The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About037-90 The Village At Sherando - Opequon District - BackfileRECEIPT E022985 AMOUNT DUE $ A AMOUNT PAID " s ' J BALANCE DUE J PAID BY CASH CHECK C7 OTHER Fr c�E�;iCK COuN-1 f DEPT. OF PL JIN NG AND DEVELOPMENT P C. 30X 6011 • 9 COURT SQUARE Wii4 ';TCR, Vli WNIA 2L601 • (703) 665-5651 y Yam; RECEIVED FROM L ' � I ADDRESS _ i THE SU �J M OF FOR BY DOLLARS DAY TIMERS RE -ORDER No. 3221 — Printed in USA RECEIPT N2 022063 AMOUNT DUE Ai UNT PAID BALANCE DUE PAID BY CASH CHECK OTHER REOE;iM COUNP DEPT. OF PLC NWNIG AND DEVELOPMENT P.O. BOX 601 • 9 COURT SQUARE WilaCHLi TER, VIRGINiA 22601 • (703) 665.5651 THE SUM OF -!�� T % , f X '� P /f '� DOLLARS $ l v' FOR c", 36- 96 1 J RECEIPT F AMOUNT DUI AMOUNT PAI BALANCE DU PAID BY CAS CHE OTH 023019 FREDERICK COUNlY DEPT. OF PI -INNING AND DEVELOPMENT P. 0. BOX 601. • 9 COURT SQUARE WINCHESi-M VIRGINIA 22601 • (703) 66:5-5651 ► J -R► SITE PLAN CHECKLIST The application is not complete if the followina are not present: 1. - ply- III �q O _ Two sets of comment sheets from the along with any marked copies of the I vZ VDOT following agencies plan; City of Winchester - dK" 412-919 I Co. San. Auth. _ Co. Hlth. Dept. -OK- c,1250 Inspections Dept. Parks & Rec . -OK- 745 /91 - OK Fire Marshall Airport Authority / 2. 2 copies of the Site Plan application / 3. 5 copies of the plan on a single sheet Wo J 4. 1 reproducible copy of the plan (if required) 5. a 35mm. slide of the plan (if required) * One copy of the application and comment sheets, two copies of the plan and the marked plans from the review agencies should be enclosed in a package which will be forwarded to the County Engineer. TRACKING DATE 6_a2 /.1?0 Application Received Site Plan forwarded to Consulting Engineer Review/Invoice received from Engineer S P. a000 A rcajv d �' 8 IArysi 3 g1�7S Fee Paid (amount $ 31vSO.00 ) Site Plan heard by Planning Commission (if required) Final Site Plan submitted with review agency, Planning Commission, and staff comments addressed. The Village 0 Sherando SITE PLAN APPLICATION Opequon Magisterial District County of Frederick, Virginia Prepared for Dr. John E. & June McAllister Rt. ],Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 (703) 662-4121 August 1990 by gilbert w. clifford & associates, inc. FREDERICKSBURG - WINCHESTER P� L Site Plan Application DATE: 17 August 1990 Application #: Complete the following application: 1. Development's Name: The Village @ Sherando 2. Location of Property: North & Adjacent to St. Rte 277, east f Steiphens Cityn 1750 + east of St. Rte, 641, Ap�rox. 1.75 miles east of I-81, 3. Property Owner's Name: Dr. John E. & June McAllister Address: Rt, 1,Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 Telephone: (703) 662-4121 4. Applicant: same Address: Telephone• Agent: Gilbert W. Clifford & Associates,Inc. Address: 200 N. Cameron St. Winchester, Va Telephone: (703) 667-2139 5. Designer/Design Co.: Address: Telephone: Contact: Tom Price 6. Is this an original or revised Site Plan? Original X Revised 7. Total Area of Parcel to be developed: 15.27 Ac 8. Property Information: a) Tax Map Number: 86 b) Parcel Number: ((A)) 102 c) Tax ID#: 86-A00-0000-0000-01020 d) Current Zoning: RP e) Present Use: Vacant f) Proposed Uses: Townhouses g) Adjoining Property Zoning: RA (Vacant). RP (Residential) & B-2 (Proposed Capitol Properties Shopping Center) i) Magisterial District: Opequon I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Planning Department. I also understand that all required material will be complete prior to the submission of my site plan. Applicant's Signature: rr s s i COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 July 29, 1991 G.W. Clifford & Associates Attn: Mr. Ron Mislowski 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: The Village At Sherando Site Plan Dear Ron: The Frederick County Planning Department administratively approved Site Plan #037-90 of The Village At Sherando on July 22, 1991. This plan calls for the construction of 94 three bedroom townhouse unit, a paved parking lot area complete with 235 regular parking spaces, 7 handicapped parking spaces, curb/gutter, and landscaping, three (3) recreational areas complete with two (2) tot lots, a volleyball -court, and picnic area, a road efficiency buffer along Golladay Road, and all appropriate erosion and sediment control measures. Enclosed is a copy of the approved site plan for your records. If I may answer any questions regarding this letter, please contact me. Sincerely, Ex, 0_. LFJ�-- Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW cc: Mr. Dudley H. Rinker, Opequon District Supervisor Dr. John E. and Mrs. June McAllister THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS 9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 LAND DISTURBING PERMIT ISSUED TO: -- BucUey Lager -- Ray Boyce who has met all requirements of the Frederick County Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance as certified by the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. AGREEMENT This agreement, made this 2nd day of OctobeA 19 90 , by and between Puckeey Lager r u party(s) of the first part, and the County of Frederick, Virginia, party of the second part. Whereas, in consideration of the approval by the party of the second part of this Virginia land disturbance plan and permit for Village at SheAando -- Site Plan #037-90 and the party of the second part requiring the following work to be completed during the land disturbance construction and before final occupancy, the party(s) of the first part or his heirs/ assigns agree to do the following work: 1. !Provide for the adequate control of erosion and sedimentation by ---temporary -and- permanent -control practices and measures - which will be. -implemented` during all phases 'of clearing,- grading and construction and to provide for conformity with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law, Title 21, Chapter.l,.Article 6.1 of the Code of. -Virginia and local code laws. 2. To provide Erosion and Sediment Control as per the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan. 5w � The party(s) of the first part does further agree that an agent of Frederick County shall be permitted entry to the site of the land disturbing activity to inspect the control measures shown in the approved plan. In testimony whereof, the party of the first part has hereunto caused its corporate names and seals to be hereunto affixed, for and in its behalf, by . Ray Boyce and caused this agreement to be acknowledged and delivered for and in its behalf. 13ucUey Lug a Corp ation i BY: In testimony whereof, the party of the second part has hereunto caused its body corporate names and seal to be hereunto affixed, for and in its behalf by Evan A. Wyatt, PtanneA 11 County of Frederick, Virginia BY: —6o�z �o Frede ick Co my Department of Pla ning & to NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not constitute approval of a site plan. This permit is for land disturbance only. 0 -3_ 0 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF FREDERICK I, Renee' S. AAtotta a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby -certify that this day personally appeared before me in my said County, Ray Bocce of 13uaUeu Lac, ens and Evan A. Wyatt, PtanneA 11 of the Frederick County Department of Planning and Development, whose names are signed to the foregoing agreement dated Octobeh 2, 1990 did personally appear before me and acknowledged the same. Given under my hand this 2nd day of OctabeA 19 90 Notary Public My Commission expires on 3123191 aO e I ee :3 76. 00 Qcre5 60 a51�C.7� COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/667-0370 October 12, 1990 G.W. Clifford & Associates Attn: Mr. Ron Mislowski 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: Site Plan Review of Village At Sherando Dear Ron: I have finished my review of the Village At Sherando townhouse site plan. The comments listed in this letter, as well as all other review agency comments, need to be addressed prior to plan approval. 1) Use of properties owned by Huffman 2) Site impervious surface ratio. 3) Height of townhouse. 4) Extension of sidewalk past unit 17 5) Location of crosswalks on Golladay 6) Location of pedestrian accessways development. and County of Frederick. to end of parking lot. Road. in relation to townhouse 7) Location of floodplain in relation to townhouse development. 8) Include parking lot landscaping requirements of section 3-3- 2.11. 9) Road efficiency buffer along Golladay Road (collector road) is a reduced buffer which requires full screening as per section 3- 12-2.2. Once the revised Master Development Plan is approved and the following comments are addressed, I will recommend approval of this site plan. If I may answer any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW 9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 APPLICANT'S CHECKLIST 21 S) Your site plan should include the following: Administrative Information Y N = 1. Name of proposed development 2. Name and address of owner _ 3. Name and address of developer 4. Name, address, and phone number of designer 5. Certificate of surveyor, engineer, or architect 6. Date plan prepared and date of revisions 7. A listing of all conditions placed on the site as a result of a conditional use permit or conditional zoning approval ,[ 8. A space labeled "approved by the Zoning Administrator" for the approval signature and date of approval General Site Information Y N 9. Location map (scale 1:2000) _ 10. Magisterial District of site ✓ _ 11. Scale of site plan (not to exceed 1:50) — 12. North Arrow 13. Zoning of site 14. Use nd zoning of adjoining properties Lots/Uses/Buildings & Structures Y N 15. Surveyed boundaries for all lots and parcels _ 16. Acreage of all lots included in the plan 17. The location and dimensions of all required setbacks and yard areas _ 18. Location of all buildings, structures, and uses 19. The proposed use of each building, structure, and / area 20. The location and type of all dwelling units NA21. Ground floor area and total floor area of all buildings with FAR calculations for commercial and industrial zoning districts 22. The height of all buildings and structures 23. The location and dimension of all signs 7 Lots/Uses/Buildings & Structures (con't) Y N 24. Location of outdoor lighting fixtures 25. Location and nature of outdoor storage areas 26. ocation and area of common open space 7 _ 27. n and description of all recreation facilities _ 28. Location of sidewalks and pedestrian ways 29. Location of outdoor trash receptacles Roads Y/ N 30. Name and number of existing and planned streets on and adjoining the site 31. Location of existing and planned streets on and adjoining the site 32. Dimensions, boundaries, width, pavement, and — construction of planned roads 33. Location and dimensions of all proposed entrances from public right-of-ways Utilities Y N 34. Location of all utilities, including sewer and water lines with the size of lines, mains, and laterals 35. Location and width of all easements, including access, utility and drainage easements 36. Location and nature of fire lanes, fire hydrants, and all other facilities necessary to meet the Fire Code requirements Parking Y N 37. Calculations describing the required number of parking and loading spaces ✓_ _ 38. Location and dimensions of all parking and loading spaces, driveways, parking aisles, curbing, and other features to be used — 39. Location and dimension of all handicapped spaces 1.1 it Natural Features Y N 40. Existing and finished contour lines 41. Location of steep slopes, woodlands, floodplains, wetlands, sinkholes, and other environmental features 42. Location of streams and drainage ways Landscaping Y N 43. Landscaping plan describing location and types of plants to be used 44. Location of required buffers and screening with cross sections or profiles Erosion and Sediment Control Y N 45. A stormwater management plan with run off calculations and location and description of facilities to be used 46. Soil erosion and sedimentation control plan with location, types, and examples of provisions to be used 9 • g. w. clifford & associates, Inc. Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square Winchester, Va. 22601 Dear Evan, 6 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-213 9 Fax: 703-665-0493 September 26, 1990 Re: Village @ Sherando I am enclosing a revised set of the plans for this townhouse project for your review. There have been a few modifications made which are important from a site plan review standpoint. I would appreciate your review of these plans and look forward to receiving your comments. If you should have any questions, please call. Regards, on Mislowsky, P.E. RAM/ckd cc: Dr. John McAllister 1] G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 MEMORANDUM: To: John Popovich, Shenandoah Gas Company Linden Lewis, C & P Telephone Jack Ambrose, Potomac Edison From: Ron Mislowsky Re: Village at Sherando, Utilities Date: October 23,1990 The design of this 94 unit townhouse project has attempted to retain as many trees as possible. By limiting graded areas, we have been able to achieve natural screening and provide shaded recreation areas. Our layout has provided a utility strip and easement along the front of all townhouses. We would encourage and appreciate all attempts to locate utilities in the areas provided. The Frederick County Planning Department requires trees to be preserved. Screening and buffers, required by the County, are achieved in part by maintaining certain tree lines. As you may know, the most important screening is along the perimeter boundary of the site. It is important to preserve the trees in this area. Any assistance you can give would be appreciated. In these times of ecological awareness, we all need to do our part to save the trees. If you have any questions or comments, please call. BOC - M R. EVg ry L0110 -r r • • G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Evan, 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 October 25,1990 9k03c1 qc) Re: Village at Sherando As you know the Planning Commission has approved The Village at Sherando Subdivision. Additionally, I have gotten FCSA approval and I believe VDOT will give approval within a week. The Fire Marshall and Parks and Recreation are also satisfied. Buckley-Lages, the contractor has started clearing and grubbing on the site. The plans were submitted to the County in August, and I still have not gotten any comments on the site plan issues. Would it be possible for you to give me an indication of when I could expect to hear something. Time is becoming of the essence, and any assistance you could provide would be appreciated. If you have any questions, please call. Regards, ryv&4tl� Ron Mislowsky, P.E. cc: Dr. McAllister RAM / kf 0 G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 November 5,1990 Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Re: Village at Sherando Dear Evan, I am enclosing the approval from V.D.O.T. on this project. This, I believe is the last agency approval needed. If you require anything else, please let me know. I am also enclosing a set of the most up to date plans. Regards, � Ron Mislowsky, P. . RM/clh cc: Dr. John E. McAllister 0 C� G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Evan, 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 November 15,1990 Re: The Village at Sherando Thanks for your comments on The Village at Sherando site plan. We have revised the plan as follows: ok - The use of the Huffman and Frederick County properties is shown on sheet 2 of 12. e k - The site impervious ratio is .32 and is shown on sheet 2 of 12. ol< - The maximum townhouse height is 35'. As the builder and style has not yet been determined, the exact height is not now known. The maximum heights is shown on sheet 2 of 12. ok - The sidewalk at unit 17 has been extended, and is shown on sheet 5 of 12. - The location of the crosswalks on Golladay Road are shown on sheets 2 and 5 of 12. Two crossings are required by the MDP and two are provided. Safety and accessibility dictated their location. ZS .�} -tr-�. sv ,�;e,�-1— -.For cross,..)oJ 1c L,)tJ I� ? ��t, h� - The pedestrian access way connecting the townhouses to the G r commercial land is shown on sheet 5 of 12. All linear O�C, % sidewalks through the site are considered pedestrian �aQ walkways. i111 NOV I 6 I 1U 0 • - The approximate location of the 100 year flood plain is shown on sheet 4 of 12. - The parking lot landscaping and road efficiency buffers are shown as required on sheet 2 of 12. The cross -sections on sheet 11 A of 12 have also been revised to clarify the intent. If you have any questions concerning this please let me know. cc: Dr. McAllister RAM / kf Regards, &&41(- 4opnMislowsky, P.E. NOV 1 6 19,, , I�� • COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/667-0370 November 27, 1990 G.W. Clifford & Associates Attn: Mr. Ron Mislowski 200 North'Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 RE: The Village At Sherando Site Plan. Dear Ron: I have had an opportunity to review the revised Village At Sherando site plan against the Final Master Plan that was approved by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors on November 14, 1990. Once - the following comments are addressed, I will recommend approval of this plan: 1) A 50 foot Active Buffer with landscaped screen ,needs to be provided along the entire property boundary that separates the B-2 tract from the RP tract (as specified on the Master Plan) . This buffer needs to be shown as a totally landscaped easement at least 10 feet in depth, with a density of 3 plants (1/3 deciduous) per 10 linear feet that are at least 4 feet .in height at planting reaching a minimum height of 6 feet at maturity. 2) The reduced road efficiency buffer along Golladay Road requires the 6 foot high berm as well as all elements of the landscaped screen. The white pine screening on 8 foot centers needs to be replaced with a totally landscaped easement at least 10 foot in depth with a density of 3 plants (1/3 deciduous) per 10 linear feet at least 4 feet in height at planting reaching a minimum height of 6 feet at maturity. 3) The pedestrian walkway connection to the B-2 parcel needs to be constructed now so that concept isn't lost over time. Also, a crosswalk should be provided as a link between units 8 and 81 as this is part of the pedestrian walkway. 9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 once these revisions are provided, I will recommend approval of this site plan. I will need 4 copies of the revised site plan for final approval. If I may answer any questions regarding this letter, please contact me. Sincerely, Evan A. Wyatt Planner II EAW i • r G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Evan, 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 November 28,1990 Re: The Village at Sherando The comments concerning the site plan in your letter of 27 November 1990 have taken me by surprise. I have attempted to explain our position on each here. 1. The 50 ft. active buffer you mention is clearly on the commercial tract, and will be required to be implemented at the time the site plan for that parcel is prepared. We discussed this with Kris the last time you were here. I thought we had agreed on this point. 2. The road efficiency buffer on the site plan reflects what is required by the approved Master Development Plan. As you can see on the MDP, white pines on 8 ft. centers are specified. Additionally, it is obvious from the MDP that the berm does not extend the entire length of the site. The site plan requires a berm that is slightly shorter than that shown on the MDP, but where the berm ends, the development is 10 ft. above the road surface, certainly common sense, and a concern for how the grading would actually appear would weigh in favor of the grading now specified on the site plan. It is our opinion that the site plan meets the intent of the MDP. The only actual difference in this area is 20± ft. of berm length. 3. It is easy to require the walkway connection to the B-2 parcel now since the county will not be financing the installation and probable relocation of that walkway in the future. It is not unreasonable to wait until the plans for the commercial tract are prepared to finalize any connections. Installing the crosswalk at this time would direct pedestrians thru the center of a three way intersection of a heavily travelled street. We already have one and possibly two unsafe crosswalks across Golladay f 0 11 Road, I don't think we need to create the opportunity for a third. We will provide the crosswalk between Lots 8 and 81 as you requested. We have been waiting for Site Plan approval for three months now. I would appreciate resolving these issues as soon as possible. If it would be helpful, I would be happy to schedule a meeting to involve all interested parties. I look forward to hearing from you. cc: Dr. McAllister RAM/kf Sincerely, Oonislowsky, P.E. COUNTY of FREDERICI Department of Planning and Developmen 703/665-565 FAX 703/667-037 November 29, 1990 Mr. Ron Mislowsky, P.E. G.W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, Va. 22601 RE: Village at Sherando Site Plan Dear Ron: Let me start by saying that we arranged to meet with you on November 9, 1990 in an effort to head off a delay that would have resulted if the pending revision to the Village at Sherando MDP had been approved as it was drawn at that time. This was a courtesy which was made possible by the fact that Evan Wyatt had determined that the pending site plan showed significant inconsistencies with the revised MDP. As I would assume you know, and as was stated in our meeting of November 911 the layout of a residential site plan must conform to the approved MDP. Had the MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors as it was drawn, you would have either been going through the MDP revision process again, or making major revisions to your site plan. This was an effort to save you and your client time and money. Evan's letter to you dated November 27, 1990 specifies items which we also discussed in our November 9 meeting. Your response, dated November 28, contains a number of inaccuracies. Specifically; Item number one of your response is false, I would refer you to article 3-12-4.2 of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance. This article clearly states that a buffer is required on land zoned Residential Performance where it abuts land zoned B-2. Item number two of your letter is also false. Here I would refer you to article 3-12-5.1 which states that a road efficiency buffer may be reduced if full screenin is provided. Evan has indicated in his letter what is necessary to meet the requirements of full screening. We can discuss details of the berm location. Regarding item number three; if your client is willing to provided a letter of credit or other form of assurance to cover the cost of installation of the sidewalk in question we could allow for a delay in its construction. Concerning of placement of the crosswalks; your design has attempted to 9 Court Square - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 It 0 minimize, what was supposed to be a pedestrian walkway system. If you feel the location of the crosswalks is unsafe, we can certainly negotiate their relocation. I believe I stated this point at our meeting. Further, let me state that it was you who placed the crosswalks in their present location. As to your statement that you have been waiting for three months for the site plan to be approved; you should know, and you may recall my stating, that we cannot approve a site plan prior to final MDP approval. This approval was just received on November 15,1990. If you or your clients do not wish to provide the revisions and/or assurances necessary to meet the ordinance requirements, we will have no choice but to deny the site plan application. Let me close by saying that your confrontational attitude and lack of willingness to cooperate on this and other matters is not what this department has come to expect from G.W. Clifford. I would hope that in the future we might be able to resolve differences without resorting to such tactics. Res ectfully Kris C. Tierne"y Deputy Director cc. Chuck Maddox Dr. Mc Allister 0 0 G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Evan Wyatt Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Evan, 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 December 14,1990 Re: Village at Sherando Based on your letter and my meeting with Kris last week, we have again revised the landscaping to meet the County's requirements. The road efficiency buffer now reflects the three trees per 10 linear ft. with one third of them to be deciduous which the ordinance specifies. Kris indicated the buffer provided along the commercial boundary was fine. The cross walk you requested has been added at Lot 8. I have talked to Dr. McAllister concerning the sidewalk connection to the south . He guarantees that the connection will be made upon development of the adjacent commercial land. As the connection is required by the master plan and he is required to bond the entire project already, this guarantee and the note on the plans seems sufficient. Dr. McAllister does not plan to move out of the area anytime, so you will always know where to find him. Hopefully, this satisfies all of your concerns. I look forward to getting this plan approved. If you have any questions, please let me know. I've enclosed five copies of the sheets that have been revised. If you need anything else, please let me know. cc: Dr. McAllister RM/clh Sincerely, Mislowsky, P. �V Ic ULU 1 4 em o3-7_qo /~; yet <�1 • � ��r'�~ t COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRCjINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. 0. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COY'AISSIONE R (703) 984-4133 RESIDENT ENGINEER April 1, 1991 Mr. Charles E. Maddox, P.E., V.P. Ref: The Villages at Sherando/ C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Golliday Road 200 North Cameron Street Route 277 Post Office Box 2104 Frederick County Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Chuck: I am writing with regard to the proposed double 9'x4' box culvert within the referenced development. If the developer elects to use precast materials in the construction of the structure we would appreciate the opportunity to review any shop drawings of the materials when they are available. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please give me a call. Sincerely, W'i11iam H. Bushman Trans. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Sr. RBC / rf xc: Hr. J. C. Heatwole Hr. L. L. Misenheimer Mr. F. E. Wymer Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. Tom Whitacre RC�COML` WR- - 2199I i,j `U , - _ _ . A TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY of VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COMMISSIONER ( 703 ) 984-4133 RESIDENT ENGINEER November 1, 1990 Mr. Ron Mislowsky Ref: The Villages at Sherando/Golladay Road C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Route 277 200 North Cameron Street Frederick County P. O. Box 2104 Winchester, VA 22601 Dear Ron: This is to acknowledge receipt of your revised plans dated October, 1990 to the above referenced location. The plans appear satisfactory and are approved. Please advise the developer accordingly. I offer the following comments: Materials used and method of construction shall apply to current observed VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications applicable during construction of this development. Our review and comments are general in nature. Should conditions in the field exist such that additional measures are warranted, such measures shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Department prior to inclusion into the Secondary Road System. Attached is a copy of the minimum requirements and information needed prior to acceptance of subdivision streets into the Secondary System. This is the responsibility of the developer. All drainage is to be carried within the right-of-way in ditch lines or gutters along the street to a pipe or drainage easement. It would appear flared end sections may be appropriate on the culverts which are on the Golladay Road right-of-way. A determination will be made during construction. The appropriate land use permits shall be obtained before any work is performed on the State's right-of-way. A joint permit issued with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority will be required to cover the proposed 10" watermain crossing of Route 277. We would suggest the encasement of this crossing be extended to the northern right-of-way line because of the potential for future road widening. A permit will also be required to cover the construction of the temporary Golladay Road connection. As we have previously discussed, the permit assembly will need to address the possibility of a traffic signal at this location if Golladay Road is to be extended to Westmoreland Drive at this tir,>Ie. This can most likely be handled by a signed agreement and the posting of a bond by the developer. • 0 Mr. Ron Mislowsky November 1, 1990 Page #2 The contractor shall notify VDOT when work is to begin or cease for any undetermined length of time. VDOT will also require (forty-eight) 48 hours notice for inspections. If mailboxes are to be placed along the roadway fronting lots, a minimum of four (4') feet shall be between the edge of pavement and the front of mailbox as shown on the attached sketch. Any entrances constructed from the referenced street(s) shall meet VDOT minimum standards. This is the developer's responsibility Any signs to be installed will be in accordance with attachments. I suggest any utilities and/or storm sewer placed within the proposed right-of-way be backfilled completely with C.R. Type 21-A Stone. This will greatly reduce the possibility of any pavement settlement. Please ensure both the developer and the County understands this Department will not be responsible for maintenance of the asphalt walkway within the Golladay Road right-of-way. The proposed double 9'x4' box culvert at Station 21+90, Golladay Road, is to be constructed to our 1987 Standards. A sub -surface investigation by a private firm will be required of the area prior to construction. Said investigation may be coordinated with our District Materials Section in Staunton. We would suggest the investigation be completed as soon as possible so any construction delays may be avoided. The developer will be responsible for paying the full salary and expense of a State assigned Inspector during construction of the box culvert and any permit work on the Route 277 right-of-way. Should you need additional information, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Transp. Resident Engineer 1 By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Sr. RBC / rf Attachments xc: Mr. J. C. Heatwole, Mr. T. R. Blac urn, Mr. J. B. Diamond, Mr. F. F. Wymer, Mr. R. W. Watkins, Dr. John McAllister, Mr. Mike Carroll, Mr. John Whitacre V r� OT cam, C o/ COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRCjINIA\ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. 0. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COMMISSIONER (703) 984-4133 RESIDENT ENGINEER October 15, 1990 pzI_CIZ Mr. Ron Mislowsky, P.E. Ref: The Villages at Sherando/ C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. Golladay Road 200 North Cameron Street Route 277 Post Office Box 2104 Frederick County Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Ron: Leon further review of the above referenced development's site plans dated September, 1990 please find our recommendations on the attached plans marked in red and as follows: 1. Eliminate the curb and gutter on the entrance taper to the townhouses. 2. The typical section is to be revised to show a 4' width and 16" depth for normal roadway ditch. A 2' flat bottom ditch will be required right of Station 16+00 to 22�00. The shoulder width is to be increased to 9' where installation of guardrail is required. Again, the type, exact length and placement of the guardrail are to be determined after fine grading is completed. 3. A pipe will be required left of approximate Station 19+00 to divert ditch water from the east side of the proposed sidewalk to the west. 4. It appears the proposed sanitary sewer line located under the proposed double 9'x4' box culvert will be in conflict with the bottom slab of the box. Therefore, the sanitary sewer line is to be relocated outside the limits of the structure as noted on Sheets 5 and 6. The 10" waterline could remain under the box if it were lowered using an encasement pipe with a minimum 18" separation between the pipe and bottom of the box. Please revise and resubmit four (4) copies for final approval. Should any changes be deemed necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recormndations. Should you have any questions concerning the above, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Trans-. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Si:ec. Senior Enclosures xc: �L•. J. C. Heatwole, Nr. F. E. vmer, Hr. R. W. Watkins, Mr. dike Carroll, STY. Jc'nn ?(_Allister - TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY �0' U-tu � uNl�-!` ' � o-ri Vool Cr p COMMONWEALTH of VIRCjINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN COMMISSIONER (703) 984-4133 RESIDENT ENGINEER October 5, 1990 Mr. Michael L. Carroll, Exec. Vice-Pres. Ref: Temp. Construction Entrance Buckley-Lages, Inc. The Villages at Sherando/Golladay Rd. P. O. Box 3231 Route 277 (Approx. 0.50 Mi. E. Rte. 1075) Winchester, VA 22601 Frederick County Dear Mike: This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated October 3, 1990 and request to construct a temporary construction entrance at the above referenced location. As requested you are given permission to install the temporary construction entrance at the location shown on the site plan prepared by G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. dated September, 1990. This letter is to be considered your temporary permit until a land use permit is applied for. The following are a part of this permit agreement: 1. While working on the State's right-of-way it will be necessary to use "Men Working" signs which must be erected prior to starting work and removed daily. 2. Traffic control will be in strict accordance with the attached. 3. Positive drainage is to be maintained within the right-of-way at all times. A minimum 15"00' C.M.P. culvert will be required under the entrance. 4. All work on the right-of-way is to be confined to the temporary entrance location only. 5. A minimum 8" of coarse aggregate by 20' in width will be required to be placed from the edge of pavement and extended back onto private property far enough to prevent carrying of mud onto the roadway. 6. Any damages to the pavement structure of Route 277 adjacent to this entrance will be corrected by your firm to the satisfaction of the Virginia Department of Transportation. 7. It should be understood any disturbed turf on the State's right-of-way will be topsoiled and reseeded. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY Mr. Michael L. Call October 5, 1990 Page #2 8. The Department of Transportation will not be held liable for suit should such result from this operation. 9. This permit is being issued for 180 days. A formal land use permit application (Form CE-7) will be applied for within this time frame. If these requirements are not followed then this temporary construction entrance permit may be revoked. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Transp. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior RBC/rf Attachments xc: Mr. F. E. Wymer Mr. W. L. Stover Mr. R. W. Watkins G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. a COMMONWEALTH 'EALT H of V1RQr1N1A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 RAY D. PETHTEL EDINBURG, 22824 COMMISSIONER (703) 984-4133 September 28, 1990 Mr. Ron Mislowsky, P.E. C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Post Office Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Ron: WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN RESIDENT ENGINEER Ref: The Villages at Sherando/ Golladay Road Route 277 Frederick County oz,1-qp Enclosed you will find the above referenced project's revised site plans submitted with your letter of September 26, 1990. We will be unable to continue our review of the plans until all recommendations in our previous letter to you dated August 27, 1990 have been addressed. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to call. RBC / rf Attachments xc: Mr. F. E. Wymer Mr. R. W. Watkins Mr. Mike Carroll Sincerely, William H. Bushman Transp. Resident Engineer By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior �CT TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRCj INIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 278 EDINBURG, 22824 (703) 984-4133 August 27, 1990 Mr. Tom Price C/O G. W. Clifford & Assoc., Inc. 200 North Cameron Street Post Office Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 Dear Tom: WILLIAM H. BUSHMAN RESIDENT ENGINEER Ref: The Villages at Sherando/ Golladay Road Route 277 Frederick County As requested we have reviewed the above referenced project's site plans dated June, 1990. Our recommendations may be found on the attached plans marked in red and as follows: 1. The future Golladay Road intersection with Route 277 is to be revised to include a 100' storage lane, 150' taper and 50' radii as noted. The temporary connection is to be completely removed when the future connection is constructed. Standard VDOT stop signs will be required at locations noted. 2. The grade of the Golladay Road intersection with Route 277 is to be adjusted as noted. 3. The surface course SM-2A shown on the typical sections are to be revised to a minimum of 1.5" depth. Also, our new pavement designations should be used on all typical sections. 4. Inlet structure #17 is to be changed to a standard DI-7 and pipe culvert #C-4 is to be increased to 18" in size. 5. It appears the pedestrian walkway will have to be moved outside of the right-of-way due to the location of the drainage ditch along the roadway. 6. Standard EC-2 erosion protection is to be changed to standard EC-3 with a section of paved ditch on each side to ends of the box culvert as noted. 7. The existing drainage easements within the Fredericktowne development should be included on these site plans. 8. Standard CD-2 underdrains and EC-1 are to be installed at locations noted. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY r • 0 Mr. Tom Price August 27, 1990 Page #2 9. The size of the box culvert should be revised to a 6'x4' size in accordance with our Road & Bridge Standards, 1989 Edition. Guardrail will be required on both sides of Golladay Road where the box culvert is located. The exact lengths and placement are to be determined after fine grading is completed. 10. The proposed 100' curb and gutter taper at the townhouse development entrance is to be deleted and a standard 36' asphalt taper included. Also, if possible, the interior parking lot entrances should be shifted away from the main entrance to Golladay Road to provide additional spacing. 11. The Golladay Road intersection radii with both Westmoreland Drive and Jefferson Village Court are to be increased to 50' as noted. At this time we would like to express our concern for potential problems which may arise at the Golladay Road intersection with Route 277. It is our understanding the owner of the Capital Properties parcel to the south of Route 277 has proffered to Frederick County to install a traffic signal, which will most probably be warranted, at the future intersection. However, construction of the future intersection by your client or the development of the Capital Properties parcel may be years off. Therefore, through copy of this letter to Frederick County we are recommending funds for the future traffic signal be required of the developers upfront and said funds be held in escrow until needed. Please revise and resubmit four (4) copies for final approval. Should any changes be deemed necessary, please design them to meet or exceed the above recommendations. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, William H. Bushman Transp. Resident Engineer gd"'� t - q,:u " ,- By: Robert B. Childress Hwy. Permits & Subd. Spec. Senior RBC / rf Enclosures xc: Mr. R. L. Moore Mr. J. B. Diamond Mr. J. C. Heatwole Mr. F. E. Wymer Mr. R. W. Watkins Frederick County Sanitati*uthority Post Office Box 619 WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 Phone 665-5690 TO 141 CL/f ce5 �4 -i<'S 5-0C1,4i T,FS i,YC 1�iNc�h%FS 7,�•;' V,4 .�: 6n/ WE ARE SENDING YOU 0 Attached ❑ Under separate cover via L [EUUW OIL TURSON DU UM DATE"O�P"� � V Yv JOS NO. ATTENTION fi'oiv RE y/L L � LR� .�► T S�E�,,,�� v ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ICJ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ the following items: ❑ Specifications COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: El For approval B Approved as submitted ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted > ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS / SST W" Y COPY TO SIGNED:,-�� h A ,Y 1.. ON Mgmpq a _ • ..i . . to)• Q Frederick County Sanitation Authority ATTN: Wellington Jones, Engineer/Director P.O. Box 618, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5690 The Frederick County Sanitation Authority is located on the second floor of the Old Frederick County Courthouse in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: ! ! - • � .\g1-1 C l fi'i:.•, iitiY'=yi• ..� -c •r � • • • Name of development and/or decription of the request: Location: �• • *. -• • - -.9-ra-IME611 I two .•. ! Sanitation Authority Comments: 7 Z / 7' S - rO �9h' CT-i�- R,E-YP4W/T, Sanit . Signature & Date: S�i�r ler 10X,4� (NOTICE TO SANITATION,,-fEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO NOTICE TQ APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach TWO copies of your plans and/or application form. 6/25/90 memo �• T O : Re* A1154 0 FROM: Wh//TAc" DATE: SUBJECT: Frederick County Sanitation Authority Post Office Box 618 , Winchester, Virginia 22601 Telephone: (703) 665-5690 _ WORk A64 77-4447 / NT a Gs/NEss -*�F Ry. s7/c Til�E �'Ly s,F' of ?Z 0 to f REC,EIVED 11 u?1 2 2 1990 REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN & SUBDIVISION COMMENTS Frederick County Fire Marshall P.O. Box 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5651 The Frederick County Fire Marshall is located at 21 Court Square in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Dr. John E. & June McAllister Rt. 1,Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 (703) 662-4121 ft=ji: G.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC, P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Va 22601 Att-n:Tam::,Priceg (703)667-2139 Name of development and/or decription of the request: The Village at Sherando Location: North & Adjacent to St Rte 277, east of Stephens City and 1750 ± east of St. Rte. 641. Approx. 1.75 miles east of I-81, Fire Marshall Comments: Fire Marshall Signature & Date: c� ��.► �'� yo (NOTICE TO FIRE MARSHALL - PLEASE TUM THIS FORM TO') NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach TWO copies of your plans and/or application form. 6/25/90 Cartcoi No. 0522VOI52 Date Recciva" oza� j "nto . . ............. Appiicant Name W. Cliffor! Associate.,-, eiddress c/o Tom P i.7 i c e 0-7--kiX ...... .. . ... . WincheEtev, Viyjinia 22601 - - --------- . ...... . ............. "roject Name The Viiiagn ap Sherand,_1 -none No. 703-667-2129 ype ot Application Site Plan Cu7rent Zoning RR lnf Dun Fire Co. I '.,I ist Due Rescua Co. 1 ztior District opequol-, RECOMMENDATIONS wtomatic sprimlor System RES!dentiaL Sprinkler SyStW �uhommtic Fire Alarm System 0 t tie I -- -------- - nmenaencv Vehicle Accwss. Adequate inadequate Not identified Fire Lanes Requirew. Yes c Comments: Post fire lanes an ail fire hydrant locations. . ........ .. ------ ......... . . ..... Roadnay/Aislewy Widths; Adequate X inadaQuate -C w azat do Netud; vez, Comments. Not 10entifiod Oppr A )PV 0 vs-i woz AaywTied "vx:- Pat 010:1 .0nuartal AZL= L /An Tc nrc"Idw 1 7 0 0 0 0 Y 0 . ....... . ------ �Sxqn7srj lure, ... . ...... .... Fasna Qn pas !�PAI . . .................... 70 iE tZ4nnals . .. ......... 7 0 nl�n� tc�qlm, . .... . nly annunz in vonFcnmace - .... ... ....... . "-A SA toil Z� ss wamar" hinvis: witn 5 9 . ....... F1 swyv�n-:� .. . . ....... . .. ........ mvr-- . . .... ..... .. ........ ...... ..... . ...... . REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN & SUBDIVISION COMMENTS Frederick County Inspections Department ATTN: Kenneth L. Coffelt, Director P.O. Box 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5651 The Frederick County Inspections Department is located at 9 Court Squard in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Dr, John E. & June McAllister Rt l,Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 (703) 662-4121 SMV: C.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC. P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Va 22601 Attn•Tom Price (703)667-2139 _ f Name of development and/or decription of the request: The Village at Sherando Location: _North & Ad Zacent to St Rte 277 east of Stephens City and 1750 ± east of St. Rte 641 AT)prox 1.75 miles east of I-81 Inspections Department Comments: ni ✓ LA Inspectignature & Dat (NOPICt TO INSPECTIONS - e`.LIEEASFFRE"A"TURN THIS F6KM TO AG NP. Fi ) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your plans and/or application form. 6/25/90 • 0 REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN & SUBDIVISION COMMENTS Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department ATTN: James Doran, Director P.O. Box 601, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 665-5678 The Frederick County Parks & Recreation Department is located on the second floor of the Frederick County Administration Building, 9 Court Square, Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Dr. John E.& June McAllister Rt. 1,Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 (703) 662-4121 ,6At7ents G.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC, P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Va 22601 `At RpmpPrice (703) 667-2139 Name of development and/or decription of the request: The Village at Sherando Location: North & Adlacent to St. Rte 277, east of Stephens City and 1750 ± east of St. Rte. 641. Approx. 1.75 miles east of I-81. Parks & Recreation Department Comments: With reference to recreation unit #3, one volleyball court does not fulfill the intended requirements for a recreation unit. Additional amenities must be added before this could be considered a recreation unit. I would also recommend that the name of the development be rejected. Parks Signature and Date: 7/11/90 (NOTICE TO PARKS - PLEASE TURN THIS FORM TO THE -AGENT,.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, r please attach a copy of your plans andJor ajoiplication form. A 70WOK rw^ Aomt, To RECRE-A--na"J 3 6!25/90 -�rl {�ce»►T,or3 Net io►3u£MS4T *-3 W 1'TK MR '"Ct3 I-�oTT- 0,= PwrtKs E �C.. Owl '1 t Z51 `11EAo . -7 9I • 0 REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN & SUBDIVISIONS COMMENTSS City of Winchester, Virginia ATTN: Tim Youmans, Planning Director 15 N. Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601 ~. (703) 667-1815 The City of Winchester offices are located in Rouss City Hall at _ 15 North Cameron Street in Winchester, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Dr. John E. & June McAllister Rt. 1,Box 198 Stephenson Va 2265 (703) 662-4121 Agent: G.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC, P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Va 22601 AttneTom Pri (703)667-2139 Name of development and/or decription of the request: The Village at Sherando Location: North & Adjacent to St Rte 277. east of Stephens City and 1750 + east of St. Rte 641 Approx 1.75 miles east of I-81 City of Winchester Comments: City Signature and Date: (NOTICE TO CITY - PLEASE RETURN TH F TO THE AGE NOTICE M APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Please also attach a copy of your plans and/or application form. 6/25/90 t 1 E 'E"I V LE D u .. i' 2 2 19.i 0 ... = .., "ram ' �'> .f REQUEST FOR SATE PLAN & SUBDIVISION COMMENTS Frederick -Winchester Health Department ATTN: Herbert L. Sluder, Sanitation Engineer P.O. Box 2056, Winchester, Virginia 22601 (703) 667-9747 The Frederick -Winchester Health Department is located at the intersection of Smithfield Avenue and Brick Kiln Road, if you prefer to hand deliver this review form. Applicant's name, address and phone number: Dr. John E. & June McAllister Rt. 1,Box 198 Stephenson, Va 22656 (703) 662-4121 Agehf: G.W. CLIFFORD & ASSOC P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Va 22601 Wi6:rTom Price (703)667-2139 Name of development and/or decription of the request: The Villaae at Sherando Location: North & Adjacent to St Rte 277 east of Stephens City and 1750 ± east of St. Rte. 641 Ap_prox 1.75 miles east of I-81 Health Department Comments: Health Signature and Date:94?4" 6/1"-25- _ (NOTICE TO HEALTH DEPT. - PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM TO,;0QF4NT.) NOTICE TO APPLICANT It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their review. Also, please attach a copy of your plans and/or application form. 6/25/90 1 0 0 July 18, 1990 Wayne Miller, Zoning Administrator Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square, P.O. ENGINEERS Box 601 ARCHITECTS Winchester, Va. 22601 `o11�g19202�� h� N 4Wr r SCIENTISTS Re: The Village At Sherando (Site Plan) 17555.096 Dear Mr. Miller, We have completed the review of the above referenced site plan and have the following comments. A. ACCESS ISSUES 1. We have no comments of the access issues except it appears that the designated construction entrance shown on the plans will be the main access into the project from Route 277 until the future Golladay connection is built. At the time the future connection is planned, consideration will have to be given to the possibility of providing turn lanes at the intersection of Route 277 and proposed Golladay Road based on the proposed and future traffic projections for this project and the surrounding properties. B. DRAINAGE 1. The grading plan is adequate for rough site grading, utilities and public improvements. Prior to construction of the townhouse units we will need a detailed grading plan for the units to include the following: - Floor elevations - Building entrance elevations, stairs, etc. - Spot elevations at building corners, entrances and other critical features such as curb and gutter returns, high and low points, drainage inlets etc. ■ 11240 Waples Mill kwd Fairfar, Virginia 22030 703.385.3566 Telkf x 703.385.83/9 y • • 2. We performed a detailed review of the stormwater computations which include the flood routing of the 2, 10 and 100 year storms for the upstream 475 acre drainage area to Wright's Run to verify the adequacy of the proposed box culverts under Golladay Road using TR-55. Our calculations show that the culvert flow is --- - governed by the outlet control and not the inlet control as indicated in the design computation. 6 o6li[i ENGINEERS We came up with a 100 year headwater elevation of ARCHITECTS 713.53 at Golladay Road which is a difference of SCIENTISTS 0.5 feet from the design calculation elevation of 713.02 feet. With the accuracy limitations existing with run-off calculations, this is not a substantial difference in the answer between the two methods used, however, it does make enough difference that there could be concern in critical areas. The main problem is the impact of the 100 year flood elevation on lots 33 and 32. We see a 2' to 5' increase in the surface water elevation behind the culverts which will render almost 90% of lot 33 unbuildable if adequate precautions are not taken into consideration. There is the need to know the present status of lots 33 thru 29. It is not clear if there are existing buildings on these lots which will adversely be affected by the 100 year flood elevation. This will result in the need for an alternative design of the drainage culvert. If the lots are vacant substantial grading will be required to make them buildable. The lot owner/builders will need to be made aware of the flood elevations and flood plain limits so they do not build within it. For this reason we recommend the following if the lots are not already built on. - The flood plain limit and building floor elevations on lots 32 and 33 will have to be indicated on the plan. - We suggest that the flood plain limit should be shown of the plats of lots 33 thru 29. 3. The Master Development Plan (reference: Evans/Snyder) does not call for a provision of storm water management for this project. It is our opinion based on current studies that storm water management is needed within the County and 0 it should be considered somewhere within the total planned development. We would like to see that the future plans within this Master Plan Development utilize storm water management which will also accommodate this particular phase of the development. C. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS We have no comments on the erosion and SCIENTISTS sedimentation control plan except that the inlet protection as required will need to be labelled on the plan. Early grading permits can be granted on this plan as well as the on -site utilities. However, before the Golladay crossing is permitted the drainage issues must be resolved. All proper erosion control measures will need to be in place prior to clearing and grading work. If you have any questions, please let me know. Si DO OHU & ASSOC ATES, INC. Paul A. Bernard, P.E. Project Manager PAB/jla cc: Thomas W. Price - C.W. Clifford & Assoc file: fredco3.17555.096 �rt.�tt`S.0 ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS SCIENTISTS 11240 Waples Mill Road Suite 100 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 703.385.3566 Wayne Miller Frederick County Planning Department 9 Court Square, P.O. Box 601 Winchester, VA 22601 Your Authorization Village at Sherando Final Site Plan Principal Project Manager Engineer Admin. Assist Signed Agreement 0.5 hrs @ 48.00 = 6.0 hrs @ 33.25 = 35.0 hrs @ 19.90 = 1.0 hrs @ 14.50 = Total Direct Total Indirect TOTAL DUE THIS INVOICE 934. 1401. $ 233E vink eopy �rr -60 Fiw1)ce, 4gsO '7/z31go G. W. CLIFFORD & ASSOCIATES, INC. 200 North Cameron Street P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 703-667-2139 Fax: 703-665-0493 MEMORANDUM: To: Paul Bernard, Donohue & Associates From: Ron Mislowsky Re: Erosion and Sediment Control Study The Village At Sherando Date: June 11,1990 Project Description This project involved is being developed by Dr. John E. McAllister. The type of construction is 94 townhouse residences. The project will also involve installation of roads, sewer, water and utilities. The total developed area is 12 acres. This area includes the Townhouse Development Site and Golladay Road. Existing Site Conditions Prior to construction, the site was characterized by rolling terrain, predominately open with some undergrowth, all typical of undeveloped areas in the Upper Shenandoah Valley. The site is in the Wiekert-Berks-Blairton Soil Association. This area is characterized by gently sloping, moderately deep, somewhat poorly draining soils that have medium to fine textured subsoil; formed in material weathered from shale. Adjacent Areas Most of the areas surrounding the development are residential in nature. Fredericktowne Estates forms the northern boundary of the entire development. Jefferson Village lies to the west. VA Route 277 will be the access to the south. Land to the north and west is existing residential. The land to the east and south is undeveloped and zoned agricultural. The site is a samll part of the 475 acre drainage area of Wrights Run, which lies just north of the site. Soils For purposes of design run off conditions, antecedent moisture condition II (normal consideration for the mid -Atlantic region) is assumed. The soil is considered to have a moderate rate of water transmission, therefore, SCS Soil Class "C" is adopted. Soils are, for the most part, of the Berks (1C) or Blairton OB) Series. A copy of the respective soil map is enclosed. Permanent Stabilization Seeding for permanent stabilization is specified in the V.E.S.C. Handbook. Any area denuded in which work is not proceeding for a period of 30 days or more will be stabilized by a temporary seeding in accordance with State guidelines and procedures. All areas to be seeded will receive seed application by hydroseed methods immediately upon obtaining grades. The seed mixture is specified in the General Notes (sheet 1 of the plans). Storm Water Management Consideration Site Plans have been attached. This development employs curb and gutter streets, enclose storm sewer and grassline ditches to carry drainage away. The site drains in two parts. The northern part, approximately 10 acres, drains off to the north and Wrights Run. Development will increase flow from this end of the site by 8 cfs during the ten year storm. Almost all this flow is carried by the storm channel on the east side of Golladay Road. The remainder sheet flows off to the east, then to Wrights Run in existing swales. We have performed flood routing of the two, ten, and 100 year storms for the site and the upstream 475 Ac. drainage area. The resulting hydrographs are enclosed. As it turns out, due to the development of a storm drain system, the peak flow from the developemnt will be passed prior to the passage of the peak from the 475 acre area. The peak flows from each of storm events analyzed actually decrease due to the staggered hydrograph peaks. The southern quarter of the site drains to an existing pond. There is some storage available in the existing ponds to detain flows from the site. We have evaluated the channel down stream of the ponds, and it is adequate to carry the small increase in flows caused by the proposed improvements. Those calculations are attached. A small part (1.5Ac) of the Townhouse Development will drain across Golladay Road to the west. The existing swale is adequate to carry this additional flow. This increase, and and the effect of the entire Single Family Phase will be addressed when plans are prepared. The calculations showing this channel to be adequate are attached. 0 i Maintenance All soil erosion control structures shall be checked weekly by the contractor during this construction period and after construction is completed until grass cover is established. Sediment retained by these structures shall be continuously removed and placed in an area of the site specified, damage to soil erosion control structures shall immediately be repaired when identified by the contractor. The contractor shall cooperate with all agents of the County, the Engineer and others who may identify needed facilities or work in order to protect the environment within the subject of this report. RGINIR 1 %SHEET NUMBER 47 • • r �; _ , / E1 1 ��• �, l��^?;' (Joins sheet 4 1) j � E • DE /.. n 6C 1 C • 44B . o- q 14B 8B ff �• `E L •,.{• i�l 5 9B IV y: wa or. 6C t F. •^r, a' r 0 8C 8C ° 3B 9t 0 33E , ` 3B t LL ul - f 1. r �s. ;,.. O o o r : 98 ,t• .. 41C _ 6C 1C F .9B 1 •r' . s ° • 3B E C E.�2. v j • a: •� f' , 9B 41 B gg � ` !� ` .41C . • r "## ` 3B / 4• 3C �. 98 3C 7 C G _! 1 o _ 4 1 D D~ 46. 3B 4 1 rn C 36 448 '� •' �- 98 3B 9B / r t- 41C .3C "' 1C -Y .� ., �� 1D • � to r - . 33 T' C , 1 9C 3C > r9C w lr i► .ti 18 \_� !� :� . 41 41 18 ' 91 TABLE 16.--SOIL AND WATER FEATURES N 0 N ("Flooding" and "water table" and terms such as "rare," "brief," "apparent," and "perched" are explained in the text. The symbol < means less than; > means more than. Absence of an entry indicates that the feature is not a concern or that data were not estimated) Flooding ,LED4 water table ; Bedrock I ' Risk of corrosion Soil name and IHydro-I —(Potential{ map symbol I logicl Frequency I Duration Months I Depth I Kind Months I Depth IHardnessl frost Uncoated IConcrete igroup i I I I I I I I I action ! steel 1B, 1C------------i C Berks 2-----------------i B Birdsboro 3B, 3C------------ i C Blairton { 4B, 4C------------i C Buchanan 5B, 5C------------ i C Carbo 6C*: I Carbo------------i C Oaklet-----------i C 7C*: I I I iNone--------i I I iRare-------- i I I iNone--------i iNone--------i iNone--------i iNone--------i !None -------- 11 Carbo------------i C iNone --------i Oaklet-----------i C iNone --------i Rock outcrop. I I I 8B, 8C------------ i C iNone--------i Chilhowie I I I 9B, 9C------------ i D iNone-------- i Clearbrook I { See footnote at end of table. I I= I I I= 1 -- i --- i >6.0 i --- i --- i 20-40 iSoft I I ___ I I I I i2.0-6.OiApparentiNov-Mari >60 i --- i0.5-3.OiPerched iNov-Mari 20-40 iSoft i0.5-3.OiPerched iNov-Mari >60 i --- I I I I I I --- i --- i >6.0 i --- i --- i 20-40 iHard { I I I I I -- i --- i >6.0 i --- i --- i 20-40 iHard --- i --- i >6.0 i--- i--- i >60 i--- I I I I I I --- i --- i >6.0 i --- i --- i 20-40 iHard --- i--- i >6.0 i--- i--- i >60 i--- I I I I I I I I I i--- i >6.0 i--- I--- i 20-40 iHard i0-0.5iApparentlOct-Aprl 20-40 iSoft I I I iLow------iLow------iHigh. Moderate ;Moderate !High. iHigh ----- iHigh ----- iHigh. iModerate iHigh ----- iHigh. iModerate iHigh-----iLow. I I I iModerate iHigh -----iLow. iModerate iHigh ----- iModerate. iModerate iHigh -----iLow. iModerate iHigh-----iModerate. I I I iModerate iHigh ----- iLow. I I I iModerate iHigh-----iModerate. I i I • L • • DRAINAGE AREAS DA Acres C T(c) i(2) i(10) 0(2)cfs Q(10)cfs A 0.42 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 0.89 1.14 n(RCP)= 0.013 B 0.15 0.80 5 5.30 6.80 0.64 0.82 n(CMP)= 0.023 C 0.14 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 0.30 0.38 n(Steel) = 0.011 D 0.34 0.75 5 5.30 6.80 1.35 1.73 E 0.60 0.75 5 5.30 6.80 2.39 3.06 F 0.63 0.75 5 5.30 6.80 2.50 3.21 G 1.45 0.35 5 5.30 6.80 2,69 3.45 H 0.34 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 0.72 0.92 1 0.41 0.60 5 5.30 6.80 1.30 1.67 J 0.55 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 1.17 1.50 K 0.98 0.35 5 5.30 6.80 1.62 2.33 L 0.55 0.60 5 5.30 6.80 1.75 2.24 M 0.26 0.60 5 5.30 6.80 0.83 1.06 N 0.50 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 1.06 1.36 O 0.76 0.60 5 5.30 6.80 2.42 3.10 P 0.76 0.40 5 5.30 6.80 1.61 2.07 Q 0.50 0.50 5 5.30 6.80 1.33 1.70 R 0.64 0.50 5 5.30 6.80 1.70 2.18 S 0.90 0.35 5 5.30 6.80 1.67 2.14 CUI/SCC Inv. In Inv. Out L(ft) D(in.) S(%) Q(des)cfs q(10)cfs v(10)fps From: Type Cap.Chk 1 17.89 2 0.82 3 15.93 4 730.50 727.00 65.0 15 5.38 15.02 11.46 12.24 Str 4 RCP o.k. 5 733.65 730.75 70.0 15 4.14 13.17 6.27 10.74 Str 5 RCP o.k. 6 740.10 733.90 190.0 15 3.26 11.69 3.21 9.53 Str 6 RCP o.k. 7 732.50 730.75 100.0 15 1.75 8.56 3.45 6.98 Str 7 RCP o.k. 8 4.09 9 740.50 738.00 55.0 15 4.55 13.80 1.67 11.25 Str 9 RCP o.k. 10 1.50 11 5.64 12 74250 742.00 85.0 15 0.59 4.96 3.30 4.05 Str 12 RCP o.k. 13 743.40 742.75 75.0 15 0.87 6.02 1.06 4.91 Str 13 RCP o.k. 16 2.07 17 743.50 742.50 75.0 15 1.33 7.47 3.88 6.09 Str 13 RCP o.k. 18 746.00 743.75 60.0 15 3.75 12.53 2.18 10.22 Str 19 RCP o.k. Str # FROM: Q(10)cfs INV. IN INV. OUT ADDS INV TOP EL. TYPE Sx Depth;Hw/d T(ft) Throat(ft) SCC 1 A 1.14 Grass Ditch, EC - 3 Required, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth SCC 2 B 0.82 PG-6A, w(1) = w(2) = 2 ft., D = 8 in. SCC3 C 0.38 Grass Ditch, EC - 2 Required, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth 4 D 1.73 730.75 730.50 730.75 734.50 DI-3C 0,0417 0.18 4.32 6.00 5 E 3.06 733.90 733.65 - 737.65 DI-313 0.0476 0.27 5.67 6.00 6 F 3.21 - 740.10 744.10 DI-3B 0.0444 0.28 6.31 6.00 7 G 3.45 732.50 735.50 DI-1 0.0310 0.27 8.71 n/a SCC 8 H 0.92 Grass Ditch, EC - 2 Required, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth 9 1 1.67 - 740.50 744.50 DI-313 0.0286 0.15 6.20 18.00 SCC 10 J 1.50 Grass Ditch, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth SCC 11 K 2.33 Grass Ditch, EC - 2 Required, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth 12 L 2.24 742.75 742.50 745.50 DI-3C 0.0278 0.22 7.91 6.00 13 M 1.06 - 743.40 747.40 DI-3B 0.0300 0.15 5.00 4.00 SCC 15 O 3.10 PG-6A, w(1) = w(2) = 2 ft., D = 8 in. SCC 16 P 2.07 Grass Ditch, 3:1 Side Slopes, 1 ft Depth 17 Q 1.70 743.75 743.50 746.00 DI-3B 0.0100 0.18 18.00 6.00 18 R 2.18 - 746.00 750.00 DI-1 0.0050 0.20 40.00 n/a Check pre post discharge off southeast end Check Pre Post Discharge at Wrights Run Pre Dev DA = 4.14 Ac Pre Dev DA = 6.50 Ac C= 0.15 c= 0.15 Q(2)pre = 3.29 GIs 0(2)pre = 5.17 cis Post Dev DA = 3.81 Ac K,L,M,N,O,P Post Dev DA = 5.93 Ac A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,S c = 0.47 Weighted C = 0.50 Weighted Q(10)post = 12.17 cfs Q(10)post = 20.03 cfs Project Village at Sherando DI#- 9 Q(10) cfs= 1.67 n = 0.015 Qn= 0.02505 W= 2 Sx(%) = 2.86 Sw(%) = 8.33 Sw/Sx = 2.91 T/W(chart 9) = 3.1 Eo (Chart 10) = 0.73 S(%) = 3.33 Se = 0.06 L(t) req'd(Cht 15) = 18.20 Spread (ft)= 6.2 Throat Length = 18 L/L(t) = 0.99 Efficiency(%) = 1.00 Flow Int.(cfs) = 1.67 Q to next DI(cfs) = 0.00 next DI # - 1 0 11 The Vill* Sherando • 0.2 STORM CONVEYANCE CHANNEL CALCULATIONS All velocities checked at channel low point SCC g2(act)cfs SCC 110(act)cfs 1 8.07 1 10.35 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsg(des)fpw @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)fpsq(des)ipEt @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 1.77 0.05 ss= 3 0.1 1.06 0.03 hi elv = 727 0.3 3.69 1.00 hi eiv = 727 0.3 2.22 0.60 to elv = 708 0.5 5.19 3.89 6.16 0.65 to elv = 708 0.5 3.12 2.34 length: 255 0.7 6.50 9.55 length: 255 0.7 3.90 5.73 4.50 0.87 n = 0.03 0.9 7.68 18.67 n = 0.05 0.9 4.61 11.20 1.1 5.27 19.13 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cfs 2 0.64 2 0.82 b. 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsq(des)fp;v @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)tpsq(des)fp<_i @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 2.16 0.1 5.22 0.11 6.70 0.15 ss= 2.16 0.1 5.22 0.11 7.21 0.17 hi elv = 734 0.3 10.85 2.11 hi elv = 734 0.3 10.85 2.11 to elv = 727 0.5 15.26 8.24 to eiv = 727 0.5 15.26 8.24 length: 41 0.7 19.10 20.21 length = 41 0.7 19.10 20.21 n = 0.015 0.9 22.58 39.51 n = 0.015 0.9 22.58 39.51 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cfs 3 6.54 3 8.39 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsq(des)fpw @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)fpsq(des)fp=_i @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 1.19 0.04 ss= 3 0.1 0.71 0.02 hi elv = 729 0.3 2.47 0.67 hi eiv = 729 0.3 1.48 0.40 to eiv = 727 0.5 3.47 2.60 to elv = 727 0.5 2.08 1.56 length: 60 0.7 4.35 6.39 4.37 0.70 length : 60 0.7 2.61 3.83 n = 0.03 0.9 5.14 12.49 n = 0.05 0.9 3.08 7.49 3.16 0.93 1.1 3.53 12.80 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cts 8 2.21 8 2.83 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsg(des)fp;v @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)fpsq(des)fpsi @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 1.12 0.03 ss= 3 0.1 0.67 0.02 hi elv = 738 0.3 2.32 0.63' 3.14 0.47 hi elv = 738 0.3 1.39 0.38 to elv = 729 0.5 3.27 2.45 to elv = 729 0.5 1.96 1.47 2.27 0.63 length: 305 0.7 4.09 6.01 length = 305 0.7 2.45 3.61 n = 0.03 0.9 4.84 11.75 n = 0.05 0.9 2.90 7.05 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cfs 10 1.17 10 1.50 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsq(des)fp;v @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(lrial)v(des)fpsq(des)fpsi @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 1.24 0.04 ss= 3 0.1 0.74 0.02 hi elv = 748 0.3 2.58 0.70 2.82 0.35 hi elv = 748 0.3 1.55 0.42 2.11 0.48 to elv = 738 0.5 3.63 2.72 to elv = 738 0.5 2.18 1.63 length 275 0.7 4.54 6.67 length : 275 0.7 2.72 4.00 n = 0.03 0.9 5.37 13.04 n = 0.05 0.9 3.22 7.83 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cfs 11 4.40 11 5.64 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsg(des)fpw @ q(act: d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)fp=_q(des)fpsi @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 1.07 0.03 ss= 3 0.1 0.64 0.02 hi elv = 742 0.3 2.23 0.60 hi elv = 742 0.3 1.34 0.36 to elv = 739 0.5 3.14 2.36 3.61 0.62 to elv = 739 0.5 1.88 1.41 length 110 0.7 3.93 5.78 length: 110 0.7 2.36 3.47 2.64 0.83 n = 0.03 0.9 4.65 11.30 n = 0.05 0.9 2.79 6.78 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC 110(act)cfs 15 2.42 15 3.10 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsg(des)fpw @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(triai)v(des)fpsq(des)fpsi @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 2.16 0.1 2.49 0.05 ss= 2.16 0.1 2.49 0.05 hi elv = 742.75 0.3 5.18 1.01 6.19 0.40 hi elv = 742.75 0.3 5.18 1.01 6.68 0.44 to elv = 741 0.5 7.28 3.93 to eiv = 741 0.5 7.28 3.93 length 45 0.7 9.12 9.65 length = 45 0.7 9.12 9.65 n = 0.015 0.9 10.78 18.86 n = 0.015 0.9 10.78 18.86 SCC g2(act)cfs SCC g10(act)cfs 16 1.61 16 2.07 b= 0 d(trial) v(des)fpsg(des)fpw @ q(act; d @ q(act) b= 0 d(trial)v(des)fpsq(des)fpsi @ q(act d @ q(act) ss= 3 0.1 0.97 0.03 ss= 3 0.1 0.58 0.02 hi elv = 750 0.3 2.02 0.54 2.57 0.44 hi elv = 750 0.3 1.21 0.33 to elv = 744 0.5 2.84 2.13 to elv = 744 0.5 1.70 1.28 1.88 0.59 length 270 0.7 3.55 5.22 length = 270 0.7 2.13 3.13 n = 0.03 0.9 4.20 10.20 n = 0.05 0.9 2.52 6.12 0 Outlet Protection Specifications Outlet at Pipe Size Ten Yr Structure # (in) Flow(cfs) 2 n/a 0.82 4 15 11.5 9 15 1.67 12 15 3.3 15 15 3.1 17 15 3.88 Box 4 x 8 567 Median Stone Apron Length Size(ft) (ft) d(50) 0.5 3 0.5 15 0.5 5 0.5 10 0.5 3 0.5 10 1.75 50 OR (2��p ICn�p �Ps�sh DESIGN OF OUTLET PROTECTION FROM A ROUND PIPE FLOWING FULL MINIMUM TAILWATER CONDITION (TW �- 0.5 DIAMETER) - I Ir � �i�"iil: �uu�I• il�i , � i i �� i � • � •err � � � 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 T Discharqe, ft./sec. �V Co 0 s� vI1-LMUF- MI On F-rsMivvu i ui[ tS-Jun -yu OFFSITE CHANNEL ADEQUACY DETERMINATION At Control Section west of Golladay Road Pre Dev Drainage Area to Control Section = 2.23 Ac Pre Development weighted c factor = 0.20 Pre Development CA = 0.45 Post Dev Drainage Areas to Control Section: 1.14 Ac @c= 0.50 1.96 Ac @c= 0.20 Post Development weighted c factor = 0.31 Post Development CA = 0.96 Vertical Drop over Section = 10.00 It Length of Section = 250.00 ft T(c) = 5.00 min i(2) = 5.30 in/hr (Frederick County) i(10) = 6.80 in/hr (Frederick County) Pre Development Q(2) = 2.36 cfs Post Development Q(10) = 6.54 cfs 744.00 742.00 740.00 738.00 736. 734.00 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 OFFSITE DRAINAGE CONTROL SECTION Predev 2 year Q = 2 cfs vert diff length n slope 0(2) 10.00 250 0.0500 0.0400 2.36 WATER Two Year w(1) w(2) A(sqft) H.R.(ft) v(fps) Q(cfs) 735.75 Elv. Vel(fps) A 0.25 0.00 8.00 1 0.12 1.49 1.49 736.00 B 0.50 8.00 18.00 8 0.42 3.32 24.89 736.50 736.02 1.56 C 0.50 18.00 25.00 18 0.73 4.82 88.02 737.00 D 1.00 25.00 28.00 45 1.56 8.03 359.42 738.00 FLOOD HEIGHT = 0.27 Postdev 10 year Q = 7 cfs vert diff length n slope Q (10 ) 10.00 250.00 0.0300 0.0400 6.54 WATER Ten Year w(1) w(2) A(sqft) H.R.(ft) v(fps) Q(cfs) 735.75 Elv. A 0.25 0.00 8.00 1 0.12 2.48 2.48 736.00 B 0.50 8.00 18.00 8 0.42 5.53 41.48 736.50 736.05 2.80 C 0.50 18.00 25.00 18 0.73 8.04 146.70 737.00 D 1.00 25.00 28.00 45 1.56 13.39 599.03 738.00 FLOOD HEIGHT = 0.30 FINDINGS: Though this development will cause an increase in the runoff from the site, the channel is more than adequate to carry the post devlopment ten year flow. The ten year year storm flood height in the offsite drainage channel is increased only slightly over that experienced during the pre development two year storm. The actual increase has been estimated at .03 ft, or abut .4 in. It is our opinion that the channel has sufficent capacity to carry the increase flow from the developed site without overtopping its banks. The velocity increase is almost doubled, but still below erodible rates. A n factor of .05 was used in pre dev, a value pf .03 was used for the post dev analysis. The velocity comparison is therefore conservative. We believe that the existing offsite channel to be capable of carrying the increased flow without degradation of the existing channel. VILLAGE AT SHERANDG 1 0/2 1 1 -Jun-9 OFFSITE CHANNEL ADEQUACY DETERMINATION At Control Section below ponds southeast of site Pre Dev Drainage Area to Control Section = 1 1 .16 Ac Pre Development weighted c factor = 0.20 Pre Development CA = 2.23 Post Dev Drainage Areas to Control Section: 3.81 Ac @ c = 0.47 7.02 Ac Cc) c= 0.20 Post Development weighted c factor = 0.29 Post Development CA = 3.19 Vertical Drop over Section = 20.00 It Length of Section = 1000.00 f t T(c) = 5.00 min i(2) = 5.30 in/hr (Frederick County) i(10) = 6.80 in/hr (Frederick County) Pre Development Q(2) = 11.83 cfs Post Development Q(10) = 21.72 cfs OFFSITE DRAINAGE CONTROL SECTION Predev 2 year Q = 12 cfs vert diff length n slope 0(2) 20.00 1000 0.0500 0.0200 11.83 WATER Two Year w(1) w(2) A(sqft) H.R.(ft) v(fps) Q(cfs) 730.39 Elv. Vel(fps) A 0.61 0.00 4.00 1 0.29 1.85 2.26 731.00 B 0.50 4.00 8.00 4 0.52 2.72 11.49 731.50 C 0.50 8.00 13.00 9 0.72 3.39 32.15 732.00 731.51 2.73 D 0.26 13.00 19.00 14 0.72 3.37 46.00 732.26 FLOOD HEIGHT = 1 .1 2 Postdev 10 year Q = 22 cfs vert diff length n slope 0(10) 20.00 1000.00 0.0300 0.0200 21.72 WATER Ten Year w(1) w(2) A(sqft) H.R.(ft) v(fps) Q(cfs) 735.75 Elv. A 0.61 0.00 4.00 1 0.29 3.09 3.77 736.36 B 0.50 4.00 8.00 4 0.52 4.54 19.16 736.86 C 0.50 8.00 13.00 9 0.72 5.66 53.58 737.36 736.90 4.62 D 0.26 13.00 19.00 14 0.72 5.62 76.66 737.62 FLOOD HEIGHT = 1 .1 5 FINDINGS: Though this development will cause an increase in the runoff from the site, the channel is more than adequate to carry the post devlopment ten year flow. The ten year year storm flood height in the offsite drainage channel is increased only slightly over that experienced during the pre development two year storm. The actual increase has been estimated at .03 ft, or abut .4 in. It is our opinion that the channel has sufficent capacity to carry the increase flow from the developed site without overtopping its banks. The velocity increase is almost doubled, but still below erodible rates. A n factor of .05 was used in pre dev, a value pf .03 was used for the post dev analysis. The velocity comparison is therefore conservative. We believe that the existing offsite channel to be capable of carrying the increased flow without degradation of the existing channel. It should also be noted that the effect of storage in the ponds upstream of the section was not accounted for. Even less of an effect is to be expected as approximately 18 percent of the additional flow will be detained. 0 Village at Sherando South to Pond Run Off Calculations Pre Development Two Year Storm Acre= 4.14 Curve Number = 71 Runoff in. = 0.40 Vol(ac-ft) = 0.14 Post Development Two Year Storm Acre = 2.24 1.57 Curve Number = 74 90 Runoff in. = 1.25 Vol(ac-ft) = 0.40 Storage Calculation Difference in Runoff = 0.85 in Increase Runoff Volume = 11277 cuft Storage at High Pond: Elv Area 736.1 1200 736.3 1475 Volume provided = 267.5 c u f t Storage at Low Pond: Elv Area 735.7 1900 736.4 3025 Volume provided = 1 724 c u ft Total Storage = 1991 c u f t 11 2 Year Storm Inches = 3 Weighted CN 81 Approximately 18% of the increased runoff from the site will be able to be stored in the two ponds immediately downstream of the site. The detaine flow will represent the first flush from the site. The ponds provide an opportunity to prevent most of the impurities from being passed downstrearr • E VILLAGE AT SHERANDO WRIGHTS RUN PRE DEVELOPMENT FLOW HYDROGRAPHS ' 'H-bb CURVE NUMUER COMPUTATION VERSION 1.11 'roject : ARTERY lOWNHUMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 Munty : FREDERlCK State: VA Checked: iubtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN PRE DEV 2 YR FLOOD, 475 AC DA jubarea : '------------------------------------------------------------------------------ KRE A Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ______________________________________________________________________ 'ULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab.) (esidentia1 districts Avg % impery (by average lot size) � 1/4 acre 38 - - 395(83) - /HER AGRICUL[URAL LANDS � nods - grass combination qood ital Area (by HygroLoqic Soil Group) - - 80(72) ---------------------------------------------------- - -----' '-' -------- AnwhA: KxE A :RAINA6E AREM 475 Acres WE1G:|ED nURvA MW8ER:81 '—'- -- --- '- -------------- ' ------ ' ------- -' ------ ------ �� y �� lR-55 Tc and At THRU SUBAREA COMPUTATION MR5;--' Project : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-1`/ County : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Date: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN PRE DEV 2 YR FLOOD, 475 AC DA ------------------------------ Subarea M - PRE A ----------------'-------- Flow iype 2 year Length Slope Sur+ace n Area Wp Velocity rain (ft/ Oft/ft) code --------------------------------- (sq/ft) NO (ft/sec) ------------------------------------------ Sheet 0.1 3.1 500 .0125 G 1.1 Sha11ow Concent'd 1000 .0083 U 0,11-7 Upen Channel 2600 4.25 0 Open Channel 2600 4,5 Time of Concentrarinn = !'a— ===== --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- shallow Eonc—�-`/=` B Fallow (No Res.) 6 Grass, burnuda --- 5urvace L Cultivated t 20 % Ms. n Woods, Light >' paveJ 0 Cultivated > 20 % Res. / 1 Uno'js, JePs� K Anpavn.` a urass-Hanoe, whor'' o - 6enerated for cse ty FABULOK method 0 VERSION !.11 roject : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 .ounty : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Date: .ubtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN PRE DEV 2 YR FLOOD, 475 AC DA otal watershed area: 0.742 sq mi Rainfall type: II Frequency: 2 years -------------------------- Subareas -------------------------- PRE A irea(sq mi) 0.74* ainfall(in) 3.1 .urve number 81* mnoft(in) 1.39 c Mrs) 1.64* (Used) 1.M.) ime70Out1et 0.00 | a/i- U.1'--. "me Total ------'------ Subarea Contributiun to Total Flow 'cfs) ----------- hr) Flow PRE A 1'9 l� � value's) p",.ViJeu orom lR-05 system /ouKnns ^ . �N�u ^ ��/ �~ Project : ARTERY TOWNHO|iES User: RM County : FREDERlCK State: VA Checked: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN PRE DEV 10 YR FLOOD, 475 AC DO Date; Date, - iota! watershed area: 0.142 sq mi Rainfall type: Ii c'�'.uskzv: 10 years ----------------------'-- Suvareas ------------------' FIRE. A Area(sq Mil o.74* Rainfall(on) 4.8 �urve numoer Qunoff(in) 2'81 Cc Mrs, 1.04* kuned/ i."0 [ime|oOuhls� '.'Qo ]. | `'.no :a me |a`�aarsa cuntrik"Ljun Lo �hr/ J. 13.0 410 4i� 10.8 332 132 14.0 2b9 26� 14.0 2v4 204 14.6 i4X W6 158 119 9; 73 ' 0 0 [R-55 WBULAR DISCHARGE METHOD VERSION 1.11 -oject : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-9(-, zunty : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Date: jbtitlez WRIGHl'S RUN PRE DEV 100 YR FLOOD, 475 AC DA ztal watershed area: 0.742 sq mi Rainfall type: II Frequency: 100 years -------------------------- Subareas -------------------------- PRE A rea(sq mi) 0.74* ainfall(in) 7.1 irve number 81* unoff(in) 4.W0 � (hrs> 1.26» (Used) 1.2� lmeToUutlet o.o0 (Used) We Total ------------- Suourea ContribuLion to 7otal Flow 'cfsj ------------ nr) Flow PKE A 1.0 36 36 1.0 6j 6� 1.9 91 �! Z.0 1.t i 0� -.� 108 138 196 11i�:-! • E VILLAGE AT SHERANDO WRIGHTS RUN POST DEVELOPMENT FLOW HYDROGRAPHS )u, n ty W-55 MULAR DlSCHAHKE N&HUD Project : ARTERY TOWNHUM03 User: RM Dare: 0b-OE-V` County : FREDERICK State: VA [hecked: ____ Date: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 2 YR FLOOD, 475 AP DA, l0.5 AC DEV SITE Total watershed area: ;.745 sq mi Rainfall t/pes lI -requency: ----------- -------------- Subareas POST n A SITE P Area(sq mil U.734 0'02* Hainfallkin) 0'1 �.i Curve number 81* Runoff(in) 1.39 2.08 [c (hrs) 1'64* WON 1.5o [imeToOutlet O.0o 0.*' la/P 0.ij 0'0} (Used) 0.15 q.10 Time Fctal --------- - mu�srea Contributiop � |hr) Flow POST A SlK i, . ' �� V 0 FK-55 iABULAR WSCHARUE METHOD VERSION 1.11 `roject : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 .ounty : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: _____ Date: `ubtit}e: WHIGH|'S KUN PUS! DEV 10 YR FLOOD 475 AC UA 10.5 AC SITE 'otal watershed area: 0.745 sq mi Rainiall type: II Frequency: 10 years ------------------------- Subareas ----------- ------------- POST A SITE A irea(sq mi) 0.73* 0.Q2AC Vainfai1(in) 4.8 4.8 0rve number 81* 90� /unoff(in) 2.81 3.68 a Mrs) 1.42W o.i8i: (Used) 1.50 0.20 .ImeTouutlei 0.00 0.00 a/P 0.10 ;.05 (Used) 0.10 0.10 .^me total ------------- nuunrea Lopi,obution to Toia1 P�ow i�/s; ------- --- Kr) Flow POST a SITE A .�.o J� 18 55 W 1 �i.9 51 13 �4 0,0 239 Z29 �z 10 �./ 382 376 ,^'J +47 442 6 � 10.0 52v 522 4 .3.2 56/4 5o3k + .�.o 326 325 3 A. �0C! � .4.6 W7 ib5 2 114 117 2 �.� 9, 16.0 62 01 i 44 43 : � � N roak blow 10e s' ��.c4n 6ec 0 r o m DR'`'5 sy em rouLines ^ Project : ARTERY TUWNHUMES User: HM Date: wovu-yv County : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: ____ Date: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 10; YR FLOOD 475 AC DA 1�'5 AC SITE [otal watershed area: 0,745 sq mi Rainfall type: II Frequency: 10: vsars ------------------------- Subareas --------------------- POST A S1lE A *rea(sq mi) o.731 U.onw Nain+a11(in) 7.1 7.l Curve number His 00* Runoff(in) 4.9; 5.92 /.meTo�ut� .'� .�sec /Loe To�� --- ---' - -- ��ba'e� :050r1bution to iota.;. VILLAGE AT SHERANDO GOLLADAY ROAD BOX CULVERT SIZING WRIGHTS RUN FLOW HYDROGRAPHS Village at Sherando, Townhomes Wright's Run at the Golladay Road The following flows determined from TR-55 Flood Routing of 475 Ac Drainage Area. Assumed 91 percent of area developed as Single Family. Calculations assume development of Townhomes and Single Family on Snyder Drainage Area - 0.75 sqmi Required Box Culvert Base(ft) - 18 Inv In = 704.25 100 yr flow - 1010 cfs Height(ft) - 4 Inv Out = 704.00 10 yr flow - 585 cfs Slope(%) - 0.25 Length = 100 Q(cfs)full = 705.19 Cl Road LP = 712.38 Q(100)/B = 56.11 Q(10)/B = 32.50 10 Year Storm 100 Year Storm • Hw/d = 1.3 Hw/d = 2.6 At HW El = 713.02 f t HW Elv = 709.5 HW Elv = 714.7 Hw/d = 2.19 Q/B = 5 0 Diff CI-HW(ft) = 2.85 Diff CI-HW(ft) _ -2.35 Q(passed) = 900 cfs 100 yr storm will overtop road, Q over road 110 cfs use 3 - 4' x 6' box culverts Height of fill over box = 2-5 feet Golladay Road Section at Box Culvert Flow Through Section = 110.00 cfs vert diff length n slope 900.00 6.00 565.00 0.04 0.0106 110.00 WATER • w(1) w(2) A(sqft) H.R.(ft) v(fps) Q(cfs) 712.38 Elv. V(fps) 0.12 0.00 45.00 3 0.06 0.59 1.59 712.50 0.25 45.00 100.00 21 0.21 1.35 28.09 712.75 0.25 100.00 145.00 51 0.35 1.92 98.98 713.00 0.25 145.00 180.00 92 0.51 2.46 226.06 713.25 713.02 1.97 FLOOD HEIGHT = 0.64 100 Year Flood Elevation at Golladay Road 713 Lowest basement floor elv at Fredecktowne Estates, adjusted for topography differ 713.7 • 12 I 10 9 a 7 600 500 EXAMPLE 400 S'. 2' eaa 0 • 1-3 cta 0/6 lacf•/ft 300 ! mw Inlet p feat (1) 1.75 3.5 200 (t) 1.90 3-9 (3) 2D0 4 ) r 0 100 CHART I (3) e 7S4 T4T 4 3 3 6 O I` rr so 3 2 S r r Z SO / _ 1.5 40 / W I.S W W t \ LL 30 O — V t H x o 0= 20/ W 1.0 r O 3 m Go t I AC,+y fZOA V'S 2 WitiGtim zl)111� C✓OisI""U 1. 5 d to 0 w1A rlta2 Au 11 t ► i / Z O — y 1.0 l0 3 W •a�la • _ a tllq�an a m m 10 flare �► W WQ ° 9 9 / ' _ _ 61 / 0 < U. 6 0 0 / O S HW WINGWALL w .7 .7 4 p SCALE FLARE _ 6 r 2 < 111 3b• la TV 3 I21 f0• aaa F]• . I31 0• Uala�a.awa .5 of .�saal 2 S S To aaa acala (2) •1 (3) Malaat Dal..aalal/f to scale (1). 1►aa •N araNal .acl�aN IIM IMapa .4 1 0 Ma Q acalaa.or as IllaallalK e .4 4 s 35 .35 1 S 30 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR BOX CULVERTS WITH INLET CONTROL GUOfAU o. ►wuc a0.o3 jAM r"S 22 (5-21) !R-5b AABULAR W5CHAR6E METHOD WRI �Oh Project : ARTERY TOWNHUMES User: RM baLe: 06-08-90 County : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: ____ Date: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 10 YR FLOOD 475 AC UA 39.5 AC SITE Total watershed area: 0.745 sq mi Rainfall type: lI Frequency; i0 years -------------------------- Subareas ---------------------- PUSl A SITE A Area(sq mi) 0.73* 0.02* Rainfall(in) 4.G 4.8 Curve number 82* 90* Runoff(in) 2.90 3.68 [c Mrs) i.641 0.21* (Used) 1.60 0.20 r1mer0Outlet 0.00 0.00 Ia/F 0.09 0.o5 (Used) 0.10 0.00 Time 10tal ------------- Woare= kontrLbution to Total Kiow (c/s� --'-- --- (hr) Flow KUSl A SiM � 25 35 62 J. � � 57 +4 �J 77 D^ �4 60 WD id8 1/5 12.5 24/ 20 1: 12.0 318 310 8 i2./ 395 389 6 12.8 461 456 1s.o 543 539 5 4 13.2 585P 581F 4 i3.4 501 4% � /3.6 421 418 J 13.8 339 336 3 14,0 274 272 2 14.3 209 201 2 14.6 163 l01 � 10.0 122 120 -Z i6.5 64 �� 1 �4 J. ��.: 2 1 M-b5 Tc a,.d it THRU SUBAREo COMPU[AlION ;ERS|uN 1.11 "roject : ARTERY TUWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-9(:*-- �ounty : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Dat�: _________ Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 10 YR FLOOD 475 ____ AC DA 39.5 AC SITE ----------------------------- Suoarea 01 - POST A ---------------------------- "low Type 2 year Length Slope Surface M Area Wp Velocity Time rain -____________-________________________________________________--_---_--_______ (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ~seet 3.1 300 .0125 G 1.12C, hallow Concent'd 1000 .0083 U 0.189 men Channel 2600 4.25 0.170 .wen Channel 2600 4.5 6.160 Time of Concentration = 1.64* ===== ---------------------------- Subarea #2 - SITE A ----------------------------- low Type vear Lerutn Slope Surface : Area Wp rain (10 (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) oft) heet 5.i 40 '0294 � 0.15` nee %- �oo ' �..j 0.;v_ hallow Concent'd 15V .025 .pen Channel 025 ii 0.0M-1 uen Uha/mei 5 !:o.e - - ±�eeV A bmoozn nurface 8 Fa1iow Mu Raw.) y1ow wsrf"�e codes ' P hras�, 1 Grass, Dense Burmuda unaliow --- awncencraLed Surfa�e CoMs -- --- U Cultivaied < VU % Res. H Woods, Light P Pa"ec b CuItivaLed > 20 % Res. I Woods, Dense U Unpaved 2 brass -Range, Knort U Generates for use K, ;ARWL4K mermo;j Project : ARTERY TUWNHOME6 User: RM DatEz Qb-08-90 County : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Date: Subtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 10 YR _____ FLOOD 475 AC DA 39.5 AC SITE Subarea : POST A _____________________________________________________________________________ Hydro1ogic Soil Group COVER DESCRlPr[ON A 8 C � _______________________________________________________________________________ Acres (CN) FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Vag Estab.) Residential districts Avg % impery (by average lot size) 114 acre 424(83) OTHER *GKinUL[URQL LANO6 Woods - grass combination 42(72) 10PH! Area (by Hywroloqic Soil Group., �66 ~=== !R-55 CURVE NUMMR CUMPUTATlON MRSION 1'11 'roject : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 munty : FREDERlCK State: VA Checked: Date: ..... ....... _____ 'ubtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 10 YR FLOOD 475 AC DA 39.5 AC SITE jubarea : SITE 'Al '------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D | Acres (CN) ULLY DEVELUPED UR8AN MEAS (Veg Estab.) ,sidential districts Avq % impery (by average lot sizp/ | 1/8 acre (town Muscs/ 65 041 Area (by Mdrolaoic Soil Group) - - 10.5(90) - 10.5 ==== ------------------'----------------'---------------- MAREA: 50E 51|E A TOTAL L�A1NA6E ARE,r Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUM8ER:90 -------------------------------` -`----- ---'-------- --------------- Project : ARTERV F0WNH0MW---.' User: Rl*,! A�P; County : FREDERMIK "tata: VA Chackeo: ,, a-te" Subtitle: WRIUHT'S RUN POST DEV 100 YR FLOOD 475 AC DA 395 AC SKE Total watershed area: 0.745 so. mi Rainfall type: 11 Frequency: 100 years --------------------------- Subareas ---.......... ---------.......... ---------- WSF A SITE A Area(sq mil O./S* 0.024 Rainfall(M) 1.1 7 .1. Curve number 82* W-1, Runoff(in) 5.01 5.92 (Used) 1.bo 0. o.) 0. (Used) QA0 0, !�j Time Total ------------- Subar&a Contribution to Total F!Qw T�Vs) Mr) &low 109 V A S 1 1 E LZA IM ill f iz.6 2% 12./ 68i VA.8 796 Wn 1 671 i 78B Wo is.0 93/ 15.2 1009F lumop 86i 1 6 4 M0 47b W J- kj nLunf-I nr- ndol V�0� 7Q--K 5votom r—fir—, �� '�� ul��HH�G� MEl��u �� VERSION l.11 Wroject : ARTERY [OWNHuME6 User: RM Date: 06-08-90 County : FREDEHlCIK State: VA Checkeo: ____ Date: Subtit1e: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 100 YR FLOOD 475 AC DA 39.5 AC SITE Total watershed area: 0.745 so. mi Rainfall type: II Frequency: 100 years -------------------------- Subareas -------------------------- PCST A SITE A Area(sq mi) 0.73* 0.02.4 Rainfall(in) 7.1 4.l Curve number 82* 90* Runoff(in) 5.01 5.92 Fc (hrs) 1.64* 0.21* (Used) 1.nu 0.20 TimeToOutlet 0.00 0.0; la/P 0.06 0.0J (Used) 0'10 O.io Time Total ------------- Subarea Contribution to (hr) Flow |`OS[ A SIFE A 11.0 it 6A ; ic.J 43 12.8 796 788 � 11.0 937 W0 / '�.4 86o l 5 ��.o 44 ^ r�nw � - `siu�/=� prn`/Ida: prom T?-`j sysjeM rouf,n—s TR-55 Tc and-Tt THRU SUBAREA COMPUTATION- VERSION 1.0'.. roject : AR7ERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 ounty : FREDERICK State: VA Checked: Date. ubtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 100 YR FLOOD 475 AC DA 39.5 AC SITE -----=---------------------- Subarea #1 - POST A ----------------------------- 1ow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (+t) (ft/sec) (hr) heet 0.1 300 .0125 8 1.120 hallow Concent'd 1000 .0083 U 0.189 pen Channel 2600 4.25 0.170 pen Channel 2600 4.5 0.160 Time of Concentration = 1.64* ===== ---------------------------- Subarea #2 - SITE A ----------------------------- low Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp velocity Time rain ____________ _______________________________________________ (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft` 00 (ft/sec) _____________ l\r) ___ neet Z,1 40 .0294 S 0.159 heet 100 .0294 A 0.018 .hallow ConcenL'J 15U .025 P 0.013 'Pen Channel 32 0.008 pen Channei 315 6 ?.M5 Time of Conceniration = 0.21* ===== - wheet Plow 1urfane Cudes '- ` OmoocK sur,ac= v Wass, bensp '-- Shallow cncentrated - 6 fa1iow (No Res./ 8 Grass, 8u-muda --- Surface Codes '-- C CultvvaLed < 20 % Res. H Woods, Light P Paved Q Cultivateu > 20 % Res. | Woods, Densi U Unpaved U 4 Grass -Range, Mort Generated for use by TABULAR method ` �� .:o '.u-�� RVE wUhbnR COMPUlATION VERSlDN !.!I - Project : ARTERY [OWNHuHES User: RM Date: 06-16 County : FREDEHICK States VA Checked: Date: Subtirle; WRIGHT'S RUN POST UEV 100 YR FLOOD 475 AC DA AC SITE Subarea : POST A ------------------------------------------------------ ------------ Hydrologic Soil Grou� COVER DESCRIPTlON A 6 C '---------------------------------------------------------------'------ Acres (CN) rULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Vag Estab.) —'-- Residential districts Avg % imper., (by average lot size) 1/4 acrc 38 ylHEH AGRICUL[URAL LAND:.; Woods - grass combination goud - 42(72/ fotai Arpa (by Hydroiou''- Soil Group, -' ----------------------------------------- 101AL NOSE 4RL4i *6o orres __....._________ ___ lR--- 55 E NUM8ER �OMF�TATlON VERSION 1.11 'roject : ARTERY TOWNHOMES User: RM Date: 06-08-90 �ounty : FHEDERICK State: VA Checked: Date: ;ubtitle: WRIGHT'S RUN POST DEV 100 YR FLOOD __ 475 AC DA 39.5 AC SITE �ubarea : SITE A ______-_________________________________________________________________ Hydrologic _ Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D _____________________________________________________________________________ Acres (CN) ULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS Meg Estab.) _ 'esidentia| districts Avg % impery (by average lot size) | 1/8 acre (town houses) 65 - - 10.5(90) - otal Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 10.5 ------- ----------------------------- -------'--------- ----------------------- - I �`bAKKA: &lTE A 101AL DRAINAGE AREA: lo.5 Acres WEISHTED CURVE NUMBEp:90 __ ______________________________ I _______________________________________