked by
debris or a grate is clogged causing runoff to
flow around instead of into the tree well; or a
surface depression is filled such that runoff
drains away from the tree well)
Maintenance Needed?
☐ YES
☐ NO
☐ N/A
☐ Make repairs as appropriate to restore
drainage into the tree well
☐ Other / Comments:

SD-1 Page 6 of 6
January 12, 2017
PDP SWQMP Template Date: February 2016
PDP SWQMP Preparation Date: [3-17-2025]
SFR:JS:vs:19500/WR/Reports/PDPSWQMP/6thSub
ATTACHMENT 4
Copy of Plan Sheets Showing Permanent Storm Water BMPs
This is the cover sheet for Attachment 4.

Use this checklist to ensure the required information has been included on the plans:

The plans must identify:

Structural BMP(s) with ID numbers matching Form I-6 Summary of PDP Structural BMPs The grading and drainage design shown on the plans must be consistent with the delineation of DMAs shown on the DMA exhibit
Details and specifications for construction of structural BMP(s) Signage indicating the location and boundary of structural BMP(s) as required by the [City Engineer] How to access the structural BMP(s) to inspect and perform maintenance Features that are provided to facilitate inspection (e.g., observation ports, cleanouts, silt posts, or other features that allow the inspector to view necessary components of the structural BMP and compare to maintenance thresholds)
Manufacturer and part number for proprietary parts of structural BMP(s) when applicable Maintenance thresholds specific to the structural BMP(s), with a location-specific frame of reference (e.g., level of accumulated materials that triggers removal of the materials, to be identified based on viewing marks on silt posts or measured with a survey rod with respect to a fixed benchmark within the BMP)
Recommended equipment to perform maintenance
When applicable, necessary special training or certification requirements for inspection and maintenance personnel such as confined space entry or hazardous waste management Include landscaping plan sheets showing vegetation requirements for vegetated structural BMP(s) All BMPs must be fully dimensioned on the plans
When proprietary BMPs are used, site-specific cross section with outflow, inflow, and model number shall be provided. Photocopies of general brochures are not acceptable.

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S
UMM
IT
AVE

NOBLE WAY
X
525
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
530
530
X
X

X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
M
X
535
535
535
X X
X
X
X
X
540
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
545
X
WX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
550
550
550
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
555
555
X
X
560
560
560
X
X
X
X
X
565
565
565
X
570
570
X
575
580
X
585
590
595
600
605
X
610
17-MAR-2025 17:03
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT01_Title.dgn c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
City of Santee, California
1 OF
NO. REVISIONS DATE BY
1 REC
2 3
AVENUE
SUMMIT
1ST VTTM SUBMITTAL 11/03/23
2ND VTTM SUBMITTAL REC
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007

SUMMIT AVENUE SITE MULTIFAMILY
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
3RD VTTM SUBMITTAL REC
02/01/24
04/25/24
4 4TH VTTM SUBMITTAL 12/19/24 REC
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
5 5TH VTTM SUBMITTAL 03/17/25 REC
SDD-116~5' B INLET SDD-116~5' B INLET SDD-116~5' B INLET SDD 116~5'B INLET
SDD 116~5'B INLET
MHX
MHX
MH
MH X
X
MHX
MHX
MHX
530
5 53
535
535
535
535
535
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

NO SCALE

VICINITY MAP
LEGEND

PROJECT BOUNDARY

EXIST TOPO CONTOUR

LOT LINE

FIRE HYDRANT
SLOPE (2:1 MAX.)

STREET GRADIENT

STREET ELEVATION

RETAINING WALL

TOP OF WALL ELEVATION

FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION
D9-A4

SD CLEANOUT

SD INLET
2%
TW
FS

RESIDENTIAL BLDG NUMBER

RESIDENTIAL UNIT NUMBER
5 PVT STORM DRAIN SD
S
W

BROW DITCH

DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
1 PARKING SPACES 5

EXISTING CONCRETE

EXISTING PAVEMENT

QUANTITIES
W

WATER SERVICE AND METER

SHEET INDEX

ENGINEER OF WORK
PH. (619) 291-0707
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
5620 FRIARS RD
RICK ENGINEERING CO.

PUBLIC UTILITIES
SDG&E

COX CABLE

CITY OF SANTEE

GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISRICT

SANTEE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT

GENERAL NOTES

EARTHWORK/GRADING QUANTITIES

CONDOMINIUM STATEMENT
CIVIL CODE.

SECTION 4125 OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AS DEFINED IN

THIS IS A MAP OF A RESIDENTIAL

EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION
PARK IN-LIEU FEE STATEMENT:

AND/OR RECREATION PURPOSES.

THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY FEES IN LIEU OF DEDICATING LAND FOR PARK

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
CUYAM
ACA
ST

MASTBLVD
M AGNO
LIAAVE
AVE
SUM M
IT
67 AV

WOODSIDE
67 8
12 5
52 52
SANTEE

CITY OF

SAN DIEGO

CITY OF LAKESIDE
SITE

GORGERD

M ISSION

GORGE RD

MISSION

MASTBLVD

WATER MAIN
PVT SEWER MAIN (8")
PVT SEWER MANHOLE 5 EA.
1,000 LF
2 EA.
50 EA.
537.3

7. EXISTING/PROPOSED ZONING: R7 (7-14 DU/AC)

8. PRESENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED

9. PROPOSED LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL

10. SETBACKS:

FRONT: 20 FT
INTERIOR SIDE: 10 FT
EXTERIOR SIDE: 10 FT
REAR: 10 FT

11. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE

12. COMMON OPEN SPACE

13. PARKING

RESIDENTAIL PARKING (GARAGE)
GUEST PARKING:

14. LOT COVERAGE
(DEVELOPED LOT)
BUILDING FOOTPRINT:

TOTAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT:

REQUIRED: 100 SF/DU X 42 DU = 4,200 SF
REQUIRED: 150 SF/DU X 42 DU = 6,300 SF
PROVIDED: 21 SPACES
WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL CALIFORNIA INC.

PROJECT MANAGER

MATTHEW ESQUIVEL DATE
PHONE: (714) 434-4416
COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626
3090 PULLMAN STREET
WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL CALIFORNIA INC.

GAS & ELECTRIC
CABLE T.V.

POLICE & FIRE

SCHOOL DISTRICT
LU: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED
MAP 16410
L
O
T 16
L
O
T 20
CR 26392
BLOCK 17
MAP 767

SITE MAP
100 50 0 100 200 300
GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 100'
378-190-01-00

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
EXP. 6-30-2025
R.C.E. NO. 56991
KAREN S. VAN ERT DATE
PRINCESS JOANN RD. & KEITH ST. ELEVATION: 505.42 MSLD
MONUMENT STAMPED "RCE 18010" PER MAP 10225 AT THE CENERLINE INTERSECTION OF

THE BASIS OF ELEVATIONS FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE STANDARD STREET SURVEY DATUM:

FLOWN:

TOPO SOURCE:

TOPOGRAPHY
NGVD 29
JULY 24, 2023

TOPO SOURCE RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY
BASIS OF BEARINGS:

I.E. GPS STATION 1017 TO 2022: S 89°37'26" E 1720.69' (GRID) RECORD OF SURVEY 11252.

DETERMINED BY GPS MEASUREMENTS TAKEN ON JULY 13, 2023 PER THE GRID BEARING BETWEEN GPS STATIONS 1017 AND 2122, AND IS CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983 (CCS83), ZONE 6, BASED UPON

THE BASIS OF BEARINGS AND COORDINATES FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE

BASIS OF ELEVATIONS
SUMM
TI
AVE
PVT. DRIVEA
PVT. ALLEY
2 PVT. ALLEY1
PVT. ALLEY
3 PAD ELEVATION
FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION FF 538.67
PE 538.0

3. NUMBER OF EXISTING LOTS: 1

WATER (PUBLIC)
SEWER

12. TRASH COLLECTION TO BE CURB SIDE.

INCORPORATED IN THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

11. TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STRUCTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE WITH FINAL DESIGN.

10. STORM DRAIN AND SEWER SHOWN IS PRELIMINARY AND IS SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION DESIGN SUBJECT TO SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF SANTEE.

9. GRADING SHOWN HEREON IS PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION IN FINAL

8. GRADING MAY BE BUILT PRIOR TO FINAL MAP RECORDATION.

FIRE DEPARTMENT DESIGN STANDARDS.

7. FIRE HYDRANTS TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF SANTEE

6. UTILITIES SHALL BE UNDERGROUND. EASEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED AS NECESSARY.

PROPERTY WHERE REQUIRED.

5. EVIDENCE SHALL BE PROVIDED OF HAVING OBTAINED GRADING RIGHTS ON ADJACENT

4. PRIVATE SEWER MAINS ARE 8" MINIMUM P.V.C. UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.

BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

THE SUBDIVISION MANUAL. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED PLANS. DESIGN SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED ON THE BASIS OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF

BY THE CITY ENGINEER AT THE TIME OF SUBMISSION OF IMPROVEMENT AND GRADING

3. SPECIFIC METHODS OF HANDLING STORM DRAINAGE ARE SUBJECT TO DETAILED APPROVAL

2. PRIVATE WATER SYSTEM TO BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE

1. ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS: 378-190-01.

NOT BEEN ADJUSTED FOR SHRINKAGE OR BULKAGE.

THE EFFECT OF REMEDIAL GRADING. THE RAW NUMBERS HAVE

QUANTITIES SHOWN ARE QUANTITIES AND DO NOT INCLUDE
CUT: 20,300 CY FILL: 3,800 CY EXPORT: 17,500 CY
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 378-190-01-00
DIEGO COUNTY AND BEING RECORDED IN BOOK 3, PAGE 95 OF SUPERVISOR'S RECORDS.

TO PUBLIC USE ON OCTOBER 3, 1900 BY AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAID SAN

ALL OF THE FOREGOING PORTIONS OF SAID STREET AND AVENUES HAVING BEEN VACATED AND CLOSED WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SAID BLOCK 16.

THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 4 IN SAID BLOCK 16 AND THE 767 AND THAT PORTION OF THE EASTERLY 50.00 FEET OF SAID CENTRAL AVENUE LYING BETWEEN NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE CENTER LINE OF CENTRAL AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO.

PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 4 IN BLOCK 16 OF SAID CAJON PARK AND THE BLOCK 17 AND THE SOUTHERLY 40.00 FEET OF SAID SIXTH STREET LYING BETWEEN THE NORTHERLY

50.00 FEET EASTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 28 IN SAID

OF SAID SUMMIT AVENUE AND THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 767 LYING BETWEEN THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE LINES OF LOTS 19 AND 30 IN SAID BLOCK 17 AND THE NORTHERLY 40.00 FEET OF SIXTH STREET AS SUMMIT AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 767 LYING WESTERLY OF AND ADJOINING THE WESTERLY

AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES OVER, UNDER, UPON AND ACROSS ALL OF PARCEL 2:

LOT 19.

EXPRESSLY EXCEPTING ANY PORTION OF SUMMIT AVENUE LYING WESTERLY OF AND ADJOINING SAID THEREON SOUTH 0°02'26" EAST, 326.74 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT. 89°55'45" EAST, 658.48 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 19 WHICH IS DISTANT 0°02'02" EAST, 326.62 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT; THENCE SOUTH BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 19 WHICH IS DISTANT THEREON SOUTH DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 27, 1893, WHICH LIES NORTHERLY OF A LINE DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 767 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE THAT PORTION OF LOT 19 IN BLOCK 17 OF CAJON PARK, IN THE CITY OF SANTEE, COUNTY OF SAN PARCEL 1:

AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT

PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
36,666 SF
LOT COVERAGE: (36,666 SF/202,554 SF) = 18% < 55% MAX.

GROSS AREA: 4.65 AC (202,554 SF)
R7: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (7-14 DU/AC.)

6. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: R7 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)

K
REN

2. NET PROJECT AREA: 2.89 AC

1. GROSS PROJECT AREA: 4.65 AC
ACTIVE COMMON O.S. PROVIDED: 11,602 SF

JOANNRD

PRINCESS

5. DENSITY = 9 DU/DA (42 DU/4.65 AC)

STORM DRAIN (PRIVATE)

4. NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL DU'S = 42
PROVIDED: 84 SPACES
REQUIRED: 2 SPACES / DU X 42 DU'S = 84 SPACES
REQUIRED: 1 SPACE / 4 DU'S = 11 SPACES

DUPLEXES
B200 (1,746 SF) X 21: 36,666 SF

OWNER/AUTHORIZED AGENT
10/25/2024
PROVIDED: 19,578 SF
PASSIVE COMMON O.S. PROVIDED: 30,807 SF
TOTAL COMMON O.S. PROVIDED: 42,409 SF
SHEET 11
SHEET 10
SHEET 9
SHEET 8
SHEET 7
SHEET 6
SHEET 5
SHEET 4
SHEET 3
SHEET 2
SHEET 1
INTERIM SUMMIT AVE. IMPROVEMENTS

INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS

WATER QUALITY DETAILS

FIRE ACCESS EXHIBIT
SITE

BOUNDARY & ENCUMBRANCES

EXISTING TOPO

DETAILS & STREET SECTIONS

KEY MAP, DETAILS
TITLE
SDD-116~5' B INLET
X
525
+
525
X .08
X 525.7
+
525.74
+
525.89
X 526.5
+
527.06
X 527.5
X
X 527.8
E
X
+
528.95 E
X
X
+
X
529.39
+
529.45
X 529.6
+
529.62
X
530
5 3
0 X
X 530.3
X 530.5
X
X 530.7
+
531.02
X X X
X 531.3
X 531.4
X
X 531.5
X
+
531.70 X
+
531.74
X 532.2
X 532.5
X
X 532.5
X
X
X 533.2
+
+
533.43
533.43
+
533
X 533.5
.54
X
+
534.19
X
X 534.4
+
534.49
MX
+
534.58
+
X
534.68 X
535
535
535
+
535.38
X
+
535.41
X 535.5
+
535.68
+
535.77
+
535.7780
X 535.8
X 535.8
+
536.09
X 536.2
X 536.4 X 536.4
+
536.70
X 536.7
X 536.8
X
X
X 537.5
+
537.60
X 537.7
X 537.9
X 538.4
X 538.8
X 538.9
X
X 539.4
X 539.4
X
X 539.6
X 539.7
+
539.77
X
540
540
540
+
540.21
X
+
540.31
X 540.4
X
X
X 540.5
X
X 540.6
+
540.74
X
+
540.94
+
541.21
+
X
541.26 X
+
541.38
X 541.5
+
541.54
+
541.57
+
541.61
+
541.63
+
541.67
+
541.69
X
+
541.80 X
X 541.9 X
+
541.95
+
542.19
+
542.31 X 542.4
X 542.6
+
542.97
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
545
X
WX
+
545.65
X
+
545.67
X
+
545.69
X
X
X
+
545.82
+
545.85
+
546.02
+
546.08
X 546.1
X
X
X
+
546.23
X
+
546.28
+
546.76
+
546.94
+
547.12
X
X
X
+
X
547.49 X
X
X
X
X
+
X
548.15 X
+
548.26
X
+
548.32
+
548.46
X
+
548.59
X
X
X
+
548.97
X
X
X
550
550
550
X
X
X 550.4
X
X
X 550.5
X
+
551.01
+
551.46
X 551.5
X 551.5
+
552.24
X
X
X
555
555
X
+
556.05
+
556.48
+
556.54
+
556.63
+
+
557.75
X
560
560
560
X 560.5
X
X 561.3
X 561.7
X
X
X
X
+
563.31
X
+
564.39
X 564.5
565
565
565
X 566.2
X
X 568.1
X 568.9
570
570
X
X 572.4
+
573.59
575
+
576.73
580
585
590
X
595
+
597.21
600
+
600.56
605
X
6 10
PVT. DRIVEA
PVT. ALLEY
2 PVT. ALLEY 1
PVT. ALLEY
3 S89°37'34" E 618.55'
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT02_KeyMap_Details_St_Sections.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
MHX
SUMM
TI
AVE
APN: 378-190-18 APN: 378-190-19 APN: 378-190-20 APN: 378-190-21 APN: 378-190-22 APN: 378-190-23 & AMY

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

MIKHAIL &
LIVAK,
MAP 16410
BLOCK 17
MAP 767
CR 14669
LOT 20
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04
LOT 19 QUILLIN, GERALD R TR
APN: 378-180-10
CERT OF COMPL. 1994-619209
DEED 2019-0125165
CR 26392
AMMY J

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00°07'43"E 326.55'
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
N00°12'53"E 326.20'
MHX
530
5 53
535
535
535
535
535
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

PRINCESSJOANNROAD

KEY MAP
KEY MAP: SHEET
KEY MAP: SHEET NUMBER

KEY MAP LEGEND
3 2
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 50'
50 25 50 100 150

KEY MAP/DETAILS/STREET SECTIONS
C
A B
A B
C
SUMM
TI
AVE
9 SECTION A-A

BOUNDARY

PROJECT
APN: 378-190-18
APN: 378-190-01

NO SCALE
GROUND
EXIST.

EXIST. DITCH
PE 533.3
FF 533.97

RECOMMENDATIONS

PER GEOTECH

WALL SUBDRAIN

WALL (CMU)

RETAINING

PROPOSED
(FG 527.0)

7.33'

NOBLE WAY)
(10206

RESIDENCE
EXIST.

RETAINING WALL

ON TOP OF

STEEL FENCE

SECTION B-B

NO SCALE
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-23

BOUNDARY

PROJECT
(FG 558.9)
GROUND
EXIST.

EXIST. DITCH

7.33'
PE 543.0
FF 543.67
H=14.1'

10.4'

RECOMMENDATIONS

PER GEOTECH

WALL SUBDRAIN

NOBLE WAY)
(10230

RESIDENCE
EXIST.
2:1
(SOLDIER PILE)

RETAINING WALL

PROPOSED

RETAINING WALL

FENCE OVER

CABLE GUARD

SECTION C-C

NO SCALE

BOUNDARY

PROJECT
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04

LINK FENCE
CHAIN
EXIST.

18.2'
FG 557.2
(FG 563.3)

7.6'
H=14.2'
PE 543.0
FF 543.67
GROUND
EXIST.

RECOMMENDATIONS

PER GEOTECH

WALL SUBDRAIN
2:1
(SOLDIER PILE)

RETAINING WALL

PROPOSED

RETAINING WALL

FENCE OVER

CABLE GUARD
16'(+
/-)
16'(+
/-)

OF INFLUENCE

BUILDING LINE

OF INFLUENCE

BUILDING LINE
30"-36"
30"-36"
(FS 537.2)
(MIN.)
S=1%
12" ACP
EXIST.
80'
40' 40'
SUMMIT AVE.

TW 537.8
FL 530.8
( BP 532.8)

SEPERATION
12" MIN.

FL 527.5
FL 530.8

5.5'
12'
PAD

RIP-RAP
GROUND
EXIST.
3' COVER

BOX CULVERT
3' (H)

SECTION D-D

NO SCALE
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT03_Details_St_Sections.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
CL

CURB CURB
MIN.

SEWER

PRIVATE
5'

NOT TO SCALE
12' 12'
9' 10'
WATER

PRIVATE
3'
MIN.

3.5'

KEY MAP/DETAILS/STREET SECTIONS

NOT TO SCALE
(NO PARKING)
80'
PL

ROW ROW
10' 10'
22'
WS-1672

SEWER MAIN PER
EXISTING 10" PVC
WS-1736

WATER MAIN PER
EXISTING 12" ACP
5573-W

WATER MAIN PER
EXISTING 12" PVC

SUMMIT AVENUE

TYPICAL EXISTING STREET SECTION
12' 3' 25' 18'
X
FENCE

CHAINLINK
EXIST.

PAVEMENT
OF EXIST.

EDGE

AC BERM
EXIST.

NOT TO SCALE

CURB CL CURB
MIN.

3.5'
0" CURB

NOT TO SCALE
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
2%

PRIVATE DRIVE A WITH PARKING PRIVATE DRIVE A WITH NO PARKING

SIDEWALK
6" CURB

PARKING
MIN.

3.5'
SEWER

PRIVATE
WATER

PRIVATE

SERVICE
FIRE

PRIVATE

STORM DRAIN

PRIVATE
0" CURB
8' 2' 9'
5'

SIDEWALK
3 0" CURB
GUTTER
CURB &
ROLLED
4"

NOT TO SCALE
1'-6"
3-5/8"

PER PLAN
TC ELEV.

FLOWLINE

PER PLAN
TC ELEV.
5' MIN/10' MAX
TRANSITION:

RADIUS EDGES 1/2"
JOINTS 2" DEEP,

WEAKENED PLAN
RADIUS EDGES 1/2"
JOINTS 2" DEEP,

WEAKENED PLAN
PARALLEL AND CONCENTRIC WITH STREET CENTERLINE.

2. TRANSITIONS SHOULD OCCUR ALONG THE BACK OF CURB, HOLDING EDGE OF PAVEMENT

1. REFER TO RSD G-1 AND G-4A FOR SPECIFIC DIMENSIONS RELATED TO EACH TYPE OF CURB.

NOTES:

NOTED OTHERWISE

PER LAYOUT PLANS, UNLESS

KEY NOTE CALLOUT
6"

THIS SHEET

GUTTER PER DETAIL,
4" ROLLED CURB &
SHEET

DETAIL, THIS
4" CURB PER
PER SDRSD G-04B (MOD.)
4" CURB TO ROLLED CURB TRANSITION
12' 5' 9' 19'
5' 9' 19'
M
IN

5.0'
M
IN

5.0'
VAN

NO SCALE

DISABLED PARKING STALL(S)

19'M
IN. S
T
ALL
D
EP
T
H

CONTIGUOUS SIDEWALK
M
IN

5.0'
3'
TYP.

WHEEL STOP
9' MIN. 9' MIN.

NO SCALE

FOR PARK SITE

TYPICAL PARKING STALL
VARIES
19'
GUTTER
3' RIBBON

5.5' 5.5'
15' 15'
SEWER

PRIVATE
WATER

PRIVATE

SERVICE
FIRE

PRIVATE

STORM DRAIN

PRIVATE
8' 2'5.5' 5.5' 9'
CL

CURB CURB
MIN.

SEWER

PRIVATE
10' 5'
WATER

PRIVATE
3'
MIN.

3.5'
2%
0" CURB
GUTTER
CURB &
ROLLED
4"
PRIVATE ALLEYS 1 AND 2
13' 13'
11'
PRIVATE ALLEY 3

NOT TO SCALE
19'
L
IN
E
T
RAFF
IC
DA
S
HED
11'
9' 10' 11'

INDICATED
(WHERE

PARKING

PARALLEL
1 CURB CL CURB
15' 15'

INDICATED
(WHERE

PARKING

PARALLEL
L
IN
E
T
RAFF
IC
DA
S
HED
1 2%

3 1

0.5" R 0.5" R
4"
6"

RECOMMENDATION

ENGINEER'S

GEOTECHNICAL

SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS,

FOR CONCRETE DETAILS

NOT TO SCALE
4" CURB (PVT)
MODIFIED (TYPE G-1 CURB)

FOR FURTHER DETAILS
NOTES: SEE CITY OF SAN DIEGO STANDARD DWG G-1

NOT TO SCALE
8'
2%
15' 5' 20'
80'
PL

CURB CURB

ROW ROW
10' 10'
28'

CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED 6"

SUMMIT AVENUE

TYPICAL STREET SECTION
WS-1672

SEWER MAIN PER
EXISTING 10" PVC
WS-1736

WATER MAIN PER
EXISTING 12" ACP
5573-W

WATER MAIN PER
EXISTING 12" PVC
2%
SIDEWALK PER RSD G-07

5.5' 6.5'
12'

ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATION

APPROVED GEOTECHNICAL

IS SUBJECT TO AN

THE EXISTING SECTION

REHABILITATION OF
(WITH PARKING)
(SOUTHERLY 303'TO POINT OFTRANSITION)
6'
2%
9' 10' 11'
19' 11'
GUTTER
6" CURB &

NOT TO SCALE

7.0"

ENGINEER

PER SOILS

SUBGRADE

COMPACTED
PER STANDARD DWG. G-12

AND JOINT SPECIFICATIONS
NOTE: ALL OTHER CONCRETE
3'
(TYPE-1)
3' RIBBON GUTTER (PVT)
VARIES (1% MIN.)
VARIES (1% MIN.)

0.02'

NOT TO SCALE

7.0"

ENGINEER

PER SOILS

SUBGRADE

COMPACTED
PER STANDARD DWG. G-12

AND JOINT SPECIFICATIONS
NOTE: ALL OTHER CONCRETE
3'
(TYPE-2)
3' RIBBON GUTTER (PVT)
VARIES (1% MIN.)
VARIES (1% MIN.)

1.5"
1'
R=1'
4"
2%

1.5'
520-C-2500

CONCRETE

PER PLAN

CURB LINE
P
ER
P
LAN
T
C

ENGINEER

PER SOILS

CLASS II BASE

AC PAVING W/
10"
VARIES
4" ROLLED CURB & GUTTER DETAIL (PVT)

NOT TO SCALE
9"
P
ER
P
LAN
C
U
RB
L
INE
520-C-2500

CONCRETE

ENGINEER

PER SOILS

CLASS II BASE

AC PAVING W/

NOT TO SCALE
0" CURB (PVT)
S
UMM
IT AVE
X
525
X
X 525.7 X 526.5
X 527.5 X 527.8
X 529.6
X
530
530
X
X 530.3
X 530.5
X
X 530.7
X X X
X 531.3
X 531.4
X 531.5
X 532.2
X 532.5
X
X 532.5
X
X
X 533.2
X 533.5
X
X
M X 534.4 X
535
535
535
X
X 535.5
X 535.8
X 536.2 X 535.8
X 536.4 X 536.4X 536.7
X 536.8
X
X
X 537.5
X 537.7
X 537.9
X 538.4
X 538.8
X 538.9
X
X 539.4
X 539.4
X
X 539.6
X 539.7
X
540
540
540
X
X 540.4
X
X
X 540.5
X
X X 540.6
X 541.5
X 541.9 X
X 542.4
X 542.6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
545
545
X
X
X
X 546.1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
550
550
X
X
X 550.4
X
X
X 550.5
X
X 551.5
X 551.5
X
X
555
X
X
560
560
X 560.5
X
X 561.3
X 561.7
X
X
X
X
X 564.5
565
565
X 566.2
X 568.9
570
570
X
X 572.4
575
580
585
590
X
595
600
S89°37'34"E 618.55'
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'
30 15 30 60 90
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT04_Exist_Topo.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
APN: 378-190-18 APN: 378-190-19 APN: 378-190-20 APN: 378-190-21 APN: 378-190-22 APN: 378-190-23 & AMY

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

MIKHAIL &
LIVAK,
MAP 16410
BLOCK 17
MAP 767
CR 14669
LOT 20
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04
LOT 19 QUILLIN, GERALD R TR
APN: 378-180-10
CERT OF COMPL. 1994-619209
DEED 2019-0125165
CR 26392
AMMY J

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00
°07'43
"E 326.5
5'
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
N00
°12'53
"E 32

6.20'
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
WX
X
X
X
X
X
X
4 EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. SHED
EXIST. SHED
EXIST. BLDG
EXIST. BLDG
EXIST. BLDG
EXIST. BLDG
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. POWER POLE
POLE
POWER
EXIST.

POLE
POWER
EXIST.

BOX
MAIL
EXIST.
(TYP.)
TREES
EXIST.

EXIST. DRIVEWAY
EXIST. STRUCTURE
EXIST. POWER POLE
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. FENCE
EXIST. FENCE
(TYP.)
EXIST. TREE LINE
EXIST. FENCE
POLE
POWER
EXIST.

CONSTRUCTION NOTES
POLE
POWER
EXIST.

STATE REGULATIONS

WELL TO BE REMOVED ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING WATER WELL.

TO BE RELOCATED

PROTECT IN PLACE

TO BE REMOVED

AND STATE REGULATIONS

SEPTIC SYSTEM TO BE REMOVED ACCORDING TO LOCAL
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM.

UNDERGROUND PER SEPARATE PERMIT

EXISTING OVERHEAD TO BE REMOVED AND PLACED
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
4 5
3 2
1 4
5 6
6 6

POWER POLE
EXIST. 2
6 6
6 1
6 6
1 S89°37'34"E 618.55'
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'
30 15 30 60 90
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT05_Bndry_Exist_Easements.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 378-190-01-00
DIEGO COUNTY AND BEING RECORDED IN BOOK 3, PAGE 95 OF SUPERVISOR'S RECORDS.

TO PUBLIC USE ON OCTOBER 3, 1900 BY AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF SAID SAN

ALL OF THE FOREGOING PORTIONS OF SAID STREET AND AVENUES HAVING BEEN VACATED AND CLOSED WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 12 IN SAID BLOCK 16.

PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 4 IN BLOCK 16 OF SAID CAJON PARK AND THE BLOCK 17 AND THE SOUTHERLY 40.00 FEET OF SAID SIXTH STREET LYING BETWEEN THE NORTHERLY

50.00 FEET EASTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES FROM THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT 28 IN SAID

AN EASEMENT FOR ROAD AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES OVER, UNDER, UPON AND ACROSS ALL OF PARCEL 2:

LOT 19.

AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APN: 378-190-18 APN: 378-190-19 APN: 378-190-20 APN: 378-190-21 APN: 378-190-22 APN: 378-190-23 & AMY

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

MIKHAIL &
LIVAK,
MAP 16410
BLOCK 17
MAP 767
CR 14669
LOT 20
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04
LOT 19 QUILLIN, GERALD R TR
APN: 378-180-10
CERT OF COMPL. 1994-619209
DEED 2019-0125165
CR 26392
AMMY J

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00
°07'43
"E 326.55'
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
N00
°12'53
"E 326.20'
S
UMM
IT AVE

NOBLE WAY
5 4'
30'

EXISTING EASEMENTS
2 1
3 1
3 EXIST. RIGHT OF WAY
EXIST. LOT LINE
40'
2 BOUNDARY/EXISTING EASEMENTS
BOTH RECORDED APRIL29, 1958,O.R.

AND DOC. NO. 68492 IN BOOK 7058, PG26;
PER DOC. NO. 68100IN BOOK 7058, PG273;

PUBLICUTILITYPURPOSES

INGRESS & EGRESS FOR ROAD &
4 5
6 IN BOOK 7058, PG273
AS DOC.NO. 68100
PARCEL1PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
IN BOOK 7058,PG273
AS DOC. NO.68100
PARCEL2PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
IN BOOK 7058,PG26
AS DOC.NO. 68492
PARCEL1PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29,1258
IN BOOK 7058,PG26
AS DOC.NO.68492
7 PARCEL2PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
REC.06-19-1968
DOC.NO.102822

CONDUITS WITH THE RIGHT OF INRESS & EGRESS

EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES,UNDERGROUND
REC.4/8/2019
DOC.2019-0125165,O.R.

RESERVED IN DEED TOCYNTHIAANNE HIGGINS

EASEMENT FOR ROAD & PUBLICUTILITIES
4 6
5 8'
7 A
P
N:378
-230
-14
A
P
N:378
-230
-14
A
P
N:378
-230
-14
X
525
X
X
X
E
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
530

X X X X
MX
X
535
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
560
560
X
565
565
570
570
X

25.2'
24'
12' 12'

22.8'
PVT. DRIVEA
PVT.

ALLEY
2 PVT.

ALLEY
1 PVT.

ALLEY
3 2.0% 2.0%

2.0%

2.0 %

1.0% 2.0% 2.0
%
2 2.0%
.0
%
P
E 534.5
19'
19'
19'
FF 536.97
PE 536.3
FF 535.87
PE 535.2
FF 534.77
PE 534.1
FF 533.97
PE 533.3
FS 533.24
FS 536.88
FS 539.72
H=13'
H=5'
H=1'
FS 542.87
FS 538.16
40' VC
PI=532.51
10+81.00

1.5 %

1.5 %
1 8
1 1
26'
13' 13'
12' 5'
19'
1 1 1
30'
11' 11' 11' 11' 11'
FF 538.07
PE 537.4
FF 539.27
PE 538.6
11'
FF 540.37
PE 539.7
11'
FF 541.47
PE 540.8
11'
FF 542.57
PE 541.9
FF 543.67
PE 543.0
11'
9'
19'
FF 534.27
PE 533.6
FF 534.47
PE 533.8

64.8' FF 537.97
PE 537.3
24'
12' 12'
FF 538.07
PE 537.4
FF 540.77
PE 540.1
1 25' 25'1 25' 25' 25'
11' 19'

16.8'
S89°37'34"E 618.55'
125' 25'
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'
30 15 30 60 90
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT06_Site.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO

EXISTING EASEMENTS
BOTH RECORDED APRIL29, 1958, O.R.

AND DOC. NO. 68492 IN BOOK 7058,PG26;
PER DOC. NO.68100IN BOOK 7058, PG273;

PUBLICUTILITYPURPOSES

INGRESS & EGRESS FOR ROAD &
IN BOOK 7058, PG273
AS DOC. NO.68100
PARCEL1PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
IN BOOK 7058, PG273
AS DOC. NO.68100
PARCEL2PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
IN BOOK 7058,PG26
AS DOC. NO.68492
PARCEL1 PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
IN BOOK 7058, PG26
AS DOC. NO. 68492
PARCEL2PER DEED RECORDED APRIL29, 1258
REC. 06-19-1968
DOC. NO. 102822

CONDUITS WITH THE RIGHT OF INRESS & EGRESS

EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES,UNDERGROUND
REC. 4/8/2019
DOC. 2019-0125165, O.R.

RESERVED IN DEED TOCYNTHIAANNE HIGGINS

EASEMENT FOR ROAD & PUBLICUTILITIES
D9-A4 D9-A4 D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
D9-A6
MH
X
MH
MH X
X
MHX
SUMM
TI AVE
APN: 378-190-18 APN: 378-190-19 APN: 378-190-20 APN: 378-190-21 APN: 378-190-22 APN: 378-190-23 & AMY

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

MIKHAIL &
LIVAK,
MAP 16410
BLOCK 17
MAP 767
CR 14669
LOT 20
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04
LOT 19 QUILLIN, GERALD R TR
APN: 378-180-10
CERT OF COMPL. 1994-619209
DEED 2019-0125165
CR 26392
40'
80'
AMMY J

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS
12'

5.5'
EXIST. 12"ACP
WATER
PER
WS-1736
EXIST. 10"PVC
SEWER
PER
W
S
-1672
50' FIRE BUFFER

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
PER 5574-W
EXIST. 12
"PVC
WATER
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00
°07'43
"E 32

6.55'
H=5' H=4' H=2'
H=5'
FS 540.98
FS 534.80
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
3 6.5'
N00
°12'53
"E 32

6.20'
30'
19' 11'
FF 535.17
PE 534.5
FF 535.27
PE 534.6
FF 538.77
PE 538.1
FF 538.97
PE 538.3
FF 541.57
PE 540.9
FF 540.97
PE 540.3
1 16.8'

16.8'

16.8'
H=7.1' H=17'
H=0.3'
D9-A4
D9-A6
MH
X
2 1
3 4
5 6
7 11'
11'
11'
11'
11'
530
530
35 5
535
535
535
535
535
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

16.8'
6 SITE
TW BW
531.1 526.5

WALL ELEVATION TABLE
532.9 528.1
535.1 531.4
536.5 535.1
540.0 539.7
549.0 541.9
560.0 543.0
556.3 543.1
548.5 543.2
542.4 542.2
3 4
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10

CONSTRUCTION NOTES
PROPOSED 0" CURB (PVT.)
PROPOSED SIDEWALK PER RSD G-07 (PVT.)
PROPOSED 10" FIRE SERVICE W/10" RPDA (PVT.)
PROPOSED 4" DOMESTIC WATER LATERAL (PVT.)
PROPOSED 3" DOMESTIC WATER METER ASSEMBLY
PROPOSED 4" DOMESTIC WATER RP DEVICE (PVT.)
PROPOSED 8" FIRE SERVICE (PVT.)
PROPOSED 4" DOMESTIC WATER (PVT.)
PROPOSED 3" DOMESTIC WATER (PVT.)
PROPOSED 8" SEWER MAIN (PVT.)
PROPOSED 4" SEWER MAIN (PVT.)
PROPOSED CURB OUTLET PER RSD D-25 (PVT.)
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT (PVT.)
PROPOSED STREET LIGHT (PVT.)
8"
24"
24"
24"
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
2 1
S
ITE
VIS
IB
ILITY
250
FT.

S
ITE
VIS
IB
ILITY
250
FT.

LANE TRANSITION TRAFFIC STRIPING

NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)

NON-NATIVE WOODLAND (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)
(HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)

DISTURBED DIEGAN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB

DIEGAN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT (SUMMIT AVE.)
X X
TW BW
PROVIDE BARRICADE PER SDRSD M-9
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20

PROTECT IN PLACE

PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FENCE

EXISTING BROW DITCH
20 6
6 21
26 26
15 16
15 21
21 22
13 15
7 8
9 15 18
16 15
13 4
5 16
14 3
10 11
18 16
15 4
12 24
16 16 16
15 15
15 13
4 4 4
3 14
12 4
3 14
12 4
5 11
24 14
18 10
11 5
4'
30'
19 SETBACK
2' GRADING
25 27
27 28
29 30
31 28
30 31
29 29
29 30
28 30
30 32
32 PER STD. DWG. PW-38
PROPOSED 30' DWY.
4 6
7 33
34 35
34 33
(TC 525.21/FL 524.73)

MATCH EXISTING
& SIDEWALK

BEGIN CURB, GUTTER

THISSHEET

SEEDETAIL'A'
24" @ 0.9%

DETAIL'A'

NO SCALE
FL 529.2
FL 529.1
TOP OF WEIR: 431.0
RIM 433.5
C
A B
A
B
C
36 36 GREEN STREET ELEMENT (WQ TREE WELL)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CLEAN OUT (PVT.) (RSD D-09)
(MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM-MWS-L-6-8-7'-5"-V-HC)
PROPOSED S.D. WATER QUALITY TREATMENT DEVICE (PVT.)
PROPOSED S.D. DETENTION VAULT (PVT.)(STORM TRAP OR EQUAL) PROPOSED BROW DITCH TYPE-B (PVT.) (RSD D-75)
11 11
10 10
10 28
35 8"
FL 526.2
8"
FL 526.04
8"
FL 525.54
8"
FL 525.42
24"
FL 526.22
37 PROVIDE TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE
37 38 STRIPED CENTERLINE
38 38
38 1
1 13
1 23
7' CURB OPNING
FS 529.0
FL 525.00
TC 525.50
RSD D-25 TYPE-B

CURB OUTLET PER
PDMWD EASEMENT NOTE:

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

EASEMENT WILL BE SHOWN ON ALL FINAL
ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE TO SAID FACILITIES. SAID

TO PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FOR

BE LOCATED WITHIN A UTILITY EASEMENT DEDICATED

SHOWN HEREON WITHIN PRIVATE PROPERTY ARE TO

AIR-VAC VALVES, AND ALL RELATED APPURTENANCES

HYDRANTS, WATER METERS, BLOW OFF VALVES,
ALL DISTRICT FACILITIES, I.E. WATER MAINS, FIRE
1 23
1 PROPOSED 6" CURB AND GUTTER PER RSD G-02
PROPOSED 5' SIDEWALK PER RSD G-07
1 2
1 2

PARKING NOTE

INDICATES PARKING COUNT
#
15 8"
(PROVIDE "NO DUMPING" STENCILING, SEE DETAIL, SHT. 8)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN INLET (PVT.)
(PROVIDE "NO DUMPING" STENCILING, SEE DETAIL, SHT. 8)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN TYPE-B CURB INLET (PVT.) (RSD D-09) WQ TREATMENT BASIN (SEE DETAIL 'B', SHT 8)
SHEET8

SEEDETAIL'B'
26 26
PROP. 4" ROLLED CURB AND GUTTER. SEE DET., SHT. 3 (PVT.) PROP. STORM DRAIN (PVT.) (18" HDPE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE) PROPOSED REVERSE CURB OUTLET PER MOD. RSD D-25 (PVT.)
PROP. STREET LIGHTING STANDARD PER DWG. PW-20 (PUBLIC)
PROVIDE REFLECTIVE MARKERS OVER TOP OF PROP. AC BERM
39 40 3' RIBBON GUTTER (TYPE-2), SEE DETAIL, SHT. 3
3' RIBBON GUTTER (TYPE-1), SEE DETAIL, SHT. 3
39 40
41 10'(W)X3'(H) BOX CULVERT PER RSD D-76 (SEE DETAILS SHT. 9) D
D
41 BW 535.8
TW 538.5
BW 535.0
TW 537.5
2-TON ROCK
28"/(W) X 24'(L) X 5.4' (T)
PER RSD D-40

RIP-RAP PAD
1\2-TON ROCK
20"/(W) X 5'(L) X 3.5' (T)
PER RSD D-40

RIP-RAP PAD
TB 540.17
MATCH EXIST.

END TEMP 6" AC BERM
(FS 539.67)
FL 534.63
TC 535.13
& SIDEWALK

END CURB, GUTTER
36 FS 532.90
TB 539.40
END TEMP 6" AC BERM

FOR SECTION D-D
SEE SHEET 2
24'
12' 12'
PVT. DRIVEA
PVT.

ALLEY
2 PVT.

ALLEY
1 PVT.

ALLEY
3 13'
30'
24'
12' 12'
11' 19'
S89°37'34"E 618.55'
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'
30 15 30 60 90
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT07_Fire_Access_Exhibit.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

P
AASHTO 2018 (US)
P
AASHTO 2018 (US)
(c) 2024 Transoft Solutions,Inc.Allrights reserved.

A
erial,HD
Ladder 105'
Custom
(c) 2024 Transoft Solutions, Inc. Allrights reserved.

SUMM
TI AVE
APN: 378-190-18 APN: 378-190-19 APN: 378-190-20 APN: 378-190-21 APN: 378-190-22 APN: 378-190-23 & AMY

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

MIKHAIL &
LIVAK,
MAP 16410
BLOCK 17
MAP 767
CR 14669
LOT 20
APN: 378-190-01
APN: 378-190-04
LOT 19 QUILLIN, GERALD R TR
APN: 378-180-10
CERT OF COMPL. 1994-619209
DEED 2019-0125165
CR 26392
AMMY J

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00
°07'43
"E 32

6.55'
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
N00
°12'53
"E 32

6.20'
30'
19' 11'
530
35 5
535
535
535
535
535
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560
7 THE FIRE CODE OFFICIAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

CURB STENCILING. EXACT PLACEMENT SHALL BE APPROVED BY
(OR OTHER APPROVED SPACING), PLACED IN BETWEEN THE
PAINTING CURBS RED. SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED EVERY 75 FEET

INDICATING THE SAME CAN BE INSTALLED IN-LIEU OF
IN FRONT OF GARAGES ALONG FIRE LANES AS WELL. SIGNS

LETTERS SHALL BE PAINTED ON THE CURB OR ASPHALT
OF THE FIRE LANE. RED STRIPES WITH WHITE STENCILED
PARKING - FIRE LANE" EVERY 30 FEET ALONG PORTIONS
RED WITH WHITE-STENCILED LETTERS INDICATING "NO
1) FIRE LANE(S) SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY PAINTING CURBS

FIRE LANE NOTE

FIRE ACCESS EXHIBIT
LEGEND:

RADIUS = 150'
FIRE HOSE PULL (L=150')

FIRE TRUCK TURNING (HOOK & LADDER)
150'
150' 150' 150' 150'
150' 150' 150' 150' 150'
PVT.

ALLEY
3 145.6'
126.9'

FIRE ACCESS
FIRE HYDRANT (PVT) PER WAS WF-01
127.0'

9.4 FT

19.4 FT

30.2 FT

9.5 FT

30.3 FT

40.2 FT
ACHIEVED STEERING ANGLE:
(69FT LENGTH)
(100' HDL TILLER TRUCK)

PIERCE MANUFACTURING
STEERING LOCK ANGLE=39.9°
30° SWEEP ANGLE: 20.6°
60° SWEEP ANGLE: 30.2°
90° SWEEP ANGLE: 34.9°
120° SWEEP ANGLE: 37.3°
150° SWEEP ANGLE: 38.5°
180° SWEEP ANGLE: 39.2°
180
150
120
90 OUTSIDE SWEPT PATH

INSIDE SWEPT PATH
60 30

9.8 FT
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT08_WQ_Details.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
9" ASTM NO. 57 STONE
3" ASTM NO. 33 SAND
18" BIOFILTRATION SOIL MEDIA
3" NON-FLOATING MULCH
NTS
3" ASTM NO. 8 STONE
24" X 24" BROOKS BOX

OR EQUIVALENT
BMP-2

BIOFILTRATION BASIN CROSS-SECTION
3" DEAD STORAGE
6" PERFORATED PVC

UNDERDRAIN PIPE

IMPERMEABLE LINER

PER GEOTECHNICAL

RECOMMENDATIONS
(6")
& FREEBOARD

CONVEYANCE
PONDING DEPTH (6")

WATER QUALITY
(FG 530.05)

BASIN FG ELEV

NOT TO SCALE

CURB CUT & TRANSITION DETAIL

TRANSITION
2' CURB
CUT
2' CURB

TRANSITION
2' CURB

JOINT FILLER

BITUMINOUS

JOINT FILLER

BITUMINOUS

TYP CURB
END OF
(TYP)
TOP OF 6" CURB

FL (TYP)

JOINT FILLER

BITUMINOUS

TYP CURB
END OF

PER PLAN

PAVEMENT SECTION
PVT. DRIVEA

PREVENTION SIGNAGE

STORM DRAIN POLLUTION

WQ TREATMENT DETAILS
8 SUM
M
TI AVE
FL 527.34
24"RCP

ROOF DRAINAGE

FOR FUTURE

CONNECTION

POINT OF
FL 530.45
RIM 532.7
FL 530.30
(IN)
FL 527.25
(OUT)
FL 526.75
(IN)
FL 527.25
BW 530.05
TW 534.5
BW 530.05
TW 534.5
BW 530.05
TW 531.1
FL 527.3
TG 530.55
BW 530.05
TW 531.5
FG 530.05

DETAIL 'B'
SCALE: 1'=5'

NO SCALE
2'
PER SDG 151

CURB & GUTTER
6" TYPE "G"

CURB OPENING WITH RIPRAP
2'
2'

SIZE PER PLAN

WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN
3'x2' RIP RAP APRON

CURB OPENING DETAILS
6" PVC
6" PVC
BMP-2
(SEE DET.THIS SHT.)
c 2020 RickEngineering Company
17-MAR-2025 16:54
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT09_WQ_Details.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO

WQ TREATMENT DETAILS
9 NTS

GREEN STREET ELEMENT SECTION

PLAN VIEW
TYPE 1

OPENING
CURB
12"
LINER
30 MIL PLASTIC

SEE BELOW

SPLASH PAD

AGGREGATE
NO. 2 COURSE

NON-COMPACTED
3" MULCH

OR BIOFILTRATION

DISPERSION AREA
LINER

PLASTIC
30 MIL
6" 6"
12"
NTS
& DISPERSION AREAS

BIOFILTRATION BASINS

2. CURB-CUT

SEE DETAIL, THIS SHEET

1. NON-COMPACTED NO. 2 COURSE AGGREGATE

SEE DETAIL, THIS SHEET
NOTES:

SUBGRADE
UNDISTURBED 8" 3"

STREET FLOW
4 MAX
1 1
1 1
1 6" SCARIFIED SOIL
TC
4" MAXPLANSPER
(NOTE 1)

SPLASH PAD
LINER
30 MIL PLASTIC
(NOTE 2)

CURB CUT
LINER
30 MIL PLASTIC
6"

PER DESIGN PLANS

MULCH OR ROCK LAYER
3" SHEDDED HARDWOOD

SPECIFICATIONS

PROJECT PLANS AND

COMPACTION PER

MATERIAL AND AMENDED SOIL
1' TYP 3.5' TYP

4.5'

PER PLAN

SECTION

STRUTURAL

ROADWAY
2"
2"
EXIST.

GROUND
2020
Rick
Engineering
Com
pany c
17-MAR-2025 16:55
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT10_Summit_Int_Imps.dgn AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO
SDD-116~5' B INLET
D9-A4
SDD-116~5' B INLET
M
H
X
X
X
X
X
EP
X
EP
10 OF
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS 10

CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 80'
WIDTH
PAVED
EXIST.

WATER (5573-W)
EXIST. 12" PVC
WATER (1673)
EXIST. 12" PVC
5 5
DITCH
BROW
EXIST.

PER TM 3915-1
EXIST. 83"X57" CMPA

BE RELOCATED

PEDESTAL TO
EXIST. ELEC.

DRAIN

CIPP STORM
EXIST. 54"
7 6
2 3
4 10
7 6
8 9
DRAIN

CMPA STORM
EXIST. 83"X57"
PROPOSED TEMPORARY 6" AC BERM
PROPOSED 6" CURB AND GUTTER PER RSD G-02
PROPOSED TYPE-A CURB RAMP PER RSD G-27A
PORTION OF EXIST. BROW DITCH TO BE REMOVED
PROPOSED TYPE-F CATCH BASIN PER RSD D-07
10 EXIST. 9' TYPE-B INLET TO REMAIN
EXIST. STREET SIGN TO BE RELOCATED
PROPOSED CROSS-GUTTER PER RSD G-12
PROPOSED TYPE-B INLET PER RSD D-02
REPLACE WITH TYPE-A4 C.O. PER RSD D-09
EXIST. TYPE-F CATCH BASIN TO BE REMOVED,
R.O.W.

EXIST.

R.O.W.

EXIST.
4" B.O.

EXIST.

TO BE REMOVED
EXIST. CROSS GUTTER
7 1
PROPOSED 18" RCP SD
18" RCP SD

PROPOSED
R.O.W.

EXIST.

GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 10'
10 5 0 10 20 30
MATCH EXIST.

END IMPROVEMENTS
MATCH EXIST.

END IMPROVEMENTS

IMPROVEMENTS
TO MATCH EXIST.
5' TRANSITION

IMPROVEMENTS
TO MATCH EXIST.
5' TRANSITION
BEGIN 6" AC BERM
END 6" CURB AND GUTTER

TO GRADE

ADJUST MH

TO REMAIN

TYPE-A CLEAN-OUT
EXIST. 8'X8'
BEGIN 6" AC BERM
END 6" CURB AND GUTTER
40' 40'
40'
2 0'
1 7
18" RCP SD

PROPOSED
R.O.W.

EXIST.
24'

AC PAVEMENT

PROPOSED
SUMMITAVE.

PR
NI
C
ESS
JOANN
RD
.
3'

AS SHOWN

WATER MAIN
ADJUST 12" PVC
11 11
SEE DETAILS, SHEET 15
PROPOSED "GREEN STREET ELEMENT"
11 11 11
X
525
X
X
X
E
X
E
X
X
X
X
X
530

X X X X
MX
X
535
540
540
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
545
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
560
560
X
565
565
570
570
X

25.2'
24'
12' 12'

22.8'
PVT. DRIVEA
PVT.

ALLEY
2 PVT.

ALLEY
1 PVT.

ALLEY
3 2.0% 2.0%

2.0%

2.0 %

1.5 %

64.8' FF 537.97
PE 537.3
24'
12' 12'
FF 538.07
PE 537.4
FF 540.77
PE 540.1
1 25' 25'1 25' 25' 25'
11' 19'

16.8'
S89°37'34"E 618.55'
125' 25'
0 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30'
30 15 30 60 90
c 2020
Rick
Engineering Com
pany
17-MAR-2025 16:55
\\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\SD CorpStds 2005.dscript \\cp.rickeng.com\projects\C19500\19877_WarmingtonSummit\Civil\PlanSets\TM\19877A_SummitAve_TM_SHT11_Interim_Street_Imp.dgn OF
City of Santee, California
AVENUE
SUMMIT
TM NO. 2023-0003/DR 2023-0007
11 5620 FRIARS ROAD
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
619-291-0707
rickengineering.com

SANTA CLARITA PHOENIX TUCSON LAS VEGAS DENVER

SAN DIEGO ORANGE RIVERSIDE SACRAMENTO SAN LUIS OBISPO

EXISTING EASEMENTS
BOTH RECORDED APRIL29, 1958, O.R.

AND DOC. NO. 68492 IN BOOK 7058,PG26;
PER DOC. NO.68100IN BOOK 7058, PG273;

PUBLICUTILITYPURPOSES

CONDUITS WITH THE RIGHT OF INRESS & EGRESS

EASEMENT FOR POLE LINES,UNDERGROUND
REC. 4/8/2019
DOC. 2019-0125165, O.R.

RESERVED IN DEED TOCYNTHIAANNE HIGGINS

CHRISTOPHER

ELLISON,
NICOLE

DAVID &

TINGLE,

LOVELLA
MESINA

MICHAEL&
LOUNG

VICTORIA

BRIAN &

JORGENSON
COLIN

GOVERNSKI

MEGAN E

AARON M &
SIMS
12'

5.5'
EXIST. 12"ACP
WATER
PER
WS-1736
EXIST. 10"PVC
SEWER
PER
W
S
-1672
50' FIRE BUFFER

QUILLIN, HIGGINS, CYNTHIA A
PER 5574-W
EXIST. 12
"PVC
WATER
N89°39'30"W 618.06'
N00
°07'43
"E 32

6.55'
H=5' H=4' H=2'
H=5'
FS 540.98
FS 534.80
L
O
T 16
M
A
P 767
3 6.5'
N00
°12'53
"E 32

6.20'
30'
19' 11'
FF 535.17
PE 534.5
FF 535.27
PE 534.6
FF 538.77
PE 538.1
FF 538.97
PE 538.3
FF 541.57
PE 540.9
FF 540.97
PE 540.3
1 16.8'

16.8'

16.8'
H=7.1' H=17'
H=0.3'
D9-A4
D9-A6
MH
X
TW BW
531.1 526.5

WALL ELEVATION TABLE
532.9 528.1
535.1 531.4
536.5 535.1
540.0 539.7
549.0 541.9
560.0 543.0
556.3 543.1
548.5 543.2
542.4 542.2
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10

LANE TRANSITION TRAFFIC STRIPING

NON-VEGETATED CHANNEL (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)

NON-NATIVE WOODLAND (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)
(HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)

DISTURBED DIEGAN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB

DIEGAN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES)
LIMITS OF PROPOSED AC PAVEMENT (SUMMIT AVE.)
X X
TW BW
PROVIDE BARRICADE PER SDRSD M-9
21 22
23 24
26 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 25
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 24" @ 0.9%

DETAIL'A'

NO SCALE
FL 529.2
FL 529.1
TOP OF WEIR: 431.0
RIM 433.5
36 GREEN STREET ELEMENT (WQ TREE WELL)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CLEAN OUT (PVT.) (RSD D-09)
(MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM-MWS-L-6-8-7'-5"-V-HC)
PROPOSED S.D. WATER QUALITY TREATMENT DEVICE (PVT.)
PROPOSED S.D. DETENTION VAULT (PVT.)(STORM TRAP OR EQUAL) PROPOSED BROW DITCH TYPE-B (PVT.) (RSD D-75)
8"
FL 526.2
8"
FL 526.04
8"
FL 525.54
8"
FL 525.42
24"
FL 526.22
37 PROVIDE TRASH CAPTURE DEVICE
38 STRIPED CENTERLINE
7' CURB OPNING
FS 529.0
FL 525.00
TC 525.50
RSD D-25 TYPE-B

CURB OUTLET PER
PDMWD EASEMENT NOTE:

CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

EASEMENT WILL BE SHOWN ON ALL FINAL
ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE TO SAID FACILITIES. SAID

TO PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FOR

BE LOCATED WITHIN A UTILITY EASEMENT DEDICATED

SHOWN HEREON WITHIN PRIVATE PROPERTY ARE TO

AIR-VAC VALVES, AND ALL RELATED APPURTENANCES

HYDRANTS, WATER METERS, BLOW OFF VALVES,
ALL DISTRICT FACILITIES, I.E. WATER MAINS, FIRE
PROPOSED 6" CURB AND GUTTER PER RSD G-02
PROPOSED 5' SIDEWALK PER RSD G-07
(PROVIDE "NO DUMPING" STENCILING, SEE DETAIL, SHT. 8)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN INLET (PVT.)
(PROVIDE "NO DUMPING" STENCILING, SEE DETAIL, SHT. 8)
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN TYPE-B CURB INLET (PVT.) (RSD D-09) WQ TREATMENT BASIN (SEE DETAIL 'B', SHT 8)
PROP. 4" ROLLED CURB AND GUTTER. SEE DET., SHT. 3 (PVT.) PROP. STORM DRAIN (PVT.) (18" HDPE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE) PROPOSED REVERSE CURB OUTLET PER MOD. RSD D-25 (PVT.)
PROP. STREET LIGHTING STANDARD PER DWG. PW-20 (PUBLIC)
PROVIDE REFLECTIVE MARKERS OVER TOP OF PROP. AC BERM
39 40 3' RIBBON GUTTER (TYPE-2), SEE DETAIL, SHT. 3
3' RIBBON GUTTER (TYPE-1), SEE DETAIL, SHT. 3
3 4
8"
24"
24"
24"
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
2 1
S
ITE
VIS
IB
ILITY
250
FT.

S
ITE
VIS
IB
ILITY
250
FT.
25 PROTECT IN PLACE

PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FENCE

EXISTING BROW DITCH
20 6
6 21
26 15
16 15
21 21
22 13
15 7
8 9
15 18
16 15
13 4
5 16
14 3
10 11
18 16
15 4
12 24
16 16 16
15 15
15 13
4 4 4
3 14
12 4
3 14
12 4
5 11
24 14
18 10
11 5
4'
30'
19 SETBACK
2' GRADING
27 30
31 29
29 29 30
28 30
30 PER STD. DWG. PW-38
PROPOSED 30' DWY.
4 6
7 33
(TC 525.21/FL 524.73)

MATCH EXISTING
& SIDEWALK

BEGIN CURB, GUTTER

THISSHEET

SEEDETAIL'A'
24" @ 0.9%
FL 529.2
FL 529.1
C
A B
A
B
C
36 11 11
10 10
10 8"
FL 525.42
37 38 38
38 1
1 13
1 23
7' CURB OPNING
FS 529.0
FL 525.00
TC 525.50
RSD D-25 TYPE-B

CURB OUTLET PER
1 23
1 1 2

PARKING NOTE

INDICATES PARKING COUNT
#
15 8"
SHEET8

SEEDETAIL'B'
26 26
39 40
1\2-TON ROCK
20"/(W) X 5'(L) X 3.5' (T)
PER RSD D-40

RIP-RAP PAD
2 1
3 4
5 6
7 11'
11'
11'
11'
11'
530
530
35 5
535
535
535
535
535
540
540
540
540
540
545
545
550
550
555
555
560
560

16.8'
11 INTERIM SUMMIT AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
GUTTER
CONC. RIBBON
TEMP. 3'
MATCH EXIST.
6" AC BERM
END TEMP.

TEMP. 6" AC BERM
& SIDEWALK. BEGIN

END CURB, GUTTER
32 NOISE ANALYSIS REPORT

SUMMIT TOWNHOMES
Santee, CA
October 26, 2023 DRAFT
Prepared for:

Warmington Residential
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, CA 92636
Prepared by:
dBF Associates, Inc.
3129 Tiger Run Court, Suite 202
Carlsbad, CA 92010
619-609-0712
ã dBF Associates, Inc. 2023
i
Executive Summary.................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Environmental Noise Background ................................................................................ 3

2.0 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 6

2.1 City of Santee.......................................................................................................................6

3.0 Environmental Setting and Existing Conditions.......................................................... 7

3.1 Existing Conditions..............................................................................................................7

3.2 Sound Level Measurement ..................................................................................................7

4.0 Potential Noise Impacts ................................................................................................. 9

4.1 Vehicular Traffic Noise .......................................................................................................9

4.2 Construction Noise.............................................................................................................11

5.0 References..................................................................................................................... 13

6.0 List of Preparers ........................................................................................................... 14 Tables
Table 1. Sound Levels of Typical Noise Sources and Noise Environments................................................. 4 Table 2. Sound Level Measurement (dBA) .................................................................................................. 7 Table 3. Grading Noise Source Levels ....................................................................................................... 11 Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map.................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Sound Level Measurement Location............................................................................................. 8 Figure 3. Future Exterior Noise Levels (Ldn)............................................................................................. 10 Appendices
Appendix A. Roadway Noise Calculations
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This analysis evaluates noise associated with the implementation of the proposed Summit Townhomes project. The project proposes development of 50 townhomes in ten three-story buildings. The project site is located at the southeast corner of Summit Avenue and the future extension of Magnolia Avenue, in the City of Santee, California (Figure 1).

Future exterior noise levels would be 57 dBA Ldn or lower at all open space areas and building façades in the project, and considered Normally Acceptable at multifamily residential land uses. Because the project is not exposed to noise levels over 65 dBA Ldn, an interior noise analysis is not necessary or required.

Project construction would occur during allowable times, and generate noise levels up to 71 dBA Leq at residential property lines. Because project construction noise levels would not exceed 75 dBA at sensitive receptors, a Construction Noise Best Management Plan is not necessary or required. 2 Figure 1. Vicinity Map
3 1.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE BACKGROUND
Noise is generally defined as loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired sound typically associated with human activity and that interferes with or disrupts normal activities. The human environment is characterized by a certain consistent noise level which varies with each area. This is called ambient noise.

Although exposure to high noise levels has been demonstrated to cause hearing loss, the principal human response to environmental noise is annoyance. The response of individuals to similar noise events is diverse and influenced by the type of noise, perceived importance of the noise and its appropriateness in the setting, time of day and type of activity during which the noise occurs, and sensitivity of the individual.

Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations that travel through a medium, such as air, and are sensed by the human ear. Sound is generally characterized by several variables, including frequency and intensity. Frequency describes the sound’s pitch and is measured in cycles per second, or hertz (Hz), whereas intensity describes the sound’s loudness and is measured in decibels (dB). Decibels are measured using a logarithmic scale. A sound level of 0 dB is approximately the threshold of human hearing and is barely audible under extremely quiet listening conditions. Normal speech has a sound level of approximately 60 dB. Sound levels above about 120 dB begin to be felt inside the human ear as discomfort and eventually as pain at still higher levels. Studies have shown that the smallest perceptible change in sound level for a person with normal hearing sensitivity is approximately 3 dBA. A change of at least 5 dBA would be noticeable and would likely evoke a community reaction. A 10-dBA increase is subjectively heard as a doubling in loudness and would cause a community response [Caltrans 2013a].

Sound levels of typical noise sources and environments are provided in Table 1.

Because of the logarithmic nature of the decibel unit, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted directly and are somewhat cumbersome to handle mathematically. A simple rule is useful, however, in dealing with sound levels. If a sound’s intensity is doubled, the sound level increases by 3 dB, regardless of the initial sound level. Thus, for example, 60 dB + 60 dB = 63 dB, and 80 dB + 80 dB = 83 dB. The normal human ear can detect sounds that range in frequency from about 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz.

However, all sounds in this wide range of frequencies are not heard equally well by the human ear, which is most sensitive to frequencies in the range of 1,000 Hz to 4,000 Hz. This frequency dependence can be taken into account by applying a correction to each frequency range to approximate the human ear’s sensitivity within each range. This is called A-weighting and is commonly used in measurements of community environmental noise. The A-weighted sound pressure level (abbreviated as dBA) is the sound level with the “A-weighting” frequency correction. In practice, the level of a noise source is conveniently measured using a sound level meter that includes a filter corresponding to the dBA curve. 4 Table 1. Sound Levels of Typical Noise Sources and Noise Environments Noise Source
(at Given Distance) Noise Environment A-WeightedSound Level Human Judgment
of Noise Loudness
(Relative to Reference
Loudness of 70 Decibels*)
Military Jet Takeoff
with Afterburner (50 ft) Carrier Flight Deck 140 Decibels 128 times as loud Civil Defense Siren (100 ft) 130 64 times as loud
Commercial Jet Take-off (200 ft) 120 32 times as loud
Threshold of Pain
Pile Driver (50 ft) Rock Music Concert
Inside Subway Station (New York) 110 16 times as loud
Ambulance Siren (100 ft)
Newspaper Press (5 ft)
Gas Lawn Mower (3 ft)
100 8 times as loud
Very Loud
Food Blender (3 ft)
Propeller Plane Flyover (1,000 ft)
Diesel Truck (150 ft)
Boiler Room
Printing Press Plant 90 4 times as loud
Garbage Disposal (3 ft) Noisy Urban Daytime 80 2 times as loud Passenger Car, 65 mph (25 ft)
Living Room Stereo (15 ft)
Vacuum Cleaner (10 ft)
Commercial Areas 70 Reference Loudness
Moderately Loud
Normal Speech (5 ft)
Air Conditioning Unit (100 ft)
Data Processing Center
Department Store 60 1/2 as loud
Light Traffic (100 ft) Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime 50 1/4 as loud
Bird Calls (distant) Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 1/8 as loud Quiet
Soft Whisper (5 ft) Library and Bedroom at Night
Quiet Rural Nighttime 30 1/16 as loud
Broadcast and Recording Studio 20 1/32 as loud
Just Audible
0 1/64 as loud
Threshold of Hearing
Source: Compiled by dBF Associates, Inc.
5 Because community noise fluctuates over time, a single measure called the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) is often used to describe the time-varying character of community noise. The Leq is the energy-averaged A-weighted sound level during a measured time interval, and is equal to the level of a continuous steady sound containing the same total acoustical energy over the averaging time period as the actual timevarying sound. Additionally, it is often desirable to know the acoustic range of the noise source being measured. This is accomplished through the Lmax and Lmin indicators, which represent the root-meansquare maximum and minimum noise levels obtained during the measurement interval. The Lmin value obtained for a particular monitoring location is often called the “acoustic floor” for that location.

To describe the time-varying character of environmental noise, the statistical noise descriptors L10, L50, and L90 are commonly used. They are the noise levels equaled or exceeded during 10, 50, and 90 percent of a stated time, respectively. Sound levels associated with L10 typically describe transient or short-term events, whereas levels associated with L90 describe the steady-state (or most prevalent) noise conditions.

The Day-Night Level (Ldn) is a descriptor representing the 24-hour, time-weighted, annual average A-weighted noise level. Noise occurring in the nighttime period (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) is penalized by adding 10 dB; this weighting is intended to reflect a typical person’s increased sensitivity to noise during late-night and early morning hours. This descriptor is used by the City of Santee to evaluate land-use compatibility with regard to noise.
6 2.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

2.1 City of Santee

2.1.1 General Plan
The City of Santee requires new projects to meet noise level standards as established in the Noise Element of its General Plan [City of Santee]. In the Residential – Multi Family land use category, noise levels up to 65 dBA Ldn are considered Normally Acceptable; noise levels up to 70 dBA Ldn are considered Conditionally Acceptable. Development Standard #2 indicates that, if the project is exposed to noise levels over 65 dBA Ldn, the building structure must attenuate exterior noise in occupied areas to 45 dBA Ldn or below.

The Housing Element of the General Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan requires demonstration that construction activities would not exceed 75 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptor, or a Construction Noise Best Management Practice Plan to minimize noise.

2.1.2 Municipal Code
The City of Santee does not regulate construction noise levels, only times of day; per Santee Municipal Code section 5.04.090, construction may occur on non-holidays, Monday through Saturday, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Many jurisdictions in San Diego County, including the City of San Diego, limit construction noise at occupied residential property lines to a 12-hour average (Leq-12h) of 75 A-weighted decibels (dBA).
7 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
Noise-sensitive land uses are locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Residences, schools, hospitals, guest lodging, libraries, and some passive recreation areas would each be considered noise-sensitive and may warrant unique measures for protection from intruding noise.

3.1 Existing Conditions
The project site is currently developed with a single-family residence. Noise-sensitive land uses in the project area include single-family residences to the north, south, and east; and a church to the southwest.

The primary existing noise source in the vicinity of the project is vehicular traffic on Summit Avenue.

Summit Avenue is a two-way unclassified roadway adjacent to the project site on the west. Its speed limit is unposted. There are no traffic counts available for Summit Avenue in the project area.

3.2 Sound Level Measurement
A sound level measurement was conducted to estimate the existing acoustical environment in the project area. A RION Model NL-31 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Type 1 Integrating Sound Level Meter (SLM) was used as the data-collection device. The meter was mounted on a tripod roughly 5 feet above ground to simulate the average height of the human ear. The microphone was fitted with a windscreen. The sound level meter was calibrated before the measurement period. Simultaneous traffic counts were conducted during the measurement period. The measurement results are summarized in Table 2 and correspond to the locations depicted on Figure 2.

Table 2. Sound Level Measurement (dBA)
Measurement Location Date / Time Leq Lmin Lmax L10 L50 L90 Traffic ML1 West project
property line
2023-10-11
09:55 – 10:10 47.8 35.3 68.9 48.1 41.0 37.3 7 cars
8 Figure 2. Sound Level Measurement Location
9 4.0 POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS

4.1 Vehicular Traffic Noise
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 was used to estimate traffic noise levels. The modeling effort considered the peak-hour traffic volume, average estimated vehicle speed, and estimated vehicle mix, i.e., percentage of cars, medium trucks, heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles. The peak hour traffic noise level was considered equivalent to the Ldn [24 CFR §51.106]. Future vehicular traffic calculations are summarized in Appendix A.

Sound levels caused by line sources (i.e., variable or moving sound sources such as traffic) generally decrease at a rate of 3 to 4.5 dBA when the distance from the road is doubled, depending on the ground surface hardness between the source and the receiving property [Caltrans 2013a]. The model assumed “hard soil” propagation conditions, which corresponds to a drop-off rate of approximately 3 dBA per doubling of distance. The actual sound level at any receptor location is dependent upon such factors as the source-to-receptor distance and the presence of intervening structures (walls and buildings), barriers, and topography. The noise attenuating effects of changes in elevation, topography, and intervening structures were not included in the model. Therefore, the modeling effort is considered a worst-case representation of the roadway noise.

4.1.1 Traffic Noise Affecting the Project Site
The future noise environment would be a result of vehicular traffic on Summit Avenue and the future extension of Magnolia Avenue.

Summit Avenue is planned to be a Collector Residential roadway. Summit Avenue is projected to carry a future (year 2050) ADT volume of 100 vehicles between Magnolia Avenue and Princess Joann Road [SANDAG 2023]. The existing vehicle speed of 25 mph and traffic mix of 100% cars were assumed to remain constant in the future.

Magnolia Avenue is planned to be a Parkway roadway, adjacent to the project site on the north. Magnolia Avenue is projected to carry a future (year 2050) ADT volume of 2,300 vehicles east and west of Summit Avenue [SANDAG 2023]. Magnolia Avenue has a planned speed limit of 40 mph. It was assumed that the vehicle mix on Magnolia Avenue would be 100% cars.

The open space areas in the project are the Neighborhood Amenity at the northwest corner and two paseos between northern buildings. Noise levels at the outdoor use areas would be approximately 57 dBA Ldn at the Neighborhood Amenity, and less at all building façades and other outdoor use areas. These noise levels are considered Normally Acceptable at multifamily residential land uses by the City of Santee. Refer to Figure 3 for details.

Because the project is not exposed to noise levels over 65 dBA Ldn, an interior noise analysis is not necessary or required.
10 Figure 3. Future Exterior Noise Levels (Ldn)
11 4.2 Construction Noise
The primary noise source from project construction would be from site preparation. Grading could require the use of heavy equipment such as bulldozers, loaders, and scrapers. No blasting would be necessary.

Haul trucks could be used to import or export fill to or from the project sites. The project would not utilize pile driving. No vibratory equipment would be used.

Construction of the project would generate a short-term temporary increase in noise in the project area.

The increase in noise level would be primarily experienced close to the noise source. The magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, noise level generated by various pieces of construction equipment, duration of the construction phase, acoustical shielding and distance between the noise source and receiver.

Construction activity and delivery of construction materials and equipment would be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., except on Sundays or holidays.

This project would implement conventional construction techniques and equipment. Standard equipment such as scrapers, graders, backhoes, loaders, tractors, cranes, and miscellaneous trucks would be used for construction of most project facilities. Sound levels of typical construction equipment range from approximately 65–95 dBA at 50 feet from the source [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 1971]. Worst-case noise levels are typically associated with grading. Noise sources associated with grading of the proposed project, and associated noise levels, are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Grading Noise Source Levels
Noise Source Noise Level Number
Bulldozer 80 dBA at 10 meters 1
Backhoe 69 dBA at 10 meters 1
Water Truck 81 dBA at 10 meters 1
Roller 73 dBA at 10 meters 1
Source: DEFRA 2005
The Datakustik Cadna/A industrial noise prediction model was used to estimate construction noise levels.

It was assumed that up to two pieces of equipment at any given time would operate continuously within the grading area boundary. No correction was applied for downtime associated with equipment maintenance, breaks, or similar situations. No noise reduction related to ground effects, atmospheric absorption, or intervening topography was included in the model.

The closest occupied residential properties are located adjacent to the project site on the north, south, and east. Without noise abatement, under the assumptions detailed above, project construction activity would produce noise levels ranging from approximately 68-71 dBA Leq at the property lines of the residences. 12 Construction would occur during the days and hours proscribed by the City of Santee Municipal Code.

Construction noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptor would not exceed 75 dBA. As such, a Construction Noise Best Management Plan is not necessary or required. 13 5.0 REFERENCES
24 CFR §51.106. 2019. April 1.

City of Santee. General Plan.

Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). 2005. Update of Noise Database for Prediction of Noise on Construction and Open Sites.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2004. Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5. February.

Harris, Cyril M. 1998. Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Third Edition.

Acoustical Society of America. Woodbury, NY.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1996a. ISO 1996/1. Acoustics – Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise – Part 1: Basic Quantities and Procedures. 1996b. ISO 1996-2. Acoustics – Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise – Part 2:

Acquisition of Data Pertinent to Land Use.
1996c. ISO 1996-3. Acoustics – Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise – Part 3:

Application to Noise Limits.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2023. Transportation Forecast Information Center.

Forecast Series ABM2+/2021 RP (Activity-Based Regional Transportation Model for the 2021 Regional Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy).
14 6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
__________________________________
Steven Fiedler, INCE
Principal, dBF Associates, Inc.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

ROADWAY TRAFFIC CALCULATIONS
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200 | Irvine, California 92618 | t: (949) 878-3509 www.tjwengineering.com
March 28, 2024
Mr. Matthew Esquivel

WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL
3090 Pullman Street
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
SUBJECT: Summit Avenue Trip Generation Analysis and VMT Screening, City of Santee Dear Mr. Esquivel,
TJW Engineering, Inc. (TJW) is pleased to submit this Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening for the proposed project located at 10939 Summit Avenue. The proposed project includes 50 3-story townhome units. A site plan is attached for reference. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the project Trip Generation Analysis and VMT Screening.

Proposed Project
The proposed site is located at 10939 Summit Avenue. The proposed project includes 50 3-story townhome units. Site access will be provided via Summit Avenue.

Trip Generation Analysis
Projected trip generation for the proposed project was developed based on Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region (May 2019). The guidelines state proposed projects will not require a transportation impact study if the project generates less than 1,000 daily trips or 100 peak hour trips.

The trip generation for the proposed project was determined using the (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002). Based on the proposed project’s intended use, the projected trip generation was determined using the Residential – Condominium (or any multifamily 6-20 DU/acre). The proposed project is projected to generate 32 total AM peak hour trips, 40 total PM peak hour trips, and 400 total daily trips, see Table 1 below for the Trip Generation.

Mr. Esquivel
Summit Avenue Trip Gen and VMT
March 28, 2024

Page 2 ends

Santee City CouncilJuly 9, 2025

Santee City Council
July 9, 2025