Upland City Council
January 12, 2026

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street, Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP Pad Preparation Guidelines for Cut and Fill Transition Condition Areas Fill Depth Required far Finish Grade Overexcavation Depth below Finish Grade (Within low-lying areas) _ (Within cut areas) Up to 5 feet Equal Depth
5 to 10 feet 5 feet
Greater than 10 feet One-half the maximum thickness of fills placed on the "Fill"portion(20 feet maximum)
Cut portions should be overexcavated beyond the structural perimeter lines for a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or to a minimum distance of 5 feet, whichever is greater. Actual subexcavation depths should be determined by the geotechnical engineer during grading.

4.3 Structural Foundation Design Parameters
In the absence of detailed development plans review, it is assumed that for load bearing support conventional continuous wall foundations and isolated spread footings will be used bearing directly on the engineered graded fills placed as described earlier in this report.

It is assumed that the subject development will include concrete tilt-up or concrete framed, concrete block construction with concrete slabs-on-grade and concrete footings in the form of isolated pier foundations or continuous wall foundations. Use of load bearing concrete wall and/or isolated spread footings are assumed to be used underlain by at least 30-inch-thick engineered fill mat of local soils compacted to minimum 90% as recommended earlier.

Structural foundations, in the form of exterior load bearing wall foundations and isolated pier foundations, may be considered in design based on the following equations:

Continuous Wall Footing: qallowable= 2000+ 350d + 250b Isolated Square Footing: gal{owable= 2400+ 350d + 100b, where gauowabIa= allowable soil vertical bearing capacity, in psf d=footing depth, minimum 30-inch,
b=footing width, minimum 24-inch.

The above soil bearing capacities may be increased for each additional depth in footing and width in excess of the minimum recommended. Under static loading conditions, with a Factor of Safety, FS = 3.0, the total maximum vertical bearing capacity is recommended not to exceed 3500 psf for continuous wall footings and isolated square footings. If normal code requirements are applied, the above capacities may further be increased by an additional 1/3 for short duration of loading which includes the effect of wind and seismic forces. The load bearing footings should be reinforced with minimum 2-#5 near the near the top and 2-#5 rebar near bottom of continuous wall footings. For isolated foundations reinforcing requirements shall be determined by the project structural engineer. Actual foundation dimensions (b & d) and reinforcement requirements should be provided by the project structural engineer based on anticipated structural dead loadings, soil bearing capacity, and Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) described.

The footing depths described should be measured vertically from the lowest adjacent outside grade and not from the finished pad grade or from finished floor surface. Footing depths and dimensions shall be verified by the geotechnical engineer prior to footing-forming, rebar, and concrete placement. It will be the contractor's responsibility to arrange such verifications by the geotechnical engineer.

Based on the laboratory determined soils' consolidation characteristics, settlements to properly designed and constructed foundations supported exclusively into engineered fills of site soils or its equivalent or better, and carrying maximum assumed structural loadings, are expected to be within "tolerable" limits.

Aiiyirx;i. H, . 1, .1

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP Under static loading conditions, over a 40-foot-span, the estimated total and differential settlements should be about 1 and 1/2-inch, respectively, provided the foundations being supported by engineered fills of local soils compacted to minimum 90% as described. Most of the elastic deformations, however, are expected to occur during construction.

4.4 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade
No concrete slabs, sidewalks and flatworks should be placed bearing directly on the surface soils currently existing. The prepared subgrades to receive footings should be adequate for concrete slab-on-grade placement. The following is provided for reference only.

Building Pad Warehouse/Truck Traffic:

1. Suggested 5-inch-thick (net) slab thickness,
2, 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. #4 rebar @ 18-inch o/c using chairs or as required by the project structural engineer,

4. Within moisture sensitive areas, it is suggested to use 10-mil-thick commercially available StegoWrap, Visqueen or other approved coverings,
5, Two(2) inches of sand with SE>30 over the installed Stego Wrap System,

6. Saw cuts requirements shall be as per the structural engineer.

Driveways:

1. 6-inch-thick net slab,

2. 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. Over native grade compacted to a maximum of 95%.

Flatwork:

1. 3 '/2-inch-thick net concrete,

2. 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. Over native grade compacted to a minimum 90%,

4. Tooled joints per the structural engineer.

It is recommended that, prior to concrete pours, utility trenches underlying concrete slabs and driveways should be thoroughly backfilled with sandy gravelly soils, mechanically compacted to the minimum compaction requirements as described.

Within moisture sensitive areas, concrete slabs should be underlain by 2-inch of compacted clean sands, followed by 10-mil-thick vapor barrier, such as commercially available StegoWrap, Visqueen or other approved coverings, overlying an additional 2-inch-thick layer of sands. Sands used should have a Sand Equivalent, SE of 30 or greater.

Subgrades to receive concrete foundations and slab-on-grade should be "'dampened" as would be expected in any such concrete placement. Use of low-slump concrete is recommended. In addition, it is recommended that utility trenches underlying concrete slabs and driveways should be thoroughly backfilled with gravelly sandy soils mechanically compacted to minimum 90%. Concrete construction joint requirements should be determined by the project structural engineer.

No concrete should be placed during extreme weather conditions, such as during high outside temperature and/or during high Santa Ana wind conditions. Use of excess water on finished grade is not recommended to prevent post-placement concrete"warping".
ruicAlst i„i.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20''Street,Uptand,CA. 24036-F/BMP

4.4.1 Concrete Curing and Crack Control
The recommendations presented in this report are intended to reduce potentials for cracking of concrete slabs-on-grade due to concrete curing or settlement. However, even when the following recommendations have been implemented, foundations, stucco walls and concrete slabs-on-grade may display some minor cracking due to minor soil movement and/or concrete shrinkage.

The occurrence of concrete cracking may also be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete used, proper concrete placement, and curing along with using crack control joints at reasonable intervals where re-entrant slab corners occur. For standard crack control, maximum expansion/construction joint spacing is recommended not to exceed 24 to 30 x the concrete thickness. Shorter distance between joint spacing would provide greater crack control. Joints at curves and angle points are suggested as determined by the project structural engineer.

To minimize potentials for"warping", subgrades to receive concrete shall be free of excess water. Concrete placements during adverse weather conditions should not be allowed.

4.5 Resistance to Lateral Loads
Resistance to foundation lateral displacement can be achieved by friction acting at the base of foundation and by passive earth pressures.A coefficient friction of 0.40 may be assumed with normal dead load forces for footing established on engineered compacted fills of local soils.

An allowable passive lateral earth resistance of 300 psf per foot of depth may be assumed for the sides of foundations poured against compacted fills. The maximum lateral passive earth pressure is recommended not to exceed 3000 lbs.

For design, active lateral pressures from local soils when used as backfills may be estimated from the following equivalent fluid density:

CONDITIONS EQUIVALENT FLUID DENITY, pcf
Level Backfill 2:1 Backfill Sloping Upwards
Active 40 55
At Rest 55 70
Seismic , 75%of active earth pressures 75%of active earth pressures

4.6 Shrinkage and Subsidence
It is our opinion that during grading the upper soils may be subjected to a volume change. Assuming a 90% relative compaction for structural fills and assuming an overexcavation and recompaction depth as described earlier, such volume change due to shrinkage may be on the order of 7%to 10%. Further volume change may be expected due to supplemental shrinkage during preparation of subgrade soils. For estimation purpose, such may be approximated to about 2-inch when conventional construction equipment is used.

4.7 Construction Considerations

4.7.1 Unsupported Excavation
Gravelly sandy site soils encountered are considered highly susceptible to caving. Temporary excavations up to 4 feet in depth may be made without rigorous lateral support. Excavated surface should be"'wetted" during construction to minimize potential surface soil raveling. No surcharge loading should be allowed within an imaginary 1:1 line drawn upward from the toe of the temporary excavations.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street,Upland•CA. 24036-FIBMP

4.7.2 Supported Excavations
If vertical excavations exceeding 4 feet in depth become warranted, such should be achieved using shoring to support sidewalls.

4.8 Soil Caving
Considering the gravelly sandy site soils encountered as described, it is our opinion that some caving may be expected during deep excavations. Temporary excavations in excess of 5 feet should be made at a slope ratio of 2 to 1 (h:v) or flatter, or as per the construction guidelines as provided by Cal-Ostia.

4.9 Site Preparations for Driveways/ParkinglPaving
Assuming concrete paving for use by conventional traffic, it is suggested that prior to concrete placement, the subgrades to receive paving should be subexcavated to minimum 18 inches, followed by the local excavated soils replacement in 6 to 8-inch-thick lifts, compacted to minimum 95%. Use of vibratory sheepsfoot roller is suggested during grading.

4.10 Pavement Thickness Design
Alternative I -Rigid Concrete Paving
Rigid paving, if selected, should be at least 6-inch-thick concrete placed directly over the local sandy gravelly soils compacted to minimum 95%. Alternatively, 5-inch thick concrete can be considered over 4- inch class II base material compacted to 95%. Actual paving thickness and reinforcement requirements should be supplied by the project structural engineer using soils' Subgrade Reaction Modulus, kcf of 350.

Rigid concrete driveways should have thickened edges to prevent potential for lateral sliding under auto and truck traffic loading.

Alternative II -Asphalt Paving
Flexural asphalt paving, if selected, based on the estimated Traffic Indices (Tls) as described and a laboratory determined soils' R-value of 75 and laboratory determined soils' Sand Equivalent, SE of 46.76, the following flexible(a.c.) pavement sections are provided for initial use:

Service Vehicle Traffic Pavement Paving
Index,Tls Type Thickness (inch)
Auto/Truck Traffic 7 a.c. over Class II base or CMl3 3.0 over 3.0

5.0 over native
10 5.0 over 3.0
Within paving areas, subgrade soils should be subexcavated to minimum 18 inches, moisture conditioned to near Optimum Moisture Content, followed by the excavated soils replacement as engineered fills compacted to at least 95°/0 of the soils' maximum Dry Density as determined by the method ASTM D1557.

Class II base or CMS used to receive asphalt concretes should be placed directly over the prepared subgrades and compacted to minimum 95°I%. Use of thicker/deepened paving edges are recommended to minimize potential for edge movement and paving distress.

Aunnst 2R, t r•'r. i

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.201"Street,Upland,CA. 24436-FHBMP The pavement evaluations are based on estimated Traffic Index (TI)as shown and on the soils' R-value as described. It is recommended that following mass grading completion, representative site soils should be laboratory tested to determine soils' R-value and to provide updated paving thickness.

4.11 Retaining Wall (if planned)
It is unknown if any retaining structure will be associated with development proposed. It is our opinion that retaining foundations should be designed based on a soils vertical bearing capacity of 1800 psf, along with the lateral active pressures as described below:

Slope of Retained Material (h:v) Equivalent Fluid Density, pcf Clean Sand Local Soil
level 30 35
2:1 42 55
During a local Magnitude 6.7 earthquake along the Cucamonga fault zone, additional lateral pressures will occur along the back of the retaining walls. The seismic-induced lateral soil pressure may be computed using a triangular pressure distribution with the maximum value at the top of the wall> The maximum lateral pressure of(20 pcf) H where H is the height of the retained soils above the wall footing should be used in the final design of retaining wall,
Sliding resistance value and passive fluid pressure values may be increased by 1/3 during short-erm wind and seismic loading conditions.

Any applicable short-term construction surcharges and seismic forces should be added to the above lateral pressure values. All walls shall be waterproofed and protected from hydrostatic pressure by a reliable permanent subdrain system.

The design parameters do not include any hydrostatic pressure build-up. Consequently, installation of "'French-drain"behind retaining walls is recommended to minimize water pressure build-up behind retaining walls. Use of impervious material is preferred within upper the 18 inches of the backfills placed.

Backfills behind retaining wall should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the soils' Maximum Dry Density as determined by the ASTM D15571 test method. Flooding and/or jetting behind wall should not be permitted.

Walls adjacent to traffic areas should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf, which is a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal traffic. If the traffic is kept back 10 feet from the wall, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.

4.12 Utility Trenches Backfill
Utility trenches backfills at depth in excess of 2 feet should be placed in thin lifts and compacted to the minimum requirements described. As an alternative, clean granular sand may be used having Sand Equivalent, SE of minimum 30. Jetting is not recommended in lieu of mechanical compaction. Trench excavations should conform to the requirements and safety as specified by Cal-Osha.

4.13 Seasonal Limitations
No fill shall be placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. Where the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until moisture conditions are considered favorable by the geotechnical engineer.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20''Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

4.14 Planters
To minimize potential differential settlement to foundations, planters requiring heavy irrigation should be restricted from using adjacent to footings. In the event that such becomes unavoidable, planter boxes with sealed bottoms should be considered.

4.15 Landscape Maintenance
Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided. Pad drainage should be directed towards streets and to other approved areas away from foundations. Slope areas should be planted with draught resistant vegetation. Over watering landscape areas could adversely affect the proposed site development during its lifetime use.

4.16 Observations and Testing During Site Preparations and Grading Recommendations provided assume that structural footings and slabs-on-grade be established exclusively into compacted fills. Excavated footings should be inspected, verified, and certified by the geotechnical engineer prior to steel and concrete placement to ensure their sufficient embedment and proper bearing as recommended. Structural backfills discussed should be placed under direct observation and testing by Soils Southwest, Inc. Excess soils generated from footing excavations should be removed from pad areas.

In general, geotechnical inspections should include, at a minimum, the following:
• Subexcavation depth during grading,
• Fill compaction testing,
• Retaining wall backfill compaction (if planned),
• Excavated foundation depth,
• Paving subgrade verification, and
• Utility trenches backfill compaction.

4.17 Plan Review
No precise grading or detailed development plans are prepared and none such are available for review.

Prior to the actual mass grading, grading and foundation plans should be available to ensure applicability of the assumptions made in preparing this report_ If during construction, conditions are observed different from those as presented, revised and/or supplemental recommendations will be required.

4.18 Pre-Construction Meeting
It is recommended that no clearing of the site or any grading operations be performed without the presence of a representative of this office. An on-site pre-grading meeting should be arranged between the geotechnical engineer and the grading contractor prior to the start of construction. Two days' advance notice for such meeting is required.

SSW August 28,20'_'4 pg. 18

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

5.0 Earth WorklGeneral Grading Recommendations
It is our opinion that the soils encountered primarily consist upper 3 feet of variegating layers of gravels and gravel silty fine to medium coarse sand mixtures with concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and occasional small boulders to the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided in the attached Log of Borings.

Prior to grading commencement, it is suggested that all debris and loose stockpiles should be cleared and disposed off-site to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. In general, site preparations and grading for the project should include, at a minimum, the following:

Structural Backfill
Local soils free of organics, debris, and rocks smaller than 6-inch in overall diameter should be considered suitable for reuse as structural backfill. Loose soils, formwork, and debris should be removed prior to backfilling retaining walls. Local soils backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided below.Where space limitations do not allow conventional backfilling operations, special backfill materials, and procedures may be required. Pea gravel or other select backfill can be used within limited space areas. Additional recommendations on such will be provided during construction.

Percentage Compaction During Mass Grading
With the presence of fine to coarse gravelly sandy soils with trace silts, isolated cobbles and rocks existing as described and assuming moderately high dead loads and seismic peak ground acceleration described, it is our opinion that structural fills placed should be compacted to the minimum 90% compaction requirements described. During grading, use of vibratory sheepsfoot roller is recommended.

Site Drainage
Adequate positive drainage should be maintained away from the structural pad in order to prevent water from ponding and to reduce potential percolation into backfill. A desirable slope for surface drainage is 2% in landscape areas and 1% in paved areas. Planters and landscaped areas adjacent to building perimeter should be adequately designed to minimize water filtration into subsoils. Considerations should be given to the use of closed planter bottoms, concrete slabs, and perimeter subdrains where applicable.

Utility Trenches
Buried utility conduits should be bedded and backfilled around the conduit in accordance with the project specifications. Buried utilities in excess of 2 feet should be backfilled with local gravelly sandy soils and compacted to at least 90%. Remaining near surface backfills should be compacted to 95%, August 18,20 2A 1. ;. I`

San Antonio water District Headquarters/400 E.20`h Street, Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP General Grading Recommendations:

Recommended general specifications for surface preparation to receive compacted engineered fills for structural support and utility trench backfill and others are presented below:

1. Areas to be graded, backfilled or paved, shall be grubbed, stripped, and cleaned of all buried and undetected debris, structures, concrete, vegetation and other deleterious materials prior to grading.

2. During grading,the estimated subexcavation depths within building pad areas and 5 feet beyond should be minimum 5 feet below the current grade surface.

3. Where compacted fill is used to provide vertical support for foundations, all loose, soft, and other incompetent soils should be removed to full depth as approved by the geotechnical engineer.

4. Compaction for structural fills shall be determined relative to the Maximum Dry Density as determined by ASTM D1557 compaction methods. All in-situ field density of compacted fill shall be determined by the ASTM ❑1556 standard methods or by other approved procedures.

5. All new imported soils, if required, shall be clean, granular, and non-expansive material requiring prior approval by the geotechnical engineer.

6. During grading, fill soils shall be placed as thin layers, thickness of which following compaction shall not exceed 6 inches.

7. In accordance with the CBC: rock sizes greater than 12 inches(305 mm)and up to 24 inches(610 mm) in maximum dimension shall be three feet(914 mm) or more below grade, measured vertically. Rock sizes greater than 24 inches (610 mm) in maximum dimension shall be 10 feet (3048 mm) or more below grade, measured vertically.

8. No jetting and/or water tampering be considered for backfill compaction for utility trenches without prior approval of the geotechnical engineer. For such backfill, hand tampering with fill layers of 8 to 12 inches in thickness or as approved by the geotechnical engineer is recommended.

9. Any and all utility trenches at depth as well as cesspool and abandoned septic tank within building pad area and beyond, should either be completely excavated and removed from the site or should be backfilled with gravel, slurry or by other material, as approved by the geotechnical engineer.

10. Any and all import soils if required during grading should be equivalent to the site soils or better. The geotechnical engineer prior to their use should approve such.

11. Any and all grading required for pavement, sidewalks or other facilities to be used by general public, should be constructed under direct observation of the geotechnical engineer or as required by the local public agencies.

12. A site meeting should be held between the grading contractor and the geotechnical engineer prior to actual site preparations and grading. Two days advance notice will be required for such meeting.

August 28,2[)21 i.•i.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.2011'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/AMP

6.0 WQMP-BMP Infiltration Rates Using Porchet
Method for Stormwater Disposal Design
In general, four(4) infiltration tests were planned at the depth and locations as suggested by the project design engineer. Considering the excessively gravely sands and concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and occasional small boulders, infiltration testing was limited to the depths of 3 and 5 feet below existing surface grade(BSG)at the southwest where 8-foot testing was planned. Planned testing (P-3 and P-4)at depths 3 to 4 feet within the area of the planned basin/swale could not be performed due to resistance at 1 and 1.5 feet due to concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and small boulders. The tests were performed using the standardized"falling-head"test converted using the Porchet method.Test locations and test data are shown in the attached Appendix D.

Method of infiltration rate as per the guidelines in accordance with Table 1, Infiltration Basin Option 2 of Appendix A of the Riverside County-Low Impact Development(LID) BMP Design Handbook as well as per the Appendices Section VII.3.8.2, Appendix VII: Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations of the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans Handbook.

Approximate test locations are shown on the attached Plate 1. The test results should be considered tentative given the potential for changes to site finish grades or changes in soil conditions as exposed during site preparations and grading.

The soils encountered within the proposed chamber consist, in general, of dry gravels and fine to medium coarse poorly graded silty sands overlying variegating layers of gravels and silty fine to medium coarse sands with rocks and cobbles to the depth explored of 3 and 5 feet as described (test borings P-1 to P-2).

Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided in the attached Log of Borings.

Based on the field infiltration testing completed, it is our opinion that for the infiltration system design proposed at about 3 and 5 feet below grade, the observed soils infiltration rates are 19.79 inches/hour and

15.62 inches/hour for test locations P-1 and P-2, respectively.

For design, it is suggested that use of an appropriate factor of safety as determined by the design engineer should be considered to the observed rate to account for long-term saturation, inconsistencies in subsoil conditions, potential for silting, and lack of maintenance. The observed soils' percolation rates are provided in Section 6.3 of this report.

6.1 METHODOLOGY AND TEST PROCEDURES
EQUIPMENT SET-UP (POST EXCAVATION) PROCEDURES:

Following test boring completion, each of the test holes were fitted with perforated PVC pipes backfilled with 2-inch-thick crushed rock at the bottom to minimize potentials for scouring and caving. For testing, each test hole was initially filled using water supplied by water jugs.

Prior to actual testing, to determine test intervals, as per the Section 2.3 for deep percolation testing of the referenced handbook guideline, two consecutive readings were performed to determine if 6 or more inches of water seeped in 25 minutes. Since 6 inches or more of water seeped away in less than 25 minutes for all test locations, P-1 and P-2 , subsequent percolation testing was performed at 10-minute time intervals for at least minimum one hour or until the rates were uniform. Testing included water placement at about and 3 feet below existing grade surface (inlet depth of 24 inches above infiltration system bottom), August 28,2024 1

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20i"Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP The final 10-minute recorded percolation test rates were converted into an Infiltration Rate (It) for inches per hour using the "Porchet Method'' equation as described in the Reference 2, Riverside County Low impact Development BMP Design Handbook, as well as per the Appendices Section VI1.3.8.2, Appendix VI€: Infiltration Rate Evaluation Protocol and Factor of Safety Recommendations on the San Bernardino County Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans Handbook.

6.2 INFILTRATION TEST RESULTS
Based on the soils infiltration testing completed at the test locations and at the test depth as described, the observed soils' percolation rates are 19.79 inches/hour and 15.62 inches/hour for test locations P-1 and P- 2, respectively.

Calculations to convert the percolation test rate to infiltration test rates in accordance with Section 2.3 of the County Handbook are presented in Table I and II below. For design, it is suggested that an appropriate Factor of Safety as selected by the design engineer should be considered to the observed field percolation rate described.

6.2.1 SUMMARY & CONVERSION CALCULATIONS

TABLE I
For WQMP-BMP design, based on the soils infiltration testing completed and, on the calculations as described, the following infiltration rates may be considered. Actual field test data are attached.

Observed Infiltration Rate for Design
Test Location Test Depth Porchet
(8-9-24) Below Grade, Method
feet Observed Rate,
inch/hour
P-1 3 19.79
P-2 5 15.62
P-3 n/a n/a
P-4 n/a n/a
Note- n/a due to shallow boring resistance to near surface concentrations of rocks,cobbles, and small boulders,infiltration tests could not be performed at the required depths.

TABLE II
Conversion Table(Porchet Method)
Test Depth Time Initial Final Initial Final Change in Average No. Test Interval, Depth, Depth, Water Water Height/ Head Hole, minutes inches inches Height, Height, Time Height/Time inches inches inches
Dt AT _ Do Dr Ho=Dt-Do Hf=Dt-Df ©H= Hf-Ho Hag = (Ho+Hf)/2
_ I
P-1 36 10 12 35.5 24.0 0.5 23.50 12.25 P-2 60 10 36 56.5 24.0 3.5 20.50 13.75 Infiltration Rate I,Itj=AH64riAt(r+2Havg) _
A B C
Test No. . ❑H60r ❑t(r+2Havg) A/B=in/hr
P-1 5640 285 19.79
P-2 4920 315 15.62
•.sw nuciu r =Y,mum•t '.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20th Street,Upland,CA. 24036-FfBMP Use of a safety factor should be considered to account for long-term saturation, inconsistencies in subsoil conditions along with the potential for silting of percolating soils.

The infiltration rate described is based on the in-situ testing completed at the locations as suggested by the project civil engineer. In the event that the final chamber location and depth vary considerably from those described herein, supplemental soils infiltration testing may be warranted.

It should be noted that over prolonged use and lack of maintenance the detention/infiltration basins or deep chambers constructed based on the suggested design rate may experience much lower infiltration rate due to the accumulation of silts, fines, soils, and others. Regular maintenance of the chambers in the form of removal of debris, oil, and fines are strongly recommended. A maintenance record of such is suggested for future use.

Suggested Requirements for Standard Stormwater BMP installation (where applicable) The invert of stormwater infiltration should be set at least 10 feet above the groundwater elevation and should not be placed on steep slopes to create conditions for slopes instability.

When adequately installed, it is our opinion that the Stormwater infiltration systems installed should not increase the potential for static or seismic settlement of structures.

Stormwater infiltration installed should not place an increased surcharge on structures or foundations on or its adjacent.The pore water pressure should not increase the soils retained by retaining structures.

The invert of stormwater infiltration should be set back at least 15 feet and outside a 1:1 plan drawn up from the bottom of adjacent foundations.

Stormwater infiltration should not be located near utility lines where the introduction of stormwater could cause damage to utilities or settlement of trench backfill.

Stormwater infiltration systems should not be allowed within 100 feet of any potable groundwater production well.

Once installed, regular maintenance of the detention systems is recommended.

SSW Angue;r 22,2024

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'"Street, Upland.CA. 24036-F/B1MP

7.0 Closure
The conclusions and recommendations presented are based upon the findings and observations as made during subsurface test excavations and subsequent laboratory testing and engineering evaluations as currently used in the Geotechnical industry. The recommendations supplied should be considered "preliminary"since they are based on soil samples only. If during construction,the subsoil conditions appear different from those as disclosed during field investigation this office should be notified to consider any possible need for modification by the geotechnical recommendations as provided in this report.

Recommendations provided are based on the assumptions that structural footings will be established exclusively into compacted fill. No footings and/or slabs should be allowed straddling over cut and fill transition interface.

Site grading observations and testing must be performed by a representative of this office. Further, it is recommended that excavated footings should be verified and approved by geotechnical engineer prior to steel and concrete placement to ensure that foundations are founded into satisfactory soils and excavations are free of loose and disturbed materials.

A pre-grading meeting between grading contractor and geotechnical engineer is recommended prior to construction preferably at the site, to discuss the grading procedures to be implemented and other requirements described in this report to be fulfilled.

This report has been prepared exclusively for the use of the addressee for the project referenced in the context. It shall not be transferred or be used by other parties without written consent by Soils Southwest, Inc.

Should the project be delayed beyond one year after the date of this report,the recommendations presented shall be reviewed to consider any possible change in site conditions.

The recommendations presented are on the assumption that the necessary geotechnical observations and testing during construction will be performed by a representative of this office. The field observations are considered a continuation of the geotechnical investigation performed.

If another firm is retained for geotechnical observations and testing, our professional liability and responsibility shall be limited to the extent that Soils Southwest, Inc.would not be the geotechnical engineer of record. Use of the geotechnical recommendations by others will relieve Soils Southwest, Inc. of any liability that may arise during the lifetime use of the structure constructed.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20''Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

PLOT PLAN AND TEST LOCATIONS
400 E. 201h Street, Upland
APN: 1044-091-22
Not to Scale
1 .._......1
E 2011-1 STREET _ _ Tf1 STREET
-, - ��«.... E 26REET
,_ , : -„. . .� "4 Y—h Aera4r710«unw � f I r .---\ , ,.
j ) r; . - r-6 :;;:4X' .-I /`/}+
1 �-^ *:e7iaw rr:nti¢ns btu NTl.t a•nn+
':.'.'. _. .eta-j }111ii 1,941 IW.
2 — ,APN 104-C*1.2•`2(r —j.. .1. T, 400 E.20TH SYRLE�_ &' 1. " ••': •.
x • • P-1 f3-4 ®t - .
__ :_ i
lt..
210 FREEWAY
Legend: • B-1 Approximate Location of Test Borings for Geotechnical Evaluations ® P-1 Approximate Location of Test Pit for BMP Soils' Infiltration • P-3 Approximate location of Test Pit for BMP Soils Infiltration that could not be performed as planned due to surface concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and small boulders.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'4 Street,tlpland,CA. 24036-F/BMP List of Appendices
Appendix A -Log of Borings
Appendix B -Laboratory Test Results
Table I: In-Situ Moisture-Density (ASTM D2216 and D2937) Table II: Max. Density/Optimum Moisture Content(ASTM D1557) Table III: Direct Shear(ASTM D3080)
Table IV: Consolidation (ASTM D2435)
Table V: Sand Equivalent, SE (ASTM D2419)
Table VI: Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422)
Table VII: Soils' Chemical Analyses Test Results
Table VIII: Soils' Density Correlation to SPT Blow Counts APPENDIX C—Supplemental Seismic Design Parameters&
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Map
APPENDIX❑ -Field Infiltration Test Data Porchet Method Calculation Summary SSW August 28,2r)24 •,.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.2011'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

LOG OF BORINGS
'SW AuousL I

Soils Southwest,tton Inc.

Co via Lata,
CA9 suite 2324 LOG OF BORING B-1
Col ,
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 C C
m o 0
12 o cJ c
N q,y, C R n w L] = Description and Remarks E m a 4 " E R in Q
ina°?N n aU .��QO C7 0 ui
G? • • \disturbed surface soils, gravels, scattered • •0 • \debris
•
GM-SM ' y � 1GRAVELS consisting of rocks and cobbles ■_ �.;. 1 {Max Dry Density = 133 pof @ 8.0 %
GRAVEL/SAND mixture-tannish light brown,
5 silty, fine to medium coarse, pebbles, rock
fragments, rocks, cobbles, dry
- Abandoned at +/- 3.0 ft. due to resistance
(concentrations of rocks and cobbles)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
1 0
15 20

2.0 30
Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate#
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a
Upland, California Page 815 of 1374
11 Bulk/Grab sample

-TOSoils Southwest, Inc.
897Via Suite N CA LOG OF BORING B-2
Colton, CA 92324
{909) 370-0474 Fax{909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 ALL N T O
pO.U - 0
v° c R ;= E Description and Remarks
G p U w a ¢U 1 ¢1 a .c
oE
° aci m� �_ `mo � m � 9 me ina u� �._ a._ Cl-ca :vim m. OLL GP $ 4 i ARravels
*�: GRAVEL- rocks cobbles, small boulders, with
I very little yellow tan silty dry sand
- Abandoned test boring @ 1.5 feet due to
resistance (concentrations of rocks and
5 cobbles
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Uoland. California dye 816 of 1374 -

Soils Southwest, Inc.

Colton,897 Via CA324 a9 N LOG OF BORING B-3 (909) 370-0474 Fax(909)370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8 HSA Date: August 9,2024 =ua c
o 0
nas0 c u u c
il, Description and Remarkss LL m a N y a - a c ❑o aw zmmo mma 2'a m E >. - ciCIma0?N ❑5 aU ❑t. n a nu_ GM--SN \gravels, scattered weeds and debris
gp
GRAVEL/SAND mixture-with gravely and
slightly silty, fine to medium coarse, rock
fragments, rocks, and cobbles, dry
- Abandoned Test boring @ 2.0 ft. due to
5 resistance (concentrations of rocks and
cobbles)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 i
Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upland. California

Soils Southwest, Inc.
cvltor� CALata9 3�4 Suite N LOG OF BORING B-4 (909) 370-0474 Fax(909)370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 ti O G C ❑
❑ y 7 C O b U u_ V -a w E • Description and Remarks vm3 O `m ❑U asn dHm
v E w� 4 = row v am
m u a, o a, m .

GM-Sm 7flx111 \disturbed surface gravels and sails
GRAVEL/SAND mixture-light tan silty, fine to
medium coarse, rock fragments, rocks,cobbles
occasional small boulders, dry
- Abandoned test boring @ 0.5 ft. due to
5� resistance (concentrations of rocks,
cobbles, small boulders)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 Groundwater: nia Site Location Plate#
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a T T
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upkpnd. California Rage 818 of 1374

Soils Southwest, Inc.
cSuite
oft on CA 92324 N LOG OF BORING B-5
ih& (909) 370-0474 Fax (909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 tl c
p .2 t c
p m — c m
LL a Q v L Description and Remarks _ m a
° m rro m c� o c `- Ti ap
co a°°N 3 n [L C D,u v, 0 6
GM-SM w lM \disturbed surface gravels and soils with k' rocks and cobbles
1 GRAVEL/SAND mixture-tan to light brown,
slightly silty, fine to medium coarse,
rock fragments, rocks, and cobbles, dry
5 - Abandoned test boring @ +/- 1.5 feet due
to resistance(concentrations of rocks and
cobbles)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upland. California
f'agc 819 of 1374

Soils Southwest, Inc.
lilS7 897 Colton, CAa9 324 N LOG OF BORING B-6 (909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. J Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 c i
o
r Q a H 0 n U ti
V
n .y L Description and Remarks
❑ U
w N
a °?ui = ❑ .E a u S U N [9 8 ci gravels, rocks, cobbles
GRAVEL/SAND mixture-light tan to brown,
slightly silty, fine to medium coarse,rocks
cobbles, dry
- Abandoned test boring @ 2.0 ft. due to
resistance (concentrations of rocks and
cobbles)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 •15
20 25_
30 Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a 1.1n1�14,, California Paye 820 of 1374

Soils Southwest, Inc.
897Col Via Lata, Suite N LOG OF BORING P-1
Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8 ESA Date: August 9,2024 c C
C O Cu ? C ❑
o m
� LL c a:= r r Description and Remarks n c q d Q m N
� o E m� �a dE :� 5 � " 15
Li
rna-m .E o5. ao 7O m t7 ❑
Ns-
GM-SM A- disturbed surface gravels and soils
GRAVELS/SAND mixture -light yellow tan,silty
SM fine, dry with rocks and cobbles
- ------ r1SAND - gray-brown, silty, fine to medium GP coarse, pebbles, rock fragments,
rocks, cobbles, dry
GRAVELS with little to no sand,rocks,cobbles
- Abandoned infiltration test boring @3.0 ft
due to resistance (concentrations of rock
and cobbles) - no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upland, California
821 of 1374

Soils Southwest, Inc.
8Colton97 Via Lata,
CA92 S3uite24 N LOG OF BORING P-2
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909)370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. l Boring Diam.: 8'I HSA Date: August 9,2024 c LL 9 m A C ❑
} 0 To
8 Ti �, 0 'Erro a:� E " .E Description and Remarks t
'❑ � $ q y C] U s
m 0. m y y a
= c a E a E E = N am
«° m 'O � m o c ,
u
SM Adisturbed gravels and soils
SAND - yellowish tannish brown, silty, fine
- to medium coarse, pebbles, rock
- __ - fragments, rocks, dry
- with rocks and cobbles
GP • ; 5 GRAVELS - - -- Abandoned infiltration test boring @5.0ft. due to resistance (concentrations of rocks
and cobbles)
- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 15
20 25
30 Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate#
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Deland dal i fg
Pagc 822 u( 1374

Soils Southwest, Inc.
. 897 Via SN , Suite IAS Cotton, CAa9 324 N LOG OF BORING P-3 (909) 370-0474 Fax (909) 370-3156
Project: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" HSA Date: August 9,2024 C k 4 P. a O
O Ei D. 0 P
Description and Remarks
"O fl N p U 61 a .1., y Q .r O E N c 7', d.o D O YC tn . "- EL''U]d N i p m E UCl1 U' ❑LL Qy--5 ` ••{ gravels, rocks, and cobbles
t GRAVEL/SAND mixture- light yellow gray tan,
silty, fine, rock fragments, rocks, cobbles
scattered small boulders, dry
SAND (fill) - color change to light brown,
5 silty, fine to medium coarse,
pebbles, rock fragments,
rocks, cobbles, scattered
debris, dry
- Abandoned infiltration test boring @ 1.5ft
due to resistance (concentrations of rock
and cobbles)
10 - no bedrock
- no groundwater
15 20
25 30
Groundwater: n/a Site Location Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upland, California

Soils Southwest, Inc,
897 Via Lata, Suite N LOG OF BORING P-4
Colton, CA 92324
(909) 370-0474 Fax(909)370-3156
Protect: San Antonio Water District Headquarters Job No.: 24036-F/BMP Logged By: John F. I Boring Diam.: 8" ESA _ Date: August 9, 2024 f
LL N 'E'= o - a a`
• y o
U0
C 5 m a E • Description and Remarks n t ; p d ❑ CS w 4. w 0G
1n N oLIg. 1p m_ C al O C R T , m N GP • • i \disturbed surface gravels and soils
-1 GRAVEL with little sand, rocks, cobbles,and
occasional small boulders, dry
- Abandoned infiltration test boring 9 1.Oft
due to resistance( concentration of rocks
cobbles)
5 --- no bedrock
- no groundwater
10 1.5
20 25
30 r Groundwater: n/a Site Location
L Plate #
Approx. Depth of Bedrock: n/a
Datum: n/a Planned Headquarter Facility
400 East 20th Street
Elevation: n/a Upland. California

KEY TO SYMBOLS
Symbol Description
Strata symbols
• Poorly graded gravel
144 Nt Silty sand and gravel
Silty sand
Notes•
1 . Exploratory borings were drilled on August 9, 2024 using a 4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
2 . No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or when re-checked the following day.
3 . Boring locations were taped from existing features and elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan . 4 . These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and recommendations in this report.
5 . Results ❑f tests conducted on samples recovered are reported Page 825 of 1374 on the logs . _ _ _

.:--'"' �- • •.•••i i •:/ •,
1-a* s — 1 1, — - -__ -•I - . 1 _. --./ ' 1C .U •C •A-li •'.--MF4'r_� ' N /G __. -A, ` - . ti, . •
- -
,-J • IrR tt, 7
1,
20TI-e - •.1554 r i 1
-
il " M1 rah a p -7 7'r N Y .�. : li , ....l " • L r • mr r 4--.
- - _ ^1_,- -m• am � � -
1 NE. ••-1 te• ian.s Clg.IY
IL. . UP
r
_. — Jr H. ;cS .11 j 7.ti 9 A 'r II _ }1 , -_._
•
•
LEGEND
al
C� \-
Qg
a _

SURFICIAL SEDIMENTS
of artificial fill
Qg alluvial grave!and sand of stream channels
Qa alluvial gravel and sand of valley areas
s......
•
• 1 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE
' MOUNT BALDY QUADRANGLE. x""'`•HEN"bun
••'w•

1.Ye 11 rm..r.,•.y1
LOSANGU.BAAbM.%S LN•Aris I1cO<r1RgCALDORAl% MOM-■ARMY,CA1972 ►sw•:as:n air t.rraft
�` BY THOMAS W.DIBBLE E.J R.,2002
1•�••••• — [alH11 R A af.\[H _
laaGltl----.M/W.5
�I.fww WM. 1.M
'wMS•MwF••••*M a• to •nwTM11•••••••aw`f •_ •
■.M •mow.•Kwr a'w1 MM +•f�•••••• �r...•• Miff rrw.w.*.+•r.......•n �r�
•mr•GAy1i1•tiJrlly•o•r i.•r•ira M"� .:7��
R1LPR611 am,samaw AP.31K O�II L■W7LiY011Natif11Opa
•a w•►1t.¢.w.••:.w tip- M " • .A.tor 'or 1•.. I 1 1 Gw�'�a r� ...
_ �r rrr�Ir ...rr.-.w.. iw.......

I~�r~ Nor.rr•
lrrriMr ... —• ....--••...r•• r••r•_•.•, .... �•.� l • 8 a..w •
JOIINATHON A.NORJRSE HONORARY MAP •1=1•••"•111',■ ..•.� ,..

SOURCE:USGSIAASG National Geological Map/Map View(beta)NGMDB

i tqa*tr-at+,-te tiorr- rice......

Contact Us Subscribe■ I Archived Soil Surveys Soil Survey Status Glossary Preferences Link Logout Help Area of Interest (A01) Soil Ma Soil Data Explorer Download Soils Data Shopping Cart (Free) Search Q Soil Map
c
Map Unit Legend 0 & :� Li, J � 1 Q J scale tl, / .. t,
San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, 1 r�..,,gea,s, + _ California (CA677) I s :±*� � r 411.

San Bernardino County Southwestern — tlf "� _ , - , ..-
Part, California (CA677) -
►.. +� 4 ' r ■f. ( ?'pis
Map Unit Map Unit Name Acres Percent ofill5P�- 1■ �- ;.,$t r Symbol in AQI AQI HaC Hanford coarse 11.8 17.2% ?4y • . �11.11),v.? - 4 •- ►= 1 ,
sand loam, 2 ►: IV"
'er • _ w-
to 9 percent . AIL,
slopes r - ;-
RmC Ramona sandy 5.7 8.3°Ia 1i .� it I ,;` - ; �-�0 - - r,• ,�
loam, to 9 f+. e +. I
.r ,� 11 •Hmc ram'
percent slopes, , ;�■.` / 4� # MLRA 19 , 1 --4 Mgr • '�' '?� .

SoC Soboba gravelly 9.9 14.5% . ••• _ loamy sand, 0 l l „ i .,• �r. w to 9 percent 1 p--" I _ �'tia 'Li �,,' slopes ram' + _t _ ' '' r� ; '� `A tor SpC Soboba stony 41.2 C0.0°I° I
: 4 e Si • r ......
�
loamy sand, 2 w • qr. ,A'
to 9 percent +� Ill* i ": i
slopes y Y '', - , . 411 1 . 7/ -'2*.

Totals for Area of 68.7 100.0% ' f - - ` . rage-8 of 1374 a T.-.ro.-o..-e '"-. ►. A .6. i lag , _ . i St 1

Map Unit Description:Soboba stony loamy sand,2 to 9 percent slopes--San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part.California Dist,HDQ,400 B.20th St..Upland.

California
San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
SpC—Soboba stony loamy sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hckv
Elevation: 960 to 3,690 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 39 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 60 to 65 degrees F
Frost-free period: 260 to 365 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Soboba and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Soboba
Setting
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional):Footsiope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
Ap-0 to 10 inches: stony loamy sand
Cl - 10 to 24 inches: very stony foamy sand
C2-24 to 60 inches: very stony sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 9 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders:0.1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat). High to very high (6.00 to 19.99 infhr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding:None
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhoslcm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low(about 3.8 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R019XG912CA-Sandy Fan
tIS1')A Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/22/2024 r Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description:Sobaba stony loamy sand,2 to 9 percent slopes—San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part,California Dist,HDQ,400 E.20th St.,Upland, California
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional):Toeslope
Landform position(three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Ramona
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (Three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga, gravelly loamy sand
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position(three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Aug 30, 2023
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/22/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2

Map Unit Description:Soboba gravelly loamy sand,0 to 9 percent slopes--San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part,California Dist,FIDQ,400 E.20th St.,Upland, California
San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
SoC—Soboba gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hckt
Elevation: 30 to 4,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 20 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 175 to 250 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Soboba and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit.

Description of Soboba
Setting
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position(two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 -0 to 12 inches: gravelly loamy sand
H2- 12 to 36 inches: very gravelly loamy sand
H3-36 to 60 inches: very stony sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): High to very high (5,95 to 19.98 inlhr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhoslcm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low(about 3.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s
Land capability classification (nonirrigafed): 6s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R019XG912CA-Sandy Fan
Hydric soil rating: No
tiSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/22/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description:Soboba gravelly loamy sand,0 to 9 percent slopes—San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part,California Dist,HDQ,400 E.20th St.,Upland, California
Minor Components
Unnamed
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Delhi,fine sand
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga, gravelly loam
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform: Drainageways
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Aug 30, 2023
USn.I Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7/22/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of

Map Unit Description:Hanford coarse sandy loam,2 to 9 percent slopes---San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part,California Dist,HDQ,400 E.20th St.,Upland, California
San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California
HaC—Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2y8t1
Elevation: 890 to 2,860 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 22 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 65 degrees F
Frost-free period: 320 to 365 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Hanford and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the►napunit.

Description of Hanford
Setting
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
A -0 to 12 inches: sandy loam
C- 12 to 60 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Welt drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat):High (1.98 to 5.95 inlhr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of panding:None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate(about 7.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigafed): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R019XG911 CA-Loamy Fan
Hydric soil rating: No
t= Natural Resources Web Sail Survey 7/22/2024 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2

Map Unit Description:Hanford coarse sandy loam,2 to 9 percent slopes—San Bernardino 24036-FBMPSan Antonio Water County Southwestern Part,California ❑ist,HDQ,400 E.20th St.,Upland, California
Minor Components
Greenfield, sandy loam
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landforrn:Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tujunga, loamy sand
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Dawn-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: San Bernardino County Southwestern Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 15, Aug 30, 2023
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 7122/2024 A Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20th Street, Upland-SBDCo_ 24036-F/BMP

APPENDIX B
Laboratory Test Programs
Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soils for the purpose of classification and for the determination of the physical properties and engineering characteristics. The number and selection of the types of testing for a given study are based on the geotechnical conditions of the site. A summary of the various laboratory tests performed for the project is presented below.

Moisture Content and Dry Density (D2937):

Data obtained from these tests, performed on undisturbed samples are used to aid in the classification and correlation of the soils and to provide qualitative information regarding soil strength and compressibility.

Direct Shear(D3080)
Data obtained from this test performed at increased and field moisture conditions on relatively remolded soil sample is used to evaluate soil shear strengths. Samples contained in brass sampler rings, placed directly on test apparatus are sheared at a constant strain rate of 0.002 inch per minute under saturated conditions and under varying loads appropriate to represent anticipated structural loadings. Shearing deformations are recorded to failure. Peak and/or residual shear strengths are obtained from the measured shearing load versus deflection curve. Test results, plotted on graphical form, are presented on Plate B-1 of this section.

Consolidation (D2835):

Drive-tube samples are tested at their field moisture contents and at increased moisture conditions since the soils may become saturated during lifetime use of the planned structure.

Data obtained from this test performed on relatively undisturbed and/or remolded samples, were used to evaluate the consolidation characteristics of foundation soils under anticipated foundation loadings.

Preparation for this test involved trimming the sample, placing it in a one-inch-high brass ring, and loading it into the test apparatus which contained porous stones to accommodate drainage during testing. Normal axial loads are applied at a load increment ratio, successive loads being generally twice the preceding.

Soil samples are usually under light normal load conditions to accommodate seating of the apparatus.

Samples were tested at the field moisture conditions at a predetermined normal load. Potentially moisture sensitive soil typically demonstrated significant volume change with the introduction of free water. The results of the consolidation tests are presented in graphical forms on Plate B-2.

August 28,2U N ;•a. ._

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20`"Street,Upland-SBDCo. 24036-FBMP Laboratory Test Results
Table I_ Max. Density/Optimum Moisture Content(ASTM D1557) Sample Location @ Depth, feet Max, Dry Density, pcf Optimum Moisture Content, % B-1 @ 0-3
SAND—GP-SR Tannish light
brown, gravel sand mixture, fine 133 8.0 to coarse with trace silts, rock
fragments, rocks, and cobbles
Table Ill: Direct Shear(ASTM D3080)
Test Boring No.

Test Cohesion, psf Friction, degrees
Sample Depth, feet Condition
B-1 @ 0-3 Remolded to 640 39
90%
Table IV: Consolidation (ASTM D2435)
Boring No., Depth, feet Consolidation Hydro Total Consolidation, B prior to Collapse, % % @ 8 kips
saturation, % @ 2 kips (saturated)
@ 2 kips
•
1 0-3 0.5 0.1 1.8
(remolded)
Table V: Sand Equivalent, SE (ASTM D2419)
Sample Location @ depth, feet Sand Equivalent Average,SE B-3 @ 0-3.0 55.9
B-6 @ 0-3.0 46.7
hugust 28,2024 •

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'"Street, Jpiand-SBDCo. 24036-F/BMP Table VI: Sieve Analysis (ASTM D422)
SAMPLE B-6 @ 0-3 feet
Grain Size % Retained
_Gravels 33
Medium to Coarse 37
Fines 18
Silts 12
Table VII: Soils' Chemical Test Results at Sample Location B-1 @ 0-3 feet Sample Method Result Units Remarks
pH EPA 9040 B 7.93 units Not corrosive
Resistivity SM 2510B 3,640 ohms-cm Moderately
corrosive _
Chloride EPA 300.0 29 mg/kg Not corrosive
Sulfate EPA 300.0 82 mg/kg Not corrosive
Table VIII: Soils' Density Correlation to SPT Blow Counts Density/Consistency 1" Soil Tube --Blows Per Foot
Standard Penetration
Sand Blows Per Foot
Granular Cohesive and Silt Clay
Gravel
•
Very Loose Very Soft 0-50 0-50 0-60 0-5 Loose Soft 50-100 50-180 60-250 5-10
Slightly Stiff 100-350 180-1000 250-1000 10-20 Compact
Compact Very Stiff 350-525 1000-2000 1000-4000 20-35 Dense Hard 525-1500 2000-5000 4000-5000 35-70 Very Dense Very Hard 1500+ 5000+ 5000+ 70+ August 28,2(124

DIRECT.SHEAR TESTS
a a'to
a
1111111"11161.11.11111.1116—
a
1 1 5; —1 - --� '

0. I
N I
x 1 I#
u 1 -4- -1---- I
a I
co I
"' 1
w
Ft a I I I ; I
r
0 0.5 V t t.5 llr2 2.5
NORMAL LOAD{KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT)
SYMBOL LOCATION DEPTH TEST COHESION FRICTION (FT) CONDITION (psf) (degree)
■ B-9 0 to 3 Remolded to 90% 640.10 39.08 Proposed Administrative Office and Maintenance Structures PR NO CT 24036-F 400 E. 20th Street
Upiand, California PLATE B-1
SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.
hA Consulting Foundation Engineers

CONSOLIDATION TESTS
LOADS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT .
a.. .
2 a.
3 00 ' --
A a-1 @ 0-3 ft. _ . —
z 5 Remolded to 90%
Q 6 _ Initial Moisture Content 8.0%
Final Moisture Content m 12.7%
5 7. .
0 co 8
fQ 9 00 1 _ _
' $o. — - 0 - - •
ac 1i.
w
a 12
13 15- J
16 _.. . ___lmiiiip,_,
• WATER PERMITTED TO CONTACT SAMPLE
stigiirA PROJECT Proposed Adirninstrative Office and Maintenance Structures 400 E. 20th Street
PROJECT NO. 24036-F PLATE B-2
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC.

Consulting Foundation Engineers

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Project: San Antonio Water District Ha) Job# 24036-F Location: 400 E.20th Street,Upland Boring No: B-6/P2(a7.0-3' Sample No: 9 Description of Soil: GP-SP
Date of Sample: 8/9/2024
Tested By: JG Date of Testing: 8/16/2024
Sieve No. Sieve Openings in mm Percent Finer Grain Size %Retained 4 4.76 66.74 Gravel 33
10 2.38 52.74 Med. to Crs 37
20 0.84 39.34 Fines 18
40 0.42 28.74 Silts 12
60 0.28 22.54
100 0,149 17.20
4_
200 0.074 10.44
Gravel Sand
Coarse to Medium I
Fine Silt Clay
v. - cav v o 0
z z z a z z z° U.S. Standard Sieve Size T
70 4.76` _ .. ,--.---- - - - -- - -
L 50 2.38 �.
0 40 0.84..— .—_,--_ r
'
ca
L. 1
if 30 _ _ __ D4Zee --•
20 0: _

0.'¢9
10 - — - - - , -0/0 4- _ - -
0 — l I -

10.00 1.00 0.10 0.01 0.00
Grain diameter, mm
Visual Soil Description : GRAVEL/SAND mixture with trace silts, fine to coarse with rock fragments, rocks, and cabbies
Soil Classification: GP-SP
System: USC
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC.

Consulting Foundation Engineers

SAND EQUIVALENT TEST
Test Date: August 16,2024
Project No.: 24036-F/PV
Job Name: San Antonio Water District Headquarters
400 E. 20th Street
Upland
Sample Location: B-6/PV-2 @ 0-3ft
Sample by: JF Tested by: JG

LABORATORY DATA
SAMPLE I - 2 3 4
NO.

TIME START 6:13 6:18 6:23
TIME SOAK 6:23 6:28 6:33
(10 min.)
TIME AT 6:25 6:30 6:35
LEVEL
15ML
TIME of 6:45 6:50 6:55

READING
(20-min)
FINE, ML 5.8 5.6 5.7
COARSE, ML 2.8 2.6 2.6
SE _ 100x 48.27 46.42 45.61
(coarse/fine)
SE Average 46.76
SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.

CONSULTING FOUNDATION

ENGINEERS

SAND EQUIVALENT TEST
Test Date: August 15,2024
Project No.: 24036-F/PV
Job Name: San Antonio Water District Headquarters
400 E. 20th Street
Upland
Sample Location: B-3/PV-1 @ 0-3ft
Sample by: JF Tested by: JG

LABORATORY DATA
SAMPLE 1 2 3 4
NO.

TIME START 1:52 1:57 2:02
TIME SOAK 2:02 2:07 2:12
(10 min.)
TIME AT 2:04 2:09 2:14
LEVEL
1 5ML
TIME of 2:24 2:29 2:34

READING
(20-min) _
FINE, ML 6.0 5.8 5.7
COARSE, ML 3.6 3.0 3.2
SE = 100x 60 51.7 56.1
Jcoarselfne)
SE Average 55.9
SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.

CONSULTING FOUNDATION

ENGINEERS

Page I of 2
A & R Laboratories, Inc.
1650 S.GROVE AVE.,SUITE C
ONTARIO,CA 91761
909-781-6335
www.arlaboralories.coui ollict*arlaborawries-coi CIIEMISTRY•MICROBIOLOGY•FOOD SAFETY-MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOL]•COSMETICS•WATER-SOIL-SOIL VAPOR WASTES

CASE NARRATIVE
Authorized Signature Name I Title(print) Ken Zheng, President Signature Date ""9a4160ed
Laboratory Job No.(Certificate of Analysis No.) 2408-00123 Project Name/No. 24036-F SAN ANTONIO WTR DIST. /400 E.20th ST., UPLAND
Dates Sampled(from/to) 08/14/24 To 08/14/21
Dates Received(from/to) 08/15/24 To 08/15/24
Dates Reported(from/to) 08/19/24 To 8/19/2024
Chains of Custody Received Yes
Comments:

Subcontracting
Inorganic Analyses
No analyses sub-contracted
•Other Analyses
No analyses sub-contracted
Sample Condition(s)
All samples intact
Positive Results(Organic Compounds)
None
Ths•data and inrumation on tiny,and dim atn dnparryorg document,repeeser+l orwr sly fLbrirplOWarlillyrxrdand is rendered anon Haim, auk a is rwk to txr rrprndK[xl,who .irf park,Rr Others:g or alto•,1.ri .rnlhnu:apsxawt Gorr vac latrnalay. lUS➢A-EPA4N1Osa Testing Food Sanitarian consulting Chemical and Miuohiological/ualyses and Research Page 842 of 1374

- A & R Laboratories, Inc.
1650 S.GROVL AVER.,SUITE C
ONTARIO*CA 91761
909-781-6335
www,arlahuralaries.cout oIUicekarlahurawrius.cnm
CiIF_MISTRY•MICROBIOLOGY-FOOD SAFETY-MOBILE LABORATORIES FOOD-COSMETICS-WATER•SOIL•SOIL VAPOR WASTES

CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
2408-00123
SOILS SOUTHWEST INC Date Reported 08/19/24
MOLDY GUP'L'A Date Received 08/15/24
897 VIA LATA SUITE N invoice No. 2349
COLTON,CA 92324 C'.ust/I S192
Permit N(ltnher
Project: 24036-F SAN ANTONIO WTR DIST./400 E.20th ST.,UPLAND Customer P.O.

Analysis Result Qual Units Method DP RI. Date Tech Sample: 001 B-1ta10-3ft Date&rime Sampled: 08/14/24 4 10:00 Sample Matrix: Soil
pFi4l25C-as Dissolved in Wtr 7,93 units EPA 9040 B 1.0 0 08/15/24 DV Resistivity 3640 ohms/cm SM 251013 1.0 1,0 08/15/24 DV Chloride 29 mg/Kg EPA 300.0(1993 Rev 2.: t.0 5.0 08/18/24 11B Sulfate 82 mg/Kg EPA 300.0(1993 Rev 2.: 1.0 5.0 08/18/21 Ttdi Respectfully Submitted:

Ken Zlieng-Lab 1)irector
QUALIFIERS ABBREVIATIONS
B=Detected in the assodaled Method Blank at a concentration above the routine RL. DF= Dilution Factor B1=SOD dilution water is over specifications.The reported result may be biased high. RL=Reporting Limit,Adjusted by DI D=Surrogate recoveries are not calculated due to sample dilution. MDL=Method Detection Limit,Adjusted by OF E=Estimated value;Value exceeds calibration level of instrument, Qual=Qualifier H=Analyte was prepared and/or analyzed outside of the analytical method holding time Tech=Technician I=Matrix Interference.

J=Anatyte concentration detected between Rt.and MDL.

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

S=Customer provided specification limit exceeded.

The data and Inlnmatlan on tins,end other oonnywnynny dowrnene..rept eserst only the idmpk(si isnetp d and is rendered upon cnrtdiiiun Pot it Ls not to he reproduced,vAxdly u n dart,tar adverbanrl r)r other purposes wrttnut approved(sum the laboratory. eSDA-EPA-nrosH Testing Fund Sanitation Consulting Chemical and Ninphlolee cal analyses and Research Page 843 of 1374

s
ART 1650 Grove Aye. Ste C. Ontario, CA 91761 CHAIN OF CUSTODY A&t Work Order :

Tel: 951-779-03TOI909-78T-6335 Fax: 951-779-6344
E-mail: oificeearlaboratories.com ��� � � Page ` of Client Name
n ' ! Liv `-, I"' c , -i / r'n c . Chilled Analyses Requested Turn TimeAround Requested
E-mail r ? / / 1 / - _ _ S I �j 5 s,a +LI 1--,e... . - r-�. 4 0 1 . CAS""' +p( q' I - I v, o a ' Intact U �? 0 Rush
Address , C z w
3 9 7 1/.'e,, +S 2S S r fr- IV Co ✓/0 n G f� w 4 [i 8 12 24 48 Report� {,. Attention Phone g g o9- 370 - 04 7., Sam led Byr /. ©Seal x %' _ g < o , Hours i;L{J ti7 Fax: -1 Q ' 'a r Project Z 4 D-% . _ P Project Site a o E'a )7L 2 0 fli Sf reef L! /4� c i x I'd F, 8 . 8 + 1- `Cl[�armai No./Name 7 O in --- E. a c4 S 6 ie I. Nn s Lab # Client Sample Collection Matrix Sample Na.,type` 4 d Fz, co Q co � - 17Is .S — & size of m m 0 m x m c<n a ? V Remarks iLa5L5rf Sample ID Date Time Type Preserve Container 0_ a. N o a 0_ < 0. 2 V u..1 LL1 CO CO L-1 LL 1.11 LU M2 f / j f .a- �._ / g. 4 -3 A l' i-/24 !D.'oJ .5of I -S� t 4 Ou ce ✓ ✓ Y t/ G ,
3 0
AA
r
5 e
u
4-
1 .
•
+
Ze..1n;:juittd Bye_ Com any dDate Till Re�.eiv 8 Company ate iTime .iiiLi!{t5 t: } '11'� 'f(5- ^ .23 Note: Samples are discarded 30 days after results are enquished By Company Date Time • Received By�pany Date Time reported unless other arrangements are made.

Matrix Code- DW=Drinking Water St_=Sludge Preservative Code lC'lce SH=NeOH ' Sample Container Types:

GW--Ground Water SS=SoiliSediment HC=HCI ST=NasSzi0 T.Tedlar Air Bag . Br Brass Tube E=EnCore WW-Waste Water AR=AIr HN=FiNOa HS=Nano: G=Giass Container P=Plastic Bo t€er,a e 844 of 1374 SD-Solid Waste PP=Pure Product ST-Steal Tube V-VOA Vial r g

A R Sample Acceptance Checklist
CLIENT: GO\\r> } � � WORK ORDER NUMBER: tiC1sj • 1� Temperature:(Criteria:0.0°C-6.0°C)
Sample Temp. (°C) .5` (iz - ID#: 2 7 `0030) Sample(s) outside temprature criteria: PM contacted by
Sample(s) outside temprature criteria, but received on ice/chilled on same day of sampling.

Sample(s) received at ambient temprature; placed on ice for transport by courier, CUSTODY SEAL:

Cooler Present and Intact Present and Not Intact Not Present Sarnple(s) Present and Intact Present and Not Intact y, Not Present Sample Condition: Yes No N/A
Was a COC received r�
Were sample IDs present?
Were sampling dates & times present?
Was a relingquished signature present?
Were the tests required clearly indicated?
Were all samples sealed in plastic bags? -
Did all bottle labels agree with COC? (ID, dates and times) Were correct containers used for the tests required?
Was a sufficient amount of samples sent for tests indicated? r' Was there headspace in VOA vials?
Were the containers labeled with correct preservatives? ExplanationslComments:
'Notification:

For discrepancies, how was the Project Manager notified? Verbal: PM Initials: Data/Time:

Email: Send to: Data/Time:

Project Manager's response:

Completed By: (AA,./1,A Date: Ph.5 li q
A R Laboratories
1650 S. Grove Ave., Suite C, Ontario, CA 91761
PH: 909-781-6335
Email: [email protected]

ANAHEIM TEST LAB, INC
196 Technology Drive.Unit D
Irvine, CA 92618
Phone (9491 336-6544
TO:

DATE:8/26/2024
SOILS SOUTHWEST. INC.
897 VIA LATA,SUITE N P.Q. NO.:Verbal
COLTON, CA.92324
LAB NO.:C-8132
SPECIFICATION:CA 301
MATERIAL:Brown,Silty Sand w.

Gravel
Project No.:24036-F
Project:San Antonio Water District HDQ
400 East 20"i St, Upland, CA
Sample ID: B-6/PV-2 @ 0-3'
Sample Date:8/16/2024

ANALYTICAL REPORT
"R" VALUE
¢Y EXUDATION BY EXPANS)ON
75 N/A

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
VV�

WES BRIDGER LA ANAGER

"R" VALUE CA301
Client: Soils Southwest, Inc. ATL No.: C 8132 Date: 8/26/2024 Client Reference No.: 24036-F
Sample: B-6/PV-2 @a 0-3' Soil Type:Brown, Silty Sand w. Gravel TEST SPECIMEN A B C D
Compactor Air Pressure psi 350 350 350
Initial Moisture Content % 2.0 2.0 2.0
Moisture at Compaction °Io 7.6 7.1 7.3
Briquette Height in. 2.45 ' 2.46 2.49 Dry Density pcf 135.5 _ 134.2 134.8
EXUDATION PRESSURE psi 184 616 322
EXPANSION PRESSURE psf 0 0 0
Ph at 1000 pounds psi 20 13 16
Ph at 2000 pounds psi 35 22 28
Displacement turns 3.45 3.86 3.81
"R"Value 72 80 76
CORRECTED "R"VALUE 72 80 76
Final "R" Value
BY EXUDATION: 75
Q 300 psi
BY EXPANSION: N/A
TI=5.0
go 1;1;T wf w 1
E EEEE EE EE EEEEEE 3 EEE: :EEEEE !
CC :

C
80 II M ,
w•■70 ......JIEEEIEI�fIll wISI .III'!!P!b 1 w ihi:
ill :I C .:..I 1111E : ant!!HIIHO! IHr so
.hill iii:l::::illiiii ... °=EEE
: :_ :
40 :::!l:::::::::l:::=::
•. ■ ..... •._ ■•• :
::• ..
1, .:1:::.. UUll1llh:
/1i:.::l::
.
30 M , Hillipillintiiiiiii= ' H1IUH!EEEEE
2e
Ilium B
::3 :
10 C.. ....w.C:�i:::CC:E H
11::Ewww::::::e::::::alEE E!E# ASIR:
:::::=...:e::e: .1. . E3: l:u3::a:-
O!:!!.•..: 3E n ? aLA!® ? lea:
0 -- - -
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20th Street,Upland-SBDCo, 24036-FIBMP

APPENDIX C
Supplemental Seismic Design Parameters
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Map
SSW AuIijt 2P, ifi24 P9. I

'' ° , . �'1� C3ldornra
eGOV . _ , - Department of Conservation I . I - California Department of Conservation California Geological Survey Fault Activity Map of California California Groksgicai Surrey 0 IS II 0 .500 E.26tn St.Upland CA 117E X 0.11
ri J
t i
, ,
I ..„0„,)0....„.....A..........•
I FAULT
, „ . „v,c. ,

4.S,
\AG pik.
+.trr shall .,•• Chairmen'HIl• r 6
nym C six+ ...-. .,r r
II
I k ox E
_ pk, , ... '"• N.1.0 4.°
Ma j ; C 7
.:4.1 n SMoali r3 ,.xnr \\‘\16:: 41.1 lir I-. •} 1 i s A i .]�pilnlii
A.15^Lsrr.ftI r_.f•.s•r_1�*iRtl F I i••rlr ! E [ Nth rfrr�1 � q CW6 - 1.' F7110 h1.

IC 40)
ratM Anmr1 C 14 s C114tr.r,S! - c.-- n Town
.ry —W-Fnolhil!-131vd' 4 'Agin'Agin- - `TX?"1— - ? Clarion! 1 FOOlhill
a' r
au s - cow r.= 111 St P.l\f9 ho
A
U - - :r Arrti+.r Kay U land err 2 s_...* ..r /r
{ Claremont vo Sib S! 1 31h s! rI ,.r.,y}lay Y':81h t1 ''$Ir.cl :'r
1m. C11:r.•ti: -
117 621 sa 1=.1)n«.'•,., San Bernard-sno Counr BureaL of Lend Mena a n,,Esn.HERE,Ga• .-=EU.SENT P. -US.. —7 - -n•:ern rdlne Fee
- �' g "e �• -
Back to Top Conditions of Use Privacy Policy Accessibility Contact Us

Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation
Mount Baldy Quadrangle
California Geological Survey
hex-=�-..
eierieireese

AREA NOT EVALUATED FOR
LIQUEFACTION OR LANDSLIDES © =r`r �` � - 11 ..14,..r... 7:,."...-) /', -- -'=.-==7_"=-7. -7 - - '. .ki -..,. ,,,t.:_-„.

FA. r r r . MouNT eALOY QUADRANGLE
.pI , ;dt 1. ,r. :.;.*-.*'-
ii
F. er . .,r EARnrouiu%MAT zags SEISMIC MAZAR°ZONES ti 1 REVISED OFr1GAL MAP OFric IAL KAP� • 7 • Irrraw Jan/I.r!/! R.wre Mennen I:30P5 t ., F�' AREA NOT EVALUA OR l _ r, r _ � .`� � LIQUEFACTFON OR DSLICIES .r�f -,�yy��• 1,,,e armor" �� l':r-..e s {} 1 I
yi.
. r-.•_ =ram=Y.
�� ... ram : _ _ _- _ =

ASCE'
ASCE Hazards Report
AMtt6rM SOCIETY or CM IItaGIHE{EiS
Address: Standard: ASCE/SEI 7-16 Latitude: 34.135692 No Address at This Location Risk Category: Ill Longitude: -117.64504 Soil Class: D-Stiff Soil Elevation: 1649.1604629371752 ft (NAVD 88)
••
r ,. I
L 1.1t
<▪ c
httpslllascehazardtool.oroi Page 1 of 3 Mon Jul 22 2024

ASCE.
hh!IFCJ:'J SCj it IV 0 IINL f:Y;I.yV Ms.

Seismic
Site Soil Class: D-Stiff Soil
Results:

Ss : 1.766 Sol : N/A
S, : 0.658 TL : 12
Fa : 1 PGA: 0.753
F„ : N/A PGA M : 0.829
SMs : 1.766 FPGA : 1.1
S:v„ : N/A le : 1.25
Sips : 1.177 C : 1.453
Ground motion hazard analysis may be required. See ASCE/SEI 7-16 Section 11.4.8.

Data Accessed: Mon Jul 22 2024
Date Source: USGS Seismic Design Maas
htlos:llascehazard toot.orgl Page 2 of 3 Mon Jul 22 2024

U.S.Geological Survey-Earthquake Hazards Program
2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source Parameters
New Search
Pref
Rupture Rupture
Distance Slip Dip Dip Stip Length
in Miles Name State Rate (degrees) Dir Sense Top Bottom (km) ( +fyr) (km) {km)

1.30 Aga CA 5 45 N thrust 0 8 28 strike

3.02 a n J CA 0.5 74 NW 0 15 20 slip

5.56 Sierra Madre CA 2 53 N reverse 0 14 57

5.56 Sierra Madre Cannerled CA 2 51 reverse 0 14 75 strike

9.14 Chino,alt I CA 1 65 5W slip 0 14 29 strike

9.22 China,alt I CA 1 50 SW 0 9 24 slip
strike •

11.28 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A CA nJa 90 V 0 16 134 slip
strike

11.28 San Jacinto;SBV4-5JV CA n/a 90 V 0 16 88 slip
strike

11.28 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+C CA n/a 90 V 0 17 181 slip
strike

11.28 San Jacinto;SBV+SJV+A+CC CA n/a 90 V 0 16 181 slip
strike

11.28 San JacintQ;SBV CA 6 90 V s€i p 0 16 45 strike

11.28 5 n Jacinto;$BV+SJV+A+CC+B+SM CA nfa 90 V 0.1 15 241 slip
strike

11.28 San Jacirlto;SBV+SJV+A+CC+B CA n/a 90 V 0.1 15 215 slip
strike

13.53 S..San Andreal;f1B+NM+SM+NSB+SSB+BG+CO CA nfa 85 0.1 13 390 slip
S.San strike

13.53 CA Andreaq;CH+CC+BB+NM+SM+NSE�+$,SEA+BG+CO n/a 86 0.1 13 512 slip
strike

13.53 S.San Andrea s;N58+SSB+BG+•C° CA n/a 79 0.2 12 206 slip
strike

13.53 5.SanAndreas;BB+NM+SM+NSB CA nfa 90 V 0 14 220 slip

U.S. Geological Survey- Earthquake Hazards Program
2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps - Source
Parameters
New Search
Fault Name State
Cucamonga California

GEOMETRY
Dip (degrees) 45
Dip direction N
Sense of slip thrust
Rupture top(km) 0
Rupture bottom (km) 8
Rake(degrees) 90
Length (kni) 28

MODEL VALUES
Slip Rate 5
Probability of activity 1
ELLSWORTH HANKS
Minimum magnitude 6.5 6.5
Maximum magnitude 6.70 6.50
b-value 0.8 0,8

Deformation
Fault Model Char Rates GR-a-value1 Weight Model
Stitched 2.1 3.31e-03/6.61e-03 2.648/NA 0.50 UnStitched 2.1 3.31e-03/6.61e-03 2.648/NA 0.50 Stitched 2.4 3.31e-03/6.61e-03 2.648/NA 0.50 UnStitched 2.4 3.31e-03 16.61e-03 2.648/NA 0.50 1 1st Value is based on Ellsworth relation and 2nd value is based on Hanks and Bakun relation
Comments
Slip rate based on cumulative vertical displacement across three strands reported by Morton and Matti (1987,1991).

National Flood Hazard Layer FI RMetteF N _\ Legend 11 7-39'4Yr 34°875"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT Ill
R lb 1 T i Without Base Flood Elevation OWE)1 i• ‘ * 1 `• U a iii 117641D a - -- Zox A.V.493

SPECIAL FLOOD
With BFE or Depth zonr AE.AO.AN.VE.AR
} f t f ' r' ~ I la HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway 'I R
M `. w io .. •_ Fr'
.fie t a e ' 0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard,Areas _ ,� y - of 1%annual chance flood with average f depth less than one foot or with drainage
V
• ' $iit , - " f + 4 ti • areas of less than one square mile:r +' y
�� rR *` ` ��:' •
_ Future Conditions i%Annual
_ - • ; i
Chance Flood Hazard Zo,rx
�� • f f ■■ L er: t Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to • • Svir r ,We# •. OTHER AREAS OF Levee.See Notes.�^=c x ` 4 •3• • . a _ $,111. $1FLOOD HAZARD Area with Flood Risk due to t.eveszar••n f .
f - j K• • - ,
• T �r.r1 +R I NO scam Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zanrx .' I or
Tf f * t eI1 EffectiveLOMRs
g.• • a t- _ e 1C• , .4 ■ OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard:
•
t je
•� ,14 31 i6 _ ti • . J . ., `* '• IIGENERA♦ ^—-- Channel,Culvert,or Storm Sewer r -
~li STRUCTURES 1 1 11 1 1 1 Levee,Dike,or floodwall '� V 4
err . .1.Y ; A • 0 2D-2 Cross Sections with 1%Annual Chance r - t�•s Water Surface Elevation
• ] AREA OFMINIMAL FLOOD HAZARDr- - - Coastal Transe•ct i'f 04 44* �- Z X ', VOW!
M -,'•••- Base Rood Elevation Line(BEE)
t , f * fi a ' ., Limit of Study ' . -1lam IT�R 50 I.' r eity)of Upland �"` T44 Co star Trn Boundary
r T 7 ' rur --- Coastal Transect Baseline a lb t~" IIIIII . 11141i• i 06071 C78701 . - n FEAT TH ES - — Profile Baseline • xHydrographic Feature
4 I e• 9/ZJ2ti16 . . .�
--•- a3 Digital Data Available
ti
' _ No Digital Data Available
MAP PANELS;•
Unmapped
r - -— �� The pin displayed on the map Is an approximate i .0 ; t _. - __ point selected 6y the user and does not represent LL 7• r `T an authoritative property location. .i I i This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of ■ �„ tr• 6 • — digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. i _ e The basemap shown compiles with FEMA's basemap ` S 3 N*., . yaccuracy standards
'irC'f E
■ _ _ �' f 1 The flood hazard Information Is derived directly from the + e authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA.This map Jib_ r }. = + f was exported on; 22.'2132a at 3 06 PM and does not pi%
.,F y ^ • • I9 ' veneer changes or amendments subsequent tD this date and •
I1 le. '• • time.The NFHL and effective information may change or +i.r+ ++ � _. _ • • }1 I become superseded by new data overtime.

F "4 r_ + . �` .1 .." � r 1 I ;- f-`� This map image is void if the one or more of the following map w _ 1 •"` —•- _ #, 4 e]i li yy elements do not appear,basemap Imagery,flood zone labels, f •• I •1 ! -i '• , ,■ legend,scale bar,map creation date,community Identifiers, 117'38'27't4 34'755"N FIRM panel number.and FIRM effective date.Map images for Feet :6 000 unmapped and unmodemized areas cannot be used for 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 regulatory purposes.

Sasemap Imagery Source:U5G5 National Map 2023

San Antonio Water District Headquarters1400 E.20`h Street, Upland-SBDCo. 24036-F/BMP

APPENDIX D
Field Infiltration Test Data
Porchet Method Calculation Summary
SSW A11,115r 2Fs,?024 i.

Conversion Table (Porchet Method)
San Antonio Water District Headquarters
400 E. 20th Street, Upland
Project No. 24036-BMP
Test lNTest Hole Depth Time initial Depth Final Depth Initial Water Height Final Water Height Change Height/Time Average Head Height/Time no. (inches) Interval (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) II, AT D (in) D,(in) H,=dT-Do H:=DrDf ❑H/MD=Ha-Hi Havg=(H0+H4)/2 P-1 - 36 10 12 _ 35.5 _ 24 0.5 _ 23.5 12.25 P-2 60 10 36 56.5 24 3.5 20.5 13.75 _ P-3 Test at required depth could not be performed P-4 Test at required depth could not be performed Observed Infiltration Rate(It)=❑H6Or/Ot(r+2Havg) Legend A B C C1 HEAD= Observed Field Rate
❑H6Or At (r+2Ha„g) A/B=inch/hr Ha= inches of water filled from bottom P-1 5640 285 19.79 Do= initial height of water(inches)from bottom P-2 4920 315 25.62 Df= final heigh of water(inches)from bottom 'P-3 Columns A-B-C : Porchet Conversion Calculations P-4 Column C: Observed Rate following Porchet Conversion Dt= depth of test hole bottom (inches)

Percolation Test Data Sheet .

Project:5Aa Arno r i o 4)Ni..2 Pic$1,44C.77 iiDM -WOO IProject No. .24t336 Test Hole No: P-I Tested By: JC�- date: t0--4-2,4 • - Depth of Test Hole,D7 3 0 1.JSCS Soil Classification Test Hole Dimensions(inches) _Length Width
. Diameter(if round)= 8.0 in. 'Sides(if rectangular)= Sandy Soil Criteria Test*
At D. Df AD Greater Than
Time Initial Final Change In or Equal to Trial Interval Depth to Depth to Water 6.0 inches??? No. Start Time Stop Time (min) Water(in.) Water(In.) Level(in,) (Y/N) 1 /0 y,r !G:�r 25 /2 3(o 29 y
2 t7:.: js -SS 25 12 3( 2c1 'i
*If two consective measurements show that six inches of water seeps away inJess than 25 minutes,the test shall be run for an additional hour with measurements taken every 10 minutes. - Otherwise,pre-soak(fill)overnight.Obtain at least twelve measurements per hole over at least six hours(approximately 30 minute intervals)with a precision of at least 0.25." • At Do Df AD MAD
Time Initial Final Change in Percolation
Trial Interval Depth to Depth to Water Rate No. Start Time Stop Time (min) Water(€n_) Water(in.) Level(in.) - (min/In.) t0:5C' 1; :cCP ,'(:" 12 3 24 o.cf2. 2 ;! ;¢ail /1'! Iw' /2 35 2�. ].[f2 8 /Mg 1-1:8 ." /' eel aciZ
4 r!:24) . ii:39 A i2 34 . ZG a•q2 5 i :O ,,, /2 3-Cc 23.5- ay3
6 : !:z: 1 !.c /2_ 35.c 23.5 0.93 7 ;.2:e i 12 7/ /0 /2.- 35_ 5- 23.5 5 Q�'3 8 -
•
9 .
10 11
12 13
14 16
_17
v
18 Comments - --� �- u

r _ T Percolation Test Data Sheet
Project:5/14.1ArzioNI O Orot2 !]iyvtic77 Ho€ —upuis,A0 Project No. 24036 Test Hole No: P-2- Tested 4: j C,-. Date: tg- j,z,y Depth of Test Hole,❑r OD USCS Soil Classification Test Hole Dimensions(inches) Length Width
. Diameter(if round}= 8.0 in. Sides(if rectangular)- _ J
Sandy Soil Criteria Test*
At i3r, Dr AD Greater Than
Time Initial Final Change in or Equal to • Trial Interval Depth to Depth to Water 6.0 inches??? No. StartTirne Stop Time (min) Water(in.) _Water(in.) Level(in,) (Y/N) 25 r. [ ti.
2 !r • r r• 25
*If two consective measurements show that six inches of water seeps away in.iess than 25 minutes,the test shall be run for an additional hour with mwsurernents taken every,10 minutes. - • Otherwise,pre-soak Mill)overnight.Obtain at least twelve measurements per hole over at least six hours(approximately 30 minute intervals)with a precision of at least D.25." At D, Dp AD AT/AD
Time initial Final Change in Percolation
Trial Interval Depth to Depth to Water Rate No. Start Time Stop Time (min) Water(iri.) Water(in.) Level(In.) • (min./In.) 1 ,:. I i , ; !� 0.44
2 fir.,. !/= ":3 / .��
3 : , a S :7
4 .l2• azj / 3 s9 P.'•
5 �. • '+ . 'd - PO • 2C1, et, 20.57 C. 7 .- •n w air' ,•
8 9
10 •
11 12
13 14
15 16 •
17 18
Comments •

MOJAVE RIVER WATERSHED Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP - including underground BMPs (DA 1) Remaining LID DCV not met by site design BMP(ft3): V,„,,,,,=Farm 4.2-3 Item 1-Form 4.3-2 Item15

DA DMA
BMP Type Use columns to the right to compute runoff volume retention DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type from proposed infiltration BMP(select BMP from Table 5-4 in TGD far BMP Type SMP Type (Use additional forms WQMP)- Use additional forms for more BMPs for more BMPsJ 2 Infiltration rate of underlying soils(ln/hr)See Section 5.4.2 and Appendix C of the TGD for WQMP for minimum requirements for f ?7 t 5-,42- assessment methods
3 infiltration safety factor See TGD Section 5.4.2 and Appendix❑ •
4 Design percolation rate(in/hr) Pd,y„=item 2/Item 3
5 Ponded water drawdown time(hr)Copy item Gin Farm 4.2-1 6 Maximum ponding depth(ft) BMP specific,see Table 5.4 of the TGD • for WOMP for BMP design details
7 Pa n d i n g Depth(ft) dew.Minimum of(1/12.1tem 4•Item 5)or Item 6 8 Infiltrating surface area,SABmp(ft2}the lesser of the area needed for infiltration of full OCVor minimum space requirements from Table 5.7 of the TGD far WOMP
9 Amended soil depth,dmed7u(ft) Only included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 in the TGD for WQMP for reference to I3MP design details 10 Amended soil porosity
11 Gravel depth,dmedio(ft)Only Included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details
12 Gravel porosity
13 Duration of storm as basin is filling(hrs) Typical"'3hrs ,14 Above Ground Retention Volume(ft3) V r,,, =item 8"fltem7+ (Item 9"Item 10)+(Item 31'item 12)4(Item 13"(Item 4/32))1 15 Underground Retention Volume(ft3) Volume determined using manufacturer's specifications and calculations
16 Total Retention Volume from LID Infiltration BMPs: (Sum of Items 14 and 15 for all infiltration BMP included in plan) .17 Fraction of DCV achieved with infiltration IMP: % Retention; =Item 16/Form 4.2-1Item 7 18 Is full LID DCV retained onsite with combination of hydrologic source control and LID retention/infiltration BMPs?Yes❑ No❑ If yes,demonstrate conformance using Farm 4.3-10;If no,then reduce Item 3 Factor of Safety to 2.0 and increase Item 8,Infiltroring surface Area,such that the portion of the site area used for retention and infiltration BMPs equals or exceeds the minimum effective area thresholds(Table 5.7 of the TGD for WQMP) for the applicable category of development and repeat ail above calculations. r
4-19

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street, Upland-SBDCo. 24036-F/BMP

PROFESSIONAL LIMITATIONS
Our investigation was performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances by other reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in these general or similar localities.

No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report.

The investigations are based on soil samples only, consequently the recommendations provided shall be considered 'preliminary'. The samples taken and used for testing and the observations made are believed representative of site conditions; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between boring.As in most major projects, conditions revealed by excavations may vary with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the project geotechnical engineer and designs adjusted as required or alternate design recommended.

The report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner,or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the project architect and engineers.Appropriate recommendations should be incorporated into structural plans.

The necessary steps should be taken to see that cut such recommendations in field.

The findings of this report are valid as of this present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they due to natural process or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside of our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should be updated after a period of one year.

RECOMMENDED SERVICES
The review of grading plans and specifications, field observations and testing by a geotechnical representative of this office is integral part of the conclusions and recommendations made in this report. If Soils Southwest, Inc. (SSW) is not retained for these services, the Client agrees to assume SSW's responsibility for any potential claims that may arise during and after construction or during the lifetime use of the structure and its appurtenant.

The recommendations supplied should be considered valid and applicable, provided the following conditions, at a minimum, are met:

Pre-grade meeting with the contractor, public agency, and the geotechnical engineer, ii. Excavated bottom inspections and verifications by the greotechnical engineer prior to backfill placement,
iii. Continuous observations and testing during site preparation and structural fill soils placement, iv. Observation and inspection of footing trenching prior to steel and concrete placement, v. Subgrade verifications including plumbing trench backfills prior to concrete slab-on-grade placement,
vi. On and off-site utility trench backfill testing and verifications, vii. Precise-grading plan review, and
viii. Consultations as required during construction or upon request.

In the event that the above conditions are not strictly fulfilled, Soils Southwest, Inc. will assume no responsibility for any structural distresses during the lifetime use of the development planned.

SSW August 28,2O 2•I

L A SAN ANTONIO WATER COMPANY HEADQUARTERS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION r`. UPLAND,CALIFORNIA AUGUST 2025
This page intentionally left blank
P:12024420241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PROOi1CTS\CECLA\Pubtic Review Oratt45an Antonio Water Headquarters ISMND_O8.0825.dotx[08/08/25)

INITIAL STuDYIMITISATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SAN ANTONI❑WATER COMPANY HEADQUARTERS PROTECT ` s A AUGUST 2025 UPLAND,CALIFORNIA rL.

APPENDIX E

PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
P:\2024\2O241723San Antonia Driveway Expansion\PRODUCTS\CEQA\Public Review❑raft\5an Antonio Water Headquarters ISMND_48.05.25.decx(08I08/25)

L A SAN ANTONIO WATER COMPANY HEADQUARTERS PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION r`. UPLAND,CALIFORNIA AUGUST 2025
This page intentionally left blank
P:12024420241723 San Antonio Driveway Expansion\PROOi1CTS\CECLA\Pubtic Review Oratt45an Antonio Water Headquarters ISMND_O8.0825.dotx[08/08/25)

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
For:

San Antonio Water Company
WQMP
APN 1044-091-22
400 E.20th Street
Upland,CA 91784
Prepared for:

CEDG Architects
401 E. Columbia Ave.

Pomona, CA 91767
(909) 625-3916
Erik Peterson
Prepared by:

Land Development Design Company, LLC
2313 E. Philadelphia St.,Ste. F
Ontario,CA 91761
(909)930-1466
Kevin Richer
Submittal Date: September 7, 2024
Revision Date:

Owner's Certification

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Project Owner's Certification
This Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)has been prepared for Stewart Development by Land Development Design Company, LLC.The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the San Bernardino County and the NPDES Area-wide Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of a WQMP.

The undersigned,while it owns the subject property,is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with San Bernardino County's Municipal Storm Water Management Program and the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors in interest and the city/county shall be notified of the transfer.The new owner will be informed of its responsibility under this WQMP.A copy of the approved WQMP shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity.
"I certify under a penalty of law that the provisions(implementation, operation,maintenance,and funding) of the WQMP have been accepted and that the plan will be transferred to future successors." Project Data
Permit/Application TBD Grading Permit Number(s): TBD Number(s):

Tract/Parcel Map Portion of Lot 281&282
Number(s): MB 11/6 Building Permit Number(s): TBD CUP,SUP,and/or APN(Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): APN 1044-091-22 Owner's Signature
Owner Name: San Antonio Water
Title
Company San Antonio Water Company
Address 139 N Euclid Ave, Upland, CA 91786
Email
Telephone# (909)982-4107
Signature Date
Owner's Certification

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Preparer's Certification
Project Data
Permit/Application TBD Grading Permit Number(s): TBD Number(s):

Tract/Parcel Map Portion of Lot 281&282 Building Permit Number(s): TBD Number(s): MB 11/6
CUP,SUP,and/or APN(Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): APN 1044-091-22 "The selection, sizing and design of stormwater treatment and other stormwater quality and quantity control measures in this plan were prepared under my oversight and meet the requirements of Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R8-2o10-oo36."
PE Stamp Below
Engineer: Kevin J. Richer
Title Project Engineer ESS/047,
•
G-
Company Land Development Design Company,LLC
73 Address 2313 E.Philadelphia St.Ste. F/Ontario,CA 91761 No. 43714 Email [email protected]
civm
Telephone# (909)930-1466 �T£ OF CA' Q"
Signature ,
Date 9/7/24
Preparer's Certification

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Table of Contents
Section 1 Discretionary Permits 1-1
Section 2 Project Description 2-1

2.1 Project Information 2-1

2.2 Property Ownership/Management 2-2

2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants 2-3

2.4 Water Quality Credits 2-4
Section 3 Site and Watershed Description 3-1
Section 4 Best Management Practices 4-1

4.1 Source Control BMP 4-1

4.1.1 Pollution Prevention 4-1

4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices 4-6

4.2 Project Performance Criteria 4-7

4.3 Project Conformance Analysis 4-12

4.3.i Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP 4-14

4.3.2 Infiltration BMP 4-16

4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP 4-18

4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP 4.19

4.3.5 Conformance Summary 4-23

4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP 4-24

4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan(if applicable) 4-25 Section 5 Inspection & Maintenance Responsibility Post Construction BMPs 5-1 Section 6 Site Plan and Drainage Plan 6-1

6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan 6-i

6.2 Electronic Data Submittal 6-i

6.3 Post Construction 6-i

6.4 Other Supporting Documentation 6-i
Forms
Form i-i Project Information i-i
Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project 2-i Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management 2-2 Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern 2-3
Form 2.4-i Water Quality Credits 2-4
Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features 3-1 Form 3-2 Hydrologic Characteristics 3-2
Form 3-3 Watershed Description 3-3
Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMP 4-2 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMP 4-4
Form 4.1-3 Site Design Practices Checklist 4-6 Form 4.2-i LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume 4-7 Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment 4-8
Contents

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume 4-9 Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration 4-io Form 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff 4-ii Form 4.3-i Infiltration BMP Feasibility 4-13
Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP 4-14 Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP 4-17
Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMP 4-18
Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP 4-19 Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment-Bioretention and Planter Boxes w/Underdrains 4-20 Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment-Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention 4-21 Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment 4-22
Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative Compliance Volume Estimate 4-23 Form 4.3-mo Hydromodification Control BMP 4-24 Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance 5-1
Contents

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Section 1 Discretionary Permit(s)
Form 1-1 Project Information
Project Name San Antonio Water Company
Project Owner Contact Name: San Antonio Water Company
Mailing E-mail
139 N Euclid Ave,Upland,CA 91786 Telephone: (909)982-4107 Address: Address:

Permit/Application Number(s): TBD Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): APN 1044-091-22 Additional Information/
Comments:

The project proposes to develop a portion of 4.92 acre site located at 400 E.20th Street, Upland. The site is bounded to the north by the right-of-way 20th Street and single family tract homes further to the north;to the west by single family tact homes;to the south by the 210 Freeway right-of-way;and to the east by an undeveloped lot.

The site is currently partially developed with a water tank and equipment pad located towards the west boundary. The site is primarily pervious with dirt and rock cover. The site has no landscape or natural vegetation. There is a small paved turn-around near the entrance to the lot.The site currently sheet flows from northeast towards southwest. There is a 3'to 6'high slope along the south boundary of the project adjacent to the freeway right- of-way. There is a natural ravine near the southwest corner that discharges into an existing ditch along the northerly freeway right-of-way
The project proposes to develop the majority of the site with a office building and maintenance building along with access drives and parking areas. The westerly third of the site will remain undisturbed around the existing water tank and equipment pad. There will be a large landscape area in front of the office building along with landscape buffers along the north,east and south boundaries. The pervious area for this scope of project is higher Description of Project: than normal. The site is divided into 2 drainage areas. DA1 covers the northeasterly quadrant of the site where drainage sheets to a landscaped infiltration basin located to the north of the proposed office building. The office building roof drains are also directed to said infiltration basin. The pervious area for DA1 is approximately 60%. The infiltration basin is designed such that an overflow will discharge at the westerly end of the basin into the undisturbed area. DA2 covers the southerly maintenance building and the easterly drive and parking lot. This area sheets towards curbs and gutters that flow westerly towards a series of catch basin inlets connected to a proposed storm drain. The storm drain will convey flows towards a proposed underground infiltration system located west of the paved area near the south boundary. The access manhole will have a grated manhole cover to allow the system flows to bubble out onto the surface when the system is full.This will only occur during large storms. The infiltration rate is high and will allow smaller storms to be contained within the system and infiltrate rapidly. The overflows will drain towards the existing ravine in the southwest corner of the site. The pervious area for DA2 is approximately 62%. This is due to the large undisturbed area being considered part of the project. These drainage patterns mimic the existing condition and overflows do not exceed pre-developed flow rates
Street improvements along 20th Street are existing.
1-1

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Provide summary of Conceptual
WQMP conditions(if previously N/A
submitted and approved). Attach
complete copy.

I
1-2

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Section 2 Project Description

2.1 Project Information
This section of the WQMP should provide the information listed below.The information provided for Conceptual/Preliminary WQMP should give sufficient detail to identify the major proposed site design and LID BMPs and other anticipated water quality features that impact site planning. Final Project WQMP must specifically identify all BMP incorporated into the final site design and provide other detailed information as described herein.

The purpose of this information is to help determine the applicable development category, pollutants of concern,watershed description, and long term maintenance responsibilities for the project,and any applicable water quality credits. This information will be used in conjunction with the information in Section 3, Site Description,to establish the performance criteria and to select the LID BMP or other BMP for the project or other alternative programs that the project will participate in,which are described in Section 4.

Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project
1 Development Category(Select all that apply):

Ti Significant re-development New development involving Ti Automotive repair nRestaurants(with SIC involving the addition or the creation of 10,000 ft2 or shops with standard code 5812)where the land replacement of 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface industrial classification(SIC) area of development is more of impervious surface on collectively over entire site codes 5013,5014,5541, 5,000 ft2 or more an already developed site 7532-7534,7536-7539
❑ Hillside developments of ❑ Developments of 2,500 ft2 ❑ Parking lots of 5,000 ft2 ❑ Retail gasoline outlets 5,000 ft2 or more which are of impervious surface or more or more exposed to storm that are either 5,000 ft2 or located on areas with known adjacent to(within 200 ft)or water more,or have a projected erosive soil conditions or discharging directly into average daily traffic of 100 where the natural slope is environmentally sensitive areas or more vehicles per day 25 percent or more or waterbodies listed on the
CWA Section 303(d)list of
impaired waters.
n Non-Priority/Non-Category Project May require source control LID BMPs and other LIP requirements.Please consult with local jurisdiction on specific requirements.
2 Project Area(ft2): 214,322 3 Number of Dwelling Units: n/a 4 SIC Code: 4941 5 Is Project going to be phased? Yes❑ No® If yes,ensure that the WQMP evaluates each phase as a distinct DA,requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion.
6 Does Project include roads? Yes❑ No® If yes,ensure that applicable requirements for transportation projects are addressed(see Appendix A of TGD for WQMP)
2-1

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

2.2 Property Ownership/Management
Describe the ownership/management of all portions of the project and site. State whether any infrastructure will transfer to public agencies (City, County, Caltrans, etc.) after project completion. State if a homeowners or property owners association will be formed and be responsible for the long-term maintenance of project stormwater facilities. Describe any lot-level stormwater features that will be the responsibility of individual property owners.

Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management
Describe property ownership/management responsible for long-term maintenance of WQMP stormwater facilities:

The maintenance of the proposed development is the responsibility of the owner.There is no homeowner or property owner's association set up for this proposed development.All of the BMPs are the responsibility of the owner to maintain.

Owner information:

San Antonio Water Company
139 N Euclid Ave
Upland,CA 91786
(909)982-4107
Contact
email
2-2

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants
Determine and describe expected stormwater pollutants of concern based on land uses and site activities (refer to Table 3-3 in the TGD for WQMP).

Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern
Please check:

Pollutant E=Expected,N=Not Additional Information and Comments Expected
Pathogens(Bacterial/Virus) E® N ❑ Wild Birds and animal wastes,garbage.

Nutrients-Phosphorous E® N ❑ Fertilizers,food waste,garbage.

Nutrients-Nitrogen E® N ❑ Fertilizers,food waste,garbage.

Noxious Aquatic Plants E® N ❑ Landscape areas.

Sediment E® N ❑ Driveways,rooftops and sidewalks.

Metals E® N ❑ Car and truck use.

Oil and Grease E® N ❑ Car and truck use.

Trash/Debris E® N ❑ Poorly managed trash containers and parking lot.

Pesticides/Herbicides E® N ❑ Landscape use.

Organic Compounds E® N ❑ Landscape use and fertilizers.

Other:Oxygen Demanding
Compounds E® N ❑ Landscape areas.

Other: E❑ N ❑
Other: E❑ N ❑
Other: E❑ N ❑
Other: E❑ N ❑
2-3

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

2.4 Water Quality Credits
A water quality credit program is applicable for certain types of development projects if it is not feasible to meet the requirements for on-site LID. Proponents for eligible projects,as described below, can apply for water quality credits that would reduce project obligations for selecting and sizing other treatment BMP or participating in other alternative compliance programs. Refer to Section 6.2 in the TGD for WQMP to determine if water quality credits are applicable for the project.

Form 2.4-1 Water Quality Credits
1 Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits:Select all that apply ❑ Redevelopment projects that Higher density ❑Mixed use development, DBrownfield reduce the overall impervious development projects (combination of residential, redevelopment footprint of the project site. riVertical density[20%] commercial,industrial,office, (redevelop real property [Credit=%impervious reduced] 1-17 units/acre[5%] institutional,or other land uses complicated by presence which incorporate design principles or potential of hazardous that demonstrate environmental contaminants)[25%]
benefits not realized through single
use projects)[20%]
❑ Redevelopment projects in ❑ Transit-oriented ❑In-fill projects(conversion of ❑ Live-Work established historic district, developments(mixed use empty lots&other underused developments(variety of historic preservation area,or residential or commercial spaces<5 acres,substantially developments designed similar significant core city center area designed to maximize surrounded by urban land uses,into to support residential and areas[10%] access to public more beneficially used spaces,such vocational needs)[20%] transportation)[20%] as residential or commercial areas) [10%]
2 Total Credit 0%(Total all credit percentages up to a maximum allowable credit of 50 percent) Description of Water Quality n/a
Credit Eligibility(if applicable)
2-4

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Section 3 Site and Watershed Description
Describe the project site conditions that will facilitate the selection of BMP through an analysis of the physical conditions and limitations of the site and its receiving waters. Identify distinct drainage areas (DA) that collect flow from a portion of the site and describe how runoff from each DA(and sub-watershed DMAs) is conveyed to the site outlet(s). Refer to Section 3.2 in the TGD for WQMP.The form below is provided as an example.

Then complete Forms 3.2 and 3.3 for each DA on the project site.If the project has more than one drainage area for stormwater management, then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA / outlet.

Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features
Site coordinates take GPs Thomas Bros Map page measurement at approximate Latitude 34°08'08"N Longitude 117°38'43"W C5 center of site
1 San Bernardino County climatic region: ® Valley ❑ Mountain 2 Does the site have more than one drainage area(DA): Yes No If no,proceed to Form 3-2.If yes,then use this form to show a conceptual schematic describing DMAs and hydrologic feature connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s).An example is provided below that can be modified for proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMA and flow routing may be attached DA r ► OUTLET
DA 2 OUTLET 2
Conveyance Briefly describe on-site drainage features to convey runoff that is not retained within a DMA Storm water runoff is directed towards a proposed landscape infiltration basin located north of the proposed office building. The drainage area consists of the northeast quadrant of the site which is DA 1 to Outlet 1 primarily landscape and the proposed office building. The overflow from this basin will discharge at the west end of the basin and sheet into the undisturbed area,continuing southwest in the same manner as the pre-developed flows.

Storm water runoff is directed southerly towards curb and gutters in the south paved driveway access adjacent to the maintenance building. The westerly drive and southerly area will be collected in a series of catch basin inlets that convey flows in a proposed storm drain pipe towards a proposed DA 2 to Outlet 2 underground infiltration system located just westerly of the paved areas. The access manhole will have a grated manhole cover to allow the system flows to bubble out onto the surface when the system is full.This will only occur during large storms. The infiltration rate is high and will allow smaller storms to be contained within the system and infiltrate rapidly. The overflows will drain towards the existing ravine in the southwest corner of the site. 3-1

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 3-2 Existing Hydrologic Characteristics for Drainage Area 1 For Drainage Area 1's sub-watershed DMA,
provide the following characteristics DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D 1 DMA drainage area(ft2) 45,262 169,059
2 Existing site impervious area(ftZ) 18,157 64,760 3 Antecedent moisture condition For desert
areas,use II II
http://www.sbcounty.aov/dpw/floodcontrol/pdf/2
0100412map.pdf
4 Hydrologic soil group Refer to Watershed
Mapping Tool—
http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP
5 Longest flowpath length(ft) 668
6 Longest flowpath slope(ft/ft) 0.004
7 Current land cover type(s) Select from Fig C-3 Dirt Dirt of Hydrology Manual
8 Pre-developed pervious area condition:

Based on the extent of wet season vegetated cover
good>75%;Fair 50-75%;Poor <50%Attach photos Poor Poor of site to support rating
3-2

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 3-3 Watershed Description for Drainage Area
Receiving waters City of Fontana Storm Drain of Poplar Ave.,San Sevaine Channel,Santa Ana Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool River Reach 3,Prado Dam,Santa Ana River Reach 2,Santa Ana River Reach 1, http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP
See'Drainage Facilities"link at this website Pacific Ocean San Sevaine Channel—None
Applicable TMDLs Santa Ana River Reach 3—Bacterial Indicator Refer to Local Implementation Plan Prado Dam—None Santa Ana River Reach 2—None
Santa Ana River Reach 1—None
Pacific Ocean—None
303(d)listed impairments
Refer to Local Implementation Plan and Watershed San Sevaine Channel—None Mapping Tool— Santa Ana River Reach 3-Copper/Lead/Bacterial Indicator http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP and State Prado Dam—pH Water Resources Control Board website— Santa Ana River Reach 2-None http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_is Santa Ana River Reach 1—None sues/programs/tmdl/index.shtml
Pacific Ocean-None
Environmentally Sensitive Areas(ESA)
Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool— n/a
http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP
Unlined Downstream Water Bodies
Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool— Santa Ana River http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP
❑ Yes Complete Hydrologic Conditions of Concern(HCOC)Assessment.Include Forms

4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 and Hydromodification BMP Form 4.3-10 in submittal Hydrologic Conditions of Concern
® No,project drains to an adequate sump,Prado Dam and Santa Ana River, perTGD3.4.
❑ Yes Attach verification of regional BMP evaluation criteria in WAP • More Effective than On-site LID
Watershed—based BMP included in a RWQCB • Remaining Capacity for Project DCV approved WAP • Upstream of any Water of the US • Operational at Project Completion
• Long-Term Maintenance Plan
® No
3-3

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Section 4 Best Management Practices (BMP)

4.1 Source Control BMP

4.1.1 Pollution Prevention
Non-structural and structural source control BMP are required to be incorporated into all new development and significant redevelopment projects.Form 4.1-1 and 4.1-2 are used to describe specific source control BMPs used in the WQMP or to explain why a certain BMP is not applicable.Table 7-3 of the TGD for WQMP provides a list of applicable source control BMP for projects with specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities.

The source control BMP in this table must be implemented for projects with these specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities.

The preparers of this WQMP have reviewed the source control BMP requirements for new development and significant redevelopment projects.The preparers have also reviewed the specific BMP required for project as specified in Forms 4.1-1 and 4.i-2.All applicable non-structural and structural source control BMP shall be implemented in the project.
4-1

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs
Check One
Identifier Name Describe BMP Implementation OR, Included Not if not applicable,state reason
Applicable
N1 Education of Property Owners,Tenants The owner shall familiarize himself with the contents of the WQMP and furnish copies of and Occupants on Stormwater BMPs ® city and county BMP factsheets to all future tenants through lease agreements.

Tenants shall not be allowed to discharge chemicals,chemical residues,wastewater or N2 Activity Restrictions ® other prohibited discharges(sediment,trash,fertilizers,pesticides,heavy metals, petroleum products or pollutants),to the outside,paved areas of the site.Pesticide application shall be done by a certified applicator.

Landscape crews shall inspect the irrigation system and shall report all drainage N3 Landscape Management BMPs ® problems to the owner.At a minimum,owner shall ensure landscape management BMPs are implemented,including application of fertilizers/pesticides by licensed persons.

N4 BMP Maintenance ® All site,source and treatment control BMPs outlined in this WQMP shall be maintained as outlined in Section 5 of this WQMP..

Title 22 CCR Compliance
N5 ❑ ® Medical Waste Storage is not a project feature. (How development will comply)
The owner shall ensure that all business activities at the site comply with the County of N6 Local Water Quality Ordinances ® San Bernardino stormwater ordinance through the implementation of BMP through this WQMP.

Hazardous waste such as oils,lubricants,etc.will have a spill contingency plan N7 Spill Contingency Plan ® developed by the operator. Absorbent materials shall be kept onsite to apply to oil/grease leaks in the parking lot.A spill cleanup and disposal process shall be created and all applicable employees shall be trained accordingly.

N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance ❑ ® Underground storage tanks are not a project feature.

N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure ® ❑ The operator will complete the Hazardous Waste Compliance based on storage of oils, Compliance lubricants,etc.
4-2

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs
Check One
Identifier Name Describe BMP Implementation OR, Included Not if not applicable,state reason
Applicable
N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation ® ❑ Building will be fitted with fire sprinklers, including areas of hazardous waste storage.

A program shall be implemented to pick up litter of the site weekly.The trash enclosure is to be swept and cleaned on a daily basis.Trash enclosures are designed to divert all N11 Litter/Debris Control Program ® flows around the enclosure.Enclosure is designed with a roof cover. All dumpsters will have lids installed and will be inspected to ensure that the dumpsters remain covered and leak-proof.The owner shall ensure tenants contract with a refuse company to have the dumpsters emptied on a weekly basis,at a minimum.

Owner shall utilize the attached County brochures for employee training on stormwater N12 Employee Training ® best management practices.Training to occur within the first three months of hire,and annually thereafter.

N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks ❑ ® Docks are not a project design feature.

The on-site catch basins shall be inspected monthly during the rainy season(October- May)and before and after each storm to ensure proper operation.The owner shall N14 Catch Basin Inspection Program ® ❑ contract with a qualified landscape contractor to inspect and clean out accumulation of trash,litter and sediment and check for evidence of illegal dumping of waste materials into on-site drains.

Parking lots shall be vacuum swept weekly to prevent sediment,garden waste,and Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and ❑ trash,or other pollutants from entering on-site drains and public storm channels.

N15
Parking Lots Vacuum sweeping will be done by a landscape contractor or other contractor provided by the owner.

N16 Other Non-structural Measures for Public ❑ ® No measures required.

Agency Projects
NPDES General Construction Activities Permit to be complied with by filing a notice of N17 Comply with all other applicable NPDES ® ❑ intent and SWPPP with the state and obtaining a WDID Discharge Permit Number prior permits to commencement of construction activities,covered under the permit. Industrial Gneral Permit will be applied for by the owner/operator. 4-3

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs
Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR,
Identifier Name Not If not applicable,state reason Included Applicable
Si Provide storm drain system stencilling and signage A painted message"No Dumping-Drains to Ocean"shall be placed on each catch 171
(CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-13) ® basin.The message shall be inspected annually&repainted as necessary.

Design and construct outdoor material storage
S2 areas to reduce pollution introduction(CASQA New ® 1 III Storage materials for construction/maintenance projects stored in covered Development BMP Handbook SD-34) enclosures.

Design and construct trash and waste storage areas Stormwater flows are designed to flow around waste areas.Trash enclosures shall S3 to reduce pollution introduction(CASQA New ® 0 be paved and have permanent roof or awning.All dumpster shall have working lids Development BMP Handbook SD-32) I which shall be kept closed at all times.

Use efficient irrigation systems&landscape design,
water conservation,smart controllers,and source Implement landscape plans consistent with county water conservation ordinances, S4 ® 0 which shall include provision of weather-based controllers,rain shutoff devices, control(Statewide Model Landscape Ordinance;
CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) drip irrigation heads and recessed finish grade of all landscaped areas.

Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of
S5 1-2 inches below top of curb,sidewalk,or ® 0 Landscape is to be depressed 1-2". pavement I
Protect slopes and channels and provide energy
S6 dissipation(CASQA New Development BMP ® 0 Rip-rap proposed to prevent erosion at overflow locations in southwest and Handbook SD-10) southeast corners.

Covered dock areas(CASQA New Development
S7 0 I ® Covered dock areas are not a design feature of this project.

BMP Handbook SD-31)
Covered maintenance bays with spill containment Maintenance bays are not located inside the maintenance building and have S8 plans(CASQA New Development BMP Handbook 0 ® internal drains that are directed through a clarifier that are on the sanitary sewer SD-31) system.

Vehicle wash areas with spill containment plans Vehicle washing is not conducted inside the maintenance building in a truck S9 (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) 0 ® wash bay.All wash waters are collected in a drain and directed through a clarifier prior to discharge into sanitary sewer
S10 Covered outdoor processing areas(CASQA New ❑ ® Outdoor processing is not a project feature.

Development BMP Handbook SD-36)
4-4

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs
Check One
Identifier Name Describe BMP Implementation OR, Not If not applicable,state reason
Included Applicable
Equipment wash areas with spill containment plans
S11 0 ® Equipment washing is not a project feature. (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33)
Fueling areas(CASQA New Development BMP
S12 0 ® Fueling is not a project feature.

Handbook SD-30)
Hillside landscaping(CASQA New Development
S13 111 ® Hillsides are not a project feature.

BMP Handbook SD-10)
S14 Wash water control for food preparation areas ® Food preparation is not a project feature.

Community car wash racks(CASQA New
S15 0 ® Community car wash racks are not a project feature.

Development BMP Handbook SD-33)
4-5

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices
Site design practices associated with new LID requirements in the MS4 Permit should be considered in the earliest phases of a project. Preventative site design practices can result in smaller DCV for LID BMP and hydromodification control BMP by reducing runoff generation. Describe site design and drainage plan including:
• A narrative of site design practices utilized or rationale for not using practices ■ A narrative of how site plan incorporates preventive site design practices ■ Include an attached Site Plan layout which shows how preventative site design practices are included in WQMP
Refer to Section 5.2 of the TGD for WQMP for more details.

Form 4.1-3 Preventative LID Site Design Practices Checklist Site Design Practices
If yes,explain how preventative site design practice is addressed in project site plan.If no,other LID BMPs must be selected to meet targets Minimize impervious areas:Yes® No❑
Explanation:Impervious cover for the proposed development is less than typical projects of this size.West portion of site is base paved to reduce impervious area.

Maximize natural infiltration capacity:Yes®No❑
Explanation:The proposed development includes one underground infiltration systems and one infiltration basin to utilize the site's natural infiltration capacity.

Preserve existing drainage patterns and time of concentration:Yes®No❑ Explanation:The existing drainage pattern has been mimicked in the site design,directing storm flows to an infiltration basin north of the proposed building for DA1.DA1 will sheet south and west to an underground infiltration system near the southwest corner.

Disconnect impervious areas:Yes® No❑
Explanation:On-site storm flows on the site are directed to the proposed on-site underground storage infiltration systems to be mitigated before possible overflow discharges from the site.Roof drains at office building will discharge to landscape along north side of building and be directed to infiltration basin in landscape area.

Protect existing vegetation and sensitive areas:Yes®No❑ Explanation:The existing site contains no vegetation or sensitive areas.The proposed development will increase vegetation of the site with proposed landscaping.

Re-vegetate disturbed areas:Yes®No❑
Explanation:The disturbed area will be stabilized with pavement,base paving and landscaping.

Minimize unnecessary compaction in stormwater retention/infiltration basin/trench areas:Yes®No❑ Explanation:The proposed underground infiltration system is to be excavated only.Compaction of native soils within the system's limits is prohibited.Compaction of system during installation must be in conformance with manufacturer's specifications.The infiltration basin will also be marked out for no compaction.

Utilize vegetated drainage swales in place of underground piping or imperviously lined swales:Yes❑No El Explanation:North parking lot drains to a vegetated infiltration basin.

Stake off areas that will be used for landscaping to minimize compaction during construction:Yes® No❑ Explanation:Landscape areas to be staked off to prevent compaction of these areas. 4-6

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.2 Project Performance Criteria
The purpose of this section of the Project WQMP is to establish targets for post-development hydrology based on performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit.These targets include runoff volume for water quality control (referred to as LID design capture volume),and runoff volume,time of concentration,and peak runoff for protection of any downstream waterbody segments with a HCOC. If the project has more than one outlet for stormwater runoff,then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA/outlet.

Methods applied in the following forms include:
• For LID BMP Design Capture Volume (DCV),the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires use of the P6 method (MS4 Permit Section XI.D.6a.ii) -Form 4.2-1 • For HCOC pre-and post-development hydrologic calculation,the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires the use of the Rational Method (San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section D). Forms 4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 calculate hydrologic variables including runoff volume,time of concentration,and peak runoff from the project site pre-and post-development using the Hydrology Manual Rational Method approach.

For projects greater than 64o acres(1.o mi2),the Rational Method and these forms should not be used. For such projects,the Unit Hydrograph Method(San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section E) shall be applied for hydrologic calculations for HCOC performance criteria.

Refer to Section 4 in the TGD for WQMP for detailed guidance and instructions.

Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume (DA 1)
1 Project area DA 2(ft2): 2 Imperviousness after applying preventative 3 Runoff Coefficient(Rc):0.28 45,262 site design practices(Imp%):40% R,=0.858(Imp%)"3-0.78(Imp%)"2+0.774(Imp%)+0.04 4 Determine 1-hour rainfall depth for a 2-year return period P2Vr_lhr(in):0.658 http://hdsc.nws.noaa.aov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca pfds.html 5 Compute P6,Mean 6-hr Precipitation(inches): 0.97
P6=Item 4*Ci,where Ci is a function of site climatic region specified in Form 3-1 Item 1(Valley=1.4807;Mountain=1.909;Desert=1.2371) 6 Drawdown Rate
Use 48 hours as the default condition.Selection and use of the 24 hour drawdown time condition is subject to approval 24-hrs❑ by the local jurisdiction.The necessary BMP footprint is a function of drawdown time.While shorter drawdown times 48-hrs reduce the performance criteria for LID BMP design capture volume,the depth of water that can be stored is also reduced.
7 Compute design capture volume,DCV(ft3): 2,011
DCV=1/12*[Item 1*Item 3*Item 5*C2],where C2 is a function of drawdown rate(24-hr =1.582;48-hr=1.963) Compute separate DCV for each outlet from the project site per schematic drawn in Form 3-1 Item 2 4-7

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume (DA 2)
1 Project area DA 2(ft2): 2 Imperviousness after applying preventative 3 Runoff Coefficient(Rc):0.27 169,059 site design practices(Imp%):38% Ft,=0.858(Imp%)^3-0.78(Imp%)'2+0.774(Imp%)+0.04 4 Determine 1-hour rainfall depth for a 2-year return period PZVr_lhr(in):0.658 http;//hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca pfds.html 5 Compute P6,Mean 6-hr Precipitation(inches): 0.97
P6=Item 4*CI,where Ci is a function of site climatic region specified in Form 3-1 Item 1(Valley=1.4807;Mountain=1.909;Desert=1.2371) 6 Drawdown Rate
Use 48 hours as the default condition.Selection and use of the 24 hour drawdown time condition is subject to approval 24-hrs❑ by the local jurisdiction.The necessary BMP footprint is a function of drawdown time.While shorter drawdown times 48-hrs reduce the performance criteria for LID BMP design capture volume,the depth of water that can be stored is also reduced.
7 Compute design capture volume,DCV(ft3): 7,243
DCV=1/12*[Item 1*Item 3*Item 5*C21,where C2 is a fu5,344nction of drawdown rate(24-hr =1.582;48-hr=1.963) Compute separate DCV for each outlet from the project site per schematic drawn in Form 3-1 Item 2 Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment
Does project have the potential to cause or contribute to an HCOC in a downstream channel: Yes❑ No Go to: http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/WAP
If"Yes",then complete HCOC assessment of site hydrology for 2yr storm event using Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 and insert results below (Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 may be replaced by computer software analysis based on the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual) If"No,"then proceed to Section 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis Condition Runoff Volume(ft3) Time of Concentration(min) Peak Runoff(cfs) 1 2 3
Pre-developed
Form 4.2-3 Item 12 Form 4.2-4 Item 13 Form 4.2-5 Item 10 4 5 6
Post-developed
Form 4.2-3 Item 13 Form 4.2-4 Item 14 Form 4.2-5 Item 14 7 8 9
Difference
Item 4—Item 1 Item 2—Item 5 Item 6—Item 3 Difference 10 / 11 / 12
(as%of pre-developed) Item 7/Item 1 Item 8/Item 2 Item 9/Item 3 4-8

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume
Weighted Curve Number
Determination for: DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H Pre-developed DA
la Land Cover type
2a Hydrologic Soil Group(HSG)
3a DMA Area,ft2 sum of areas of
DMA should equal area of DA
4a Curve Number(CN)use Items
land 2 to select the appropriate CN
from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for
WQMP
Weighted Curve Number
Determination for: DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H Post-developed DA
lb Land Cover type
2b Hydrologic Soil Group(HSG)
3b DMA Area,ft2 sum of areas of
DMA should equal area of DA
4b Curve Number(CN)use Items
5 and 6 to select the appropriate CN
from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for
WQMP
5 Pre Developed area weighted CN: 7 Pre-developed soil storage capacity,S(in): 9 Initial abstraction,la(in):

S=(1000/Item 5)-10 Ia=0.2 Item 7
6 Post Developed area weighted CN: *8 Post-developed soil storage capacity,S(in): 10 Initial abstraction,la(in):

S=(1000/Item 6)-10 Ia=0.2 Item 8
11 Precipitation for 2 yr,24 hr storm(in):

Go to: http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca pfds.html 12 Pre-developed Volume(ft3):

Vpm=(1/12)*(Item sum of Item 3)*[(Item 11—Item 9)^2/((Item 11—Item 9+Item 7) 13 Post-developed Volume(ft3):

VP,e=(1/12)*(Item sum of Item 3)*[(Item 11—Item 10)^2/((Item 11—Item 10+Item 8) 14 Volume Reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement,(ft3):

VHcoc=(Item 13*0.95)—Item 12
4-9

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration
Compute time of concentration for pre and post developed conditions for each DA(For projects using the Hydrology Manual complete the form below)
Pre-developed DA1 Post-developed DA1
Variables Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA

DMAA DMAB DMAC DMAD DMAA DMAB DMAC DMAD 1 Length of flowpath(ft) Use Form 3-2
Item 5 for pre-developed condition
2 Change in elevation(ft)
3 Slope(ft/ft),So=Item 2/Item 1
4 Land cover
5 Initial DMA Time of Concentration
(min)Appendix C-1 of the TGD for WQMP
6 Length of conveyance from DMA
outlet to project site outlet(ft)
May be zero if DMA outlet is at project site
outlet
7 Cross-sectional area of channel(ft')
8 Wetted perimeter of channel(ft)
9 Manning's roughness of channel(n)
10 Channel flow velocity(ft/sec)
Vjs=(1.49/Item 9)*(Item 7/Item 81o.6'*
(Item 3)"o.5
11 Travel time to outlet(min)
Tt=Item 6/(Item 10*60)
12 Total time of concentration(min)
Tc=Item 5+Item 11
13 Pre-developed time of concentration(min): Minimum of Item 12 pre-developed DMA 14 Post-developed time of concentration(min): Minimum of Item 12 post-developed DMA 15 Additional time of concentration needed to meet HCOC requirement(min): Tc_Hcoc=(Item 13*0.95)—Item 14 4-10

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
=MEForm 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff
Compute peak runoff for pre-and post-developed conditions Pre-developed DA to Project Post-developed DA to Project Outlet(Use additional forms if Outlet(Use additional forms if Variables more than 3 DMA) more than 3 DMA)

DMAA DMAB DMAC DMAA DMAB DMAC
1 Rainfall Intensity for storm duration equal to time of concentration (peak=10A(LOG Form 4.2-1 Item 4-0.6 LOG Form 4.2-4 Item 5/60) 2 Drainage Area of each DMA(Acres)
For DMA with outlet at project site outlet,include upstream DMA(Using example schematic in Form 3-1,DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 3 Ratio of pervious area to total area
For DMA with outlet at project site outlet,include upstream DMA(Using example schematic in Form 3-1,DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 4 Pervious area infiltration rate(in/hr)
Use pervious area CN and antecedent moisture condition with Appendix C-3 of the TGD for WQMP
5 Maximum loss rate(in/hr)
Fm=Item 3*Item 4
Use area-weighted Fa,from DMA with outlet at project site outlet,include upstream DMA(Using example schematic in Form 3-1,DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) 6 Peak Flow from DMA(cfs)
Qp=Item 2*0.9*(Item I-Item 5)
7 Time of concentration adjustment factor for other DMA to DMAA n/a n/a site discharge point DMA B n/a n/a Form 4.2-4 Item 12 DMA/Other DMA upstream of site discharge point(If ratio is greater than 1.0,then use maximum value of 1.0) DMA C n/a n/a 8 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: 9 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: 10 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA C:

Qp=Item 6DMAA+[Item 6DMAB*(Item 1 DMAA-Item Qp=Item 6DMAB+[Item 6DMAA*(Item IDMAB-Item Qp=Item 6DMAc+[Item 6DMAA*(Item IDMAC-Item SOMAS)/(Item IDMAB-Item SDMAB)*Item 7DMAA/2]+ 5DMAA)/(Item IDMAA-Item SDMAA)*Item 7DMAB/1]+ SDMAA)/(Item IDMAA-Item SDMAA)*Item 7DMAc/i]+ [Item 6DMAc*(Item IDMAA-Item 5DMAC)/(Item IDMAC- [Item 6DMAC*(Item IDMAB-Item 5DMAC)/(Item IDMAC- [Item 6DMAB*(Item IDMAC-Item SDMAB)/(Item IDMAB Item SDMAC)*Item 7DMAA/31 Item SDMAC)*Item 7DMAB/31 -Item SDMAB)*Item 7DMAC/21 10 Peak runoff from pre-developed condition confluence analysis(cfs): Maximum of Item 8,9,and 10(including additional forms as needed) 11 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: 12 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: 13 Post developed Qp at Tc for DMA C:

Same as Item 8 for post-developed values Same as Item 9 for post-developed values Same as Item 10 for post developed values
14 Peak runoff from post-developed condition confluence analysis(cfs): Maximum of Item 11,12,and 13(including additional forms as needed)
15 Peak runoff reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement(cfs): Qo-HCOC=(Item 14*0.95)—Item 10 4-11

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3 Project Conformance Analysis
Complete the following forms for each project site DA to document that the proposed LID BMPs conform to the project DCV developed to meet performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit(WQMP Template Section

4.2). For the LID DCV,the forms are ordered according to hierarchy of BMP selection as required by the MS4 Permit(see Section 5.3.1 in the TGD for WQMP).The forms compute the following for on-site LID BMP:
• Site Design and Hydrologic Source Controls(Form 43-2) • Retention and Infiltration(Form 4.3-3)
• Harvested and Use(Form 4.3-4) or
• Biotreatment(Form 4.3-5).

At the end of each form,additional fields facilitate the determination of the extent of mitigation provided by the specific BMP category,allowing for use of the next category of BMP in the hierarchy,if necessary.

The first step in the analysis,using Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP,is to complete Forms 4.3-1 and 4.3-3) to determine if retention and infiltration BMPs are infeasible for the project. For each feasibility criterion in Form 4.3-1,if the answer is"Yes,"provide all study findings that includes relevant calculations,maps, data sources,etc.used to make the determination of infeasibility.

Next,complete Forms 4.3-2 and 4.3-4 to determine the feasibility of applicable HSC and harvest and use BMPs, and,if their implementation is feasible,the extent of mitigation of the DCV.

If no site constraints exist that would limit the type of BMP to be implemented in a DA, evaluate the use of combinations of LID BMPs,including all applicable HSC BMPs to maximize on-site retention of the DCV. If no combination of BMP can mitigate the entire DCV,implement the single BMP type,or combination of BMP types,that maximizes on-site retention of the DCV within the minimum effective area.

If the combination of LID HSC,retention and infiltration,and harvest and use BMPs are unable to mitigate the entire DCV,then biotreatment BMPs may be implemented by the project proponent. If biotreatment BMPs are used,then they must be sized to provide sufficient capacity for effective treatment of the remainder of the volume-based performance criteria that cannot be achieved with LID BMPs (TGD for WQMP Section 5.4.4.2).

Under no circumstances shall any portion of the DCV be released from the site without effective mitigation and/or treatment.
4-12

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
LEI Form 4.3-1 Infiltration BMP Feasibility
Feasibility Criterion—Complete evaluation for each DA on the Project Site 1 Would infiltration BMP pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Yes n No Refer to Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP
If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
2 Would installation of infiltration BMP significantly increase the risk of geotechnical hazards? Yes❑ No (Yes,if the answer to any of the following questions is yes,as established by a geotechnical expert):
• The location is less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent • The location is less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback. • A study certified by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study determines that stormwater infiltration would result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards.

If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
3 Would infiltration of runoff on a Project site violate downstream water rights? Yes❑ No If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on hydrologic soil group(HSG)D soils or does the site geotechnical investigation indicate presence of soil characteristics,which support categorization as D soils? Yes n No If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
5 Is the design infiltration rate,after accounting for safety factor of 2.0,below proposed facility less than 0.3 in/hr(accounting for soil amendments)? Yes n No
If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
6 Would on-site infiltration or reduction of runoff over pre-developed conditions be partially or fully inconsistent with watershed management strategies as defined in the WAP,or impair beneficial uses? Yes n No See Section 3.5 of the TGD for WQMP and WAP
If Yes,Provide basis:(attach)
17 Any answer from Item 1 through Item 3 is"Yes": Yes❑No If yes,infiltration of any volume is not feasible onsite.Proceed to Form 4.3-4,Harvest and Use BMP.If no,then proceed to Item 8 below. 8 Any answer from Item 4 through Item 6 is"Yes": Yes❑No If yes,infiltration is permissible but is not required to be considered.Proceed to Form 4.3-2,Hydrologic Source Control BMP.

If no,then proceed to Item 9,below.
9 All answers to Item 1 through Item 6 are"No": Yes®No❑ Infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible,LID infiltration BMP must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the MEP.

Proceed to Form 4.3-2,Hydrologic Source Control BMP.
4-13

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.1 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP
Section XI.E. of the Permit emphasizes the use of LID preventative measures;and the use of LID HSC BMPs reduces the portion of the DCV that must be addressed in downstream BMPs.Therefore,all applicable HSC shall be provided except where they are mutually exclusive with each other, or with other BMPs.Mutual exclusivity may result from overlapping BMP footprints such that either would be potentially feasible by itself, but both could not be implemented. Please note that while there are no numeric standards regarding the use of HSC,if a project cannot feasibly meet BMP sizing requirements or cannot fully address HCOCs,feasibility of all applicable HSC must be part of demonstrating that the BMP system has been designed to retain the maximum feasible portion of the DCV. Complete Form 4.3-2 to identify and calculate estimated retention volume from implementing site design HSC BMP. Refer to Section 5.4.1 in the TGD for more detailed guidance.

Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA1) 1 Implementation of Impervious Area Dispersion BMP(i.e. DA DMA routing runoff from impervious to pervious areas),excluding DA 1 DA DMA BMP Type impervious areas planned for routing to on-lot infiltration BMP Type (Use additional forms BMP: Yes El No® If yes,complete Items 2-5;If no, for more BMPs) proceed to Item 6
2 Total impervious area draining to pervious area(ft2)
3 Ratio of pervious area receiving runoff to impervious area 4 Retention volume achieved from impervious area
dispersion(ft3) V=1tem2*Item 3*(0.5/12),assuming retention of 0.5 inches of runoff
5 Sum of retention volume achieved from impervious area dispersion(ft3): Vretention=Sum of Item 4 for all BMPs 6 Implementation of Localized On-lot Infiltration BMPs(e.g. DA DMA on-lot rain gardens): Yes ElNo® If yes,complete Items 7- DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type
13 for aggregate of all on-lot infiltration BMP in each DA;If no, BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms proceed to Item 14 for more BMPs)
7 Ponding surface area(ft2)
8 Ponding depth(ft)
9 Surface area of amended soil/gravel(ft2)
10 Average depth of amended soil/gravel(ft)
11 Average porosity of amended soil/gravel
12 Retention volume achieved from on-lot infiltration(ft3) Vretention=(Item 7*Item 8)+(Item 9*Item 10*Item 11)
13 Runoff volume retention from on-lot infiltration(ft3): Vretention=Sum of Item 12 for all BMPs DA
14 Implementation of evapotranspiration BMP(green, DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type DMA brown,or blue roofs): Yes ❑ No® BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms If yes,complete Items 15-20. If no,proceed to Item 21 for more BMPs) 4-14

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA1) 15 Rooftop area planned for ET BMP(ft2)
16 Average wet season ET demand(in/day)
Use local values,typical 0.1
17 Daily ET demand(ft3/day)
Item 15*(Item 16/12)
18 Drawdown time(hrs)
Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1
19 Retention Volume(ft3)
Vretention=Item 17*(Item 18/24)
20 Runoff volume retention from evapotranspiration BMPs(ft3): Vretention=Sum of Item 19 for all BMPs

DA DMA
21 Implementation of Street Trees: Yes ❑ No® DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type If yes,complete Items 22-25. If no,proceed to Item 26 BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs)
22 Number of Street Trees
23 Average canopy cover over impervious area(ft2)
24 Runoff volume retention from street trees(ft3)
Vretention=Item 22*Item 23*(0.05/12)assume runoff retention of

0.05 inches
25 Runoff volume retention from street tree BMPs(ft3): Vretention=Sum of Item 24 for all BMPs 26 DA DMA
Implementation of residential rain barrels/cisterns: DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type Yes ❑ No® BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms If yes,complete Items 27-29;If no,proceed to Item 30 for more BMPs) 27 Number of rain barrels/cisterns
28 Runoff volume retention from rain barrels/cisterns (ft3) Vretention=Item 27*3
29 Runoff volume retention from residential rain barrels/Cisterns (ft3): Vretention=Sum of Item 28 for all BMPs 30 Total Retention Volume from Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs: Sum of Items 5,13,20,25 and 29 4-15

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.2 Infiltration BMPs
Use Form 4.3-3 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed retention and infiltration BMPs.Volume retention estimates are sensitive to the percolation rate used,which determines the amount of runoff that can be infiltrated within the specified drawdown time.The infiltration safety factor reduces field measured percolation to account for potential inaccuracy associated with field measurements,declining BMP performance over time,and compaction during construction.Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP provides guidance on estimating an appropriate safety factor to use in Form 4.3-3.

If site constraints limit the use of BMPs to a single type and implementation of retention and infiltration BMPs mitigate no more than 4o%of the DCV,then they are considered infeasible and the Project Proponent may evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs lower in the LID hierarchy of use(Section 5.5.1 of the TGD for WQMP) If implementation of infiltrations BMPs is feasible as determined using Form 4.3-i,then LID infiltration BMPs shall be implemented to the MEP (section 4.1 of the TGD for WQMP). 4-16

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP - including underground BMPs (DA 1) f 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC BMP(ft3):2,011(DA 1),7,243(DA 2) V nn,et=Form 4.2-1 Item 7-Form 4.3-2 Item 30
DA 1 DA 2 DA/DMA
BMP Type Use columns to the right to compute runoff volume retention BMP Type from proposed infiltration BMP(select BMP from Table 5-4 in TGD for BMP Type: BMP Type:
(Use additional forms for
WQMP)- Use additional forms for more BMPs Infiltration Infiltration more BMPs) 2 Infiltration rate of underlying soils(in/hr)See Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP for minimum requirements for 15.62 15.62 assessment methods
3 Infiltration safety factor See TGD Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D4 3 3 4 Design percolation rate(in/hr) P design=Item 2/Item 3 5.21 5.21 48 hr. max 48 hr. max
5 Ponded water drawdown time(hr)Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1 5.41 hrs 16.12 hrs 6 Maximum ponding depth(ft) BMP design 20.84 20.84 7 Ponding Depth(ft) dBMP=Minimum of(1/12*Item 4*Item 5)or Item 6 2.35 7 8 Infiltrating surface area,SABMP(ft2)the lesser of the area needed for infiltration of full DCV or minimum space requirements from Table 5.7 of 1,755 1,425 the TGD for WQMP
9 Amended soil depth,dmedia(ft) Only included in certain BMP types, n/a n/a see Table 5-4 in the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details 10 Amended soil porosity n/a n/a
11 Gravel depth,dmedia(ft)Only included in certain BMP types, see n/a n/a Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details
12 Gravel porosity n/a n/a
13 Duration of storm as basin is filling(hrs) Typical-3hrs 3 3 14 Above Ground Retention Volume(ft3) Vretent,on=Item 8*(Item7+ 2,284 1,856 (Item 9*Item 10)+(Item 11*Item 12)+(Item 13*(Item 4/12))] 15 Underground Retention Volume(ft3) Volume determined using 4,124 5,674 manufacturer's specifications and calculations
16 Total Retention Volume from LID Infiltration BMPs:6,408(DA 1),7,530(DA 2) (Sum of Items 14 and 15 for all infiltration BMP included in plan) 17 Fraction of DCV achieved with infiltration BMP:318%(DA 1),103.99%(DA 2) Retention%=Item 16/Form 4.2-1 Item 7
18 Is full LID DCV retained on-site with combination of hydrologic source control and LID retention and infiltration BMPs? Yes® No❑ If yes,demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10;If no,then reduce Item 3,Factor of Safety to 2.0 and increase Item 8,Infiltrating Surface Area,such that the portion of the site area used for retention and infiltration BMPs equals or exceeds the minimum effective area thresholds(Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP)for the applicable category of development and repeat all above calculations. 4-17

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP
Harvest and use BMP may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing infiltration BMPs.

Use Form 4.3-4 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed harvest and use BMPs.

Volume retention estimates for harvest and use BMPs are sensitive to the on-site demand for captured stormwater. Since irrigation water demand is low in the wet season,when most rainfall events occur in San Bernardino County,the volume of water that can be used within a specified drawdown period is relatively low.

The bottom portion of Form 4.3-4 facilitates the necessary computations to show infeasibility if a minimum incremental benefit of 4o percent of the LID DCV would not be achievable with MEP implementation of on-site harvest and use of stormwater(Section 5.5.4 of the TGD for WQMP).

Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMPs (DA1)
1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC or infiltration BMP(ft3): 0 V„nmet=Form 4.2-1 Item 7-Form 4.3-2 Item 30-Form 4.3-3 Item 16

DA DMA
BMP Type(s) Compute runoff volume retention from proposed DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type harvest and use BMP(Select BMPs from Table 5-4 of the TGD for g M P Type B M P Type (Use additional forms WQMP)- Use additional forms for more BMPs
for more BMPs)
2 Describe cistern or runoff detention facility
3 Storage volume for proposed detention type(ft3)Volume of cistern
4 Landscaped area planned for use of harvested stormwater (ft2)
5 Average wet season daily irrigation demand(in/day)
Use local values,typical-0.1 in/day
6 Daily water demand(ft3/day)Item 4*(Item 5/12)
7 Drawdown time(hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 4.2-1
$Retention Volume(ft3)
V,ete„tion=Minimum of(Item 3)or(Item 6*(Item 7/24))
9 Total Retention Volume(ft3)from Harvest and Use BMP Sum of Item 8 for all harvest and use BMP included in plan 10 Is the full DCV retained with a combination of LID HSC,retention and infiltration,and harvest and use BMPs?Yes® No❑ If yes,demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10. If no,then re-evaluate combinations of all LID BMP and optimize their implementation such that the maximum portion of the DCV is retained on-site(using a single BMP type or combination of BMP types).If the full DCV cannot be mitigated after this optimization process,proceed to Section 4.3.4. 4-18

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP
Biotreatment BMPs may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing retention and infiltration,and harvest and use BMPs.A key consideration when using biotreatment BMP is the effectiveness of the proposed BMP in addressing the pollutants of concern for the project(see Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP).

Use Form 4.3-5 to summarize the potential for volume based and/or flow based biotreatment options to biotreat the remaining unmet LID DCV w. Biotreatment computations are included as follows:
• Use Form 4.3-6 to compute biotreatment in small volume based biotreatment BMP(e.g.bioretention w/underdrains); • Use Form 4.3-7 to compute biotreatment in large volume based biotreatment BMP(e.g.constructed wetlands); • Use Form 4.3-8 to compute sizing criteria for flow-based biotreatment BMP(e.g.bioswales) Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC, List pollutants of concern Copy py from Form 2.3-1.
infiltration,or harvest and use BMP for potential
biotreatment(ft3): 0 Form 4.2-1 Item 7-Form 4.3-2 Item 30—Form 4.3-3 Item 16-Form 4.3-4 Item 9
Volume-based biotreatment Flow-based biotreatment Use Forms 4.3-6 and 4.3-7 to compute treated volume Use Form 4.3-8 to compute treated volume 2 Biotreatment BMP Selected
(Select biotreatment BMP(s) i l Bioretention with underdrain necessary to ensure all pollutants of ❑Planter box with underdrain ❑Vegetated swale concern are addressed through Unit ❑Constructed wetlands ❑Vegetated filter strip Operations and Processes,described
in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP) ['Wet extended detention ❑Proprietary biotreatment n Dry extended detention
3 Volume biotreated in volume based 4 Compute remaining LID DCV with 5 Remaining fraction of LID DCV for biotreatment BMP(ft3): Form 4.3- implementation of volume based biotreatment sizing flow based biotreatment BMP:
6 Item 15+Form 4.3-7 Item 13 BMP(ft3): Item 1—Item 3 % Item 4/Item 1 6 Flow-based biotreatment BMP capacity provided(cfs): Use Figure 5-2 of the TGD for WQMP to determine flow capacity required to provide biotreatment of remaining percentage of unmet LID DCV(Item 5),for the project's precipitation zone(Form 3-1 Item 1) 7 Metrics for MEP determination:
• Provided a WQMP with the portion of site area used for suite of LID BMP equal to minimum thresholds in Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP for the proposed category of development: n If maximized on-site retention BMPs is feasible for partial capture, then LID BMP implementation must be optimized to retain and infiltrate the maximum portion of the DCV possible within the prescribed minimum effective area.The remaining portion of the DCV shall then be mitigated using biotreatment BMP. 4-19

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment —AL
Bioretention and Planter Boxes with Underdrains

DA DMA
Biotreatment BMP Type DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type (Bioretention w/underdrain,planter box w/underdrain,other BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms comparable BMP)
for more BMPs)
1 Pollutants addressed with BMP List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP
2 Amended soil infiltration rate Typical"5.0
3 Amended soil infiltration safety factor Typical-2.0
4 Amended soil design percolation rate(in/hr)Pdesign=Item 2/ Item 3
5 Ponded water drawdown time(hr)Copy Item 6from Form 4.2-1 6 Maximum ponding depth(ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
7 Ponding Depth(ft) chimp=Minimum of(1/12*Item 4*Item 5)or Item 6
8 Amended soil surface area(ft')
9 Amended soil depth(ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
10 Amended soil porosity,n
11 Gravel depth(ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
12 Gravel porosity,n
13 Duration of storm as basin is filling(hrs) Typical-3hrs 14 Biotreated Volume(ft3) Vbiotreatea=Item 8*((Item 7/2)+(Item 9 *Item 10)+(Item 11*Item 12)+(Item 13*(Item 4/12))]
15 Total biotreated volume from bioretention and/or planter box with underdrains BMP:

Sum of Item 14 for all volume-based BMPs included in this form 4-20

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
MI= Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment —
Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention

DA DMA
Biotreatment BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type Constructed wetlands,extended wet detention,extended dry detention, BMP Type (Use additional forms or other comparable proprietary BMP.If BMP includes multiple modules for more BMPs) (e.g.forebay and main basin),provide separate estimates for storage and pollutants treated in each module. Forebay Basin Forebay Basin 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP forebay and basin
List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP
2 Bottom width(ft)
3 Bottom length(ft)
4 Bottom area(ft2)Abottor,=Item 2*Item 3
5 Side slope(ft/ft)
6 Depth of storage(ft)
7 Water surface area(ftz)
Aswfoce=(Item 2+(2*Item 5*Item 6))*(Item 3+(2*Item 5*Item 6)) 8 Storage volume(ft3)For BMP with a forebay,ensure fraction of total storage is within ranges specified in BMP specific fact sheets,see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details V=Item 6/3*[Item 4+Item 7+(Item 4*Item 7)^0.5]
9 Drawdown Time(hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 2.1
10 Outflow rate(cfs)QBMP=(Item 8forebay+Item 8basin)/(Item 9*3600) 11 Duration of design storm event(hrs)
12 Biotreated Volume(ft3)
Vbiotreated=(Item 8foreboy"Item 8bosin)+(Item 10*Item 11 *3600) 13 Total biotreated volume from constructed wetlands,extended dry detention,or extended wet detention:
(Sum of Item 12 for all BMP included in plan)
4-21

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment

DA DMA
Biotreatment BMP Type DA DMA DA DMA BMP Type Vegetated swale,vegetated filter strip,or other comparable proprietary BMP Type BMP Type (Use additional forms BMP
for more BMPs)
1 Pollutants addressed with BMP
List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in TGD Table 5-5 2 Flow depth for water quality treatment(ft)
8MP specific,see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
3 Bed slope(ft/ft)
BMP specific,see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
4 Manning's roughness coefficient
5 Bottom width(ft)
=(Form 4.3-5 Item 6*Item 4)/(1.49*Item 2' *Item 3"o5)
6 Side Slope(ft/ft)
BMP specific,see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
7 Cross sectional area(ft2)
A=(Item 5*Item 2J+(Item 6*Item 2"2)
8 Water quality flow velocity(ft/sec)
V= Form 4.3-5 Item 6/Item 7
9 Hydraulic residence time(min)
Pollutant specific,see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details
10 Length of flow based BMP(ft)
L=Item 8*Item 9*60
11 Water surface area at water quality flow depth(ft2)
SAc0 =(Item 5+(2*Item 2*Item 6))*Item 10
4-22

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.5 Conformance Summary
Complete Form 4.3-9 to demonstrate how on-site LID DCV is met with proposed site design hydrologic source control, infiltration,harvest and use, and/or biotreatment BMP.The bottom line of the form is used to describe the basis for infeasibility determination for on-site LID BMP to achieve full LID DCV,and provides methods for computing remaining volume to be addressed in an alternative compliance plan. If the project has more than one outlet,then complete additional versions of this form for each outlet.

Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative
Compliance Volume Estimate (DA 1)
1 Total LID DCV for the Project DA-1(ft3):15,344 Copy Item 7 in Form 4.2-1 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control LID BMP(ft3):0 Copy Item 30 in Form 4.3-2 3 On-site retention with LID infiltration BMP(ft3):40,596 Copy Item 16 in Form 4.3-3 4 On-site retention with LID harvest and use BMP(ft3):Copy Item 9 in Form 4.3-4 5 On-site biotreatment with volume based biotreatment BMP(ft3):0 Copy Item 3 in Form 4.3-5 6 Flow capacity provided by flow based biotreatment BMP(cfs):0 Copy Item 6 in Form 4.3-5 7 LID BMP performance criteria are achieved if answer to any of the following is"Yes":
• Full retention of LID DCV with site design HSC,infiltration,or harvest and use BMP: Yes® No❑ If yes,sum of Items 2,3,and 4 is greater than Item 1
• Combination of on-site retention BMPs for a portion of the LID DCV and volume-based biotreatment BMP that address all pollutants of concern for the remaining LID DCV: Yes❑ No❑ If yes,a)sum of Items 2,3,4,and 5 is greater than Item 1,and Items 2,3 and 4 are maximized;orb)Item 6 is greater than Form

4.3--5 Item 6 and Items 2,3 and 4 are maximized
• On-site retention and infiltration is determined to be infeasible and biotreatment BMP provide biotreatment for all pollutants of concern for full LID DCV: Yes❑ No❑
If yes,Form 4.3-1 Items 7 and 8 were both checked yes
8 If the LID DCV is not achieved by any of these means,then the project may be allowed to develop an alternative compliance plan.Check box that describes the scenario which caused the need for alternative compliance:
• Combination of HSC,retention and infiltration,harvest and use,and biotreatment BMPs provide less than full LID DCV capture: ❑
Checked yes for Form 4.3-5 Item 7,Item 6 is zero,and sum of Items 2,3,4,and 5 is less than Item 1.If so,apply water quality credits and calculate volume for alternative compliance, Van=(Item 1—Item 2—Item 3—Item 4—Item 5)*(100-Form 2.4-1 Item 2)% • An approved Watershed Action Plan(WAP)demonstrates that water quality and hydrologic impacts of urbanization are more effective when managed in at an off-site facility: ❑ Attach appropriate WAP section,including technical documentation,showing effectiveness comparisons for the project site and regional watershed
4-23

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP
Use Form 4.3-io to compute the remaining runoff volume retention,after LID BMP are implemented,needed to address HCOC,and the increase in time of concentration and decrease in peak runoff necessary to meet targets for protection of waterbodies with a potential HCOC.Describe hydromodification control BMP that address HCOC,which may include off-site BMP and/or in-stream controls. Section 5.6 of the TGD for WQMP provides additional details on selection and evaluation of hydromodification control BMP.

Form 4.3-10 Hydromodification Control BMPs mi=
1 Volume reduction needed for HCOC 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control,infiltration,and performance criteria(ft3): 0 harvest and use LID BMP(ft3):0 Sum of Form 4.3-9 Items 2,3,and 4 Evaluate option to increase implementation of on-site retention in Forms 4.3-2,4.3-3,and 4.3-4 in excess *
(Form 4.2 21tem 4 0.95)—Form 4.2 21tem 1 of LID DCV toward achieving HCOC volume reduction 4 Volume capture provided by incorporating additional on-site or off-site retention BMPs 3 Remaining volume for HCOC volume (ft3):0 Existing downstream BMP may be used to demonstrate additional volume capture(if so, capture(ft3):0 Item 1—Item 2 attach to this WQMP a hydrologic analysis showing how the additional volume would be retained during a 2-yr storm event for the regional watershed)
5 If Item 4 is less than Item 3,incorporate in-stream controls on downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification ❑ Attach in-stream control BMP selection and evaluation to this WQMP 6 Is Form 4.2-2 Item 11 less than or equal to 5%: Yes❑ No❑ If yes,HCOC performance criteria is achieved.If no,select one or more mitigation options below:
• Demonstrate increase in time of concentration achieved by proposed LID site design,LID BMP,and additional on-site or off-site retention BMP ❑
BMP upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate increased time of concentration through hydrograph attenuation(if so,show that the hydraulic residence time provided in BMP for a 2-year storm event is equal or greater than the addition time of concentration requirement in Form 4.2-4 Item 15) • Increase time of concentration by preserving pre-developed flow path and/or increase travel time by reducing slope and increasing cross-sectional area and roughness for proposed on-site conveyance facilities❑ • Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification,in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California ❑ 7 Form 4.2-2 Item 12 less than or equal to 5%: Yes❑ No❑ If yes,HCOC performance criteria is achieved.If no,select one or more mitigation options below:
• Demonstrate reduction in peak runoff achieved by proposed LID site design,LID BMPs,and additional on-site or off- site retention BMPs ❑
BMPs upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate additional peak runoff reduction through hydrograph attenuation(if so,attach to this WQMP,a hydrograph analysis showing how the peak runoff would be reduced during a 2-yr storm event)
• Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification,in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California ❑ 4-24

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (if applicable)
Describe an alternative compliance plan(if applicable) for projects not fully able to infiltrate,harvest and use, or biotreat the DCV via on-site LID practices.A project proponent must develop an alternative compliance plan to address the remainder of the LID DCV.Depending on project type some projects may qualify for water quality credits that can be applied to reduce the DCV that must be treated prior to development of an alternative compliance plan(see Form 2.4-1,Water Quality Credits). Form 4.3-9 Item 8 includes instructions on how to apply water quality credits when computing the DCV that must be met through alternative compliance.

Alternative compliance plans may include one or more of the following elements:
• On-site structural treatment control BMP-All treatment control BMP should be located as close to possible to the pollutant sources and should not be located within receiving waters; • Off-site structural treatment control BMP-Pollutant removal should occur prior to discharge of runoff to receiving waters;
• Urban runoff fund or In-lieu program,if available
Depending upon the proposed alternative compliance plan,approval by the executive officer may or may not be required (see Section 6 of the TGD for WQMP).
4-25

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
Section 5 Inspection and Maintenance
Responsibility
for Post Construction BMP
All BMP included as part of the project WQMP are required to be maintained through regular scheduled inspection and maintenance (refer to Section 8, Post Construction BMP Requirements, in the TGD for WQMP). Fully complete Form 5-1 summarizing all BMP included in the WQMP.Attach additional forms as needed.The WQMP shall also include a detailed Operation and Maintenance Plan for all BMP and may require a Maintenance Agreement(consult the jurisdiction's LIP). If a Maintenance Agreement is required, it must also be attached to the WQMP.

Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance
(use additional forms as necessary)
Reponsib
BMP le Inspection/Maintenance Minimum Frequency of Party(s) Activities Required Activities
N1 The owner shall familiarize himself with the contents of the Education of Property WQMP and the County&City Ordinance and brochures and Educational materials will be Owners,Tenants,and Owner furnish copies of city and county BMP factsheets to all future kept onsite for reference.

Occupants on
Stormwater BMPs tenants through lease agreements.

Tenants shall not be allowed to discharge chemicals,chemical N2 residues,wastewater or other prohibited discharges listed in Owner the City and County Ordinances,to the outside,paved areas Daily Activity Restrictions of the site.Owner shall inspect property regularly and resolve violations as needed.

N3 Landscape crews shall inspect the irrigation system after each Be inspected bi-weekly after Landscape Owner landscape procedure and shall report all drainage problems to each landscape procedure.

Management BMPs the owner.

N11
A program shall be implemented to pick up litter of the site Weekly inspection and Litter/Debris Control Owner weekly. cleanup of the site.

Program
Employee shall be trained
N12 Owner shall utilize the attached County brochures for upon hire and annually Employee Training Owner employee training on stormwater runoff best management thereafter.Brochures from practices. employee training will be
kept on site for reference.

N14
Catch Basin The on-site catch basins shall be inspected monthly during Inspection Program the rainy season(October-May)and before and after each Shall be inspected monthly storm to ensure proper operation.Catch basins to be
SC-44 cleaned when capacity is reduced by 25%.The owner shall during the rainy season Drainage System Owner contract with a qualified landscape contractor to inspect and (October May)and before Maintenance clean out accumulation of trash,litter and sediment and and after each storm to check for evidence of illegal dumping of waste materials into ensure proper operation.

MP-52 on-site drains.

Drain Inlet
6-1

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
N15
Vacuum Sweeping of Parking lots shall be swept utilizing a vacuum sweeper Private Streets and weekly to prevent sediment,garden waste,and trash,or Parking Lots Owner other pollutants from entering on-site drains and public Weekly storm channels. Vacuum sweeping will be done by a
SC-43 landscape contractor or other contractor provided by the Parking/Storage Area owner.

Maintenance
S1
Storm Drain Stencil A painted message"No Dumping-Drains to Ocean"shall be Shall be inspected for SD-13 Owner placed on each catch basin.The message shall be inspected legibility annually and Storm Drain Systems
for legibility annually&repainted as necessary. repainted as necessary.

Signs
S3
Trash and Waste Trash enclosure to be inspected for debris and leaking roof.

Storage Areas Inspect and repair weekly at Owner Pick up debris and sweep daily.Repairs to be made upon minimum.Clean daily.

SD-32 inspection.

Trash Enclosures
Implement landscape plans consistent with county water
S4 conservation resolutions,which shall include provision of Efficient Irrigation weather-based controllers,rain shutoff devices,drip Be inspected bi-weekly after Systems and Owner irrigation heads and recessed finish grade of all landscape each landscape procedure.

Landscape Design areas. Inspect irrigation system for leaks.Observe landscape and adjust watering for plant's needs.

S5 Be inspected bi-weekly after
Finish Grade of Owner Landscape to be inspected for depression of 1-2". each landscape procedure.

Landscape
S6 At the beginning of the wet
Protect Slopes and Owner Rip-rap pads to be kept clean of debris and sedimentations. season and as necessary Channels
Observe drawdown time for a storm after completion or
Underground Owner following maintenance of the facility,to confirm that the Quarterly and after storm Infiltration System events
drawdown time(48 hours)has been obtained.

MP-51 Owner The Owner shall enter into a contract with a qualified Inspection and Maintenance Vortex Separator contractor to inspect and maintain the Hydrodynamic to be performed quarterly Separator unit. during the first year,and bi- annually thereafter.

Section 6 WQMP Attachments

6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan
Include a site plan and drainage plan sheet set containing the following minimum information:
6-2

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
• Project location
• Site boundary
• Land uses and land covers,as applicable
• Suitability/feasibility constraints
• Structural Source Control BMP locations
• Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP locations • LID BMP details
• Drainage delineations and flow information
• Drainage connections

6.2 Electronic Data Submittal
Minimum requirements include submittal of PDF exhibits in addition to hard copies. Format must not require specialized software to open. If the local jurisdiction requires specialized electronic document formats(as described in their local Local Implementation Plan),this section will describe the contents (e.g., layering,nomenclature,geo-referencing,etc.) of these documents so that they may be interpreted efficiently and accurately.

6.3 Post Construction
Attach all O&M Plans and Maintenance Agreements for BMP to the WQMP.

6.4 Other Supporting Documentation
• BMP Educational Materials
• Activity Restriction-C, C&R's&Lease Agreements
6-3

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

6.1 Site Plan & Drainage Plan

LEGEND

LANDSCAPE

AC PAVEMENT
r'873j I � '
•• CONCRETE/SIDEWALK
I !I" II BUILDING ar `� ,� �- � TRASH ENCLOSURE w
_ �"d _ _ ° wwaeerr. �� '+ _ _ _ �1 TRASH ENCLOSURE • Q m "� ►�`` F rs '�� �D~ a �"r UNDERGROUND STORAGE W - E4*". -L(P") ,
S s I ° IBM V T spa `� V , R t ## INFIL TRA 170N SYSTEM .,. \
:+ u D
' ` ,. emir .. 17-77( © • '` =`:. 2.! INFIL TRA 770N BASIN 0 rt�» � DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY T,_...a _ .
`'°� I (18.50()1857)
°'e' 7PROP. STORM DRAIN �.�rc4 - ';`` Oa of CIO' I .- - Q rr � DRAINAGE FLOW 1 1 ir _ ,
_., , .1.
..,,.....,_.
'., .-
, 4
.........„)
r :tip S A.
a rrr, I ROOF DRAIN ; 1_• •, rem,) )
co ,'• }, - 1 / DA a • PROP. RIP-RAP PAD n ; :. 0
ammi
' i ., : . ' • PROP. MANHOLE iii
:2.�•':-;."-:_‘-' DA o/ i , _____ 110 ® FOSSIL FILTERTCH BA51N W/ .06(1 ,:•.-•-.=:--•.•••-... • .. - --..
' r -- , • • • ••• ,.�: Iliali- ksue i ,, ] PROP. UNDER WALK DRAIN CI- i --------°/ 4211
e 1
....- I
' '�'• _ CI ,„„, )// j \.( BAR' LEGEND• 1 J ^l l 1� 5C-42 BUILDING REPAIR AND COINSTRUCAON Ai-,r J Se. ''" -r -y7..k. . . .. /f� Cias2) 1 f (f63p] i 1 ] 1 1] L

4.00e -111 2 SS CC

PARKING/STORAGE AREA MAINTENANCE
.. ..- t
y...' .•�.. _
�'` 'r � 11,� rillK�llRilll111 1111 1'!Iflili�' - - 3 5C-�4 DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE Q._.':;' I - - 1 4® SC-73 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - 1.3e i o 1 5 SD-11 ROOF RUNOFF CONTROLS • .....� , - -• l 1 ® - ® _ - SD-12 EFFICIENT IRRIGATION �, ,� I• -"" +� I d ° - VARIES 7� 5D-13 STORM DRAIN SIGNAGE • t f4r I d g SD-32 TRASH ENCLOSURES �� VARIES VARIES . ,: , :.,, :" I L - 9 MP-52 DRAIN INSERT `:i ►?'•�' 1�'.`; f {' , 1--LT7 0 RIP-RAP 000(
I • .....9 i. ._, I pa_ N W/6'" MIN. COBBLE 10 TC 10 INFIL TRATION TRENCH _ _ A
_ _ _ -
1_
�.. , d / a Cr r ire ,'} � �■ 04.4604� _ 5C-10 NON-STORMWA 7FR DISCHARGES `� - iiii
-N � ' ` ��•,� co ���I I I�?... OAP y I- 5C_11 SPILL PROTECTION, CONTROL AND CLEANUP - � - �ts�� • S4 SC 47 BUILDING & GROUND MAINTENANCE lit - _ 5L=80HOSEPING PRAC7TCES1 - 1 -_ 1 SI & LANDSCAPE PLANNING I t I-� -I i I-t e • MARIFI 1160N NON-WOVEN_ FILTERFABRIC •
41 • - - RIP RAP PAD S 4) 1
°
r�eaa It
- o e T AREA 45,262 SF ._,.._, a.+ A - PAVEMENT SECTION PER IMPERI9OUS AREA: 14157 SF 4 PRECISE GRADING PLAN PERVIOUS AREA: 27,,705 SF SUBCRADE FILL MATERIAL: Awr/»�//i///�Agipm
GRANULAR WELL GRADED '�*! Lg! �- � � �� ..� TOTAL AREA 169,059 SF
_ SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, '..:r.�;;.. .., 2424 TOP SECTION WITH GALVANIZED FRAME) I
r t ,f . - / i Between 12'and 16'curb openings(4 Filters and Mounting Hardware) 62HDWM4 XL 32"x 32"up to 43 x 48"(or 192"max perimeter 2 pc set 523LHD WASY'IED STONE \ :.. 5" r! I tYp
' '- 36-0 MANHOLE PER -., --1 F-1-i-+{ _ SEEhi. CREATE YOUR ADS FLE)LSTORM PART NUMBER BY COMBINING FRAME P/N AND BAG P/N SPECIFICATIONS FOR STANDARD BAGS BY NOMINAL BAG/FRAME SIZE APWA STD. 320-2 1 6 { T}� CHART • 1.IDENTIFYYOUR FLEXSTORM FRAME PARTNUMBER FROM TABLES ABOVE Nominal Bag Sire Solids Filtered Flow Rate at50%Max)CFS) *PC Oil **PC-Oil "*FX*Oil I W/GRATED RIM FOR �J 1-1 +i{T~ OVERFLOW �C 3• . ' ' ' ' "''di-�U UP + 3e o,_ }�_{ 2.SELECT YOUR BAG PART NUMBER BASED ON APPLICATION NEEDS Matched to Frame Storage FX PC IL Retention Retention Retention r } Il{{}d{ r I� .t.I�I_ 1 (22"depth) (12"depth} Clean Water Flow Min A.O.S. Sire (COL) (Woven) (Post Constr) (Non Woven} (02) (02) (pz) } # ! �. ! FLEXSTORM FILTER BAGS Small 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.9 79 168 89 -_- _ {i I!+I I11{-f '� STC3 bag PIN Short Bag PIN Rate(GPM/SgFt) (US Sieve} o I T I i;TT FX:Standard Woven Bag FX FX-S 200 40 Medium 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.3 115 204 89 Y ,,. rK? Sir 26 714" �` 2G 114" - �
34" 34" FX+:Woven w/MyCelx FXP FHP-5 200 40 Large 3.8 2.7 1.8 1.9 173 262 89 - s FXO:Woven w/Oil Boom FX0 FXO-S 200 40 XL 4.2 3.6 2.4 2.6 230 319 178 7C WRAF! 160N PC:Post Construction BagPC PC-S 137 140 Filtration Efficiency82% NA Large scale 3rd pa rtytesiingper PSTM❑7351 using 7% NON-WOVEN •''�.,..� .-,�' concentration USDA Sandy Loam FILTER FABRIC 2 --2-:---..," NT5 • IN STATE 21p FREE3YA> k� R��Vc% � 9/11/2024 67'7;i of MAl�A� L' kC WOMP EXHIBIT DRAWN BY: SCALE BOTTOM I 24 x 24 �Prroouc rs aXi SECTION HT. LBS KNOCK-OUTS CATCH BASIN KEVIN J. RICHER 2424 B30 30" 1595 (4)18"x 18" No. f437 24 R.C.E.43714 LIC. EXP.3/31/2025 DATE PREPARED FOR: DESIGNED

1.=40.
2424 B36 36" 1905 (4) 18"x 18" ORS 2424 DWG DATE REV.DWG.DATE B APPROVED BY: DESIGNED BY:
11-23-99 02-28-00 SAN ANTONIO WATER ERICK PETERSON 24 x24" CATCH CH BASIN `k.. CIVLIF- �P �ND, CA 91784E. 20THET POMONA, CA 91767� CHECKED BY:KJRSHELF 1 OF CA
NTS DATE 1 SHEETS age iui or l.5r4

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

6.2 Electronic Data Submittal

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

6.3 Post Construction

Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)

6.4 Other Supporting Documentation

10/9/23,3:57 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server NOAA Atlas 14,Volume 6,Version 20.
(44\. �N
Location name:Fontana,California,USA* , nun
Latitude:34.0761*,Longitude:-117.489'
iiiElevation:1074 ft
"source:ESRI Maps 'a P
'source:USGS `"""`

POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
Sanja Perica,Sarah Dietz,Sarah Heim,Lillian Hiner,Kazungu Maitaria,Deborah Martin,Sandra Paviovic,Ishani Roy,Carl Trypaluk,Dale Unruh,Fenglin Yan,Michael Yekta,Tan Zhao,Geoffrey Bonnin,Daniel Brewer,Li-0huan Chen,Tye Parzybok,John Yarchoan NOAA,National Weather Service,Silver Spring,Maryland
PF tabular I PF go hD ical I Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90%confidence intervals(in inches)( Average recurrence interval(years)
Duration 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000 s rtln 0.104 0.137 0.182 0.220 0.274 0.317 0.362 0.410 0.479 0.535 (0.087-0.127 (0.114-0.167) (0.151-0.222)(0.181-0.270) (0.218-0.348) (0.246-0.411) (0.274-0.482) (0.302-0.563) 0.338-0.685) (0.364-0.793) 10-min 0.150 0.197 0.261 0.315 0.392 0A54 0.519 0.588 0.686 0.766 (0.125-0.181) (0.164-0.239) (0.217-0.318) (0.260-0.387) (0.312-0.498) (0.353-0.589)•(0.393-0.691) (0A33-0.806) (0.484-0.982) (0.522-1.14) 75-mill 0.181 0.238 1 0.316 0.381 0.474 1 0.549 0.627 0.711 0.830 0.927 (0.151-0.219) (0.198-0.289) (0.262-0.384)140.314-0.468),.(0.377-0.603)(0.427-0.713) (0.476-0.835) (0.524-0.975) (0.586-1.19) (0.631-1.38) 30-min 0.270 0.355 0.471 0.569 ' 0.707 0.818 0.935 1.06 ' 1.24 1.38 (0.225.0.327) (0.295-0.431))(0.391-0.573)10.468-0.698)i(0.562.0.898) (0.636-1.06) .(0.709-1.24) (0.781-1.45) (0.873-1.77) (0.941-2.06L 60-min 0.395 0.520 0.689 0.833 1.04 1.20 1.37 1.55 1.81 2.02 (0.330.0.479) (0.433-0.631) (0.572-0.839), (0.685-1.02) (0.823-1.32) (0.932-1.56) (1.04-1.82) (1.14-2.13) (1.28-2.59) (1.38-3.00) 2-hr 0.597 0.771 1.00 1.20 1.47 1.68 1.91 2.14 2.47 2.73 (0.498-0.724) (0.642-0.936) (0.834-1.22) I(0.987.1.47) I (1.17.1 87) ` (1.31-2.19) (1.45-2.54) (1.58-2.94) (1.74-3.53) , (1.86-4.05) 3-hr 0.763 0.980 1.27 1.50 1.83 2.09 2.35 2.63 3.01 3.31 (0.636.0.925) (0.816-1.19) (1.05-1.54) (1.24-1.85) ,I (1.46-2.33) I (1.62-2.71) . (1.78-3.13) (1.94-3.60) (2.12-4.31) (2.26-0.91)_ 6-hr 1.09 1.40 1.80 2.12 2.56 2.90 3.24 3.59 4.07 4.44 (0.910-1.32) (1.16-1.70) (1.49-2.19)_ (1.75-2.61) (2.04-3.26) (2.26-3.77) (2.46-4.32) (2.65-4.93) (2.87-5.82) (3.02-6.58) 12-hr 1 A4 1.87 2.42 2.85 3.42 3.84 4.26 4.69 5.24 5.67 (1.20-1.75) (1.56-2.27) (2.00-2.94) (2.34-3.49) (2.72-4.34) (2.99-4.99) (3.23-5.68) (3.45-6.42) (3.70-7.51) (3.86-8A0) 24-hr 1.94 2.57 3.35 3.96 4.76 5.34 5.91 6.48 7.21 7.75 (1.72-2.24) (2.27-2.96) (2-95-3.88) (3.47-4.62) , (4.03-5.73) (4.43-6.57) (4.79-7.45)_, (5.10.8.39) , (5.45-9.72) (5.67-10.8) 6 3. 0 5 7 .
2-day - (2.09-22.3.72] (2.82319.68) (3.75-4.92)4.26 (4.4655.1.94) (5.26-7.48)6.21 (5.83-8.65)7.03 (6.36-97.8.89) (6.84-8.611.2) (7.389163.2) (7.73-10164.7) 3-day 2.58 3.54 4.79 5.80 7.15 8.17 9.20 10,2 11.7 12.7 (2.28 2.97) (3.13-4.09) (4.23-5.65) (5A75.76) I (6.05.8.62) I (6.78-10.1) (7.45-11.6) (8.08-13.3) (8.82-15.7) (9.31-17.8) 4-day 2.79 3.88 6.30 6.46 8.02 9.21 10A 11.7 13.3 14.6 (2.47-3.22) (3.43-4.48) (4.68-6.14) (5.65-7.53) (6.79-9.66) (7.61-11.3) (8.44-13.1) (9.19.15.1) (10.1-18.0) (10.7-20.4) 7-day 3.22 4.54 6.28 7.70 9.65 11,2 12.7 14.3 16.5 18.2 [2.8.23,71} (4.01-5.24) (5.53-7.26) i6.74-8.98) (8.17-11.8) (9.25-13.7) (10.3-16.0) (11.3-18.5)_ (12.5-22.2) (13.3-25.4) 10-clay3A9 4.95 6.90 8.50 10.7 12.4 14.2 16.1 18.6 20.6 (3.09-4.02) (4.38-5.71) (6.08-7.98) (7.44-9.92) (9.07-12.9) (10.3-15.3) (11.5-17.9) (12.7-20.8) (14.1-25.1) (15.1-28.7) 20-day 4.10 5.90 8.35 10A ' 13.3 15.6 17.9 20.5 24.0 26.8 (3.63.4.72) (5.22-8.82) (7.36-9.86) (9.10-12.1) (11.2-16.0) (12.9-19.1) (14.5-22.6) (16.1-26.5) (18.1-32.3JJ19.6-37.4) 30{!ay 4.83 6.97 9.91 12.4 15.9 18.8 21.8 25.0 29.5 33.1 (4.27-5.56) (6.17-8.05) (8.74-11.5) (10.9-14.5) (13.5-19.2) (15.6-23.1) (17.6-27.4) (19.7-32.3) (22.3-39.7) (24.2-46.2) 45-day 5.69 8.17 11.6 14.6 18.8 22.2 25.9 29.8 35.5 40.1 (5.04-6.56) (7.23-9.43) (10.2-13.4) (12.7-17.0) (15.9-22.6) (18.4-27.3) (21.032.6) (23.5-38.6) (26.8-47.9) (29.3-56.0) 60-day 6.69 9.48 13.4 16.8 21.7 25.7 30.0 34.7 41.5 I 47.1 (5.92-7.71) (8.38-10.9) (11.8-15.5) (14.7-19.6) (18.3-26.1) _(21.3-31.6) (24.3-37.8) (27.3-44.9) (31.4-55.9) (34.4-65.7) .1 Precipitation frequency(PF)estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series(PDS).

Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90%confidence interval.The probability that precipitation frequency estimates(for a given duration and average recurrence interval)will be greater than the upper bound(or less than the lower bound)is 5%.Estimates at upper bounds are not checked against probable maximum precipitation(PMP)estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.

Please refer to NOAAAtlas 14 document for more information.

Back to Top
PF graphical

https:!lhdsc.nws.noaa.govlpfdslpfds_printpage.html?lot=34.t77B1&lon=-117.4890&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 1/4

TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES
Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate and Worksheet Assigned Factor Product(p)
Factor Category Factor Description Weight(w) Value(v) p =w x v Soil assessment methods 0.25 1 0.25
Predominant soil texture 0.25 1 0.25
A
Suitability Site soil variability 0.25 1 0.25 Assessment - Depth to groundwater/impervious 1 0.25 layer 0.25
Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA= Lp 1.00
Tributary area size 0.25 3 0.75
Level of pretreatment/expected 3 0.75
sediment loads 0.25
B Design Redundancy 0.25 3 0.75
Compaction during construction 0.25 1 0.25
Design Safety Factor, SB = Lp 2.50

3.00 Combined Safety Factor, STOT= SAX SB
Measured Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, KM 12.71
(corrected for test-specific bias)

4.23 Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, KDESIGN= STOT X KM Supporting Data
Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms:

See Section 6.4 of the project WQMP for project Geotechnical Engineering Investigation by Soils Southwest
Note: The minimum combined adjustment factor shall not be less than 2.0 and the maximum combined adjustment factor shall not exceed 9.0.

VII-35 May 19,2011

,... -,_ — • , , • _ .,,
•••••••"•••••••••• "- ''." .1,1', '. 1.,• .. eo:4-,,,...,,. "-r.k.'4..%: %:'41.'",-.7-:-.-.bi,., '.:Li '-7.-...'.•• .7- ,.tdtw414,K et-
..,:,'.7..i..7 .••:.••,.,i•,;,•;,...-t.:4";: ...• ".,;,,-,',..;;;',..-;....::-,:?4,-1",:'.."*.i,..,;' A.,,,...r..-....w,. ,.,,,,,-. 1;47„,.... .747,...., ,i.:,......7,-,,,,..„7,,7 ii-„,:.:7,..„.-.7-...,..,,,,,w7.,,......,..,,,,,,,,rtv.:*;7,,,,,t;,,, ,,,,,,r.„,,, .0-„;tc:,t'..7.:, .,,,,,,o, ,I...-,77,‘7,..; - ?6.,:',4‘....,4,.:..15,:4•...,,, 44 i'„"-';-*-4144\,. ,"?...,:-.,";:. ,V.'1' 'Nly.' - ,:t.' L,-•;t -,••• r;', ...,‘,''',t-:':1''' :4...,.,."..1 ..' ';,,7.-...‘'..:-.:....;.-...?,..s:;-..'..,-:4"..4;1-...A.IL•R`. .",01•;4-;'.,R..,;,.;. 7....",'''.‘:. .,--.'... ..,',--"-'-.:'-.f-R't, op , ,,„ •:--,-7#7,-A.4,,,-;-.,44,„:,.-,,,...,,,-.w,v.. , ,i,..,, .--,.:u.:,-41,, ...1,-•=p;.,•.•.„-,„441T, :,-''--,--4.:4-.'14 ••-_•,46:--.2, ' -,?e,N,,,,,, -0,:sp;At. ,i,Litihr•mt,-, 1,t, ,...., ,.4.: ..,-.4:,,,t,,, - -.,,, i....: ::::t.,..,...,,,...,.-:i .,.:, „-.:.-, ':-.e-/7-',..., -..:-',,,.i.:-,:'.,:.,:.:.-:..,.. .'..,,!-,,I,.,,,,,,,:,., .,,,,- - '_.::.'-'2..P-t0,1,44:14;i•,4„',.'4.,::',,'...,,'--:/. W-•••,::"-'4v.=,.. ',',A'-',17•-.--:1, „,..4,,,.4'. -':••Al...1"*...,,.---••--:4_•••.-'44 :0..".".-4#•:- ,'*,,:„.-L'44•'..,',:,M.'i3.",4?;;.•,;',:l''',-,"'• '-"r'74iiiiNw-:,:'.•'...,-;-,.. ' 4:•'..: -.:'R,..,',4h';40,t,':'1„,i'...'4Z-Y ''.,„ •,,,;'‘ ,,,,,....'',` •. ..•:;,f.1,'"--• ,.„ oorittlx
''''''..7..f.', ...!,'.-.4:;;-;:;'-'74.5 •':‘, ''-4.'.-•,',.;.•:.'.:4f'..j.'..4•:.,;'-';''''''''.'--''''''.: ''.'-'''1.-''''.'''-';4"?:-.'' 'I ' •C"'t'''''.•;',t''''''''. ',('''......9*.FII Cl•-'?'),--,0),..?-i-,.',:•,.---..,:,*::r9V:-.4:';'W:' iq",N1414i, ,':''''.''- 10.1,,,c'.';;.,•,1±.... '..:-'.'''':7ii"..t,-.''7-''' ,,...,:• 7•.;;.;','6' 4!'17;•.11;0"... ..,-,-t,-.4',:t•-• •••„, . .-1:,,',....4*,„ .'. ,'"-*', .,,,'Z'..-;: ,'''•:•,i's..,--•,,,-..-..; 'S-,--.: . '1'.' •.• /
......,,....,„....,,.,, .....,,, ,,,,?,,,,,,,,,:,..„. ,, ,.,,..„,,,.....„,,,;,..,,,....,,..,.,a....;.:, ,, .,,.,.:.: ,....,:.,,,,,,.,„e ,2,--..„,..., :',,, , „ „.,,,,,,,,,..,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,.1,„J"...,,,,,..,,e5:•:, ,,,,,,,,,,J,.. ,,,,•/':•,,,,,,,,..„:„,,,,.i.,,,"„,,, -,.4,1-,',,r,.,t,..„•,,,,,.'4,,,,,'.-_'•4"i;w.,..-,,,,,0-,,,!,ii;N:"„ki„,,,, ,,,,,•.'F',.......:,4.'..-..,7sit•Asi'd:. ...7., ; -...,.'..'.„:,,,.'..'..4 ,..,-1 ,'--. .,' . .1. ..,'• '.;:,;','":#>.':;';'' ...,..Lvt'"'".17;'• ,„k'y 1 ,,,f..-:-•-••• ,-",..:• -.-'• ...k.,-.".`....-r.`,.4:.••'4,'....- •.''.4..4-',..,:l :1'4;4"'..''''?.,'''c'"".'•i.:.:4'.''...;4. ,•,,d, ."4". 7,p.--,-,J,..1°ii _ --.. -'''''-', • 4 . . f•-:• "....1.. ' ...',;/.. ... ,'"!'1. 'I'''''"•."';' ' . . '''''''''''.. .. '". -'4'' ''.:'''' ''''''i: ' ...' '''''''''':-' ."-.."1....:-4.1''''''' ' - "Ii.P.Pf-q"LiDr4.0: if ii. i ,liftli ."• -„r,..1 1,:.iritiii:IP0‘.1.71 ' '1.-:'ilr''.:* ''-'ir:•'fir, ''-#.'''' ".;>.•:=1:'•r•••," 12g=41. -'.• sl."'" It.t';',*,r''..‘1.-...,:1". ,', .,,..zi .a.t.,.w. ....- _, i lt.
........_ ,... ,...5 fory ... ,.,..--- :..,..:...... - .-= ' Itarrer---.>'-'...' 14, '--, •••-•• r- e '..,-*; '=4:17 77---tr'-t- ' 4i--:-40,..;•,4*-;"-ix .44 i..,.',::. •!/,+,44- , ' 11,•14,..„..,-;-,z--..44t.A.:,,,,a-- ,,,,, •••:....... '• ' :- - --1 ;Qiiii , ,—,. ,zaAr...._. "' . .. . . . ,.1_. it 2.4,•.._ t.',,, s, ,,,,,, ,. isipils, . ... Pi,M.,..-..7,1EVICI=re.,,,,,,,.....j.........,..f,,',..., . , , ,_... . _ t ...t. . •----•-., •ir •• 4-- ! I ,
A-1: A••;.1,.1.-.--'77.._6, .••.i,.I.'7"7.•%754,,,tir., ,.,...,,,,:,,,4744,„.Ay!!../ tlitl04:71Fejt..17.41151 .47,t.i.,47;;,,....:;:-.2r...'y.--: .•1.•.7';';,'„;,,.'1 1,. :• I'- VR-4.1„Wili'! ";!..7:,,3r.' ;017- re./.: 4..-•• -..;41.,,,tki ti 114 u •fl', :; '; 0 ., / .,--••'- 4i,1 • " - • • ', •-1-.!:''"I"••• ; '.* ••J ..4,40i,,..t•-•• .1 ,,• . ...p.,. 7,S, ,i' ''T. •:; .--7.".,,t14:'Srj,7..7.r.,"'","....lt,P.'‘.." 'NI titilert*li1;;;" r't . , ':..: r 1•!;t'Zit'. ',.a..rtivq.,tiii:n: .g.co--,,,,, it . ...r. _ .7i , ..J,,,, . ;-.1.•14 ./ , it 34
. . , ..
4 . ,;. ,' .. - -.._ri-.-tt.•- '.,;:4-.:•:,• , ," ,.- •! --.1,-- •- , ,,,i' ,.. :.- Ot,,r-- ttrmir.„..„„,.... ,t,sr.-7.. ...,..z.",.. .: .4,4,z.:. . Pl;‘,i gl .,;.,rit;At! •,... F,•....,.:.,::..,,, _ ... .r; .: 1 .,,L.,.,..., „;,:;„.: 1.1 _ !.!.......or..•" 4.01.•,.. ;1.'2 ..,,„,','..yi_i 1, -_,--_.1.,-4.4„!!'', „,.`,'. A.' (.2! i ir,,e1r4i1,4c,,,,,,•;.,,L. ---''„;,,,: ,.i.4114-: ,...,- -, .,,:,.,,...6 -,,,...5„.. ...,:.......0., ,,,,.. „:. ., ,. ..."'"!..Nr75.,4,,..4, , i...in ,.44.... L.,4,y 7.•..• -•:.,411,I Tit,. _...,,,,I"L , •.. - -/,[ ,)!. ,,-,V, ) li" ,‘,0 . 0 ; -4,1114 .1 — ,., ,,,,.:•.;;,, ,/f.,,, ,, • .i„. .• '''' **•1 l'- :`,••4• I "N, 'Pi - , 4 . 3119 103 roHd,t.„7„.--- '4, -'• -•,.17::.•%i.....7,1111:it.,' itlileollig. '•; ."‘".7'1i'iot,,.."•`. *.:', ."4::".•,f.••••i 4..". --q-,-7 t z,. 4•./'r..t4,,': -.)-i--: : ,i 4 ,,s,,,,L,.ii.-Ii..,....•. 7,777..i:•, `-- I. • . 7 7.,'' '''.4.-'' '. •7#0''''.. ..4*V.1'7,'' 7''''' •n„ - . I, 1174w't . L:••"4",.:7 -...i.A.'. ...,,IL.t.,:- - • •-••„....:ci;'"•r.-•!......,,.......,„_. ..L...• '-'2,,,,:€4.C4,:.A,-d:7...,,,..,,,,,4,4%, ta.'...t.. .:. ..',:7'.. -‘:-. ....- .,•i:"''''''''' . t.::.4.;;Trrr.ti, I.-« - ,..: '.-.7%1=-..',.--4''''''., ',rj",i'..4“SR. 44':::;,-,',.••:iji• ,; 4 ,.,iii-.T.'=",,,..•.,L. "I . ' ,,..,. - "14.74 4.....',- - ---.•.. - ,.. -', .gei•, .,• '..-'..r ,..1. "i, , ' : . . ••• . 1.., ',i , 1 . , 1 A ••-. .. "`;'""" '-:-.- • ''-' '. 1 ' ''d'Ai.,--1:t.'s '•.,., '` ...„.'..•,44',-A` ', 1,....t1.'4.---.1-71' ' , i'"7.-.-:.:•-v.' :444' v ' - 4.,----•,A; . '''' -•(..er;:42,..sett -1,..-;.-: ----_, -. 1.5,, ..„. ir,,,,,,...3--..., ..zg.......44;Of ;111p...1,., .,,,,:.., _ ,j,.., ...,.,...,„!,,.;....,,..a- „.: 47....;;;_•,, ;-,:lautti,t ,A,,,,t--k.•., ..-- 8 0..- i -- ,„t•: • ••:. , , , _ „• ,.1,. .4,4,.; ., ,4 -77': ,••• • . , 1 ' • '7. .l'.,*,''' '.4,..4,:-.r..74(i p •tiii-Q-ff'=•'•14--AIL.,_,„:, •.04:r_-..4, -,• : ,,,„:=.:_.-,,, ,ilz,.,,4_,, -, .,.... ::,..., ,.,,t - ...;',•-'4"' inr::•;.:,-y ,..-.'74,-41.,, -,'„:„...,S„.,.1.A..:,., ,,,...'-'n'......*: -:-.1*-4,,rAi''''1''''*W. ditirjoy,iv;•.....•-....,.;,!......., ,._..., •,..,47•_..- ,.__',.,..,..„,!..,_._....„...7,1,...,4 0.511.....4EL,..,..t.c„.....;.;..., y:t 4,A tz:., .1:1, ,..,., .,. •
' '''''' ,,',-1`,. ...• •••::\•,. -,' ' i, ' "•,.{...,..,., ,, Airii.7,1--•4.1.7"-i-rP .V, kiii!.i ii: ;1' -.--,,-;•..tre,.-2,:,7_...I.•„•7Pt-,... ...,,,,...,,,.",, ,.. : .A...._ .,..."...,.4t..' ; , bill..‘„_,..-,,,,. ..,,.„ .,A.; , . • - .. . ,, , ' '"'-i••:".4.' .vili • ' tii••:- '7::-''`` . f'''•...;• -'1"•'' ,•-•!-••'..'i C4 1 •• ?"' • •.. J.' .I'. .'',.:• ;'::":4.`‘::`...:- .1...-,'''• '-', '-:,. ., 4'11,...\S. ..fiNk'-' it:i• '7.;;;artriViii..•OP- .''" ,f7". I' ''' -•1°' !.-1-3!!"..,-1—' ••-'-".i...-P.A:••;.!!. L- ; ,:`,." ''... :'- -.1."'l-'''•'""'• '.., .'- . -',;,...- <
. ,.......,...- 4,-v..,,,.k , •.3'30,4, i --4, ; 1`,A 1 ••'' •17.1.-lt•.•,:-''-'*' .4.4RIF.,•Ir,-- • -' . ,. -1; 14 i.....'"",-:,f. ,...4••-.`' • . ..;•.iN•..4•C;.4,Ni - !I•itl'AA.'",. .eisoNOSBOI.410!Sir....."`...41. - ..- _-- i •"*"..iiss.:410.':i....toi .''••"1,"..:- '" .."LEA" '' ' )1 . .....e.1- .• •,-, :. -•i ••.3 k.;'' ,:-..fr- „.,';•1 „•-•,. ,•II - -,-- ,r" .,.. r' - -,i -..i• ':•- B' - /4h. r.r...'-li .,„.,9.,,,,,,.. ,iwz:.,,..,"";..„,„,_...x.., •'..?•••,\ 'i 4.,14r4,1_, ... ,,,...---. _ : ,,-.&,..t.etLini ' •-4 , •.--..---I; ,'cic- . -.,77-;.',."!,..." r ,;,; • /I ' ' I.[it,',6.-"! : -.-i;*I.,., .:,-r..1; .:.:.,,,V,1 :_./.74)1,...,„,:,!ILZI;V.•,,,:t2.,..' ..' ,a4,,,.,,,,..,:ili. : , , ,,,,,:-.. :- ..,,,..,„.•:,-.,,, -..,, .7---.,,,i,." . ., ;"I.:, ....4,t,,,,7•• t ,,_,,,,„i '.'ll _. 1•• 4,1' tr,-,;71.0 it,., i, .1r..4.30•-•.-- - • -•i,;;,:gtr. . ,,-.i,f ti!'7"Z',,'" --"•- . -. •-,- ,'7•••,,*i= ' :/„..Pti.., --4.-t • ow ley ,,,t-t, Lei. tip•.=a. .a.......• 10.,r'. .....--.- 1.0 2,..., Mk,, ' ,,L_ 4'4.'..ji..,:6:": K.'S':1,.i., '41 '' . r.K• ' ,Y ',:Piht:.Z.,,,,..' ..,-Icrit.. !glif:lem.1:7,rgeoair',.--, . -.1.40..;::,'-..1::•;z;--i:---..M,'-.". ' ; .:1.• , or looja - . ., , . ._.... ,...,
. ..,. ,
,...,,,,,,...„,....,..,,,,,v..„„,:.,.,.---,....4. ' * ,,•••,: . '''er. lkuNI10.'-101.41! . ''''''.f '- rILI..-...:1;...t"t, Adi I:`,..13ii:. :IL.,..,r,11, ‘..,.., ".:7!?....'...:,....' 'omt:;."' is Op
phip , . _ .. .... , , ..----,,,,--_, "• Pi,i,c.H.Ifse,...,-.2,'I.1.... •,..,. .,.t. •...,T-.:. .'., - .....:-.‘-'..,,4".*,.•''.C.''., --..'-:..'...,:0741,4(4,...4•••--71''•,',V iir.o.ra..4-1;11- lit• fel-Mk 1"...:1.•iffl 1•4;r-z- i•-•'..""s..4, •;:r.,..ii:lirzz•,-, --'1...;,:t.'tr!!'..`;::!:.:',.'•. ...... .••... '"'' • ' iiii ',,-R,(7•4' .„i, '.'Ars., r 4' - ,L' "'.'1;...,,,if .1„.4-7.,4,- ..-7,,i'!. ,.,.4i.•-:..;;;,1,..i.‘,,,0,,,..14,..,;-z,-..;. :,._,„.,..:44;J-4.4..:..4.-. - •k
-',.t..." Ift'-'••, ••,—-•,'• -7...41., ''''''' ' 1,0"4034.411,4`.."*=/1.4Mqii14.A‘fr''4...'''''in ** 4 ...:i=lti -. . A -...-.,,,..z.:-f.,,..,...•--R,,,,, ::. .-.. . , . ' i L.• .. ,.' ., ' ' A:•••,ii --..,..,_.'".`"•'.NW -110.."- .'•••*.•.' ''. . . "'.? 11,,,,.k*.N...••• ••-.1411'cO' NI-a'''.tieg.=.. .`s. .3....-r1:6:::''."i . •-• w• A." rr ee e . r.••••4•'••••••...•••-• • '• "e-.4.e e'' ' rr'' • ••.r.`"46.irr •‘ 'r. • ' '• . r 'A.." ,, .01„71.' 1•;. ',tr. ,..... r- - rr:- • r r . " ,,;'.;,;,.rr''...-':-.. ,-,re., '".7.; - ., . ,,..','-1.?.eatilia WOS•alii, .INiSMIQ-ailAr=1.=1:.,,,:jr...=.F...- . er....<-1„...i.,,.. plii,ii, ...:.;,,ii-....,.,.....r.r.,,.... .. .- - • ,....,--.'" • ... ' ___.,..,.._ .... ik, „ -..., • •...P....' ........ ,''•..."_•,:• ,;.;.q•,- N'..-*.„ ..<::, ,,4.•;-,--,-':Illiptipip..4.41.1-4,zzi.41it""4.11.1VESVic!•mft171._''.. el..-6r--.-.,-,ThI4-...11314.1-°- 45_34-5,....:.4-•""4-...,-.7.'li'".7::.- '••••••''. • :: "-- ..' ''.-;• ---'41'-...--•'-' ..--- . ,. .:44.p• "`r10 ' '. ''-'Ff r''. "W.*•',-. .400 4 ''' ..""1 .1somisigirl 44% ....4.'".. !,.-4 .c' sI"••-• ' . -• ---,...;;;;;;0• •• •.;• •' - ;'-'1I\\.... .-:1'1•471. .Cilig."-- ov;1111111.10-*721,6-"r k;11:2.!.!.•!ipmart.1?..I.LIVX117414.,'..'?:', , ' —,L : L .. , .....L...7-=71••!•=:''''--, Sili. _:::•:;:',g.,0„,!;: :',.,..:„,r4f.-,;„.-.....„.„.',,:-7.,', 2:.:-..- •.,,.,..v•• L,..,.,,,._LL,._. ...._ ,..... .. .--....p: --''ri°11:..-„, - • ..., ..,, ..,-,,.. . . .,.....-1.11”...z.tiragsr-tatilriss.-filln-..%_': ;,. . -.,-a ,,-.,, L. .75..r.,,,..!,7,...c 9 ilti.F t : .
., :,,,.„„,,,,,g,..4 -4....., :
,
, , , ...,. ,,
, ..1 ,e! ,!3 • .

1...... .. : -1 . .._
rt,...., ,.....-,..,--..e.,-,...',......-**,•A*,,,,. ..a Inn -Kin . ....., •, ,.,'. --,.•..,,..1 i t,,,,. F" • k - . , .
...EOM," 4 r ,77,7
''---------
1/....,
_.—_______._\,
son. GROUP BOUNDARY i .... ....4"="=11,g1....
\ A SOIL GROUP DESIGNATION
SCALE i.,48,C0C,
II \
\
• ---- BOUNDARY OF INDICATED SOURCE
i E-I SCALE REDUCED BY 1/2 HYDROLOGIC SOILS GROUP MAP ISAN BERNARDINO COUNTY\ C-2
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 1 •
) FOR
..

HYDROLOGY MANUAL C-3 C-4 SOUTHWEST-A AREA !NOE X NIAP Page 915 of 1374
C 26 FIGURE C-I3

I
` ds9i
•
r. . f - lave River Fork .e 'M` I' —• . . -.'-'73 ?. ....
�y "`" Ti
H sethief
r).� T1 d. y.•. • . - -tom Can-^I .~ i.0 ' - - - ',y'wi -r Yoh-. A;�/ri
'�
■ j' tyy
• i. y Cleghorn Canyon , •
ir lii
, �'.'. ,Sawpit Canyon 7,.; _ 6re CGvQe- • Ailli-oriew be .1.:,....._rig
-�, • ., .F% a C Gt
pF' , ram• l - i.'...r�qi �m --` _ - ' ! �. ..! le l }� �` -3 - }r 2 aile Ba•si_ .��I bear Creek . - ^, _ a -4 r i a Devil Basin#4y �1.' _ • .. . 1r �,�gp Pe ail Ba #7' �- s �+
' YEN' �"Sa .:sin 1 Sychjfi '.(c'•.,...1." i1 ') ' Day Creek Waterm_ asin# :IV'
d",. ' �• \ '� WatermanSp C4unds_g•tO mc9,.-: Sa\In,COE Hch asin :�-reekSpreading `r em- n#2 1 ��l N Hdi Sand Cafiyon•BasinSan Sevaine Basin SOD] ti, r rr Dyn' it enii e,
San An -} si 2 01 1 STATE HWY210 ,5 STATE HWY210 • !., Pa1torPB n or?Basin San An - w- 5 r - __ yy
Cucam. sin.6 t Victoria. in a.tu w Pe 's I Basi Bledsol � San Ant. s �'� H 03 '�� Cactus Basi i I ,,,,��--• �.„ �` 4 -02 i-- Ci Cre eadin Grounds 1 W.r.• ev'n Oaks D. OE DSOD f onio asrtM9 Cactus Bas #2 y t1' 9 _ I ] ll • • V urch Street Basin /{ .`;�.."--" RXI Coll asin#1 / \M ..,. „reek Gateh; se,COEF „J-If)9 _i- i_Sev :---I. . ;' !�, -j- .:, _ - -
College Height •
04 s1 •. Seven O. :. •EPI P "•:•Grounds `eek. . s11, Montclai• :- .1 Ba�na sin��dig _ ,�;'H r. even - 1``i - •- .- �1�y,� •
M. v Turn Basin#1 II II `3\ 41.i IV I I i 10-115Etiwanda C nservation Bas ? War Creek Co l I I H05 �*� ( �'_ s ii4creek.� r i Juru a Basin DSOD
I I III P ] :4 . ... )H12 m to `. y-Creek BPreadrtsdi� � i Wineville Basin _ r.
tl asin#2 m/ th Sfrsef Basin t ' o y Q° Mountain View t aNn-,V t . . r„7` �. -s ,[l • v !. n'.►-r�!:.., yin I Ri ' 1r..[� ..:k^gygar��'� i m / " 'Sawn Tim -Creek .� M C, l _ S� �' Yucaipa• a r r,.. P.• ;� • '�. F `�1�

1. I�q.Basi4 irELri..r• l�L�-.7�1�Pye��'��` aJ •� v2d.B T 'to 1 itP},,_ e.]' ,Y 5 vt • +t I •er Cucamon � +i r.�; PROJECT SITE ,,:'r"•-ma's""' , - `-14 " . ass k.. r •` �-r
.• - . . • ..Jf� 6 -
. ...1..M`-' V f- STATE HWY 60 . -: 7"7:- j a''• Legend y�P��9, HCOC Exemptareas ..vi,'f`{"- Regional Bo. .Boundary Hydromodification Government Land None Exempt FAhn. 1 H03 H09 = III 1 VI e O C.. :oundary — EHM State of California Land HCOC Exempt - G H10 J IV VII ' I rains eCourse - Low United States of America Land g Mli A H01 H05{ H11 IX VIII
Medium Q City Boundary - B H02 H06 Im1-1 H12 -J II. W — High Freeways -C HO2A H07 U X
- - - High(Default) NM Basins and Dams - E HO2B H08 II V XIII

SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.
tit)II'\ 11\II Rl115 1NI) I NlIF.()\111 N111 I1r,INI I I:I!tt,(()NM 1 I1\Iti 897 VIA LATA, SUITE N• COLTON,CA 92324 •(909)370-0474 • (909) 370-0481 •FAX (909) 370•3156 l erjt j1 of Get:technical evaluation`anti
Sails 1nliltratian Testing far WI M17-II3M1F Starinwater t isnnsal Design Planned New San Antonio Water District Headquarters Office and Maintenance Facility 400 E. 20th Street
Upland, CA
APN: 1044-091-22
Project No. 24036-F/BMP
August 28, 2024
Prepared for:

CEDG, Inc.
do Mr. Erik Peterson
401 E. Columbia Avenue
Pomona, CA 91767
soil ssouthwestpa ol.com
Established 1984 Page 917 of 1374

SOILS SOUTHWEST, INC.
111I I RI\I ti \NI)I N\Ik(1N 111\11I I NUM I kING COW it 11N I ti 897 VIA LATA, SUITE N -COLTON,CA 92324 -(909)370-0474 •(909) 370.0481 •FAX(909)370-3156 August 28, 2024 Project No.24001-F/BMP
CEDG, Inc.
401 E. Columbia Avenue
Pomona, CA 91767
Attention: Mr. Erik Peterson
Subject: Report of Geotechnical Evaluations and
Soils Infiltration Rates for WQMP-BMP Stormwater Disposal Design Planned New San Antonio Water District Headquarters Office and Maintenance Facility 400 E_ 20th Street
Upland, CA
APN: 1044-091-22
Reference: Preliminary Site Plan Provided by Addressee Dear Mr. Peterson,
Presented herewith is the report of(i) Geotechnical Evaluations and (ii) Soils Infiltration Rates for WQMP- BMP Stormwater Disposal Design proposed for the planned new administrative office and maintenance structures, parking, along with shallow depth basin and underground infiltration disposal systems to be located 400 East 20th Street, Upland, California. in absence of detailed development plans review, the opinions and recommendations included should be considered as"preliminary". Revised and/or updated recommendations may be warranted following precise grading and development plans review.

Based on the referenced site plan, it is understood that the subject development will primarily include two new near grade structures including one maintenance shop and one administrative office structure.

Construction of wood and stucco, concrete tilt-up or concrete framed, or concrete block construction with concrete slabs-on-grade is assumed. Supplemental construction is to include on-site driveways and parking and paving for auto/heavy-duty truck traffic , along with the installation of a couple WQMP-BMP stormwater disposal systems to complete the project. Moderate site preparations and grading should be expected. For estimation purposes, the anticipated structural loadings of 80 kips and 8 klf are assumed for isolated column and conventional wall spread foundations, respectively.

Based on the test explorations and laboratory testing completed at this time, it is our opinion that the soils encountered primarily consist of upper 3 feet of variegating layers of gravels and silty fine to medium coarse gravel sand mixtures with high concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and occasional small boulders to the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided in the attached Log of Borings.

Na shallow-depth groundwater or impermeable layers were encountered. Historical and shallow-depth groundwater is reported at approximately 267 feet below grade as measured at the nearest water well, 01 N07W28N002S. Based on such, and as described in the Special Publication SP117, published by the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, it is our opinion that the site is considered non-susceptible to seismically induced soils liquefaction thereby requiring no special geotechnical design recommendations other than those as recommended herein. [email protected]
Established 1984 Page 918 of 1374

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street.Upland,CA. 24036-FfOMP Based on review of the available USGS (California Geologic Survey) publication, it is understood that the site is not situated within an A-P Special Studies Zone where a known seismic fault passes through the site or its adjacent. Supplemental information is provided in Appendix C.

Following review of the online FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Mapping, it is understood that the project site is classified as a Zone X, Area of Minimal Flood Hazard.

Based on the evaluations completed at this time, it is our opinion that from a geotechnical viewpoint, the site should be considered suitable for the proposed development provided that the recommendations and opinions included are considered in design and construction.

Final grading and detailed development plan review is suggested to verify the applicability of the certain assumptions as used in preparing this report.

This report has been substantiated by subsurface explorations and mathematical analysis made in accordance with the generally accepted engineering principles, including those field and laboratory testing considered necessary in the circumstances.

We offer no other warranty, expressed or implied.

Respectfully submitted,
Soils Southwest, Inc.
eSSION
Malay Gupta, RCE 3 708 C
QP �� John Flippin
y�` K'GU,o Project Coordinator

4. w31708a12-31-24
` CIO- q,
9�FOF CA�-�F�
SSW August 28,2024 pn.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'F'Street, Lipiand,CA- 24036-F/BMP

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose and Scope of Work
This report presents the results of(I) Geotechnical Evaluations and (ii)Soils Infiltration Testing for WQMP-BMP Stormwater Disposal System Design for the new administrative office and maintenance structures, parking, along with shallow depth and underground infiltration design systems to be located 400 East 20th Street, Upland, California- In absence of precise grading and/or detailed development plans, the recommendations and opinions included may require updating and revisions recommendations following detailed development plans review.

Thesoils encountered as described herein are based on visual observations made during test explorations, supplemented by the necessary laboratory testing completed at this time. Being beyond scope of work, no geologic investigations or Phase I Environmental Site Assessment(ESA)are included. Reports of such will be supplied upon request.

The recommendations contained reflect our best estimate of the soils' conditions as encountered during field explorations as conducted for the site. It is not to be considered as a warranty of the soils' conditions for other areas or for the depth beyond the explorations advanced at this time.

The recommendations supplied should be considered valid and applicable following review of the final grading and development plans when supplied and when the following conditions are observed:

Pre-grade meeting with the contractor, public agency, and the geotechnical engineer, ii. Excavated bottom inspections and verifications by the geotechnical engineer prior to backfill placement,
iii. Continuous observations and testing during site preparation and structural fill soils placement, iv- Observation and inspection of footing trenching prior to steel and concrete placement, v. Plumbing trenches backfill placement prior to concrete slab-on-grade placement, vi. On and off-site utility trenches backfill testing and verifications, and vii. Consultations as required during construction or upon your request.

1.2 Site Description
The rectangular shaped subject parcel of 4.92 acres is currently a water district yard facility in operation .

In general, the site is bounded by East 20'h Street to the north, by Interstate 210 Freeway on the south, by vacant undeveloped property on the east, and by Flower Court on the west. Following review of the available site drawings, overall vertical relief within the property is unknown, however, based on site reconnaissance, sheet flow from incidental rainfall is estimated to flow towards the south and southwest.

Other than an existing reservoir tank, pump station, and numerous soil, rock, and asphalt debris stockpiles in the center portion of the property, along with a satellite tower at the southeast corner, presence of no other significant features were noted.

1.3 Proposed Development
No precise grading and/or detailed development plans are available for review; however, it is understood that the subject development will primarily include two (2) structures near existing grade to accommodate, among others, a maintenance building and an administrative office- Use of wood and stucco framed, concrete block, or metal framed construction with concrete slabs-on-grade is assumed. Supplemental construction is anticipated to include on-site driveways, parking and paving, along with the installation of two (2) WQMP-BMP stormwater disposal systems. Considering existing offsite paving, curb-gutter, and drive approaches, off-site street improvements is not anticipated at this time.

Moderatesite preparations and grading are anticipated as described in the following sections- ssw .: s

San Antonio Water District I-feadquarters/404 E.26"'Street, Upland,CA. 24036-FIBI1/MP

1.4 Subsurface Investigation
The geotechnical evaluations include subsurface explorations, soil sampling, necessary laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparation of this report. Being beyond scope of work, no geologic investigations or Phase I Environmental Site Assessments are included. Reports on such will be supplied on request.

In general, our scope of work included the following: review of the referenced site plan supplied along with three (6) test borings (B-1 to B-a) explored by using a Hollow-Stem Auger(HSA) drill rig advanced to the refusal depth of 3 feet below grade along with four(4) infiltration test borings to maximum depths between 3 and 8 feet(P-1 and P-4)as requested for WQMP-BMP Stormwater Disposal Design. During explorations, the soils encountered were continuously logged, bulked, and undisturbed samples were procured and recorded. Collected samples were subsequently transferred to our laboratory for necessary geotechnical testing.

Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided on the attached Log of Borings. Approximate test locations are shown on the attached Plate A.
o Laboratory testing conducted on the selected bulk and undisturbed samples were programmed according to the project requirements. The laboratory testing included determinations of • Moisture Density Determination (ASTM D2216),
• Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content(ASTM D1557), • Soils' Peak and Residual Shear Strengths (ASTM D3080), • Soils' Consolidation Characteristics(ASTM D2435),
• Soils' Sieve Analyses(ASTM D422),
• Soils' R-value(ASTM D2844), and
• Soils' Sand Equivalent, SE (ASTM D2419),
o Based on the field investigation and laboratory testing completed the necessary engineering analyses and evaluations were made on which to base our preliminary recommendations for foundation design, slab-on-grade, site preparations and grading, utility trenches backfill, and o Preparation of this report for initial use by the project design professionals.

The recommendations supplied should be considered "tentative" and may require revisions and/or upgrading following final grading and detailed development plans review.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20`"'Street, Upland,CA. 24036-FIBIVIP

2.0 Geotechnical Evaluations

2.1 Site Soils Description
The soils encountered primarily consist of upper 3 feet of variegating layers of gravels and silty fine to medium coarse gravel sand mixtures with high concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and occasional small boulders to the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided in the attached Log of Borings.

Based on review of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Web Soil Survey for the subject area, it is our understanding that the soil classification within the structural pad areas is identified as being SpC-Soboba stony loamy sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes with the upper 60 inches consisting of stony loamy stand and very stony sands below existing grade, whereas the soils within the planned underground infiltration disposal system at the southwest portion of the property being classified as HaC-Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes consisting of sandy loam and fine sandy loam up to five (5) feet below existing grade. Following review of the Geological Map of the Mount Baldy Quadrangle(2002), the project site is designated as consisting of Qg alluvial gravel and sand of stream channels.

Based on review of the available USGS(California Geologic Survey) publications, it is understood that the site is not situated within an A-P Special Studies Zone where seismic fault passes through the site or its adjacent.

No groundwater or impermeable soils were encountered within the refusal depth of 3 feet explored.

According to California Department of Water Resources, the historical groundwater level is at a depth of approximately 267 feet which is in excess of 50 feet below grade as measured at the nearest water well (01N07W28N0025) . Based on such and as described in the Special Publication SP117, published by the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, it is our opinion that the site is considered non-susceptible to seismically induced soils liquefaction.

Laboratory shear tests conducted on the upper soils remolded to 90% indicate"moderate"shear strengths under increased moisture conditions. Results of the laboratory shear tests are provided on Plate B.

Consolidation tests conducted on remolded samples indicate"slight" potential for compressibility along with slight to moderate hydro-collapse potential under anticipated static structural loadings with potential for "tolerable"settlements to footings and concrete slabs-on-grade. Areas of slight to moderate compressibility and/or hydro collapsible potential may require further excavation and/or compaction effort. Results of the laboratory determined soils consolidation potential are shown in Appendix B.

Fine to medium coarse to coarse sands with traces of silts along with rocks and cobbles encountered are considered "low" in expansion potential requiring no special construction requirements other than those as recommended herein. Supplemental soil expansion testing, however, is recommended following mass grading completion to provide supplemental/revised foundation recommendations, if warranted,

2.2 Subsurface Variations
During site preparations and grading, buried irrigation, debris, organic and others may be encountered. In addition, variations in soil strata, their continuity and orientations may be expected. Due to the deposition characteristics of the soils encountered, care should be exercised in interpolating or extrapolating the subsurface soils conditions existing in between and beyond the test explorations conducted.

2.3 Excavatibility
It is our opinion that the grading required for the project may be accomplished by using conventional heavy- duty construction equipment. No blasting or jackhammering should be warranted. However, considering the presence of high concentration of cobbles and boulders, it is suggested to use rocks no greater than 6- 8 inches in compacted fills, but directly beneath footings and slabs should be avoided.

AurJusi 1B,2(1a,/ I..i. ,.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters(400 E.2Q'"Street, Upiand,CA. 24036-F/BMP

2.4 Soil Corrosivity
Reference Soil Sample B-1 © 0-3 feet below grade

1. Chloride concentration equal to 29 mg/Kg does not exceed 10,000 ppm is non-corrosive to ferrous metals,

2. pH equal to 7.93 units exceeding 4.0 units is non-corrosive to buried metals,

3. Sulfate concentration equal to 82 mg/Kg does not exceed 2000 ppm is non-corrosive to concrete, and

4. Resistivity equal to 3,640 ohms/cm is`moderately"corrosive to buried metals.

Soil chemical test results are included in Appendix B.

It is suggested that following mass grading completions. soils corrosivity potential evaluations should be made to determine, at a minimum, concentrations of pH, sulfate, chloride, and resistivity. Further corrective recommendations should be provided by Corrosion Engineer.

2.5 Groundwater
No groundwater or bedrock was encountered within the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. However,following review of the available recorded groundwater well data as shown in the table below, historical groundwater was measured at approximately 267 feet below the existing well grade. The following table describes the historical and the current groundwater level as recorded in the nearest well as listed by the local reporting agency.

GROUNDWATER TABLE
Reporting Agency California Department of Water Resources Marcelo Montagna 2008 Maps
httq://wd I.water.ca.qov/waterdata li b rary/
Well Number 01 N107W 28N002S Cucamonga-1000547 Well Monitoring Agency Chino Basin
Well Location: Township/Range/Section T01 N-RO7W-Section 28 Well Elevation: 1.675
Current Depth to Water(Measured in feet) 469
Current Date Water was Measured March 26,2024
Depth to Water (Measured in feet) 267
(Shallowest)
Date Water was Measured (Shallowest) December 16,1983 Fluctuations in groundwater levels, however, can occur due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff, altered natural drainage paths, and other factors not evident at the time the test borings completed.

Accordingly, for the planned development, it is our opinion that provisions should be maintained to dispose incidental surface runoff away from the individual structural pads, once constructed. • ,

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'h Street, Upland,CA. 24036-FIBMP

3.0 Faulting and Seismicity

3.1 Faulting and Seismicity
Based on the information published by the USGS (currently known as California Geologic Survey) Department of Conservation, State of California, it is understood that the site is not situated within an A-P Special Study Zone where earthquake fault(s) runs through or adjacent to the subject site. In the absence of shallow(less than 50 feet)depth groundwater,the site is considered non-susceptible to soils liquefaction in the event of a strong motion earthquake. However, the site being within Southern California where potentials for seismically induced structural hazards could not be ignored, it is our opinion that implementation of the current CBC seismic design parameters in structural design as described herein may reduce the potential for seismically induced structural distress to some"acceptable"tolerable limits.

Seismically induced site-specific potential hazards are discussed in the following sections_

3.2 Direct or Primary Seismic Hazards
Surface ground rupture along with active fault zones and ground shaking represent primary or direct seismic hazards to structures. There are no known active or potentially active faults that pass through or towards the subject site and the site is not situated within an A-P Special Studies Zone. According to the current 2022 CBC, the site is considered situated within Seismic Zone 4- As a result, it is likely that during the life expectancy of the structures built, moderate to severe ground shaking may have some adverse effects to the structures built.

3.3 Induced or Secondary Seismic Hazards
In addition to ground shaking, effects of seismic activity may include surface rupture, flooding, Iandsliding, lateral spreading, settlements, and subsidence. Potential effects of such are as described below.

3.3.1 Liquefaction
Liquefaction is caused by build-up of excess hydrostatic pressure in saturated cohesionless soils due to cyclic stress generated by ground shaking during an earthquake. The significant factors on which liquefaction potential of a soil deposit depends, among others include, soil type, relative soil density, intensity of earthquake, duration of ground shaking, and depth of ground water.

No groundwater was encountered within the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. In absence of historically reported groundwater within 50 feet below grade, and based on review the Special Publication SP117, published by the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, it is our opinion that the site is considered non-susceptible to seismically induced soils liquefaction thereby requiring no special geotechnical design recommendations other than those as recommended herein-

3.3.2 Shallow Depth Ground Rupture
The site is not situated within an A-P Special Studies Zone. Based on review of the existing geologic information, no major fault is noted to cross through or extend towards the site- The potential for surface rupture resulting from nearby fault movement is not known for certainty; however, in our opinion it is considered"remote"due to the distance of the site to the recorded nearby earthquake fault

3.3.3 Flooding
Flooding hazards include tsunamis (seismic sea waves), Seiches, or failure of manmade reservoirs, tanks, and aqueducts. The potential for these hazards is considered "remote" considering the inland site location and in absence of nearby known bodies of water. Based on review of the FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette map, it is our understanding that the subject area is delineated as Zone X, Area of Minimal Flood Hazard on its eastern half while the western half is delineated as being in an area with "Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee as shown in the attached Appendix C.

August 28,2024 i -

San Antonio Water District Headquartersl400 E.20"'Street,Upiand,CA. 24036-FIBMP

3.3.4 Landslides
Seismically induced landslides and other slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after an earthquake. Considering the site and its adjacent being relatively flat, it is our opinion that potential for seismically induced landslides should be considered "remote".

3.3.5 Lateral Spreading
Seismically induced lateral spreading involves lateral movement of soils due to ground shaking. Lateral spreading is demonstrated by near vertical cracks with predominantly horizontal movement of the soil mass involved. The topography of the site being near level, it is our opinion that the potential for seismically induced lateral spreading should be considered "remote".

3.3.6 Seismically Induced Settlement
Considering the proximity of the earthquake fault as described, it is our opinion that potential for some total and differential settlements due to ground shaking may be anticipated as described herein.

3.4 Seismic Design Parameters
The design spectrum was developed based on the 2022 CBC. Site Coordinates of 34.135692°N, -117.645040°W were used to establish the seismic parameters presented below.

3.4.1 Seismic Design Coefficients
The site is situated at approximately 1.3 miles from the Cucamonga Fault capable of generating an earthquake magnitude, M of 6.7 and Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration, PGA of 0.753g at 10% probability of exceedance in 50-year return period_
Forfoundation and structural design use of the following seismic parameters are suggested as based on the current 2022 CBC:

Recommended values are based upon the online review of ASCE 7-22 Hazard Tool coefficient parameters.

The following presents the seismic design parameters evaluated based on the available publications published by California Geological Survey (CGS), 2022 CBC, and ASCE Standard 7-16.

TABLE 3.4.1 Al: Seismic Design Parameters
Seismic Source Type
Based on California Geological Survey-Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PGA) having a 10% probability of exceedance in a 50-year period is described as below:

Seismic Source Type I Appendix C
Nearest Maximum Fault Magnitude M?6.7
Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PGA) 0.753g
In design, vertical acceleration may be assumed to about 1/3 to 213 of the estimated horizontal ground accelerations (PGA)described.

Aug Lis , •I•

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street, Upland,CA. 24036-F!BMP It should be noted that lateral force requirement in design should be intended to resist total structural collapse due to the described PGA of 4.753g or greater. However, during the lifetime use of the structure built, it is our opinion that some structural damage may be anticipated requiring structural repairs and/or replacement. Use of flexible lifeline connections are suggested.

TABLE 3.4.1 A2: Seismic Design Coefficients
CBC Chapter 16 2022 ASCE 7-16 Standard Recommended Seismic Design Parameters Values
1613A.5.2 Site Class D
1613.5.1 The mapped spectral accelerations at short period Ss 1613.5.1 The mapped spectral accelerations at 1.0-second period S1 1613A5.3(1) Seismic Coefficient, Ss 1.766g
1613A5.3(2) Seismic Coefficient, Si 0.658g 1613A5.3(1) Site Class D 1 Seismic Coefficient, F, 1g 1613A5.3(2) Site Class D 1 Seismic Coefficient, n/a • 16A-37 Equation Spectral Response Accelerations,SMMS=F,Ss 1.766g 16A-38 Equation Spectral Response Accelerations, Snit =FV Sin/a 16A-39 Equation Design Spectral Response Accelerations, Soy=2/3 x Sin; 1.177g 16A-40 Equation Design Spectral Response Accelerations,Sol =2/3 x Sn;z n/a Mi ust 28,2024 141. 1 i

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'h Street,Upland,CA. 24036-FIOMP

4.0 Evaluations and Recommendations

4.1 General Evaluations
Based on field explorations, laboratory testing, and subsequent engineering analyses, the following tentative conclusions and recommendations are presented for initial study:
(I) From a geotechnical viewpoint, the site is considered grossly stable for the proposed development, provided that the recommendations supplied herein are incorporated in design and construction.

Foundation design should reflect considerations of the seismically induced PGA as described. (II) Based on the dry, silty, gravelly, variable consistency nature of the upper soils existing as encountered, it is our opinion that for structural support the load bearing soils should be reworked in the form of subexcavations, followed by scarification, moisturization, and their replacement as engineered fills compacted to minimum 90%. In the event that new fill soils are required over the current grade surface such should be placed on the original grades when prepared as described. (Ill) The subexcavation depths during mass grading as described in the following section should be considered as "minimum". During grading, localized deeper subexcavations may be required within areas underlain by buried debris, utilities, localized fills or soft soils and others. It will be the responsibility of the grading contractor to inform the project geotechnical engineer of the presence of such prior to further site preparations and grading.
(IV) In order to minimize potential for differential settlements, it is recommended that structural footings should be established exclusively into engineered fills of local soils compacted to the minimum as recommended in this report. Construction of footings and slabs straddling over cut and fill transition conditions shall be avoided.
(V) Structural design consideration should include probability for "moderate" peak ground acceleration from relatively active nearby earthquake faults. Implementing the seismic design parameters and procedures as outlined in the current CBC and as described earlier, however, may minimize the adverse effects for the structures proposed.
(VI) Although no groundwater was encountered, provisions should be maintained during construction to divert incidental rainfall away from the structural pads constructed. (VII) It is our opinion that, if site preparations and grading are performed as recommended and as per the generally accepted construction practices and current CBC, the proposed development will not adversely affect the stability of the site or its adjacent.

4.1.1 Recommendations for Site Preparations and Grading for Structural Support In absence of detailed development plans review, the planned structural pad grades are assumed at/or near the existing grade surface. For adequate structural support, it is our opinion that moderate site preparations and grading should be included in the form of subexcavations of the near grade dry, silty, gravelly, variable consistency soils and their replacement as engineered fills compacted to minimum 90%.

In general, site preparations and grading should include subexcavations of the near surface soils to about:
(i) minimum 5 feet below the current grade surface or
(ii)to the depth as required to expose the underlying moist and dense natural subgrades or (iii) to the depth as required to maintain a 24-inch-thick compacted fill mat blanket below foundation bottoms, whichever is greater.

The site preparations and grading described should encompass, at a minimum, the proposed structural footprint areas and minimum 5 feet beyond or as suggested by the geotechnical engineer during grading. No cut and fill transition conditions should be allowed.
.,,

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.2011 Street.Upland,CA. 2403E-F/BMP Within areas requiring fill soils, if any, such may be placed following sufficient subexcavations to expose the underlying dense subgrades as approved by the project geotechnical engineer. During grading, the engineered fills placed should be compacted to near Optimum Moisture and with minimum 90% compaction of soils' Maximum Dry Density as determined by ASTM 01557.

The subexcavation depths described should be considered as "preliminary". Localized additional subexcavations may be required within areas underlain by undocumented old fills, buried utilities and abandoned sewer and/or buried septic systems. It is recommended that the excavated subgrades should be verified and approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to structural fill soil placement. Supplemental recommendations may be warranted following detailed development plans review.

Mass grading required for the project is recommended to encompass, at a minimum, the entire individual structural pads and beyond.

For reference, supplemental general mass grading recommendations are included Section 5 of this report.

4.2 Structural Fill Material Requirements
The local and/or imported fills, if required, should be gravelly sand, free of organics, roots, debris, and rocks larger than 6 to 8-inch in diameter.

Although no significant variations in soil conditions are anticipated, actual soils conditions may vary during grading. It will be the contractor's responsibility to notify Soils Southwest, Inc. about such variations for revised/updated geotechnical recommendations.

Non-expansive in nature, the on-site soils free of organic, debris, and rocks larger than 8-inch in load bearing structural backfills placed should be compacted to minimum 90%of the soils' Maximum Dry Density as determined by ASTM D1557 test method. Import soils, if required, should be non-expansive, gravelly sand and meeting the following criteria:

Liquid Limit <35
Plasticity Index <15
Expansion Index <20

4.2.1 Structural Fill Soils Placement
Within the areas of structural loadings, it is our opinion that the near grade soils should be subexcavated to minimum 5 feet depth. For adequate structural bearing, it is our opinion that the excavated soils may be placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts with near Optimum Moisture Conditions compacted to minimum 90°/0. No structural fills should be placed during unfavorable weather conditions.

4.2.2 Cut and Fill Transition Conditions Pad Preparations (if applicable) Use of cut and fill transition conditions should be avoided to minimize potential for differential settlements to footings and concrete slabs-on-grade. Within cut and fill transition areas, if it becomes essential, it is suggested that following the necessary cut, the entire structural pad should be prepared so as to establish a uniform bearing compacted fill mat prepared in conformance to the general guidelines as described below. •.•v j'.i,i Vlt?� . , ,..,, i

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street, Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP Pad Preparation Guidelines for Cut and Fill Transition Condition Areas Fill Depth Required far Finish Grade Overexcavation Depth below Finish Grade (Within low-lying areas) _ (Within cut areas) Up to 5 feet Equal Depth
5 to 10 feet 5 feet
Greater than 10 feet One-half the maximum thickness of fills placed on the "Fill"portion(20 feet maximum)
Cut portions should be overexcavated beyond the structural perimeter lines for a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or to a minimum distance of 5 feet, whichever is greater. Actual subexcavation depths should be determined by the geotechnical engineer during grading.

4.3 Structural Foundation Design Parameters
In the absence of detailed development plans review, it is assumed that for load bearing support conventional continuous wall foundations and isolated spread footings will be used bearing directly on the engineered graded fills placed as described earlier in this report.

It is assumed that the subject development will include concrete tilt-up or concrete framed, concrete block construction with concrete slabs-on-grade and concrete footings in the form of isolated pier foundations or continuous wall foundations. Use of load bearing concrete wall and/or isolated spread footings are assumed to be used underlain by at least 30-inch-thick engineered fill mat of local soils compacted to minimum 90% as recommended earlier.

Structural foundations, in the form of exterior load bearing wall foundations and isolated pier foundations, may be considered in design based on the following equations:

Continuous Wall Footing: qallowable= 2000+ 350d + 250b Isolated Square Footing: gal{owable= 2400+ 350d + 100b, where gauowabIa= allowable soil vertical bearing capacity, in psf d=footing depth, minimum 30-inch,
b=footing width, minimum 24-inch.

The above soil bearing capacities may be increased for each additional depth in footing and width in excess of the minimum recommended. Under static loading conditions, with a Factor of Safety, FS = 3.0, the total maximum vertical bearing capacity is recommended not to exceed 3500 psf for continuous wall footings and isolated square footings. If normal code requirements are applied, the above capacities may further be increased by an additional 1/3 for short duration of loading which includes the effect of wind and seismic forces. The load bearing footings should be reinforced with minimum 2-#5 near the near the top and 2-#5 rebar near bottom of continuous wall footings. For isolated foundations reinforcing requirements shall be determined by the project structural engineer. Actual foundation dimensions (b & d) and reinforcement requirements should be provided by the project structural engineer based on anticipated structural dead loadings, soil bearing capacity, and Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) described.

The footing depths described should be measured vertically from the lowest adjacent outside grade and not from the finished pad grade or from finished floor surface. Footing depths and dimensions shall be verified by the geotechnical engineer prior to footing-forming, rebar, and concrete placement. It will be the contractor's responsibility to arrange such verifications by the geotechnical engineer.

Based on the laboratory determined soils' consolidation characteristics, settlements to properly designed and constructed foundations supported exclusively into engineered fills of site soils or its equivalent or better, and carrying maximum assumed structural loadings, are expected to be within "tolerable" limits.

Aiiyirx;i. H, . 1, .1

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP Under static loading conditions, over a 40-foot-span, the estimated total and differential settlements should be about 1 and 1/2-inch, respectively, provided the foundations being supported by engineered fills of local soils compacted to minimum 90% as described. Most of the elastic deformations, however, are expected to occur during construction.

4.4 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade
No concrete slabs, sidewalks and flatworks should be placed bearing directly on the surface soils currently existing. The prepared subgrades to receive footings should be adequate for concrete slab-on-grade placement. The following is provided for reference only.

Building Pad Warehouse/Truck Traffic:

1. Suggested 5-inch-thick (net) slab thickness,
2, 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. #4 rebar @ 18-inch o/c using chairs or as required by the project structural engineer,

4. Within moisture sensitive areas, it is suggested to use 10-mil-thick commercially available StegoWrap, Visqueen or other approved coverings,
5, Two(2) inches of sand with SE>30 over the installed Stego Wrap System,

6. Saw cuts requirements shall be as per the structural engineer.

Driveways:

1. 6-inch-thick net slab,

2. 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. Over native grade compacted to a maximum of 95%.

Flatwork:

1. 3 '/2-inch-thick net concrete,

2. 2500 psi concrete with water/cement ratio of 0.64 maximum,

3. Over native grade compacted to a minimum 90%,

4. Tooled joints per the structural engineer.

It is recommended that, prior to concrete pours, utility trenches underlying concrete slabs and driveways should be thoroughly backfilled with sandy gravelly soils, mechanically compacted to the minimum compaction requirements as described.

Within moisture sensitive areas, concrete slabs should be underlain by 2-inch of compacted clean sands, followed by 10-mil-thick vapor barrier, such as commercially available StegoWrap, Visqueen or other approved coverings, overlying an additional 2-inch-thick layer of sands. Sands used should have a Sand Equivalent, SE of 30 or greater.

Subgrades to receive concrete foundations and slab-on-grade should be "'dampened" as would be expected in any such concrete placement. Use of low-slump concrete is recommended. In addition, it is recommended that utility trenches underlying concrete slabs and driveways should be thoroughly backfilled with gravelly sandy soils mechanically compacted to minimum 90%. Concrete construction joint requirements should be determined by the project structural engineer.

No concrete should be placed during extreme weather conditions, such as during high outside temperature and/or during high Santa Ana wind conditions. Use of excess water on finished grade is not recommended to prevent post-placement concrete"warping".
ruicAlst i„i.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20''Street,Uptand,CA. 24036-F/BMP

4.4.1 Concrete Curing and Crack Control
The recommendations presented in this report are intended to reduce potentials for cracking of concrete slabs-on-grade due to concrete curing or settlement. However, even when the following recommendations have been implemented, foundations, stucco walls and concrete slabs-on-grade may display some minor cracking due to minor soil movement and/or concrete shrinkage.

The occurrence of concrete cracking may also be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete used, proper concrete placement, and curing along with using crack control joints at reasonable intervals where re-entrant slab corners occur. For standard crack control, maximum expansion/construction joint spacing is recommended not to exceed 24 to 30 x the concrete thickness. Shorter distance between joint spacing would provide greater crack control. Joints at curves and angle points are suggested as determined by the project structural engineer.

To minimize potentials for"warping", subgrades to receive concrete shall be free of excess water. Concrete placements during adverse weather conditions should not be allowed.

4.5 Resistance to Lateral Loads
Resistance to foundation lateral displacement can be achieved by friction acting at the base of foundation and by passive earth pressures.A coefficient friction of 0.40 may be assumed with normal dead load forces for footing established on engineered compacted fills of local soils.

An allowable passive lateral earth resistance of 300 psf per foot of depth may be assumed for the sides of foundations poured against compacted fills. The maximum lateral passive earth pressure is recommended not to exceed 3000 lbs.

For design, active lateral pressures from local soils when used as backfills may be estimated from the following equivalent fluid density:

CONDITIONS EQUIVALENT FLUID DENITY, pcf
Level Backfill 2:1 Backfill Sloping Upwards
Active 40 55
At Rest 55 70
Seismic , 75%of active earth pressures 75%of active earth pressures

4.6 Shrinkage and Subsidence
It is our opinion that during grading the upper soils may be subjected to a volume change. Assuming a 90% relative compaction for structural fills and assuming an overexcavation and recompaction depth as described earlier, such volume change due to shrinkage may be on the order of 7%to 10%. Further volume change may be expected due to supplemental shrinkage during preparation of subgrade soils. For estimation purpose, such may be approximated to about 2-inch when conventional construction equipment is used.

4.7 Construction Considerations

4.7.1 Unsupported Excavation
Gravelly sandy site soils encountered are considered highly susceptible to caving. Temporary excavations up to 4 feet in depth may be made without rigorous lateral support. Excavated surface should be"'wetted" during construction to minimize potential surface soil raveling. No surcharge loading should be allowed within an imaginary 1:1 line drawn upward from the toe of the temporary excavations.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20"'Street,Upland•CA. 24036-FIBMP

4.7.2 Supported Excavations
If vertical excavations exceeding 4 feet in depth become warranted, such should be achieved using shoring to support sidewalls.

4.8 Soil Caving
Considering the gravelly sandy site soils encountered as described, it is our opinion that some caving may be expected during deep excavations. Temporary excavations in excess of 5 feet should be made at a slope ratio of 2 to 1 (h:v) or flatter, or as per the construction guidelines as provided by Cal-Ostia.

4.9 Site Preparations for Driveways/ParkinglPaving
Assuming concrete paving for use by conventional traffic, it is suggested that prior to concrete placement, the subgrades to receive paving should be subexcavated to minimum 18 inches, followed by the local excavated soils replacement in 6 to 8-inch-thick lifts, compacted to minimum 95%. Use of vibratory sheepsfoot roller is suggested during grading.

4.10 Pavement Thickness Design
Alternative I -Rigid Concrete Paving
Rigid paving, if selected, should be at least 6-inch-thick concrete placed directly over the local sandy gravelly soils compacted to minimum 95%. Alternatively, 5-inch thick concrete can be considered over 4- inch class II base material compacted to 95%. Actual paving thickness and reinforcement requirements should be supplied by the project structural engineer using soils' Subgrade Reaction Modulus, kcf of 350.

Rigid concrete driveways should have thickened edges to prevent potential for lateral sliding under auto and truck traffic loading.

Alternative II -Asphalt Paving
Flexural asphalt paving, if selected, based on the estimated Traffic Indices (Tls) as described and a laboratory determined soils' R-value of 75 and laboratory determined soils' Sand Equivalent, SE of 46.76, the following flexible(a.c.) pavement sections are provided for initial use:

Service Vehicle Traffic Pavement Paving
Index,Tls Type Thickness (inch)
Auto/Truck Traffic 7 a.c. over Class II base or CMl3 3.0 over 3.0

5.0 over native
10 5.0 over 3.0
Within paving areas, subgrade soils should be subexcavated to minimum 18 inches, moisture conditioned to near Optimum Moisture Content, followed by the excavated soils replacement as engineered fills compacted to at least 95°/0 of the soils' maximum Dry Density as determined by the method ASTM D1557.

Class II base or CMS used to receive asphalt concretes should be placed directly over the prepared subgrades and compacted to minimum 95°I%. Use of thicker/deepened paving edges are recommended to minimize potential for edge movement and paving distress. nunnsr 2i ,

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.201"Street,Upland,CA. 24436-FHBMP The pavement evaluations are based on estimated Traffic Index (TI)as shown and on the soils' R-value as described. It is recommended that following mass grading completion, representative site soils should be laboratory tested to determine soils' R-value and to provide updated paving thickness.

4.11 Retaining Wall (if planned)
It is unknown if any retaining structure will be associated with development proposed. It is our opinion that retaining foundations should be designed based on a soils vertical bearing capacity of 1800 psf, along with the lateral active pressures as described below:

Slope of Retained Material (h:v) Equivalent Fluid Density, pcf Clean Sand Local Soil
level 30 35
2:1 42 55
During a local Magnitude 6.7 earthquake along the Cucamonga fault zone, additional lateral pressures will occur along the back of the retaining walls. The seismic-induced lateral soil pressure may be computed using a triangular pressure distribution with the maximum value at the top of the wall> The maximum lateral pressure of(20 pcf) H where H is the height of the retained soils above the wall footing should be used in the final design of retaining wall,
Sliding resistance value and passive fluid pressure values may be increased by 1/3 during short-erm wind and seismic loading conditions.

Any applicable short-term construction surcharges and seismic forces should be added to the above lateral pressure values. All walls shall be waterproofed and protected from hydrostatic pressure by a reliable permanent subdrain system.

The design parameters do not include any hydrostatic pressure build-up. Consequently, installation of "'French-drain"behind retaining walls is recommended to minimize water pressure build-up behind retaining walls. Use of impervious material is preferred within upper the 18 inches of the backfills placed.

Backfills behind retaining wall should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the soils' Maximum Dry Density as determined by the ASTM D15571 test method. Flooding and/or jetting behind wall should not be permitted.

Walls adjacent to traffic areas should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf, which is a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal traffic. If the traffic is kept back 10 feet from the wall, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.

4.12 Utility Trenches Backfill
Utility trenches backfills at depth in excess of 2 feet should be placed in thin lifts and compacted to the minimum requirements described. As an alternative, clean granular sand may be used having Sand Equivalent, SE of minimum 30. Jetting is not recommended in lieu of mechanical compaction. Trench excavations should conform to the requirements and safety as specified by Cal-Osha.

4.13 Seasonal Limitations
No fill shall be placed, spread or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. Where the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until moisture conditions are considered favorable by the geotechnical engineer.

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20''Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

4.14 Planters
To minimize potential differential settlement to foundations, planters requiring heavy irrigation should be restricted from using adjacent to footings. In the event that such becomes unavoidable, planter boxes with sealed bottoms should be considered.

4.15 Landscape Maintenance
Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided. Pad drainage should be directed towards streets and to other approved areas away from foundations. Slope areas should be planted with draught resistant vegetation. Over watering landscape areas could adversely affect the proposed site development during its lifetime use.

4.16 Observations and Testing During Site Preparations and Grading Recommendations provided assume that structural footings and slabs-on-grade be established exclusively into compacted fills. Excavated footings should be inspected, verified, and certified by the geotechnical engineer prior to steel and concrete placement to ensure their sufficient embedment and proper bearing as recommended. Structural backfills discussed should be placed under direct observation and testing by Soils Southwest, Inc. Excess soils generated from footing excavations should be removed from pad areas.

In general, geotechnical inspections should include, at a minimum, the following:
• Subexcavation depth during grading,
• Fill compaction testing,
• Retaining wall backfill compaction (if planned),
• Excavated foundation depth,
• Paving subgrade verification, and
• Utility trenches backfill compaction.

4.17 Plan Review
No precise grading or detailed development plans are prepared and none such are available for review.

Prior to the actual mass grading, grading and foundation plans should be available to ensure applicability of the assumptions made in preparing this report_ If during construction, conditions are observed different from those as presented, revised and/or supplemental recommendations will be required.

4.18 Pre-Construction Meeting
It is recommended that no clearing of the site or any grading operations be performed without the presence of a representative of this office. An on-site pre-grading meeting should be arranged between the geotechnical engineer and the grading contractor prior to the start of construction. Two days' advance notice for such meeting is required.

SSW August 28,20'_'4 pg. 18

San Antonio Water District Headquarters/400 E.20'Street,Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP

5.0 Earth WorklGeneral Grading Recommendations
It is our opinion that the soils encountered primarily consist upper 3 feet of variegating layers of gravels and gravel silty fine to medium coarse sand mixtures with concentrations of rocks, cobbles, and occasional small boulders to the refusal depth of 3 feet explored. Descriptions of the soils encountered are provided in the attached Log of Borings.

Prior to grading commencement, it is suggested that all debris and loose stockpiles should be cleared and disposed off-site to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer. In general, site preparations and grading for the project should include, at a minimum, the following:

Structural Backfill
Local soils free of organics, debris, and rocks smaller than 6-inch in overall diameter should be considered suitable for reuse as structural backfill. Loose soils, formwork, and debris should be removed prior to backfilling retaining walls. Local soils backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided below.Where space limitations do not allow conventional backfilling operations, special backfill materials, and procedures may be required. Pea gravel or other select backfill can be used within limited space areas. Additional recommendations on such will be provided during construction.

Percentage Compaction During Mass Grading
With the presence of fine to coarse gravelly sandy soils with trace silts, isolated cobbles and rocks existing as described and assuming moderately high dead loads and seismic peak ground acceleration described, it is our opinion that structural fills placed should be compacted to the minimum 90% compaction requirements described. During grading, use of vibratory sheepsfoot roller is recommended.

Site Drainage
Adequate positive drainage should be maintained away from the structural pad in order to prevent water from ponding and to reduce potential percolation into backfill. A desirable slope for surface drainage is 2% in landscape areas and 1% in paved areas. Planters and landscaped areas adjacent to building perimeter should be adequately designed to minimize water filtration into subsoils. Considerations should be given to the use of closed planter bottoms, concrete slabs, and perimeter subdrains where applicable.

Utility Trenches
Buried utility conduits should be bedded and backfilled around the conduit in accordance with the project specifications. Buried utilities in excess of 2 feet should be backfilled with local gravelly sandy soils and compacted to at least 90%. Remaining near surface backfills should be compacted to 95%, August 18,20 2A 1. ;. I`

San Antonio water District Headquarters/400 E.20`h Street, Upland,CA. 24036-F/BMP General Grading Recommendations:

Recommended general specifications for surface preparation to receive compacted engineered fills for structural support and utility trench backfill and others are presented below:

1. Areas to be graded, backfilled or paved, shall be grubbed, stripped, and cleaned of all buried and undetected debris, structures, concrete, vegetation and other deleterious materials prior to grading.

2. During grading,the estimated subexcavation depths within building pad areas and 5 feet beyond should be minimum 5 feet below the current grade surface.

3. Where compacted fill is used to provide vertical support for foundations, all loose, soft, and other incompetent soils should be removed to full depth as approved by the geotechnical engineer.

4. Compaction for structural fills shall be determined relative to the Maximum Dry Density as determined by ASTM D1557 compaction methods. All in-situ field density of compacted fill shall be determined by the ASTM ❑1556 standard methods or by other approved procedures.

5. All new imported soils, if required, shall be clean, granular, and non-expansive material requiring prior approval by the geotechnical engineer.

6. During grading, fill soils shall be placed as thin layers, thickness of which following compaction shall not exceed 6 inches.

7. In accordance with the CBC: rock sizes greater than 12 inches(305 mm)and up to 24 inches(610 mm) in maximum dimension shall be three feet(914 mm) or more below grade, measured vertically. Rock sizes greater than 24 inches (610 mm) in maximum dimension shall be 10 feet (3048 mm) or more below grade, measured vertically.

8. No jetting and/or water tampering be considered for backfill compaction for utility trenches without prior approval of the geotechnical engineer. For such backfill, hand tampering with fill layers of 8 to 12 inches in thickness or as approved by the geotechnical engineer is recommended.

9. Any and all utility trenches at depth as well as cesspool and abandoned septic tank within building pad area and beyond, should either be completely excavated and removed from the site or should be backfilled with gravel, slurry or by other material, as approved by the geotechnical engineer.

10. Any and all import soils if required during grading should be equivalent to the site soils or better. The geotechnical engineer prior to their use should approve such.

11. Any and all grading required for pavement, sidewalks or other facilities to be used by general public, should be constructed under direct observation of the geotechnical engineer or as required by the local public agencies.

12. A site meeting should be held between the grading contractor and the geotechnical engineer prior to actual site preparations and grading. Two days advance notice will be required for such meeting.

August 28,2024 ,. i.