Post on 24-Sep-2020
transcript
Otay Water District
Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration
Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement Project
CIP 2574 & CIP 2625
August 2, 2018
Prepared by:
Lisa Coburn-Boyd
Environmental Compliance Specialist
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, CA 91978
Negative Declaration Otay Water District – August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement i
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
Acronyms and Abbreviations.…………………………………………………………………….…………………………..………..….…iii
List of Tables and Figures……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…….…...v
Chapter 1 Project Description.…………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………..1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Authority to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration ............................................................. 2
Chapter 2 Determination .............................................................................................................................. 3
Chapter 3 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form................................................................................. 4
3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ............................................................................... 4
3.2 Determination ............................................................................................................................. 5
3.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ......................................................................................... 6
I. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................ 6
II. Agricultural and Forestry Resources ................................................................................... 7
III. Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 9
IV. Biological Resources ......................................................................................................... 12
V. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................ 13
VI. Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................. 16
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................... 19
VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................... 21
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................... 23
X. Land Use and Planning ...................................................................................................... 26
XI. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................ 27
XII. Noise ................................................................................................................................. 28
XIII. Population and Housing .................................................................................................... 30
XIV. Public Services................................................................................................................... 31
XV. Recreation ......................................................................................................................... 33
XVI. Transportation/Traffic ...................................................................................................... 34
XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................ 36
XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................. 38
Chapter 4 References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….40
Negative Declaration Otay Water District – August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement ii
APPENDICES
Appendix A Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Modeling Results, Helix Environmental Planning, June 2018
Appendix B Cultural resources Review of the Vista Vereda Pipeline Replacement Project,
ICF, June 2018
Appendix C Geotechnical Evaluation – Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, Ninyo &
Moore, December 2017
Negative Declaration Otay Water District – August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement iii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
ACP asbestos concrete pipe
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BMPs best management practices
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CARB California Air Resources Board
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CBC California Building Code
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e CO2-equivalent
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
dBA A-weighting decibels
District Otay Water District
EO Executive Order
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Greenbook Greenbook Committee of Public Works Standards
GHG greenhouse gas
IBC International Building Code
IS Initial Study
Leq average noise level
Negative Declaration Otay Water District – August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement iv
MBTA Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MTCO2e metric ton carbon dioxide equivalent
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NOX oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
PDR Preliminary Design Report
PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns
PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns
PVC poly vinyl chloride
ROG reactive organic gases
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SCIC South Coastal Information Center
SDAB San Diego Air Basin
SDAPCD San Diego Air Pollution Control District
SDG&E San Diego Gas and Electric
SOX sulfur oxides
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TMP Traffic Management Plan
Williamson Act California Land Conservation Act of 1975
Negative Declaration Otay Water District – August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement v
Table Page
1 Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Construction Emissions ............................................................ 10
2 Estimated Constuction GHG Emissions ................................................................................................ 20
Figure Follows Page
1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Project Pipeline Alignments ................................................................................................................... 1
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 1 Otay Water District
Chapter 1 Project Description
1.1 Introduction The Otay Water District (District) is proposing the Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement Project to replace water lines in Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road. The project is a capital improvement project for the District to replace an existing water main within a District easement that is located outside of the existing roadway corridors. The project would replace approximately 1,800 linear feet of the 2,500 existing 12-inch water main adjacent to Vista Vereda Road. The transmission capability of the pipeline in Vista Vereda Road would be transferred to a new replacement pipeline in Hidden Mesa Road. The new pipeline in Vista Vereda would be a distribution pipeline with laterals to any residents not directly adjacent to Vista Vereda.
1.2 Project Location The Vista Vereda pipeline work would be located within an existing 20-foot wide District easement in a residential neighborhood located in the Hillsdale area of San Diego County. See Exhibit 1 for the project regional location. The pipeline work would begin at the intersection of Vista Grande Road and Vista Verde and proceed north for approximately 1,400 feet. The pipeline work would then proceed west at a point approximately 500 feet past the intersection of Vista Vereda and Vereda Court, and continue westerly for approximately 400 feet. The pipeline in Hidden Mesa Road is also located in a residential neighborhood. The Hidden Mesa Road pipeline work will begin at the intersection of Hidden Mesa Road and Hidden Mesa Trail and proceed east on Hidden Mesa Road for approximately 2,500 feet, terminating at the intersection of Hidden Mesa Road and Vista Grande Road. The pipeline replacement in Hidden Mesa Road is located completely within the roadway and would be replaced in the same trench as the existing pipeline.
1.3 Project Description The Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement project is a capital improvement project for the Otay Water District (District) that would replace approximately 1,800 linear feet of an existing 2,500 foot 12-inch water main adjacent to Vista Vereda Road in the Hillsdale area of San Diego County. The existing water main is located in the center of a 20-foot wide District easement that is located adjacent to Vista Vereda Road. The replacement pipeline would begin at the intersection of Vista Grande Road and travel north to a point between Vereda Court and Hidden Springs Court, at which point it would turn west for approximately 400 feet. The Hidden Mesa pipeline would begin at the intersection of Hidden Mesa Trail and continue easterly for approximately 2,500 feet to the intersection of Vista Grande Road (See Exhibit 2 for the pipeline alignments). The existing water main and District easement is located outside of the existing Vista Vereda roadway and traverses the front yards of multiple residential lots, with the majority of the residents encroaching into the easement with private amenities, landscape features, driveways, retaining walls and structures. The portion of the project alignment that extends westerly to Hidden Mesa Trail is located in the rear and side yards of residential lots that contain numerous trees, a significant grade difference up a large earthen slope adjacent to a residential structure, and is adjacent to overhead San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) utilities. In addition, there are areas within this portion of the existing pipeline that include large rocks
Regional Location MapVISTA VEREDA AND HIDDEN MESA ROADF
P:\WO
RKIN
G\CI
P P25
74 12
-Inch
PL R
eplac
emen
t, 978
Zone
, Vist
a Vere
da\G
raphic
s\Exh
ibits-
Figure
s\Env
ironm
ental
\Reg
ional
Loca
tion M
ap.m
xd
Content may not reflect National Geographic's current map policy. Sources:National Geographic, Esri, Garmin, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA,ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp.
PROJECT SITE
WATER LINE REPLACEMENT0 6.53.25
Miles
FIGURE 1
Proposed ProjectVISTA VEREDA AND HIDDEN MESA ROADF
P:\
WO
RK
ING
\CIP
P25
74
12
-In
ch
PL R
ep
lace
me
nt,
97
8 Z
on
e,
Vis
ta V
ere
da
\Gra
ph
ics\E
xh
ibits-F
igu
res\E
nvir
on
me
nta
l\V
ista
Ve
red
a &
Hid
de
n M
esa
Ro
ad
.mxd
Existing Water Line Alignment
Proposed Water Line Alignment
HIDDEN MESARD
VISTA GRANDE
RD
VIST
A
VERE
DA
WATER LINE REPLACEMENT0 250125
Feet
FIGURE 2
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 2 Otay Water District
and shallow pipe segments with retaining walls placed directly over the top of pipe, potentially compromising the structural integrity of the main line. The constraints and the location of the existing water line and the encroachments have resulted in limited access to the water line. Maintenance and repair of the water line is negatively impacted by its location. The goals of the replacement project would be to maintain the transmission network, provide a distribution service to the Vista Vereda area while simultaneously improving the access and minimizing the risk associated with damage to private properties during routine maintenance or emergency repairs within the system. After review of several alternatives during the planning phase of the project, the District proposes the alternative that would transfer the transmission capability of the pipeline that currently exists in Vista Vereda Road to a new 12-inch replacement pipeline in Hidden Mesa Road. A new distribution water line would be constructed in Vista Vereda Road with service laterals to any residential lots that are not adjacent to Vista Vereda. The majority of the Vista Vereda pipeline would be 12- and 8-inch in diameter, but there would also be segments of 4-inch, 2-inch and 1-inch diameter pipe. The 12-, 8- and 4-inch pipeline segments would be poly vinyl chloride (PVC) piping and the 2- and 1-inch segments would be copper piping. The existing waterline in Vista Vereda would be abandoned in place. The existing asbestos cement pipeline (ACP) in Hidden Mesa Road would be removed and replaced with a 12-inch PVC pipeline. Exhibit 2 shows the proposed project alignments.
The proposed water pipelines would be installed by open trench construction. The open trench excavation would consist of excavating down to the appropriate depth, installing the new pipe, and then backfilling the trench. If the trench is located under pavement, the existing pavement would be saw-cut and removed, the excavation filled with granular backfill, and the cut pavement replaced. Excess soil and cut pavement would be hauled from the site and disposed of at locations approved for such use. The proposed pipelines would be placed underground at approximate depths between 3 and 10 feet. Construction would be primarily limited to normal working hours 8 to 10 hours per day, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. It is anticipated that construction of the pipelines would require approximately 10 months. Once construction of the project is complete, operation would be passive, with only periodic drive-by inspection of the pipelines being done by District operations staff.
1.4 Authority to Prepare a Negative Declaration As provided in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15070 (Title 14 – California Code of Regulations), a Negative Declaration (ND) may be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when an Initial Study (IS) shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The District is the lead agency and is responsible for planning, constructing, and operating the Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road water lines.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 3 Otay Water District
Chapter 2 Determination In conformance with State CEQA Guidelines, the District prepared an Initial Study and completed an Environmental Checklist Form (see Chapter 3) for the proposed Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road water line replacement project. During the Initial Study process, the lead agency determined that the proposed project would not result in any significant environmental impacts. Based on the findings of the Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form prepared for this project, the District has determined that preparation of the ND is the appropriate environmental documentation for purposes of CEQA compliance. Chapter 3 of this ND contains the Initial Study Checklist and provides an analysis of all environmental issues.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 4 Otay Water District
Chapter 3 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. Project title: Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road Water Line Replacement
2. Lead agency name and address: Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley, CA 91978
3. Contact person and phone number: Lisa Coburn-Boyd, 619-670-2219
4. Project location: Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road, Hillsdale area, unincorporated San Diego County
5. Project sponsor's name and address: Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley, CA 91978
6. General plan designation: County of San Diego Semi-Rural Residential
7. Zoning: County of San Diego Rural Residential
8. Description of project: See Section 1.3
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: See Section 1.2
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: County of San Diego (encroachment permit, excavation permit, traffic control permit), San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (Construction General Storm Water Permit or Water Pollution Control Plan).
?.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant lmpact" as indicated by the checklíst on the following pages.
_ Agriculture and ForestryLl Resources
n cultural Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
E M.t"r¡rlt
n vl¡neral Resources
n prui. services
Mandatory Findings of! Transportation/Traffic n Utititi.rTService Systems n Significance
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[l t tinO that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
fl t tinO that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, therewill not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed
to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
f t tinO that the proposed project MAY have a signifícant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
fl t tinO that the proposed project MAY have a "potentíally significant impact" or "potentially signifícant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2l has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
f] t tinO that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the envíronment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to thatearlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, nothing further is required.
J ¿---C-a?,<ts.:v¡ -Ytv'.1 -
I Aesthetics
I BiologicalResources
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
tr Land Use / Planning
tr Population / Housing
n altQuality
I Geology/Soils
Hydrology / Water
n Quality
E ruoise
E Recreation
Date
(t*nv Vlzåa r Ðìz-I:.i a*Sigìãture -
ð-I -ì<a (r¡ht vn - ßa,vò
Printed Name For I
Negative DeclarationVista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 5
August 2018Otay Water District
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 6 Otay Water District
3.3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
a. No Impact. The proposed project would consist of underground pipelines that would not be visible
once construction is complete. In addition, no designated scenic vistas have been identified within the
project site or vicinity. Therefore the project would not impact a scenic vista.
b. No Impact. The proposed project would include placement of pipelines beneath existing roadways or
other disturbed/developed areas within and surrounded by urban development. The project would
not result in impacts to trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway.
Therefore, no impacts to scenic resources would occur.
c. Less than Significant Impact. Short-term visual impacts would occur during construction due to
trenching, stockpiling, and other construction-related activities. However, the project site would be
restored to its current condition following installation of the pipelines. The proposed pipeline would
not be visible following construction. Therefore, impacts to visual character and quality would be less
than significant.
d. No Impact. The proposed project would entail the installation of an underground pipeline that would
not create a new permanent source of substantial light or glare. Therefore, no impact would occur as
a result of the project.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 7 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 8 Otay Water District
(as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
a. No Impact. The project site is not within or near farmland (Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance). The proposed project would not convert farmland to non-
agricultural uses. Therefore, no impact to agricultural resources would occur.
b. No Impact. The project site is not zoned for agricultural uses, and no Williamson Act contract land is
present in the existing or proposed pipeline alignments. Therefore, there would be no impact to
agricultural resources.
c. No Impact. The project site is not zoned as forest land or timberland. Therefore, implementation of
the project would not conflict with existing zoning for such lands, and no impact would occur.
d. No Impact. The project site is not within or near forest land. Accordingly, project construction and
operation would not convert forest land to non-forest use, and no impact would occur.
e. No Impact. The project would not involve changes in the existing environment which would result in
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
Therefore, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 9 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
a. No Impact. The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), which is currently
classified as a nonattainment area under the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for
particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and ozone (O3) identified in the California State Implementation
Plan (SIP). The San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) is responsible for developing
and implementing the clean air plan for attainment and maintenance of the ambient air quality
standards in the Basin. The SDAPCD’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) contains a comprehensive
list of pollution control strategies to reduce emissions, and achieve ambient air quality standards.
These strategies are developed, in part, based on regional population, housing, and employment
projections prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), which is the regional
planning agency for San Diego County. The proposed project would result in the replacement of two
existing water pipelines. The project would not result in population growth; it would instead serve the
existing population and accommodate any future growth in the immediate area. Because the
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 10 Otay Water District
proposed project is consistent with the regional growth forecasts, pursuant to APCD guidelines, it
would be considered consistent with the region’s AQMP. In addition, the proposed project would
comply with all existing and new rules and regulations as they are implemented by the County,
SDAPCD, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and/or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
related to emissions generated during construction. Therefore, the proposed project would not
conflict with the applicable air quality attainment plan, and no impact would occur.
b. Less Than Significant Impact. Operation of the proposed pipelines would not emit any pollutants. An
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis of the project was conducted by Helix
Environmental in June, 2018 (Appendix A). Construction emissions were calculated by using California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2. CalEEMod is a computer program accepted
by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) that can be used to estimate
anticipated emissions associated with land development projects in California. CalEEMod has separate
databases for specific counties and air districts. The San Diego County database was used for the
proposed project. The model calculates emissions of ROG, NOx, PM2.5, PM10, and CO. For this analysis,
the results are expressed in pounds per day (lbs/day), and are compared with the mass daily emissions
thresholds that were established by the APCD.
Construction emissions include exhaust emissions from off-road construction equipment, on-road haul
trucks, and vehicles used by workers to commute to and from the site. The model also calculates
particulate emissions from dust generated during grading activities and particulates in the exhaust of
off-road and on-road vehicles. The analysis of construction emissions assumes watering active grading
areas a minimum of twice daily to control dust.
For the purposes of estimating emissions associated with construction activities, a timeframe of
January 2019 through October 2019 was applied to the analysis. The District anticipates that a
construction crew of approximately 8 to 10 workers would typically be present on site during active
construction. The calculated daily construction emissions are shown in Table 1. Specific inputs to
CalEEMod and details of the results are included in Appendix A. As shown in Table 1, the maximum
daily construction emissions would be less than the SDAPCD significance thresholds and, therefore,
less than significant.
Table 1
MAXIMUM DAILY CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions 2 21 21 <0.5 1 1
SDAPCD Thresholds 75 100 550 250 100 55
Significant Impact? No No No No No No
See Appendix A for model output data.
ROG = reactive organic gases; NOx = nitrogen oxides; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides;
PM10 = respirable particulate matter; and PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 11 Otay Water District
c. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would be located within the SDAB, which is
currently in attainment for all national and state Ambient Air Quality Standards except for federal and
state one-hour ozone standards and state PM10 and PM2.5 standards. For the reasons described above
in Item III.a, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any
of these criteria pollutants, including precursors to ozone. In addition, daily emissions would be low,
temporary in duration, and localized within the immediate project vicinity. Accordingly, cumulative
impacts associated with air quality would be less than significant.
d. Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors along the existing and proposed pipeline alignments
include residences. For the reasons described for Item III.a, the proposed project would not generate
substantial pollutant concentrations. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.
e. Less Than Significant Impact. During the construction activity, a temporary short-term odor impact
may occur as result of diesel emissions. However, due to the short-term nature of construction and
the small size of the project, odor impacts associated with construction would less than significant. In
the short term, diesel exhaust from construction equipment may create noticeable odors near the
proposed pipeline alignment; however, the diesel exhaust odors would be temporary and minor, and
would not affect a substantial number of people at any given time since the equipment location would
change depending on which segment of the alignment is being constructed. There would not be any
operational emissions associated with the proposed potable water pipelines. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 12 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 13 Otay Water District
a. Less Than Significant Impact. The Vista Vereda pipeline project site consists of an existing developed
area surrounded by development and associated ornamental landscaping. The project site does not
contain any sensitive biological resources nor does it contain any candidate, sensitive or special status
species. There are a number of trees encroaching into the easement for the Vista Vereda pipeline
segment that could be removed during construction. If tree removal is scheduled to occur between
February 1 and August 15, surveys for nesting bird species shall be conducted by a qualified biologist.
If any active nests are found, removal of the affected vegetation and/or trees would be delayed until
it has been determined that the nests are no longer active. The Hidden Mesa Road pipeline project
site is completely contained with an existing roadway. Therefore, the impact of the project would be
less than significant.
b. No Impact. The project site consists of an existing developed area surrounded by development and
associated ornamental landscaping. No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community is
located within or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, no impacts to riparian habitats or other
sensitive communities would occur as a result of the project.
c. No Impact. The project site consists of an existing developed area surrounded by development and
associated ornamental landscaping. No jurisdictional wetlands or waterways occur within or
immediately adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse
effect on federally protected wetlands.
d. Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the project would not interfere with the
movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites. There are no waterways with the ability to support fish on the project sites and
no native wildlife nursery sites occur within the project area. The project site consists of an existing
developed area surrounded by development and associated ornamental landscaping. Removal of
ornamental landscaping could disturb potentially suitable nesting habitat for birds/raptors, as
described in 4.a., but the scattered ornamental plantings and roadside vegetation do not serve as a
wildlife corridor because they do not link areas of native habitat. Therefore, impacts to wildlife
movement from the project would be less than significant.
e. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project consists of the replacement of two sections of
existing pipeline. Although several trees may need to be removed, the trees are ornamental landscape
and are not covered by a tree preservation policy. Additionally, the project would not conflict with
any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, the project impact would
be less than significant.
f. No Impact. The proposed project occurs completely within Otay Water District easements and is not
subject to any adopted regional conservation plans. Therefore, the project would not conflict with
such plans, policies, or ordinances and no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 14 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
a. No Impact. The Vista Vereda pipeline is proposed to be located adjacent to an existing pipeline and
the construction would occur in a previously developed area, surrounded by modern era residences.
The Hidden Mesa pipeline will be entirely constructed in a residential street in the same trench as an
existing pipeline. A cultural resources record search and desktop review was conducted for the project
by ICF in June, 2018 (Appendix B). Historic resources were not identified within or adjacent to the
project site. Furthermore, the project site has been previously graded to allow for the existing
development. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b. No Impact. In addition to the cultural resources record search which found that the project area has
low potential for historic archaeological resources, a geotechnical report of the proposed pipeline
alignments was conducted by Ninyo & Moore in December, 2017 (Appendix C). The subsurface
exploration done for the study indicated that the sites for both the Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa
pipeline replacements are underlain by fill to depths of up to 10 feet. Additionally, the study found
granitic rock underneath the fill. Native soils would not be disturbed by the installation of the
pipelines. Therefore, there is no possibility for the substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource. There would be no impact as a result of the project.
c. No Impact. As stated in V.b., a geotechnical report of the proposed pipeline alignments was
conducted by Ninyo & Moore in December, 2017 (Appendix C). The subsurface exploration done for
the study indicated that the sites for both the Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa pipeline replacements
are underlain by depths of up to 10 feet of fill. Additionally, the study found granitic rock
underneath the fill. Native soils will not be disturbed by the installation of the pipelines. Therefore,
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 15 Otay Water District
there is no possibility for the destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature. There would be no impact as a result of the project.
d. Less than Significant Impact. Although, the geotechnical report found no native soils in the pipeline
work areas, and the cultural resources study found no evidence to suggest the presence of human
remains, there is still a minor possibility that human remains could be found at the site. In the event
that human remains are discovered during Project activities, the procedures outlined in Section
7050.5 of the California Health and Human Safety Code would be followed and the county coroner
will be contacted. Should the remains be identified as Native American, the coroner will contact the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours and the NAHC will designate a Most
Likely Descendent (MLD) within 48 hours. The MLD and the District will work together to determine
appropriate treatment of the human remains. Therefore, impacts on human remains would be less
than significant.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 16 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
a.i. Less Than Significant Impact. A geotechnical evaluation of the project alignment was conducted by
Ninyo and Moore. (Appendix C) The project alignment is considered to be within a seismically
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 17 Otay Water District
seismically active area. The closest known fault is the Rose Canyon Fault which is approximately
15.2 miles west of the site. There are no known active faults underlying the site or projecting toward
the site and the site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Surface rupture due
to faulting beneath the site is considered low and the impacts would be less than significant.
a.ii. Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is located in seismically active southern California,
and is likely to be subjected to moderate to strong seismic ground shaking. Seismic shaking at the
site could be generated by events on any number of known active and potentially active faults in
the region, in particular the nearby San Andreas Fault Zone. An earthquake along any of the known
active fault zones in the region could result in severe ground shaking and consequently that could
potentially result in significant impacts to the proposed water lines, including rupture or severing of
the pipelines (depending on factors such as event duration, motion frequency, and underlying
soil/geologic conditions). The project design, however, would incorporate measures to
accommodate projected seismic loading, pursuant to existing guidelines such as the “Greenbook”
Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook Committee of Public Works
Standards, Inc. 2012), and the International Building Code (IBC; International Conference of Building
Officials 2012). In addition, the project design would follow guidelines within the California Building
Code (CBC; California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2). Based on the incorporation of applicable
measures into project design and construction, the potential impacts associated with strong seismic
ground shaking would be less than significant.
a.iii. Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is the phenomenon whereby soils lose shear strength
and exhibit fluid-like flow behavior. Severe or extended liquefaction can result in significant effects
to surface and subsurface facilities through the loss of support and/or foundation integrity. Loose,
granular soils are most susceptible to these effects, with liquefaction generally restricted to
saturated or near-saturated soils at depths of less than 100 feet. The project alignment is primarily
underlain by granitic rock with a thin mantle of man-made fill, residual soil, colluvium, and younger
alluvial deposits that are Holocene in age and younger. The deeper rock units are not considered
susceptible to seismic-induced soil liquefaction or ground settlement. The young alluvial materials
are considered to have a low potential for liquefaction, but their areal extent along the proposed
pipeline alignment is limited. Given that the project does not include the construction of any
habitable structures, and that the construction of the proposed pipelines would incorporate
standard guidelines from the Greenbook, IBC, and CBC, impacts associated with liquefaction would
be less than significant.
a.iv. No Impact. There are no known (mapped) landslides in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Accordingly, no impacts associated with landslides would occur.
b. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project has a minor potential to increase wind or water
erosion of soils on or off site during project construction, due to the presence of soil piles and exposed
trenches. However, implementation of the project design features would reduce the potential
impacts to less than significant.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 18 Otay Water District
c. No Impact. As discussed in Items VI.a.iii and VI.a.iv, above, the project area is not located on a
geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project.
Therefore, no impacts related to unstable geologic units or soils would occur.
d. No Impact. Expansive soils are generally high in clays or silts that shrink or swell with variation in
moisture. Expansive (or shrink-swell) behavior is attributable to the water-holding capacity of clay
minerals, and can adversely affect the structural integrity of facilities including underground pipelines.
The majority of soil materials along the proposed pipeline alignment are considered non-expansive.
In addition, the majority of the proposed pipeline alignment would occur within existing roadways or
other developed areas, which were designed and built to account for effects of expansive soils.
Portions of the proposed pipelines to be placed in unpaved, non-engineered areas would incorporate
standard engineering techniques in accordance with the IBC and CBC to avoid adverse effects of
expansive soils. Therefore, no impacts related to expansive soils would occur.
e. No Impact. The proposed project would involve installation of a new potable water pipeline. Septic
tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems would not be a part of the proposed project.
Therefore, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 19 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
a. Less than Significant Impact. California Health and Safety Code Section 38505(g) defines greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to include the following compounds: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). As individual GHGs have varying heat trapping properties and atmospheric lifetimes, GHG emissions are converted to carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) units for comparison. The CO2e is a consistent methodology for comparing GHG emissions because it normalizes various GHG emissions to a consistent measure. The most common GHGs related to the project are CO2 (CO2e = 1), CH4 (CO2e = 21), and N2O (CO2e = 310). The County utilizes a screening-level emission level of 900 metric tons (MT) CO2e to evaluate whether a project must conduct further analysis. This screening threshold is based on a report by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) entitled “CEQA & Climate Change,” dated January 2008. The 900 MTCO2e per year screening threshold was developed by analyzing the capture of 90 percent or more of future discretionary development for residential and commercial projects. County guidance also recommends including construction emissions (amortized over a typical duration of 20 years) in the screening threshold. The proposed project’s construction-related contribution to GHG emissions would primarily result from fuel combustion in construction equipment, construction worker commute trips, and hauling/delivery truck trips. Construction-related GHG emissions result from CO2, CH4, and N2O that is released during the combustion of gasoline or diesel fuel in on- and off-road vehicles and equipment. Estimated annual GHG emissions from construction activity (Appendix A, Helix Environmental, June 2018) are provided in Table 2, below.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 20 Otay Water District
Table 2
ESTIMATED GHG CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Phase Emissions
(MT CO2e/yr)
Annual Emissions 332
Amortized Construction Emissions1 11
Screening Threshold2 900
Significant Impact? No
1 Construction emissions are amortized over 30 years in accordance with County guidance.
2 Screening threshold from California Air Pollution Officers Association (CAPCOA).
The project is the replacement of existing underground pipelines with no operational emissions of greenhouse gases, therefore the only source of GHG emissions would be during construction. As shown in Table 2, the estimated increase in annual GHG emissions from amortized construction emissions would be 11 MT CO2e per year. This value is significantly less than the County of San Diego screening threshold of 900 MT CO2e per year. It is generally accepted as very unlikely that any individual development project would generate GHG emissions of a magnitude to directly impact global climate change; therefore, any impact would be considered on a cumulative basis. Because the proposed project’s GHG emissions would be less than 900 MT CO2e per year, the emissions would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
b. Less than Significant Impact. Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, established statutory limits on GHG emissions in California. Under AB 32, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for adopting rules and regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. The CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan outlines the state’s strategy to achieve the 2020 GHG emissions limit and future emissions reduction targets established by Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The County guidelines were established for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs to meet the state requirements of AB 32. As discussed in Section VII.a, project-related GHG emissions would not exceed the regional significance threshold established by the County of San Diego. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in emissions that would adversely affect state-wide attainment of GHG emission reduction goals, as described in AB 32 and EO S-21-09. Emissions would therefore have a less than cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change impacts, and the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 21 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 22 Otay Water District
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
a. Less Than Significant Impact. Like nearly all construction projects, project equipment would use
diesel fuel and other common petroleum-based products, but not in quantities that would be
considered beyond that of any standard construction project and not of the quantities that would
present any danger to the public. All materials would be transported and used in accordance with
standard practices. Ongoing operation of the pipelines would not entail any transport, storage, or use
of hazardous materials Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less Than Significant Impact. See response to 7.a, above.
c. Less than Significant Impact. A portion of the project (Vista Vereda pipeline segment) is located
within a quarter mile of an elementary school (Vista Grande Elementary School). While small amounts
of hazardous materials (such as fuel, lubricants, etc.) would be present on the site during project
construction, these materials would be typical of those used at construction sites, and would be
handled in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal requirements. Standard construction
procedures would prevent the use of these materials from causing a significant hazard to the nearby
schools or its students and staff. Following installation of the pipeline, the area would be returned to
pre-existing (i.e., current) conditions, and no hazardous substances would be used for the project
following construction. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
d. No Impact. A review of the EnviroStor database of hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 maintained by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control
(http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm) shows that the project site is not included in
this listing. Therefore, there would be no impact.
e. No Impact. The project site is not located within 2 miles of an airport land use plan, public airport, or
public use airport; therefore, no impacts would occur.
f. No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; thus, no impacts
would occur.
g. No Impact. The proposed project would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response or evacuation plan. A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be implemented to ensure
that roadways remain open and accessible during construction. If project construction limits traffic
to one lane along any of the roadways, traffic would be flagged around the work site. Traffic would
not be affected after pipeline installation is complete. Therefore, no impact would occur.
h. No Impact. The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires because it would consist of the construction and operation of
an underground pipeline. Therefore, no impact related to wildland fires would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 23 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 24 Otay Water District
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
a. Less Than Significant Impact. Potential water quality impacts associated with the proposed project
would be limited to short-term construction-related erosion/sedimentation. All District construction
bid documents for Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) require a contractor to provide an erosion
control plan or a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (for projects that would result in
land disturbance of 1 acre or more). The Erosion Control Plan would comply with the storm water
regulations or ordinances of the local agency jurisdiction within which the CIP project occurs, while
the SWPPP would comply with the NPDES General Construction Permit. These plans would be based
on site-specific hydraulic and hydrologic characteristics, and identify a range of Best Management
Practices (BMP) to reduce impacts related to storm water runoff, including sedimentation BMPs to
control soil erosion. The construction contractor would identify the specific storm water BMPs to be
implemented during construction of the proposed project, and would prepare and implement the
final Erosion Control Plan or SWPPP for the project. Therefore, water quality impacts would be less
than significant.
b. No Impact. Groundwater along the proposed pipeline alignments in Vista Vereda and Hidden Mesa
Road is anticipated to be located at depths below the trenching depth for the pipelines. Although
groundwater may be encountered during trenching activities, particularly in the wet (rainy) season,
the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level. Accordingly, no impact would occur.
c. No Impact. Installation of an underground pipeline would not affect local drainage patterns. No rivers
or streams would be altered, and the proposed project would not result in substantial erosion or
siltation. In addition, the project would implement construction BMPs to minimize erosion and runoff.
Accordingly, no impact would occur.
d. No Impact. Installation of an underground pipeline would not affect local drainage patterns. The
proposed project would not increase the rate or volume of surface runoff from the project area,
primarily because it would not create new impervious surfaces. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 25 Otay Water District
e. Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in the response to Item IX.d, above, the proposed project
would not significantly increase the local surface runoff volumes. Accordingly, short-term pollutant
generation would be less than significant.
f. No Impact. No potential water quality impacts other than those described above in this section are
anticipated.
g. No Impact. The proposed project does not involve construction of residential units. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
h. No Impact. Based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps (2012), the proposed
potable water lines are not within a mapped 100-year floodplain. Accordingly, no impact associated
with flooding would occur.
i. No Impact. The proposed project would include the installation and operation of underground
potable water pipelines. Therefore, the project would not cause people or structures to be located in
an inundation risk area associated with a dam or levee, and no impact would occur.
j. No Impact. The proposed project would include the installation and operation of potable water
pipelines. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to an inundation
risk area for seiches, tsunamis, or mudflows.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 26 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
a. No Impact. Installation and operation of the proposed underground potable water pipelines within
existing roadways and other disturbed/developed areas would not divide an existing community.
Specifically, construction would not result in physical barriers or road closures that would divide or
prohibit access to the surrounding community. Accordingly, no associated impact would occur.
b. No Impact. The proposed project would include the installation and operation of potable water
pipelines. The land use designation from the County General Plan within and immediately adjacent
to the proposed pipelines is Semi-Rural Residential. This land use designation does not preclude utility
lines/facilities. The zoning designation within and immediately adjacent to the proposed pipeline
alignments is Rural Residential. This zoning does not preclude public utility corridors. The proposed
project would, therefore, not conflict with zoning or general plan land use designations, and no impact
would occur.
c. No Impact. The project is not subject to any adopted regional conservation plans. Therefore, the
project would not conflict with such plans, policies, or ordinances and no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 27 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
a. No Impact. The proposed project would be constructed beneath existing roadways and other
disturbed/developed areas. The project site is not currently used for mineral resource extraction, nor
is it located in an area with the known potential for mineral resources. Therefore, no impact to
mineral resources would occur.
b. No Impact. The proposed project would be constructed beneath existing streets, developed areas,
and in disturbed areas. The project site is not currently used for mineral resource extraction, nor is it
located in an area with the known potential for locally important mineral resources. Additionally, the
site is not designated in the County General Plan as a mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, no
impact to mineral resources would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 28 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XII. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
a. Less Than Significant Impact. The County of San Diego’s Code of Regulatory Ordinances, Section 36.4
(i.e., Title 3, Division 6, Chapter 4) discusses County noise requirements. Sections 36.408 through
36.411 of the Noise Ordinance establish noise limitations for construction activities. Except for
emergency work, it is unlawful for any person to operate or cause to be operated, construction
equipment between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or that exceeds an average sound level of 75 dB for an
8-hour period, when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise source is located
or on any occupied property where the noise is being received. Construction noise would be most
impactful during the trenching phase of the project. During this phase, an excavator would move along
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 29 Otay Water District
the pipeline route digging the trench and loading the materials into a dump truck. An excavator and
a dump truck operating for 40 percent of an 8-hour construction day would generate a 75 dBA LEQ
noise contour of 75 feet. In addition, all construction equipment would be properly outfitted and
maintained with manufacturer-recommended noise-reduction devices. Therefore, trenching
activities would not exceed the 75 dBA LEQ noise limit for the residences on Vista Vereda or Hidden
Mesa Road and the impact would be less than significant.
b. No Impact. Ground-borne vibration is a concern for projects that require heavy construction activity
such as blasting, pile-driving, and operating heavy earth-moving equipment. Ground-borne vibration
can result in a range of impacts, from minor annoyances to people to major shaking that damages
buildings. Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by man-made sources attenuates rapidly with
distance from the source of vibration. Sensitive receptors for vibration include structures (especially
older masonry structures), people (especially residents, the elderly and sick), and vibration-sensitive
equipment. Construction activities associated with the project will be limited to trenching and
placement of pipe and do not have the potential to result in ground-borne vibration. Therefore, no
impact will occur.
c. No Impact. Project-related noise generation would be primarily limited to short-term construction
activities. Pipeline facilities, once installed, are passive and would not generate noise. Therefore, no
impact would occur.
d. Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project may create elevated short-term
construction noise impacts but as discussed in item XII.a., these noise impacts would not exceed the
County noise limitations for construction activities. Therefore, the impacts would be less than
significant.
e. No Impact. The proposed project consists of underground pipelines. The project would not include the
construction of aboveground structures that would result in people being exposed to noise from a
public airport. In addition, the project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area of a public
airport.
f. No Impact. The proposed project consists of underground potable water pipelines and is not within
the vicinity of a private airport. Therefore, there would be no impact.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 30 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
a. No Impact. The proposed project would include the replacement of existing potable water pipelines to allow for easier maintenance and repair. The replacement pipelines would not be growth inducing because the capacity of the pipelines would not change or extend potable water service to any areas not already being served. Therefore, no impact associated with population growth would occur.
b. No Impact. The proposed project would not displace any housing. Therefore, no impact would occur.
c. No Impact. The proposed project would not displace any people. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 31 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
a. Fire Protection – Less Than Significant Impact. The construction and operation of an underground
potable water pipeline would not generate a demand for increased fire protection services. During
construction, fire protection may be required, but these would be short-term demands and would not
require increases in the level of service offered or affect these agencies’ response times. Because of
the low probability and short-term nature of potential fire protection needs during construction, the
proposed project would result in less than significant impacts.
b. Police Protection – Less Than Significant Impact. Impacts to police protection would be less than
significant for reasons similar to those provided for “Fire Protection,” above. Therefore, the project
would result in less than significant impacts.
c. Schools – No Impact. The proposed project would place no demand on school services because it
would not involve the construction of facilities that would generate school-aged children, and would
not involve the introduction of a temporary or permanent population into this area. Therefore, the
project would have no impact on schools.
d. Parks – No Impact. The proposed project would place no demand on parks for reasons similar to
those provided for “Schools,” above. Therefore, the project would have no impact on parks.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 32 Otay Water District
e. Other Public Facilities – No Impact. The proposed project would not involve the introduction of a
temporary or permanent human population into this area. Therefore, the proposed project would
not result in any long-term impacts to other public facilities.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 33 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
a. No Impact. The proposed project would not generate any residents who would require parks or other
recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur to such facilities.
b. No Impact. The proposed project neither includes recreational facilities nor requires the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 34 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
a. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not include any components that would result in long-term traffic generation. While construction activities would likely generate a small number of trips associated with construction equipment and worker vehicles, these trips would be limited to the construction period, and would not be considered substantial in relation to the existing traffic load in the project vicinity. During construction, access and the use of roadways along Vista
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 35 Otay Water District
Vereda and Hidden Mesa Road may be temporarily disrupted. However, as stated in Section VIII, a TMP would be implemented during construction of the proposed project. Roadways would remain open to traffic. If project construction limits traffic to one lane, traffic would be flagged around the work site. In addition, pedestrian and bicyclist access along the affected roadways would be maintained. Following construction of the proposed project, vehicle trips would be nominal (approximately once per month), and limited only to routine maintenance activities. Impacts associated with temporary increases in traffic associated with construction would be less than significant and the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, including alternative modes of transportation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less Than Significant Impact. See discussion of Item XVI.a, above. The proposed project would not
conflict with an applicable congestion management program, and impacts would be less than significant.
c. No Impact. The project would not include any aviation components or structures where height would
be an aviation concern. Therefore, no associated impact to traffic patterns would occur.
d. No Impact. The proposed project would not include design features that would affect traffic safety,
nor would it cause incompatible uses (such as tractors) on local roads. Therefore, no associated impact would occur.
e. Less Than Significant Impact. During construction of the proposed project, access along some local
streets may be limited for brief amounts of time. The TMP for the project would include measures (such as flagging and detouring) that would divert traffic to an appropriate route. Except for brief periods, access would be maintained to commercial and residential driveways along the proposed project alignment. Traffic would not be affected after project construction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f. No Impact. The proposed project would have no impact on alternative transportation plans.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 36 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
a. No Impact. Because it would not involve the construction of facilities that would generate sewage,
the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of any wastewater facilities
or exceed applicable wastewater treatment requirements. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b. No Impact. The proposed project would provide the District with improved service capabilities and reliability. It would not, however, require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. Therefore, no associated impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 37 Otay Water District
c. No Impact. The proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of storm water
drainage facilities. Therefore, no associated impact would occur. d. No Impact. The project would not require new or expanded entitlements for water service.
Therefore, no associated impact would occur. e. No Impact. The proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new wastewater
treatment facilities or the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, no associated impact would occur.
f. No Impact. Solid waste generation during pipeline construction would be short-term and minimal.
Construction debris (e.g., asphalt, concrete) would be recycled, as feasible. Excess soil would be hauled from the site, and would be disposed of at locations approved for such use. Operation of the pipelines would not generate any solid waste or affect landfill capacities. Therefore, no associated impact would occur.
g. No Impact. The proposed project would comply with all applicable, federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste. Accordingly, no impact would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 38 Otay Water District
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than Significant
Impact No
Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a. Less than Significant Impact. Based on the evaluations, technical studies, and discussions in this Initial
Study, the proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment
or have any more than a less than significant impact on fish or wildlife species and/or their habitat.
The project would also not impact any examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory. Therefore the project would result in a less than significant impact.
b. No Impact. The project sites would be located in developed areas that are not planned for additional
development. The work that would be done is an improvement, replacing aging infrastructure to
ensure reliable water supply to existing customers within the District’s service area. Therefore, there
are no cumulatively considerable effects of the project and there would be no impact.
c. Less than Significant Impact. The project would not consist of any use or any activities that would
negatively affect any persons in the vicinity. In addition, all resource topics associated with the project
have been analyzed in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, and found to pose no impact or less
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 39 Otay Water District
than significant impact. Consequently, the project would not result in any environmental effects that
would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly; therefore, no impact
would occur.
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 40 Otay Water District
Chapter 4 References
Cultural Resources Review of the Vista Vereda Pipeline Replacement Project, ICF, June 2018
EnviroStor Database, California Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
FEMA Flood Map Service Center, San Diego County, California and Unincorporated Areas, Map number 06073C1668G
Geotechnical Evaluation – Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, Ninyo & Moore, December 2017
Otay Water District 2015 Water Facilities Master Plan Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Atkins, November 2016
Preliminary Design Report – Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement Project (CIP 2574), Rick Engineering, December 2017
San Diego County Municipal Code, Code of Regulatory Ordinances, Section 36.4: 36.401-36.423
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Results, Helix Environmental Planning, June 2018
Negative Declaration August 2018 Vista Vereda & Hidden Mesa Rd. Water Line Replacement 41 Otay Water District
Appendix A
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Results
Helix Environmental
June 2018
Page 1 of 2
Memorandum
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
7578 El Cajon Boulevard
La Mesa, CA 91942
HunterS@helixepi.com
619.462.1515 tel
619.462.0552 fax
www.helixepi.com
Date: June 21, 2018
To: Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd Otay Water District
Cc:
From: Victor Ortiz, Hunter Stapp HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
Subject: Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Results
HELIX Proj. No.: OWD-05.06
Message:
Per your request, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) has completed air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions modeling for the Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project (Project). The Project involves the transfer of the transmission capability of approximately 2,500 linear feet of existing 12-inch water main adjacent to Vista Vereda Road in the Hillsdale area of San Diego County to 3,000linear feet of new 12-inch pipeline in Hidden Mesa Road, with the majority of the existing pipeline to beabandoned in place.
The Project would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants and GHGs during construction. Construction emissions would include fugitive dust, exhaust from heavy construction equipment, and tailpipe emissions from vehicle trips associated with workers commuting to and from the site and trucks hauling material. Fugitive dust control measures, including watering exposed grading areas and unpaved roads and reducing vehicle speeds on unpaved roads, are incorporated into the project design.
Modeling was conducted using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.2. CalEEMod is a computer model used to estimate criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions resulting from construction and operation of land development projects throughout the state of California. Model results for criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions are shown in Table 1, Maximum Daily Criteria Air Pollutant Construction Emissions, and Table 2, Estimated GHG Construction Emissions, respectively.
Page 2 of 2
Memorandum (cont.)
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
7578 El Cajon Boulevard
La Mesa, CA 91942
619.462.1515 tel
619.462.0552 fax
www.helixepi.com
Table 1 MAXIMUM DAILY CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions 2 21 21 <0.5 1 1
SDAPCD Thresholds 75 100 550 250 100 55
Significant Impact? No No No No No No Source: CalEEMod (output data is attached)
Table 2 ESTIMATED GHG CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Phase Emissions
(MT CO2e/year)
Annual Emissions 332
Amortized Construction Emissions1 11
Screening Threshold2 900
Significant Impact? No Source: CalEEMod (output data is attached) 1 Construction emissions are amortized over 30 years in accordance with County
guidance. 2 Screening threshold from California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
(CAPCOA).
As shown in Table 1 and Table 2, criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions from Project construction would not exceed the applicable thresholds. (Enclosures)
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Impact area of project.
Construction Phase -
Off-road Equipment -
Trips and VMT - Trip data provided.
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Area Coating - No operational emissions.
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
User Defined Industrial 1.00 User Defined Unit 0.63 27,500.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
13
Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.6 40
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company San Diego Gas & Electric
2019Operational Year
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
720.49 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr)
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement ProjectSan Diego County, Winter
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 1 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Exterior 13750 0
tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 41250 0
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 12
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 10
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/21/2019 10/31/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/15/2019 1/2/2019
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 27,500.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 0.63
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.38
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.37 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.46 0.46
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.37 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Concrete/Industrial Saws
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Excavators
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Generator Sets
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Skid Steer Loaders
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Sweepers/Scrubbers
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 434.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 10.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 2 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2019 2.2928 21.2594 21.3786 0.0343 0.1171 1.3049 1.4220 0.0314 1.2371 1.2684 0.0000 3,353.1629
3,353.1629
0.6963 0.0000 3,370.5697
Maximum 2.2928 21.2594 21.3786 0.0343 0.1171 1.3049 1.4220 0.0314 1.2371 1.2684 0.0000 3,353.1629
3,353.1629
0.6963 0.0000 3,370.5697
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2019 2.2928 21.2594 21.3786 0.0343 0.1171 1.3049 1.4220 0.0314 1.2371 1.2684 0.0000 3,353.1629
3,353.1629
0.6963 0.0000 3,370.5697
Maximum 2.2928 21.2594 21.3786 0.0343 0.1171 1.3049 1.4220 0.0314 1.2371 1.2684 0.0000 3,353.1629
3,353.1629
0.6963 0.0000 3,370.5697
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 3 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 2.3000e-004
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 2.3000e-004
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 4 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Pipeline Replacement Trenching 1/2/2019 10/31/2019 5 217
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Pipeline Replacement Air Compressors 0 6.00 78 0.48
Pipeline Replacement Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Pipeline Replacement Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Pipeline Replacement Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Pipeline Replacement Skid Steer Loaders 1 8.00 65 0.37
Pipeline Replacement Sweepers/Scrubbers 1 8.00 64 0.46
Pipeline Replacement Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 5 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
3.2 Pipeline Replacement - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.2305 20.6217 20.9472 0.0319 1.3020 1.3020 1.2343 1.2343 3,101.2898
3,101.2898
0.6778 3,118.2338
Total 2.2305 20.6217 20.9472 0.0319 1.3020 1.3020 1.2343 1.2343 3,101.2898
3,101.2898
0.6778 3,118.2338
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Water Unpaved Roads
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count
Worker Trip Number
Vendor Trip Number
Hauling Trip Number
Worker Trip Length
Vendor Trip Length
Hauling Trip Length
Worker Vehicle Class
Vendor Vehicle Class
Hauling Vehicle Class
Pipeline Replacement 8 10.00 0.00 434.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 6 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
3.2 Pipeline Replacement - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0179 0.6069 0.1390 1.5600e-003
0.0350 2.3200e-003
0.0373 9.5800e-003
2.2200e-003
0.0118 170.1818 170.1818 0.0159 170.5786
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0444 0.0308 0.2924 8.2000e-004
0.0822 5.9000e-004
0.0827 0.0218 5.4000e-004
0.0223 81.6914 81.6914 2.6400e-003
81.7573
Total 0.0623 0.6377 0.4314 2.3800e-003
0.1171 2.9100e-003
0.1200 0.0314 2.7600e-003
0.0341 251.8731 251.8731 0.0185 252.3359
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 2.2305 20.6217 20.9472 0.0319 1.3020 1.3020 1.2343 1.2343 0.0000 3,101.2898
3,101.2898
0.6778 3,118.2338
Total 2.2305 20.6217 20.9472 0.0319 1.3020 1.3020 1.2343 1.2343 0.0000 3,101.2898
3,101.2898
0.6778 3,118.2338
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 7 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.2 Pipeline Replacement - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0179 0.6069 0.1390 1.5600e-003
0.0350 2.3200e-003
0.0373 9.5800e-003
2.2200e-003
0.0118 170.1818 170.1818 0.0159 170.5786
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0444 0.0308 0.2924 8.2000e-004
0.0822 5.9000e-004
0.0827 0.0218 5.4000e-004
0.0223 81.6914 81.6914 2.6400e-003
81.7573
Total 0.0623 0.6377 0.4314 2.3800e-003
0.1171 2.9100e-003
0.1200 0.0314 2.7600e-003
0.0341 251.8731 251.8731 0.0185 252.3359
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 8 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
User Defined Industrial 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
5.0 Energy Detail
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
User Defined Industrial 0.581689 0.044135 0.186694 0.113515 0.018244 0.005600 0.015197 0.022573 0.001888 0.002088 0.006279 0.000742 0.001357
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 9 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGas Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 10 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Unmitigated 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGas Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 11 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural Coating
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products
0.5885 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.0000e-005
0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Total 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural Coating
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products
0.5885 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 1.0000e-005
0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Total 0.5885 0.0000 1.0000e-004
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.2000e-004
2.2000e-004
0.0000 2.3000e-004
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 12 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
11.0 Vegetation
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:45 AMPage 13 of 13
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Impact area of project.
Construction Phase -
Off-road Equipment -
Trips and VMT - Trip data provided.
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Area Coating - No operational emissions.
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
User Defined Industrial 1.00 User Defined Unit 0.63 27,500.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
13
Wind Speed (m/s) Precipitation Freq (Days)2.6 40
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company San Diego Gas & Electric
2019Operational Year
CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
720.49 0.029CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr)
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement ProjectSan Diego County, Annual
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 1 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
2.0 Emissions Summary
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Exterior 13750 0
tblAreaCoating Area_Nonresidential_Interior 41250 0
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadMoistureContent 0 12
tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 10
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/21/2019 10/31/2019
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/15/2019 1/2/2019
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 0.00 27,500.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.00 0.63
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.38
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.37 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.46 0.46
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.37 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Concrete/Industrial Saws
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Excavators
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Generator Sets
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Skid Steer Loaders
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Sweepers/Scrubbers
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 434.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 20.00 10.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 2 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2019 0.2482 2.3072 2.3190 3.7200e-003
0.0124 0.1416 0.1540 3.3300e-003
0.1342 0.1376 0.0000 330.2969 330.2969 0.0685 0.0000 332.0095
Maximum 0.2482 2.3072 2.3190 3.7200e-003
0.0124 0.1416 0.1540 3.3300e-003
0.1342 0.1376 0.0000 330.2969 330.2969 0.0685 0.0000 332.0095
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2019 0.2482 2.3072 2.3190 3.7200e-003
0.0124 0.1416 0.1540 3.3300e-003
0.1342 0.1376 0.0000 330.2966 330.2966 0.0685 0.0000 332.0092
Maximum 0.2482 2.3072 2.3190 3.7200e-003
0.0124 0.1416 0.1540 3.3300e-003
0.1342 0.1376 0.0000 330.2966 330.2966 0.0685 0.0000 332.0092
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 3 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Unmitigated Operational
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 1-2-2019 4-1-2019 0.7570 0.7570
2 4-2-2019 7-1-2019 0.7650 0.7650
3 7-2-2019 9-30-2019 0.7650 0.7650
Highest 0.7650 0.7650
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 4 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mobile 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Pipeline Replacement Trenching 1/2/2019 10/31/2019 5 217
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 5 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Water Exposed Area
Water Unpaved Roads
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Pipeline Replacement Air Compressors 0 6.00 78 0.48
Pipeline Replacement Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Pipeline Replacement Excavators 1 8.00 158 0.38
Pipeline Replacement Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Pipeline Replacement Skid Steer Loaders 1 8.00 65 0.37
Pipeline Replacement Sweepers/Scrubbers 1 8.00 64 0.46
Pipeline Replacement Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Count
Worker Trip Number
Vendor Trip Number
Hauling Trip Number
Worker Trip Length
Vendor Trip Length
Hauling Trip Length
Worker Vehicle Class
Vendor Vehicle Class
Hauling Vehicle Class
Pipeline Replacement 8 10.00 0.00 434.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 6 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
3.2 Pipeline Replacement - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2420 2.2375 2.2728 3.4600e-003
0.1413 0.1413 0.1339 0.1339 0.0000 305.2585 305.2585 0.0667 0.0000 306.9263
Total 0.2420 2.2375 2.2728 3.4600e-003
0.1413 0.1413 0.1339 0.1339 0.0000 305.2585 305.2585 0.0667 0.0000 306.9263
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.9100e-003
0.0665 0.0145 1.7000e-004
3.7100e-003
2.5000e-004
3.9600e-003
1.0200e-003
2.4000e-004
1.2600e-003
0.0000 16.9172 16.9172 1.5300e-003
0.0000 16.9555
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.2800e-003
3.2800e-003
0.0318 9.0000e-005
8.7000e-003
6.0000e-005
8.7600e-003
2.3100e-003
6.0000e-005
2.3700e-003
0.0000 8.1212 8.1212 2.6000e-004
0.0000 8.1277
Total 6.1900e-003
0.0698 0.0463 2.6000e-004
0.0124 3.1000e-004
0.0127 3.3300e-003
3.0000e-004
3.6300e-003
0.0000 25.0384 25.0384 1.7900e-003
0.0000 25.0832
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 7 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
3.2 Pipeline Replacement - 2019
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.2420 2.2375 2.2728 3.4600e-003
0.1413 0.1413 0.1339 0.1339 0.0000 305.2582 305.2582 0.0667 0.0000 306.9260
Total 0.2420 2.2375 2.2728 3.4600e-003
0.1413 0.1413 0.1339 0.1339 0.0000 305.2582 305.2582 0.0667 0.0000 306.9260
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 1.9100e-003
0.0665 0.0145 1.7000e-004
3.7100e-003
2.5000e-004
3.9600e-003
1.0200e-003
2.4000e-004
1.2600e-003
0.0000 16.9172 16.9172 1.5300e-003
0.0000 16.9555
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 4.2800e-003
3.2800e-003
0.0318 9.0000e-005
8.7000e-003
6.0000e-005
8.7600e-003
2.3100e-003
6.0000e-005
2.3700e-003
0.0000 8.1212 8.1212 2.6000e-004
0.0000 8.1277
Total 6.1900e-003
0.0698 0.0463 2.6000e-004
0.0124 3.1000e-004
0.0127 3.3300e-003
3.0000e-004
3.6300e-003
0.0000 25.0384 25.0384 1.7900e-003
0.0000 25.0832
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 8 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
User Defined Industrial 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
User Defined Industrial 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
User Defined Industrial 0.581689 0.044135 0.186694 0.113515 0.018244 0.005600 0.015197 0.022573 0.001888 0.002088 0.006279 0.000742 0.001357
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 9 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Electricity Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
NaturalGas Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 10 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGas Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
NaturalGas Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 11 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
Electricity Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 12 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Unmitigated 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural Coating
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products
0.1074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Total 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 13 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10
Exhaust PM10
PM10 Total
Fugitive PM2.5
Exhaust PM2.5
PM2.5 Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural Coating
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer Products
0.1074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Total 0.1074 0.0000 1.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
2.0000e-005
0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e-005
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 14 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Outdoor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 15 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Outdoor Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
8.0 Waste Detail
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Category/Year
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 16 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Unmitigated
Waste Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
User Defined Industrial
0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 17 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
11.0 Vegetation
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Date: 6/18/2018 9:46 AMPage 18 of 18
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project - San Diego County, Annual
Appendix B
Cultural Resources Review
of the
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project
ICF
June 2018
525 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA 92101 USA +1.858.578.8964 +1.844.545.2301 fax icf.com
Memorandum
To: LisaCoburn‐BoydOtayWaterDistrict2554SweetwaterSpringsBlvdSpringValley,CA91978
From: KarolinaChmielArchaeologistICF525BSt.Suite1700SanDiegoCA,92101
Date: June29,2018
Re: Cultural Resources Review of the Vista Vereda Pipeline Replacement Project
OtayWaterDistrict(OWD)ispreparinganegativedeclarationfortheVistaVeredaPipelineReplacementProject(Project)locatedinElCajon,California.Aspartoftheenvironmentalprocess,OWDretainedICFtoperformaculturalresourcesrecordsearchanddesktopreviewforpotentialculturalresourceslocatedwithintheProjectarea.
Project Description
TheProjectconsistsofreplacinganexistingpipelinewithinanexistingneighborhoodinElCajon,CA.Themajorityofthenewpipelinewillbelocatedinthesametrenchastheexistingpipeline.Asmallsegmentofthenewpipelinewillbeplacedthreefeetawayfromtheexistingpipelineinashallowtrench.Thenewpipelinemeasures2inchesindiameter.TheProjectislocatedonVistaVeredafromVistaGrandeRoadtoprivatepropertiesjustnorthofVeredaCourt,inElCajon,California(Figure1).Theprojectmeasuresjustoveraquarter‐mileinlength.
Record Search and Desktop Review Results
ICFarchaeologistNaraCoxconductedarecordsearchattheSouthCoastInformationCenter(SCIC),locatedontheSanDiegoStateUniversitycampusonJune26,2018.TheSCICisthebranchoftheCaliforniaHistoricalResourcesInformationSystem(CHRIS)thathousesinformationonhistoricalresourcesinSanDiegoandImperialCounties.CHRISisarepositoryofinformationonrecordedhistoricalresources,amongotherhistoricalinformation,andismaintainedbytheCaliforniaOfficeofHistoricPreservation.Theobjectiveoftherequestwastoidentifystudiesandarchaeologicalandbuilt‐environmentresourcesinorwithinquarter‐mileoftheProjectarea.
Lisa Coburn‐Boyd June 29, 2018 Page 2 of 3
TherecordsearchrevealedthatnopreviouslyrecordedculturalresourceshavebeenidentifiedwithintheProjectarea.Twopreviouslyidentifiedculturalresources(CA‐SDI‐5671andCA‐SDI‐12174H)wererecordedwithinthequarter‐milebufferoftheProject.CA‐SDI‐5671consistedofaprehistoricsurfacelithicscatterandfoodprocessingsite.Theresourcewaslastupdatedin1987.CA‐SDI‐12174Hwasrecordedashistoricremnantsofaroad,cobblewall,corralandrockembankmentassociatedwitha1920speriodhouse.Theresourcewaslastupdatedin1991anddescribedashighlydisturbed.Therecordsearchalsorevealedthatsixstudieshaveoccurredwithinthequarter‐milebufferbutnoarchaeologicalsurveysoccurredwithintheProjectarea.
ICFarchaeologistKarolinaChmielconductedadesktopreviewofpubliclyavailablehistoricmapsandaerialstoassesstheProjectareaforarchaeologicalsensitivity.Historicaerialsrevealedthatsometimebetween1971and1980,portionsoftheareaweredevelopedforhousing(NETR1971,1980).NodevelopmentoccurredwithintheProjectareapriorto1971.Sometimeafter1980andpriorto1989,theentireProjectareawasdevelopedforhousing(NETR1989).Thehousingdevelopmentincludinggradingtounknowndepths.
Generally,areaswithhighprehistoricarchaeologicalsensitivityconsistofbaseoffoothills,valleys,andareasnearwatersourcessuchasadrainageorcreek.Areviewoftopographicmapsbetween1903and1975(USGS1903,1975)indicatesthattheProjectareaissituatedongentlyslopingsouthfacinghillswithnoimmediatewatersourcenearby.Therefore,thisareaisnotconsideredtohavehighsensitivityforprehistoricarchaeologicalresources.
Management Recommendations
ResultsoftherecordsearchindicatedthatnopreviouslyidentifiedculturalresourcesarelocatedwithintheProjectarea.Basedonreviewoftopographicmaps,theprojectareaisnotlocatednearwaterorfeaturesthathavehighpotentialforprehistoricarchaeologicalresources.Nodevelopmentoccurredpriorto1971inthearea,therefore,theProjectareahaslowpotentialforhistoricarchaeologicalresources.Additionally,theProjectareahasbeenpreviouslygradedforhousinganddisturbedbytheinstallationoftheoriginalpipeline.Overall,theProjecthaslowpotentialtodisturbintactculturalresources.Givenallthefactorsdiscussedabove,ICFisnotrecommendingarchaeologicalmonitoringduringconstructionoftheProject.
Althoughthereisnoevidencetosuggestthepresenceofhumanremains,intheunlikelyeventthathumanremainsareencounteredduringgrounddisturbingactivities,allworkwillceaseandtherequirementsofCaliforniaHealthandSafetyCode§7050.5(a)(b)shallbefollowedandthecountycoronerwillbecontacted.ShouldtheremainsbeidentifiedasNativeAmerican,thecoronerwillcontacttheNAHCwithin24hoursandtheNativeAmericanHeritageCommissionwilldesignateaMostLikelyDescendentwithin48hours.TheMLDandOWDwillworktogethertodetermineappropriatetreatmentofthehumanremains.
Sincerely,
Lisa Coburn‐Boyd June 29, 2018 Page 3 of 3
KarolinaChmiel,MA
ICFArchaeologist
Attachments:Figure1Projectlocation
References:
NETR(NationalEnvironmentalTitleResearch,LLC1971AerialofProjectarea.Accessedat:historicaerials.com1980AerialofProjectarea.Accessedat:historicaerials.com1989AerialofProjectarea.Accessedat:historicaerials.com
USGS1903ElCajon15‐minutetopographicmap.1:62500scale.1975ElCajon7.5‐minutetopographicmap.1:2400scale.
Figure 1Project Location
OWD Vista Vereda
\\PDC
CITR
DSGI
S1\Sa
n Dieg
o\proj
ects\
otay_
water
_dist
rict\V
ista_
Verde
_Cult
ural\m
apdo
c\Rec
ord_S
earch
.mxd
Date
: 6/29
/2018
195
66
±Source: ESRI Imagery
0 500
Feet
Project Area
Appendix C
Geotechnical Evaluation
Vista Vereda Water Main Replacement Project
Ninyo & Moore
December 2017
Geotechnical EvaluationVista Vereda Water Line Replacement
El Cajon, California
Otay Water District2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard I Spring Valley, California 91978
December 27,2017 | Project No. 107952011
C
Geotechnical I Envrronmental I Constructron lnspectron & Testrng I Forensrc Engrneerrng & Expert Witness
Geophysrcs I Engineenng Geology I Laboratory Testrng I lndustrral Hygrene Occupatronal Safety I Arr Quality I GIS
Nrogo\4[r¡$reì{f )l(r;lrllli:ilr ri irl! Itlilrl[:f ì1il. S'rr)lü:¡rs .,\)'ìSilrl¡rll:
I{¡ogoc.¡$ssreGool€chnlcel t Eny¡ronmontâl Scloncor Conrúltanlg
Geotechn ical Eval uationVista Vereda Water Line ReplacementEl Cajon, California
Mr. Stephen Beppler, PEOtay Water District2254 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard I Spring Valley, California 91978
December 27,20'17 | Project No. 107952011
ørøf
Jeffrey T. Kent, PE, GESenior Engineer
CLHJTIIGTF/gg
Gregory T. Farrand, PG, CEGPrincipal Geologist
Distribution: (1) Addressee (via e-mail)
T.
no¡i17 tù
5710 Rulfin Road I San Diego, California 92123 | p,858,576,1000 | www,ninyoandmoore.com
1
2
3
4
5
5.1
5,2
5.3
6
6.1
6.2
7
I8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
SGOPE OF SERVICES 1
SITE AND PROJECT DESGRIPTION 1
SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2
GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2
Regional Geologic Setting 2
Site Geology 3
5.2.1 Fiil 3
5.2.2 Granitic Rock 3
Groundwater 4
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 4
Faulting and Seismicity 4
6.1.1 Surface Ground Rupture 5
6.1.2 Ground Motion 5
Landsliding 6
CONCLUSIONS 6
RECOMMENDATIONS 7
Earthwork 7
8.1.1 Site Preparation 7
8.1.2 Excavation Characteristics 7
8.1.3 Temporary Excavations and Shoring I8.1.4 Excavation Bottom Stability I8.1.5 Construction Dewatering I8.1.6 Modulus of Soil Reaction 10
8.1.7 Pipe and Trench Zone Backfill Materials 10
8.1.8 Backfill Placement and Compaction 11
Trenchless Piping lnstallation 11
Lateral Pressures for Thrust Blocks and Jacking 11
Flexible Pavement Reconstruction 12
Soil Gorrosivity 12
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | December 27, 2017
8.6
8.7
8.8
It0
Concrete Placement
Pre-Construction Conference
Plan Review and Construction Observation
LIMITATIONS
REFERENCES
13
13
13
14
16
5
10
12
TABLES1 - PrincipalActive Faults
2 - Pipe and Trench Zone Recommended Gradation
3 - Recommended Preliminary Pavement Sections
FIGURES
1 - Alignment Location
2 - Boring Locations
3 - Fault Locations
4 - Geology
5 - Lateral Earth Pressures for Braced Excavation
6 - Thrust Block Lateral Earth Pressure Diagram
APPENDICESA - Boring Logs
B - Laboratory Testing
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | December 27, 2017
I INTRODUGTION
ln accordance with your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the water
line replacement project located along Msta Vereda, Hidden Mesa Road, and Hidden Mesa Trail in
El Cajon, California (Figure 1). This report presents our findings and conclusions regarding the
geotechnical conditions at the subject alignment and our recommendations for the design and
construction of this project.
2 SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our scope of services included the following:
Reviewing background information including available topographic maps, geologic data, faultmaps, and aerial photographs.
a
a
a
Obtaining an excavation permit from the County of San Diego Department of Public Works.
Siting and staking of the boring locations for utility clearance by Underground ServiceAlert (USA).
Providing trafüc control measures during the performance of our subsurface exploration.
Performing a subsurface exploration program consisting of the drilling, logging, and sampling ofnine exploratory borings. The borings were logged and sampled in the field by Ninyo & Moorepersonnel. Bulk and in-place soil samples were collected from the borings and transported toour in-house laboratory for testing.
Performing geotechnical laboratory testing on representative soil samples to evaluategeotechnical characteristics and design parameters.
Performing geotechnical analysis of the data obtained from our site reconnaissance,subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing.
Preparing this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regardingthe geotechnical design and construction of the project.
3 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project alignment is situated within several public and private roadways including Hidden Mesa
Road, Hidden Mesa Trail, and Vista Vereda within El Cajon, California (Figure 1). The noted roadways
consist of asphalt concrete (AC) pavement surfaces through undulating hills and drainages. Surface
elevations along the project alignment generally range between approximately 625 feet to 815 feet
above mean sea level (MSL). Based on the provided proJect exhibits and discussion with the client,
we understand that the project will involve the installation of a new water pipeline in order to replace
the existing, aging water line. ln general, traditional cut-and-cover trenching techniques are anticipated
a
a
a
a
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | Decenber 27 ,2017
for the installation of the new water line. Additionally, trenchless technologies may be used in certain
areas of the project alignment, however specifics are not known at this time.
4 SUBSURFACE EVALUATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our subsurface exploration for the project was performed on November 2,2017, December 4,
and 5, 2017. The subsurface exploration program consisted of the drilling, logging, and
sampling of nine small-diameter borings (B-1 through B-9) to depths of up to approximately
11/zfeet. The borings were drilled using either a limited-access track-mounted drill rig or a
truck-mounted drill rig utilizing 6 and 8-inch-diameter solid stem augers. During the drilling
operations, the borings were logged and sampled by Ninyo & Moore personnel. Representative
bulk and in-place soil samples were obtained from within the borings. The samples were then
transported to our in-house geotechnical laboratory for testing. The approximate locations of the
exploratory borings are shown on Figure 2. The logs of the borings are included in Appendix A.
Laboratory testing of representative soil samples included tests to evaluate in-situ moisture content
and dry density, gradation (sieve) analysis, Atterberg limits, shear strength, expansion index,
Modified Proctor density relationships, soil corrosivity, and R-value. Additionally, an outside
laboratory was used to evaluate sulfide content and redox potential of site soils. The results of our
in-situ moisture content and dry density tests are presented on the boring logs in Appendix A. The
remaining laboratory testing results are presented in Appendix B.
5 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our findings regarding regional and site geology and groundwater conditions are provided in the
following sections.
5.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The project alignment is situated in the western portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic
Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends approximately
900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to the southern tip of
Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990; Harden, 2004). The province varies in width from
approximately 30 to 100 miles and generally consists of rugged mountains underlain by Jurassic
metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous rocks of the southern
California batholith. The portion of the province in eastern San Diego County that includes the
project area consists generally of Cretaceous-age granitic rocks.
2Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California I 10795201 1 | Decenber 27 , 2017
The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of suÞparallel faults and fault zones trending
roughly northwest. Several of these faults are considered to be active. The Elsinore, San Jacinto and
San Andreas faults are active fault systems located east of the project alignment and the Rose
Canyon, Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough, and San Clemente faults are active faults located west
of the project alignment (Figure 3). Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within
this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of rightlateral, strike-slip movement. The Rose
Canyon Fault Zone, the nearest active fault system, has been mapped approximately 15.2 miles west
of the project site.
5.2 Site Geology
The results of our geologic reconnaissance and subsurface exploration indicate that the site is
generally underlain by fill and Cretaceous-age granitic rocks of the southern California batholith
(Todd, 2004) as shown on Figure 4. Generalized descriptions of the earth materials encountered
during our subsurface exploration are presented below. Additional descriptions of the materials
encountered in our exploratory borings are shown on the logs in Appendix A.
5.2.1 Fiil
Fill was encountered in our exploratory borings B-1 through B-9 at the ground surface or
underlying the AC pavements and extending to depths of up to approximately 10 feet. The
fill generally consisted of various shades of brown, dry to moist, loose to very dense, well
graded sand with silt and silty sand with cobbles.
5.2.2 Granitic Rock
Granitic rock was encountered in our exploratory borings B-1,B.-2 and 84 through B-9 underlying
fill materials and extending to the total depths explored of approximately 11% feet. As
encountered, the granitic rock generally consisted of reddish brown, brown, tan, gray, and black
medium- to coarse-grained, granitic rock that was weathered. Several outcrops of large granite
boulders were observed at the surface along the project alignment and the possibility of
subsurface core stones exists.
3Ninyo&Moore f VistaVeredaWaterLineReplacement,El Cajon,California 110795201 1 lDecenber27,2017
5.3 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory borings. Due to the site topography, presence
of existing drainages that cross the project alignment, and the presence of existing underground
utility trench lines, zones of seepage and perched water conditions should be anticipated.
Fluctuations in the groundwater level may occur due to variations in ground surface topography,
subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation practices, groundwater pumping, and other factors which
may not have been evident at the time of our field evaluation.
6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
ln general, hazards associated with seismic activity include ground surface rupture, strong ground
motion, liquefaction, and landslides. These considerations are discussed in the following sections.
6.1 Faulting and Seismicity
The project alignment is considered to be within a seismically active area. Based on our review of
the referenced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as our geologic field
reconnaissance, the subject alignment is not underlain by known active or potentially active faults
(i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in the last 11,000 years and
2,000,000 years, respectively). Major known active faults in the region consist generally of en-
echelon, northwest-striking, right-lateral, strike-slip faults. These include the Rose Canyon,
Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough, and San Clemente faults, located to the west of the project
alignment, and the Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas faults, located to the east of the project
alignment. The locations of these faults are shown on Figure 4.
Based on published geologic data, the Rose Canyon Fault Zone is the closest active fault to the
site, and is mapped approximately 15.2 miles west of the site. A rupture along this fault zone is
capable of generating a maximum moment magnitude (M."") 6.9 earthquake (USGS, 2008).
The project alignment is not located within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone for earthquake faults. Table 1 lists selected principal known active faults that may affect
the subject site and the maximum moment magnitude as published by the United States
Geological Survey (USGS, 2008). The approximate faultto-site distances were calculated using
the USGS fault parameters web-based design tool (USGS, 2008).
4Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | December 27, 2017
ApproximateFault-to-Site Distance
miles (kilometers)
Maximum MomentMagnitude
(Mmax)
Table I - Principal Active Faults
Fault
Rose Canyon
Palos Verdes
Coronado Bank
Elsinore (Julian Segment)
Earthquake Valley
Elsinore (Coyote Mountain Segment)
Newport-lnglewood (Offshore Segment)
San Jacinto (Anza Segment)
San Jacinto (Superstition Mountain Segment)
Laguna Salada
15.2
26.5
26.5
29.3
33.6
36.3
40.1
57.5
58.5
60.0
(24.5)
(42.6)
(42.6\
(47.2)
(54.1)
(58.4)
(64.5)
(92.5)
(e4.1)
(e6.6)
6.9
7.3
7.4
7.4
6.8
6.9
7.3
6.7
7.1
7.3
The principal seismic hazards at the subject site are surface fault rupture and strong ground
mot¡on. Liquefaction is not a consideration for the project due to the shallow depth of granitic
rock at the site. A brief description of these hazards and the potential for their occurrences on
site are discussed below.
6.1.1 Surface Ground Rupture
Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconna¡ssance, no active
faults are known to cross the project site. The active Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located
approximately 15.2 miles northeast of the site. Therefore, the probability of damage from
surface ground rupture is considered to be low. However, lurching or cracking of the ground
surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible.
6.1.2 Ground Motion
The 2016 California Building Code (CBC) specifies that the Risk-Targeted, Maximum
Considered Earthquake (MCE$ ground motion response accelerations be used to evaluate
seismic loads for design of buildings and other structures. The MCEp ground motion
response accelerations are based on the spectral response accelerations for 5 percent
damping in the direction of maximum horizontal response and incorporate a target risk for
structural collapse equivalent to 1 percent in 50 years with deterministic limits for near-
source effects. The horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) that corresponds to the
MCER for the project alignment was calculated as 0.399 using the United States Geological
Survey (USGS, 2017) seismic design tool (web-based).
5Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 10795201 1 | Decenber 27 , 2017
The 2016 CBC specifies that the potential for liquefaction and soil strength loss be evaluated,
where applicable, for the Maximum Considered Earthquake Geometric Mean (MCEc) peak
ground acceleration with adjustment for site class effects in accordance with the American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-10 Standard. The MCE6 peak ground acceleration is
based on the geometric mean peak ground acceleration with a 2 percent probability of
exceedance in 50 years. The MCE6 peak ground acceleration with adjustment for site class
effects (PGAM) was calculated as 0.389 using the USGS (2017) seismic design tool that yielded
a mapped MCEG peak ground acceleration of 0.329 for the project alignment and a site
coefücient (Fpc¡) of 1.178 for Site Class C.
6.2 Landsliding
Based on our review of referenced geologic maps, literature and topographic maps, and
subsurface exploration, landslides or indications of deep-seated landsliding were not noted
underlying the project alignment. The potential for significant large-scale slope instabilig along
the project alignment is not a design consideration.
7 GONCLUSIONS
Based on our review of the referenced background data, geologic field reconnaissance, subsurface
exploration, and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that construction of the proposed project is
feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical considerations include the following:
Based on the results of our background review and subsurface exploration, the geologicunits that underlie the project alignment include fill and granitic rock.
The on-site fill should be generally excavatable with conventional heavy-duty earth movingconstruction equipment in generally good condition. However, difficult excavating conditionsshould be anticipated due to the presence of granitic rock.
Due to the presence of undocumented fill, caving and/or sloughing of excavations should beanticipated. The contractor should be prepared to address these conditions.
On-site excavations that encounter granitic rock may generate oversize materials that arenot suitable for reuse in trench backfill.
Materials derived from on-site excavations performed in existing fill materials are generallyconsidered unsuitable for reuse as backfill within the pipe zone and/or trench zone ascompared to the WaterAgencies'Standards (2011). However, excavations into granitic rockmay generate materials that are generally considered suitable for reuse as backfill withinthe pipe zone and/or trench zone as compared to the Water Agencies' Standards (2011),provided they are screened of oversize materials.
a
a
a
a
6Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California I 10795201 1 | December 27, 2017
a Based on the soil corrosivity testing presented in Appendix B, test results indicate the sitesoils are not considered corrosive based on American Concrete lnstitute (ACl) 318-14 andCaltrans (201 2) corrosion criteria.
No active faults are reported underlying or adjacent to the alignment. The active RoseCanyon fault has been mapped approximately 15.2 miles west of the project alignment.
8 RECOMMENDATIONS
ïhe following sections include our geotechnical recommendations for the design of the
proposed project. These recommendations are based on our evaluation of the site geotechnical
conditions and our understanding of the planned construction.
8.1 Earthwork
ln general, earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented
in this report. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted for questions regarding the recommendations
or guidelines presented herein.
8.1.1 Site Preparat¡on
Prior to performing site excavations, the project alignment should be cleared of vegetation,
surface obstructions, rubble and debris, abandoned utilities and foundations; and other
deleterious materials. Existing utilities within the project limits, if any, should be re-routed or
protected from damage by construction activities. Obstructions that extend below finish
grade, if any, should be removed and the resulting holes filled with compacted soils.
Materials generated from the clearing operations should be removed from the project site
and disposed of at a legal dumpsite.
8.1.2 ExcavationCharacteristics
Our evaluation of the excavation characteristics of the on-site materials is based on the
results of our exploratory borings, our site observations, and our experience with similar
materials. ln our opinion, the existing fill are generally expected to be rippable with heavy-
duty trenching equipment. Additionally, due to the presence of undocumented fills, the
contractor should anticipate caving and/or sloughing of excavations.
a
7Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | Decenber 27 ,2017
Due to the presence of granitic rock, the contractor should expect to encounter difficulty
when performing the trench excavations along the project alignment. The contractor should
be prepared for heavy ripping conditions. Additionally, excavations into the granitic rock
may generate oversize materials.
8.1.3 Temporary Excavations and Shoring
For temporary excavations, we recommend that the following Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) soil classifications be used:
FiilGranitic Rock
Type CType B
Upon making the excavations, the soil classifications and excavation performance should
be evaluated in the field by the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the OSHA
regulations. Temporary excavations should be constructed in accordance with OSHA
recommendations. For trench or other excavations, OSHA requirements regarding
personnel safety should be met using appropriate shoring (including trench boxes) or by
laying back the slopes to no steeper than 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) in fill or alluvium and
1:1 in granitic rock. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage may be shored or
stabilized by placing sandbags or gravel along the base of the seepage zone. Excavations
encountering seepage should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. On-site safety of
personnel is the responsibility of the contractor.
ln areas with limited space for construction where temporary excavations may not be laid back at
the recommended slope inclination, a shoring system with bracing may be incorporated to stabilize
the excavation sidewalls during construction. The shoring system should be designed using the
magnitude and distribution of lateral earth pressures presented on Figure 5. The recommended
design earth pressures are based on the assumptions that (a) the shoring system is constructed
without raising the ground surface elevation behind the shoring, (b) that there are no surcharge
loads, such as soil stockpiles, construction materials, or vehicular traffc, and (c) that no loads act
above a 1:1 plane extending up and back from the base of the shoring system. For shoring
subjected to the above-mentioned surcharge loads, the contractor should include the efiect of
these loads on lateral earth pressures acting on the shoring wall.
INinyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | Decenber 27,2017
Settlement of the ground surface may occur behind the shoring wall during excavation. The
amount of settlement depends on the type of shoring system, the quality of contractor's
workmanship, and soil conditions. Settlement may cause distress to adjacent structures, if
present. To reduce the potential for distress to adjacent structures, we recommend that the
shoring system be designed to limit the ground settlement behind the shoring to Tzinch or less.
Possible causes of settlement that should be addressed include vibration during installation of
the sheet piling, excavation for construction, construction vibrations, dewatering, and removal of
the support system. We recommend that the potential settlement distress be evaluated
carefully by the contractor prior to construction.
The contractor should retain a qualified and experienced engineer to design the shoring
system. The shoring parameters presented in this report are for preliminary design purposes
and the contractor should evaluate the adequacy of these parameters and make appropriate
modifications for their design. We recommend that the contractor take appropriate measures to
protect workers. OSHA requirements pertaining to worker safety should be observed. We
further recommend that the construction methods provided herein be carefully evaluated by a
qualified specialty contractor priorto commencement of the construction.
8.1.4 Excavation Bottom Stability
Excavations bottoms that expose granitic rock are anticipated to be generally stable and
should provide suitable support to the proposed pipeline. Howeve¡ if unstable excavation
bottom conditions are exposed, they may be mitigated by overexcavating the excavation
bottom to suitable depths and replacing with a layer of compacted 3/a- to 17z-inch crushed
gravel encased in a woven geotextile (e.g., Mirafi@ 600X geotefile or an approved
equivalent). Recommendations for stabilizing excavation bottoms should be based on
evaluation in the field by the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction.
8.1.5 ConstructionDewatering
Groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface exploration. However, existing
utility trench lines may act as conduits for perched water conditions. Where groundwater,
seepage, and/or perched water are encountered, dewatering measures during excavation
operations should be prepared by the contractor's engineer and reviewed by the design
engineer. Considerations for construction dewatering should include anticipated
drawdown, piping of soils, volume of pumping, potential for settlement, and groundwater
INinyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacemenl, El Cajon, California | 10795201 1 | December 27 , 2017
discharge. Disposal of groundwater should be performed in accordance with guidelines of
the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWOCB).
8.1.6 Modulus of Soil Reaction
We anticipate some trenching will be used on this project. The modulus of soil reaction (E)
is used to characterize the stiffness of soil backfill placed at the sides of buried flexible
pipelines for the purpose of evaluating deflection caused by the weight of the backfill above
the pipe. For pipelines constructed in granular fill soils and granitic rock materials, we
recommend that a modulus of soil reaction of 1,600 pounds per square inch (psi) be used
for design for 0 to 5 feet deep excavations and 2,200 psi for excavations exceeding 10 feet
depth, provided that granular bedding material is placed adjacent to the pipe, as
recommended in this report.
8.1.7 Pipe and Trench Zone Backfill Materials
ln accordance with the Water Agencies' Standards (2011), we recommend that imported
granular material be used within the pipe and trench zones for pressurized piping. lmported
material should have a sand equivalent no less than 30 as evaluated by ASTM D 2419, a
coefficient of uniformity of 3 or greater, and should conform to the following gradation:
Table 2 - Pipe and Trench Zone Recommended Gradation
U.S. Standard Sieve Size I percent eassinj by Weight
25mm (1")
19mm (3/4")
4.75mm (No. a)
600um (No.30)
75um (No. 200)
100
90-100
50-95
25453-15
Native materials should not be used in the trench zone unless the native materials meet the
requirements above and specific written permission has been obtained from the District
Engineer. Based on the results of our laboratory testing, some materials generated from on-
site excavations may be suitable for reuse as trench zone backfill based on the guidelines
within the WaterAgencies' Standards (2011).
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 10795201 1 | Decenber 27 ,2017 10
8.1.8 Backfill Placement and Compaction
Trench backfill should be placed at or above the laboratory optimum moisture content and
compacted by mechanical methods in uniform horizontal lifts to a relative compaction of
90 percent as evaluated by the latest edition of ASTM D 1557. The upper 12 inches of
street subgrade and aggregate base materials beneath pavement areas should be
compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent as evaluated by the latest edition of
ASTM D 1557. The lift thickness of fill will depend on the type of compaction equipment
used, but generally should not exceed I inches in loose thickness. Successive lifts should
be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. Special care
should be taken to avoid pipe damage when compacting trench backfill above the pipe.
8.2 Trenchless Piping lnstallationWe anticipate that the rehabilitation will utilize open trenching. However, in the event that
trenchless piping installation methods (e.9., microtunneling and/or jack-and-bore methods) are
utilized, the following recommendations should be considered.
The materials encountered during our subsurface exploration included fill and granitic rock. The
contractor should anticipate a varying degree of drilling difficulty along the alignment. For
example, the loose fills may result in the loss of soil material at the drilling or casing head, while
drilling through granitic rock may result in excessive amounts of pipe friction and/or refusal.
Additionally, minor ground surface settlements may occur from the pipe jacking operations.
The contractor should provide means to reduce the surficial settlement and the effects on
surface improvements and adjacent underground utilities. We recommend that an
experienced specialty contractor be used for the microtunnel or jack-and-bore operations.
8.3 Lateral Pressures for Thrust Blocks and Jacking
Thrust restraint for buried pipelines and lateral pressures for jacking may be achieved by transferring
the thrust force to the soil outside the pipe through a thrust block. Thrust blocks may be designed
using the lateral passive earth pressures presented on Figure 6. Thrust blocks should be backfilled
with granular backfill material, compacted as outlined in this report.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Ca¡on, California | 10795201 1 | Decenber 27,2017 11
8.4 FlexiblePavementReconstructionWe anticipate that trench excavations in existing pavement areas will involve resurfacing along
the trench alignment. ln general, trench resurfacing should be 1-inch thicker than the existing
pavement section in accordance with the San Diego Regional Standard Drawings (San Diego
Regional Standards Committee, 2012).
For the design of new pavement sections, we have used Traffic lndices of 5, 6.5, 7, and LAdditionally, based on the results of our laboratory testing, an R-value of 65 was also used in
the preliminary design of pavement sections. The preliminary recommended pavement sections
are presented in the following table:
Residential Collector
Light Collector
Community Collector
Major
5
6.5
7
8
3
3
3
4
5
I9
10
Table 3 - Recommended Preliminary Pavement Sections
Caltrans Class 2 AggregateBase (in)Asphalt Concrete (in)Design Traffic lndex Road Classification
Notes:Aspha¡t concrete ¡s Type A, Dense-graded Hot Mix Asphalt complying with Caltrans Stândard Specification 39-2 (2015)Class 2 Aggregate Base Complying with Caltrans Standard Specification 26-1.02 (2015).
lf traffic loads are different from those assumed, the pavement design should be re-evaluated.
Additionally, we recommended that the upper 12 inches of the subgrade and aggregate base
materials be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent as evaluated by the current
version of ASTM D 1557. Additionally, we recommend that AC materials be compacted to
95 percent relative compaction as compared to the laboratory evaluated Hveem density. We
recommend that the geotechnical consultant re-evaluate the pavement design, based on the R-
value of the subgrade material exposed at the time of construction.
8.5 Soil CorrosivityLaboratory testing was performed on representative samples of near-surface soils to evaluate
soil pH, electrical resistivity, water-soluble chloride content, and water-soluble sulfate content.
The soil pH and electrical resistivity tests were performed in general accordance with California
Test (CT) 643. Chloride content tests were performed in general accordance with CI 422.
Sulfate testing was performed in general accordance with CT 417. The laboratory test results
are presented in Appendix B.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | Decenber 27,2017 '12
The pH of the tested samples ranged from 6.5 lo 7.4. The electrical resistivities of the tested
samples ranged from approximately 1,700 to l,800ohm-centimeters (ohm-cm). The chloride
contents of the tested samples ranged from approximately 25 to 35 parts per million (ppm). The
sulfate contents of the tested samples ranged from approximately 0.005 to 0.017 percent by weight
(i.e., 50 to 170 ppm). Based on the laboratory test results, ACI 318, and Caltrans (2012) corrosion
criteria, the project alignment would not be classified as corrosive, which is defined as having earth
materials with an electrical resistivity of less than 1,000 ohm-cm, more than 500 ppm chlorides,
more than 0.10 percent sulfates (i.e., 1,000 ppm), and/or a pH of 5.5 or less.
Additionally, a soil sample was sent to an outside laboratory to evaluate oxidation-reduction (redox)
potential and sulfide content in accordance with American Water Works Association (A\AfuVA) C105
Standards. Testing indicated a redox potential of 150 millivolts and a negative reading forsulfides,
as presented in Appendix B.
8.6 Goncrete Placement
Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates can
be subject to premature chemical and/or physical deterioration. As stated above, the soil
samples tested in this evaluation indicated water-soluble sulfate contents of approximately
0.005 and 0.017 percent by weight (i.e., approximately 50 and 170 ppm). According to ACI
318, the potential for sulfate attack is negligible for a water-soluble sulfate content of less than
0.10 percent by weight (i.e., less than 1,000 ppm) in soils. Due to the potential for variability of
soils, we recommend consideration be given to using Type llA/ cement for concrete structures
in contact with soil per ACI 318.
8.7 Pre-Construction Conference
We recommend that a pre-construction meeting be held prior to commencement of grading. The
owner or his representative, the civil engineer, Ninyo & Moore, and the contractor should be in
attendance to discuss the plans, the project, and the proposed construction schedule.
8.8 Plan Review and Construction Observation
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on analysis of
observed conditions. lf conditions are found to vary from those described in this report, Ninyo &
Moore should be notified, and additional recommendations will be provided upon request. Ninyo &
Moore should review the final project drawings and specifications prior to the commencement of
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 10795201 1 | December 27, 2017 13
construction. Ninyo & Moore should perform the needed observation and testing services during
construction operations.
The recommendations provided in this report are based on the assumption that Ninyo & Moore
will provide additional geotechnical evaluations during final design of the project and
geotechnical observation and testing services during construction. ln the event that it is decided
not to utilize the services of Ninyo & Moore during construction, we request that the selected
consultant provide the client with a letter (with a copy to Ninyo & Moore) indicating that they fully
understand Ninyo & Moore's recommendations, and that they are in full agreement with the
design parameters and recommendations contained in this report. Construction of proposed
improvements should be performed by qualified subcontractors utilizing appropriate techniques
and construction materials.
9 LIMITATIONS
The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical
report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care
exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No warranty,
expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions presented
in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations
may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during
construction. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through additional
subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore
should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the
content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document.
This report is intended for design purposes only. lt does not provide sufücient data to prepare an
accurate bid by contractors. lt is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant perform
an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The independent
evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports prepared for the
adjacent areas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 107952011 | December 27, 2017 14
Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site
conditions. lf geotechnical conditions difierent from those described in this report are encountered, our
ofüce should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon request.
It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with time as a result of natural
processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. ln addition, changes to the
applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to government action or
the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in
part or in whole, by changes overwhich Ninyo & Moore has no control.
This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings,
conclusions, and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at
said parties' sole risk.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California I 10795201 1 | Decenber 27,2017 15
1O REFERENCES
American Concrete lnstitute (ACl), 2014, ACI 318-14, Building Code Requirements forStructural Concrete and Commentary.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2010, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings andOther Structures, ASCE 7-10.
Building News, 2015, "Greenbook", Standard Specification for Public Works Construction: BNIPublications.
California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2016, California Building Code (CBC):California Code of Regulations ,Title 24, ParI2, Volumes 1 and 2.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of KnownActive Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada:lnternational Conference of Building Officials: dated February.
California State Transportation Agency, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2015, CorrosionGuidelines (Version 2.1), Division of Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion TechnologyBranch:dated January.
California State Transportation Agency, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2015, StandardSpecifications.
Cao, T., Bryant, W.A., Rowshandel, 8., Branum, D., and Willis, C.J., 2003, The Revised 2002California Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Maps: California Geological Survey: dated June.
Geotracker, 20 17, http://qeotracker. swrcb. ca. qov/.
Google lnc., 20 17, www. qooqleearth. com
Harden, D.R., 2004, California Geology 2nd Edition: Prentice Hall, lnc.
Hartley, J.D., and Duncan, J.M., 1987, E' and lts Variation with Depth: American Society of CivilEngineers (ASCE), Journalof Transportation Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 5: dated September.
Historic Aerials, 2017, www historicaerials.com/viewer
Jennings, C.W., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas: California GeologicalSurvey, California Geological Map Series, Map No. 6.
Ninyo & Moore, ln-house Proprietary Data.
Ninyo & Moore, 2017, Proposal for Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, Otay Water District VistaVereda Water Line Replacement, San Diego County, California, Proposal No. P02-01043:dated July 12.
Norris, R.M. and Webb, R.W., 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition: John Wiley & Sons, lnc.
San Die Regional Standards Committee, 2015, San Diego Regional Standard Drawings: datedJuly 26
Tan, S.S., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Southern Part of the San Diego MetropolitanArea, SanDiego County, California, El Cajon Quadrangle, Plate C, California Geologic SurueyLandslide Hazard ldentification Map No. 33, Open-File Report 95-03.
Tan, S.S., 2002, Geologib Map of the El Cajon 7.5' Quadrangle, San Diego County, California: ADigital Database, Scale 1:24,000.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California I 10795201 1 | Decenber 27 , 2017 16
Todd, V.R., Alvarez, R.M., and Techni Graphic Systems, lnc., 2004, Preliminary geologic map ofthe El Cajon 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, Scale 1:100,000.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1953, Aerial Photographs, FlightAXN-9M-45:dated April 14
United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2012, Flood lnsurance RateMap (FIRM), Map Numbers 06073C1668G: dated May 16.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2008, National Seismic Hazard Maps - FaultParameters Database, World Wide Web,http://qeohazards.usos.qov/cfusion/hazfaults search/.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2015, El Cajon Quadrangle, California, San DiegoCounty, 7.S-Minute Series: Scale 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2017, U.S. Seismic Design Maps website,https://earthquake. usqs.qov/desiqnmaps/us/aoolication. ph o.
USDA, 1953, FlightAXN-9M, Number29,30,81, and 82 Scale 1:20,000: datedApril 14.
WaterAgency's Standards, 2011, Standard Specifications for Potable Water, Recycles Waterand Sewer Faculties, Construction Specifications, Standard Drawings and ApprovedMaterials: dated November 23.
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California | 10795201 1 | Decenber 27 , 2017 17
FIGURES
Ninyo & Moore I Vista Vereda Water Line Replacement, El Cajon, California I 107952011 | December 27,2017
10795201 12126t2417 AOB
tnô9o{ss-+(D-(oq
3ÞTzomx
-!{lÛUiltu
-
^1:r,'ri';r:: rtì ¡Ji;l! 1
7 51r,Jr{ lr.1tl:.:
Â;,¡r:¿ Arr
iosn,: .1.,*
,,,'çi\ /-
;ti
r¡
ar
r, år;1,I
Ij1
ior,
.i.b.¡
1J_
:ì
:ur
trù¡r5i {\,å }
!
!
rù*
Çñ
':it+'
I
õttaali'
!
f
2\
-/ù L¡r
U.:fi
(-,tlv
.'
(-
v¿s
/, i::
û\
-.{l
,i
I-lf
¿
"t4_
'?a " h.1l {.,'. /¡ ')-rî, 'þ. a:¡a¿:?1: i-'
-:-' L; .
a
'{'
! ¡--
\}
,1'Õttll I
,-:,'N
=¡t.tþ.
"', ^
€\'
,;;7J{i/
1ô
??lo
âf,
")n,, l-',-1o2**
=mz{
/%t-t1õ.:þ
{:uIt-Hl
- r\t' -
l,_.1 J
aI
11 ¡.¡l
3,$"¡
I
'/< ¡lËn''
lr
.'{
UJe
!:4ur
>']f
ñiüFqil
-4
I
II
-t\J'
\'¡
Q
.i,lrsil.:le Lr.r
LJ l,rålfHt[ì pl
\, iì iÀ!'fl.1 Ln
!]¡o
'r'
.si'
dr.$
¿.'
!:*'
&
=úñr
Iq
I,':-i:ri¡
îþ
.d,
tî
,1^
'iút)
e,
J'.:
¡I
:-
'-¡rJr[,.rs.
zo!m
onmojozIomzaozØ
zO
ooIõzØ
Ãm
!!ÃoX
il-¡1
ØoCÃol-1.ì
m
A
€onoIo!.oo!
U')tm7moÉ>
-Íi oin zor- =Pz m
õrrr z:27 +g ti ã= IÈí Þt-) > -¡T= -iN zt+ Oì 5= Z
ñF
;ê4rD
6)
6'
Þñ=.
9¿@q
oo
0=
_@ooo
TmmI
-oo
0o
oN
o
BORING LOCATIONS
VISTA VEREDA WATER LINE REPLACEMENTEL CAJON, CALIFORNIA
107952011 | 121',17
NOTE: DIRECTIONS, Dl|MÊNSIONSAND LOCAÍ ONSARÉAPPROXI|\,1AIE. I SOURCE: GOOGLE ÊARrH 2017 1,000
N¡ogoa¡f[ssreGeotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
LEGEND
+
0+ 500
FEET
B-9 BORTNGrD=11 5 TD=TOTAL DEPTH lN FEET
FIGURE 2