HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-18 Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church - PIN 43-A-90, 90B & 93 - Stonewall - BackfileComment Sheets:
GIS
Frederick Water
Inspections
Public Works _
Parks & Rec
Health Dept.
J
.. ✓
OPEN FILE:
i 1..-4J. I (I
C�
al �'
CLOSE FILE:
�l
SETS PLAN TRACMNG SHEET
WDOT
Winchester _
Stephens City
Middletown _
Airport
Fire
One copy of Site Plan application form
Payment of site plan review fee
One reproducible copy of Site Plan
File Opened
Reference Manual updated/number assigned
D-base updated
Scan documents to Planning S: drive
Application Action Summary updated
Scan additional items as needed (Project Planner to direct)
n
Approved (or denied) letter mailed to applicant/copy to file and cc's
File stamped "approved", "denied" or "withdrawn"
Reference Manual updated
D-base updated
Scanning updated
Application Action Summary updated
Sys ID #
DATE- q191 lie
ECEIPT 4373.e
RECEIVED FROM C-1 L J( 1 1,j t I LA-1
Y .l / IJIA 1 IC .11 C Yv
ADDRESS P-O• - 8 �-G_Gl1
Two � l _ �'
1 ot
�4(0.�-
FOR 1+� � � - l i"iY t )c ✓ _s4cx:1F (,Lr)
ACCOUNT
HOW PAID
BEGINNING
CASH
BALANCE
AMOUNT
CHECK
PAID
BALANCE
MONEYDER
DUE
OR
`f3-�1-gU . Go B +
BY �
9)2001 IiMIFORM® 51657N-CL
Please note: The site plans associated with this file are
located in the file room.
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/ 665-5651
Fax: 540/ 665-6395
April 5, 2019
James L. Hinze
Zion Church Builders, Inc.
PO Box 218
Mattawan, MI 49071
Re: Review Comments for Site Plan #37-18, Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church —
building addition
Property Identification Number (PIN): 43-A-90
Dear Mr. Hinze:
The above -referenced site plan was approved on April 5, 2019. The site plan is approved for a
9,975 square foot (SF) sanctuary addition with an addition 66 parking spaces in the RA (Rural
Areas) Zoning District in the Stonewall Magisterial District.
All requirements of the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance have been met in the approved site
plan. Attached are three (3) hard copies of the signed site plan by the Zoning Administrator. Please
forward these copies to the appropriate representative(s). Furthermore, advise the owner(s) that a
copy should be kept for future reference, and an approved copy must be kept on the construction
site throughout the development process. Further, once site development is complete, the owner(s)
should contact this office to schedule an on -site inspection. Do not hesitate to contact me if you
have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
M. Tyler Klein, AICP
Senior Planner
MTK/pd
Attachments
cc: Judith McCann -Slaughter, Stonewall Magisterial District
Gary R. Oates & William H. Cline, Stonewall District Planning Commissioners
Jane Anderson, Real Estate
Commissioner of Revenue
Kenneth Scott, Frederick County Fire & Rescue (einail)
Kristen Simpson, Project Manager, Zion Church Builders, Inc. (email only)
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church, 189 Parson Court, Winchester, VA 22603
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 9 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
Pam Deeter
To: Judy McCann -Slaughter; Gary Oates; wcline.fredcogovpc@icloud.com
Subject: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Attachments: Approval Ltr - SP #37-18 Cornerstone UPC.docx
Good afternoon,
Please find attached an approved site plan #37-18 letter from Mr. Klein for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
which is in your magisterial district. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Klein.
Pam Deeter,
Secretary II
Dept. Planning & Development
107 N. Kent St. Suite 202
540-665-5651
pdeeter@fcva.us
0 •
Pam Deeter
To: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Subject: Site plan approval letter
Attachments: Approval Ltr - SP #37-18 Cornerstone UPC.docx
Good afternoon,
Please find attached a site plan approval letter from Mr. Klein for the Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church. If you
have any questions, please contact Mr. Klein.
Pam Deeter,
Secretary II
Dept. Planning & Development
107 N. Kent St. Suite 202
540-665-5651
pdeeter@fcva.us
0 •
Pam Deeter
From: Microsoft Outlook
To: Kenneth Scott
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 2:53 PM
Subject: Delivered: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Your message has been delivered to the following recipients:
Kenneth Scott (kscott@fcva.us)
Subject: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
0 .
Pam Deeter
From: Microsoft Outlook
To: Gary Oates
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 2:53 PM
Subject: Relayed: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Delivery to these recipients or groups is complete, but no delivery notification was sent by the
destination server:
Gary Oates (oatesgr@aolxom�
Subject: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
0
0
Pam Deeter
From: Microsoft Outlook
To: Judy McCann -Slaughter
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 2:53 PM
Subject: Delivered: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Your message has been delivered to the following recipients:
Judy McCann -Slaughter (jslaughter(&fcva.us)
Subject: Site plan approval for Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
0 •
Pam Deeter
From: Microsoft Outlook
To: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, April 5, 2019 2:56 PM
Subject: Relayed: Site plan approval letter
Delivery to these recipients or groups is complete, but no delivery notification was sent by the
destination server:
zionchurchbuilders(&gmail.com (zionchurchbuilders(&gmail.com)
Subject: Site plan approval letter
• 0
COUNTY of FREDERICK
Department of Planning and Development
540/ 665-5651
Fax: 540/ 665-6395
September 24, 2018
James L. Hinze
Zion Church Builders, Inc.
PO Box 218
Mattawan, MI 49071
Re: Review Comments for Site Plan #37-18, Cornerstone United Pentecostal
Church — building addition
Property Identification Number (PIN): 43-A-90
Dear Mr. Hinze:
Planning Staff has reviewed the above -referenced site plan to determine if administrative
approval can be granted. At this time, administrative approval cannot be granted. This site
plan cannot be approved until the issues in this letter, as well as all issues of the other
review agencies, have been adequately addressed. Please review Staff s comments listed
below and then prepare a revised site plan which adequately addresses each concern.
Review Comments:
1) Site Plan Reference. Add the site plan number, SP #37-18 to the cover sheet.
2) Zoninj4 Details. The following revisions should be made to Sheet T-0:
• Tax Map Number: Remove reference to parcel PIN Ws 43-A-90A and 43-
A-90B as these no longer exist.
• Previous Approvals: Add a reference to previous site plan approvals #29-
78, #17-99, and #39-06.
Signage: Add a note that there are no modifications to existing signs and no
new signage is proposed with this building addition.
3) Future Route 37. On Sheet C-2 and C-3, future Route 37 should be depicted. See
attached snap fiorn Frederick County GIS.
4) Landscanin2 & Screening. A "Landscape Plan" should be provided which depicts
the required parking area headlight screening, parking area shade trees and
impervious area plantings (§165-202.01(13)). Calculations showing the required
plantings should also be provided for Staff to review. A note should also be
included that all landscaping and plantings will conform to the Frederick County
107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 9 Winchester, Virginia 22601-5000
0 0
Review Comments — SP #37-18, Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church — building addition
September 24, 2018
Page 2
Zoning Ordinance § 165-203.01.
Staff may provide additional comments after° review of the required "Landscape
Plan. "
5) Site Lightiniz. Add a note that all lighting will conform to Section §165-201.07 of
the Frederick County Zoning Ordinance and will be downcast and full cutoff.
Provide light fixture detail sheets. Specify the proposed height of pole -mounted
light fixtures; the pole height should not exceed 25-feet (FT).
6) Agency Approvals. Comment sheets (approvals) are required from the following
agencies: Building Inspections, the County Engineer (Public Works), the Fire
Marshall, and the Virginia Department of Health.
Staff acknowledges receipt of Frederick Water and Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) comments.
After you have revised the site plan, please resubmit one (1) copy so that Staff may verify
the information contained on the plan addresses the above comments. Staff will also need
all approved review agency comment sheets, at least five (5) copies of the final plan set
and a digital (PDF) copy for approval. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any
questions or concerns regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
M. Tyler Klein, AICP
Senior Planner
MTK/pd
Attachments
cc: Kristen Simpson, Project Manager, Zion Church Builders, Inc. (email only)
0 0
Pam Deeter
To: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Subject: Site Plan #37-18 Cornerstone United Pentecostal Property
Attachments: Review Comments - #37-18 Conerstone UPC.docx
Good afternoon,
Please find attached a review comments letter from Mr. Klein for the Cornerstone United Pentecostal Property. If you
have any questions, please contact Mr. Klein.
Pam Deeter
Planning and Development
107 N. Kent Street, Suite 202
Winchester, VA 22601
(540) 665-5651
Pam Deeter
From: Tyler Klein
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 1:06 PM
To: Pam Deeter
Subject: Review Comments - SP#37-18, Cornerstone
Attachments: Review Comments - #37-18 Conerstone UPC.docx; Future Route 37 - 43-A-90.pdf
Please find attached the comment letter for the above site plan; also attached is a PDF map that should be included with the letter in
addition to the marked -up plan set. Please also provide a email copy of the letter and map to Kristen Simpson
(zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com). Thank you.
M. Tyler Klein, AICP
Senior Planner
Department of Planning & Development
Frederick County, Virginia
107 N. Kent Street
Winchester, VA 22601
(540)722-8248
tklein(@fcva.us
Pam Deeter
From: Microsoft Outlook
To: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 3:09 PM
Subject: Relayed: Site Plan #37-18 Cornerstone United Pentecostal Property
Delivery to these recipients or groups is complete, but no delivery notification was sent by the
destination server:
zionchurchbuildersC&gmail.com (zionchurchbuilders@gmail.comj
Subject: Site Plan #37-18 Cornerstone United Pentecostal Property
�tEQUEST FOR SITE LN COMMENTS
t
I Frederick County Department of
Planning & Development
Mail to:
Frederick County
Department of Planning & Development
107 North Kent Street
Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone: (540) 665-5651
Hand deliver to:
Frederick County
Department of Planning & Development
107 North Kent Street, 2nd Floor
Winchester, Virginia 22601
.,3
Applicant: It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their
review. Please attach two (2) copies of the Site Plan with this sheet.
Applicants Name: James L. Hinze/Zion Church Builders, Inc.
Email Address: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Mailing Address: Po Box 218
Mattawan, MI 49071
Name of development and description of the request:
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church building addition
Telephone: 269-544-7211
Location of Property:
189 Parson Court
Winchester, VA 22603
Department of Planning & Development Comments:
-PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY -
Date Received Review Number 1 2 3 4 5 (circle one)
Date Reviewed
Revision Required Date Approved
Signature & Date:
** Please Return Form to Applicant**
16
it
U
Ir' AUG 3 0 2018
ll L
1
2.
3
SITE PLAN APPLICATION
n Office Use Only -
Date Application Received: Application #:
FF 0o
Fees Received:, i�� Receipt #: ��� % Initials:
Project Title: Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Project Description: New sanctuary addition
Location of Property: 189 Parson Court
(Street address) Winchester, VA 22603
4. Applicant/Designer:
Name: Daniel G. White, Architect
Primary Point of Contact: Jim Hinze
Address: 10687 Stadium Drive
Kalamazoo, MI 49009
5. Property Owner (if different than above):
Name: Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Address: 189 Parson Court
Winchester, VA 22603
6. Property Information:
a. Property Identification Number:
b. Total acreage of the parcel to be developed:
C. Total disturbed area of the parcel:
d. Present Use:
e. Proposed Use:
f. Magisterial District(s)
8
Telephone: 269-544-7211
email: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Telephone: 540-662-2562
43-A-90, 90B & 93
7.4841 acres
1.263 acres
Church
Addition to existing church
Stonewall
7. Site Plan Type:
a. Is this an original or new site plan? Yes n No
I V l
b. Is this a revised site plan? Yes -WI No
If yes provide all previous site plan numbers:
C. Is this a minor site plan? Yes II No
i
IV]
If yes provide all previous site plan numbers: 39-06
8. Zoning Information:
a. Current Zoning: RA
b. Was this property Rezoned? Yes F-1
No
l
IV]
C. If yes provide the rezoning number for this property:
d. Are there any proffers for this property? Yes
H
No
e. Has a MDP been approved for this property? Yes
No
f. If yes provide the MDP number for this property:
9. Adjoining property zoning and use:
USE
North Residential
East Highway
South Residential
West Residential
ZONING
RP
RP
RP
I have read the material included in this package and understand what is required by the Frederick County Planning
Department. I also un,de s�d that all required r a vial will be complete prior to the submission of my site plan.
Signature:
Name (Pri
Date:
James L. Hinze
August 16, 2018
9
i
•
SITE PLAN APPLICATION CHECKLIST
The checklist shown below specifies the information which is required to be submitted as part of the site
plan application. The Department of Planning & Development will review the application to ensure that
it is complete prior to accepting it. If any portion of the application is not complete, it will be returned to
the applicant(s).
(1) One (1) set of approved comment sheets are required from each relevant
review agency prior to final approval of a site plan. It is recommended that
applicants contact the Department of Planning & Development to determine
which review agencies are relevant to their site plan application. A list of
potentially relevant review agencies is shown below:
W] Frederick County Department of Planning & Development
W1Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)
Department of GIS (Geographic Information Services)
Frederick Water
Frederick County Building Inspections Department
Frederick County Department of Public Works
FVIFrederick County Fire Marshal
FVirginia Department of Health
nFrederick County Department of Parks & Recreation
City of Winchester
Town of Stephens City
Town of Middletown
Winchester Regional Airport Authority
Frederick County Public Schools (for residential plans)
(2)
One (1) copy of the Site Plan application form.
❑✓
(3)
Payment of the site plan review fee.
(4)
Two (2) copies of the site plan for review.
❑✓
(5)
Completed Special Limited Power of Attorney (original).
(6)
Traffic Impact Analysis (if applicable).
10
0
C�
SITE PLAN CHECKLIST
The Site Plan Checklist, shown below, lists the information which is required to be on each site plan. Site plans
which are incomplete or missing information will be returned to the applicant (s) for revision.
ProjectInformation Section
� (1)
. W]
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
A title that includes the name of the proposed or existing business and a subtitle which
describes the proposed development.
The name, address, and phone number of the land owner, developer, and designer.
The Frederick County Property Identification Number (PIN) of all lots included on the
site plan.
The number and type of dwelling units included on the site plan for residential uses.
The total land area and total developed land area of all lots included on the site plan.
A detailed description of the proposed use or uses of the development, as well as a
description of the existing use or uses.
A reference to any other site plan, master development plan approved by the county
for the site.
The date the site plan was prepared and a list of all revisions made, including the date
and a description of why the site plan was revised.
A table of contents including all pages of the site plan.
A list of all proposed utility providers, with their address and phone number.
A location map showing the location of the site, along with the location of streets,
roads and land uses within five hundred (500) feet of the property.
A statement listing all requirements and conditions placed on the land included in the
site plan resulting from approval of conditional zoning or a conditional use permit.
A description of setbacks or conditions placed on the site as a result of an approved
variance.
(14) The name of the Magisterial District the property is located within.
Calculations Section
(15) Calculations showing the Floor Area Ration (FAR) of the site, including the maximum
allowed FAR, total ground floor area, total floor area, and total lot area.
-- (16) Calculations showing the total number of required and proposed parking spaces,
11
including the total number of existing and proposed spaces.
(17)
Calculations showing the total number of required handicap spaces, including the total
number of existing and proposed spaces.
(18)
Calculations showing the total number of required loading spaces, including the total
number of existing and proposed spaces.
(19)
Calculations showing the total number of required perimeter and interior trees
required, including the number of provided trees.
❑
(20)
Calculations showing the percentage of the property that will be landscaped and the
percentage of woodlands disturbed.
(19)
Calculations showing the total number of required perimeter and interior trees
required, including the number of provided trees.
Site Plan & Details Section
I V I
(21)
The location of all adjoining lots with the owner's name, specific use, zoning, and
zoning boundaries shown.
(22)
The location of all existing or planned right-of-ways and easements that are located on
or adjoin the property, with street names, widths, and speed limits shown.
I r l
(23)
All nearby entrances that are within two hundred (200) feet of any existing or
proposed entrances to the site.
(24)
All existing and proposed driveways, parking and loading spaces, parking lots and a
description of surfacing material and construction details to be used. The size and
angle of parking spaces, aisles, maneuvering areas, and loading spaces shall be shown.
❑�
(25)
A North arrow.
(26)
A graphic scale and statement of scale.
❑�
(27)
A legend describing all symbols and other features that need description.
❑�
(28)
A boundary survey of the entire parcel and all lots included with distances described at
least to the nearest hundredth of a foot.
(29)
The present zoning of all portions of the site, with the location of zoning boundaries.
(30)
The location of all existing and proposed structures, with the height, specific use,
ground floor area, and total floor area labeled.
(31)
The location of all existing and proposed outdoor uses, with the height, specific use,
and land area labeled.
(32)
Existing topographic contour lines at intervals acceptable to the Zoning Administrator.
Proposed finished grades shall be shown by contour.
12
(33) The location of the front, side, and rear yard setback lines required by the applicable
zoning district.
(34)
The location and boundaries of existing environmental features, including streams,
floodplains, lakes and ponds, wetlands, natural stormwater retention areas, steep
slopes, and woodlands.
❑
(35)
The location of outdoor trash receptacles with details for all required screening
elements.
(36)
A Photometric Plan per § 165-201.07.
(37)
The location, dimensions, and height of all signs.
(38)
The location of required buffers, landscaping buffers, and landscaped screens,
including examples, typical cross sections or diagrams of screening to be used. The
location and dimensions of required fencing, berms, and similar features shall be
specified.
_❑
(39)
The location of recreational areas and common open space.
(40)
The location of all proposed landscaping with a legend. The caliper, scientific name,
and common name of all deciduous trees. The height at planting, scientific name, and
common name of all evergreen trees and shrubs.
❑
(41)
The height at planting, caliper, scientific name, and common name shall be provided
for all proposed trees. The height at planting, scientific name and common name shall
be provided for all shrubs.
(42)
The location of sidewalks and walkways, including all sidewalks or bicycle paths
required along any road right of way.
(43)
The location and width of proposed easements and dedications.
(44)
A stormwater management plan describing the location of all stormwater management
facilities with design calculations and details.
(45)
A soil erosion and sedimentation plan describing methods to be used.
FVI(46)
The location and size of sewer and water mains and laterals serving the site.
13
• 0
(47) Facilities necessary to meet the requirements of the Fire Code.
❑� (48) A signed seal of the certified Virginia land surveyor, architect, or engineer who
prepared the plan. The seal and signature of the engineer, surveyor or architect shall
be on each sheet of the site plan.
(49) A space labeled "Approved by the Frederick County Zoning Administrator" for the
signature of the Zoning Administrator, approval date, and a statement that reads "site
plan valid for five (5) years from approval date."
(50) All requirements specified elsewhere in the County Code, including but not limited to
the Subdivision Ordinance.
14
Special Limited Power of Attorney
County of Frederick, Virginia
Frederick Planning Website: wvvyi.fcva.us
Department of Planning & Development, County of Frederick, Virginia
107 North Kent Street, Winchester, Virginia 22601
Phone (540) 665-5651 Facsimile (540) 665-6395
Know All Men By These Presents: That I (We)
��
(Name) `'ern e.✓ Imt t'pc, (Phone)
S 6— 6G2-2S--?2.
(Address) 1 �01 PA-2�a� �. WINC.4e-
the owner(s) of all those tracts or parcels of land ("Property") conveyed to me (us), by deed recorded in the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Frederick, Virginia, by
Instrument No.
on Page
Parcel: Lot: Block: Section:
do hereby make, constitute and appoint:
and is described as
Subdivision:
(Name) Zt o )1c L� l Jl /Yl (Phone)
(Address) �� !%��( / V1�/k�/ /�i `1y i f
To act as my true and lawful attorney -in -fact for and in my (our) name, place and stead with full power and
authority I (we) would have if acting personally to file planning applications for my (our) above described
Property, including:
_Rezoning (including proffers)
FConditional Use Permit
_=Master Development Plan (Preliminary and Final)
Subdivision
Site Plan
_=Variance or Appeal
My attorney -in -fact shall have the authority to offer proffered conditions and to make amendments to previously
approved proffered conditions except as follows:
This authorization shall expire one year from the day it is signed, or until it is otherwise r scinded or modified.
In witness thereof, I (we have hereto set my (our) hand and seal this j� Lh day of ry Q, �1 , 20 ,
Signature(s)
v —I-/ }
State of Virginia, City/County of LO,'�� �� , To -wit:
t
I, , a Notary Public in and for the jurisdiction aforesaid,
certify th t the rson(s) who signed to the foregoing instrument personally app ared before me and has
acknowl g d tl saw fore e " the�urisdiction aforesaid this '�l lday of �� , 20�.
My Commission Expires:��(�
0 0
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN COMMENTS
Frederick Water Comment
Mail to: Hand deliver to:
Frederick Water Frederick Water
Attn: Engineer 315 Tasker Road
P.O. Box 1877 Stephens City, Virginia 22655
Winchester, Virginia 22604 Phone: (540) 868-1061
_.__
Applicant: It is your responsibility to complete this form as accurately as possible in order to assist the agency with their
review. Please attach two (2) copies of the Site Plan with this sheet.
Applicant's Name: James L. Hinze/zion Church Builders, Inc. Telephone: 269-544-7211
Email Address: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com
Mailing Address: Po Box 218
Mattawan, MI 49071
Name of development and description of the request:
Comerstone United Pentecostal Church building addition
Location of Property:
189 Parson Court
Winchester, VA 22603
Frederick Water:
Date Received _
Date Reviewed _
Revision Required
Signature & Date:
ATER AUTHORITY USE ONLY -
Review Number 1 2 3 4 5 (circle one)
Date Approved
** Please Return Form to Applicant**
D
34 111111 "1 1
0 •
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN COMMENTS
Virginia Department of Transportation
Mail to: Hand deliver to:
Virginia Department of Transportation Virginia Department of Transportation
Attn: Resident Engineer Attn: Resident Engineer�1a��1
14031 Old Valley Pike 2275 Northwestern Pike
Edinburg, Virginia 22824 Winchester, Virginia 22603
Phone: (540) 984-5600
Applicant: Please fill out the information as accurately as possible in order to assist the Virginia Department of
Transportation with their review. Please attach two (2) copies of the site plan with traffic generation data and drainage
calculations with this sheet.
Applicant's Name: James L. Hinze/Zion Church Builders, Inc.
Email Address: zi-c urchbuilders@gman.com
Mailing Address: Pa Box 218
Mattawan, MI 49o71
Name of development and description of the request:
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church building addition
Location of Property:
189 Parson Court
Winchester VA 22603
Telephone: 269-544-7211
-VDOT USE ONLY -
Date Received Review Number 1 2 3 4 5 (circle one)
Date Reviewed
Revision Required Date Approved lQ
VDOT Signature & Date:
** Pleasc Return Form to Applicant**
15
Kristen Simason
From: Rhonda Funkhouser <Rhonda.Funkhouser@vdot.virginia.gov>
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2018 3:59 PM
To: eric@lighthouseengineeringconsultants.com
Cc: zionchurchbuilders@gmail.com;jbishop @fcva.us; Matthew Smith; Lloyd Ingram
Subject: Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church Building Addition - VDOT Comments to Site
Plan
Attachments: Scanned from a Xerox Multifunction Printer.pdf
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Staunton/Edinburg Land Development
14031 Old Valley Pike
Edinburg, VA 22824
Mr. Hess,
A VDOT review was conducted for the Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church Building Addition site plan with
a seal date of August 13, 2018. Based on the review of the drawings, the existing entrance from Route 661 is
adequate and acceptable to our office. Please ensure that all applicable agencies have the most recent set of
approved drawings.
We offer the following general comments:
• Our review and comments are general in nature. Should details be overlooked during plan review or
conditions in the field exist such that additional measures are warranted, such measures shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the department.
• Materials used and methods of construction shall adhere to the current observed VDOT Road and
Bridge Specifications, Road and Bridge Standards, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and Land
Use Permit Special Provisions.
• 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.
• Any construction related changes to the approved plan must come through the design engineer to
VDOT for approval. Please allow a minimum of 5 business days for VDOT review.
• A Land Use Permit shall be obtained before any work is performed on the State's right-of-way. The
permit is issued by this office and may require application fees, the salary & expenses of a State
assigned inspector, and surety bond coverage.
If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Regards,
•
Lloyd A. Ingram I Land Development Engineer
Virginia Department of Transportation
Clarke, Frederick, Shenandoah & Warren Counties
14031 Old Valley Pike
Edinburg, VA 22824
voice: 540/984-5611
fax: 540/984-5607
e-mail: Lloyd. Ingram(d)vdot.virQinia.gov
• •
Erosion & Sediment ControCPCan &
Stormwater-"Alanagement Plan
For
ProposedAdditions
Cornerstone United PentecostaC Church
'Winchester, 'Virginia
PIN#: 43-A-90 & 43-A-94 (Part o�O
Instrument #: 070015056 & 08008577
Prepared For.
Cornerstone 'United PentecostaC Church
18q Parsons Court
'Winchester, 'Virginia 22603
ERIC C. HESS
Lie. No. 040226
�- 8120
1ZO1&
��'SsIUNAL lc��'
.August 20, 2o18
Prepared By:
P4 Bvx iZ
Pounding Mil, Mrglnia 24637
s --F phanc (271) l84 s"T Email. &rk@%gh w seen*eeri*F*nsulartLcOln
WWI*: (423) 6#24671 Wabeite: wnw�yr�aeen�prfooringcoriau�tarno.aaia
•
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 1
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to provide a narrative description of the Erosion &
Sediment Control and Stormwater Management measures, maintenance procedures
and storm water runoff calculations related to the site grading of building additions and
associated parking areas. The additions would be constructed on the same property as
the existing church facilities located at 189 Parsons Court in Winchester, Virginia. The
additions include a new sanctuary (approximately 9,975 sq. ft.), a fire water storage
tank, and additional parking and drive areas to support the proposed additions.
This Erosion & Sediment Control Plan & Stormwater Management Plan is prepared for:
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
c/o Jeff Dillon, Pastor
189 Parson Court
Winchester, Virginia 22603
Phone: (540) 662-2562
Email: idillon442@comcast.net
This document should be present at the site and readily available for all involved parties
including, regulatory agencies, design professionals, contractors and the owner, at all
times during construction operations.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site consists of a disturbed area of 1.439 acres (62,681 sq ft). The site
grading will perform excavation and fill placement adjacent to the existing church
location.
The purpose of the project is to develop the subject site for a new sanctuary addition
(9,975 square feet) and associated parking and drive areas. The development will also
include a sediment/detention basin and a bio-retention basin.
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The site is currently a part of the existing property of the Cornerstone United
Pentecostal Church. The areas to be developed currently consist of grassed lawn
areas, a graveled area, and the existing stormwater detention basin. Stormwater
drainage currently exits the subject area via a drainage swale located near the
southeast corner of the property.
The existing site is shown in the image of Figure 1 below.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 2
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
Figure 1 — Aerial image showing the subject site, existing structures, and existing parking area. (Source:
Google Earth)
Existing drainage conditions include mainly sheet flow across the existing site. Some
shallow concentrated flow may exist at the outlet location for the existing stormwater
detention basin. The shallow concentrated flow would exist between the outlet and the
existing pipe culvert to the southeast that carries the drainage beneath Interstate 81.
ADJACENT AREAS
The adjacent areas consist of low density residential development and Interstate
Highway 81. Stormwater runoff will flow in generally a northwest to southeast direction
across the subject site. Plans for perimeter controls along the southern side of the
disturbed area include silt fencing and a sediment basin/stormwater detention basin.
The remaining areas are located hydraulically independent of the site and will not
require perimeter controls.
OFF -SITE AREAS
At this time, there are no plans to disturb other offsite areas. The Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Regulations apply to all land disturbing activities which evolve from
this project. All land disturbing activities must be conducted in accordance with these
regulations. All erosion and sediment control practices, both vegetative and structural,
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 3
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
must be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with the Standard and
Specifications found in Chapter III of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook (1992).
SOILS
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC performed a review of soil data for the subject
site. The soil data was obtained using the Web Soil Survey database of the U. S.
Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service.
The soils existing at the subject site primarily belong to the Frederick-Poplimento loams
unit. The Frederick-Poplimento loams soil type consists of loam, clay loam, and clay
soils. The Frederick-Poplimento loams exist near the summits of rolling hill areas and
has slopes of approximately 2 to 7 percent. The soil unit has a moderately high
capacity to transmit water and also has a moderate availability for water storage in the
subsurface profile. The soil type has a depth to bedrock of more than 80 inches. The
soil type typically has a good capacity for infiltration. The soil report indicates that the
hydrologic soil group is a B/C.
The soils report indicates that the soil type has a slight potential for off -road, off -trail
erosion once the site surface materials are removed. The RUSLE2 and Conservation
Planning attributes related to erosion are included in the report.
The WebSoil Survey Custom Soil Resource Report is included in Appendix A of this
report.
CRITICAL AREAS
The only critical areas for the subject site are located in the side slopes of the sediment
basin/stormwater detention basin. The side slopes are sloped with a geometry of 2H:1 V
(50% slope).
In order to prevent excessive erosion, it will be critical to quickly establish vegetation for
these areas. Roughening, or tracking the slope surfaces, should be performed prior to
seeding to prevent the seed from being removed from the slope surface via wind,
gravity, water runoff, etc. Areas requiring surface roughening are shown on the drawing
using the symbol SR.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
i 0
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 4
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES
The practices listed below will be used to satisfy the minimum standards as set forth in
Chapter 3 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook.
Minimum Standard 3.02 — Construction Entrance
A project construction entrance will be installed at the subject site at the locations
shown on the drawing. The construction entrance should be installed prior to
beginning land disturbing operations.
Minimum Standard 3.05 — Silt Fence
Silt fence will be used as a method of perimeter control on down slope areas as
shown on the drawing. Silt fence should be installed prior to beginning grading
operations. A total of 740 linear feet of silt fence is planned for the subject site.
Minimum Standard 3.08 — Culvert Inlet Protection (Stone Option)
Culvert inlet protection will be used to prevent transport of sediment into the
outlet pipe culvert of the sediment basin. Inlet protection should be installed at
the locations shown on the drawing immediately prior to placing the culverts into
use.
Minimum Standard 3.14 — Temporary Sediment Basin
A sediment basin will be used to collect and detain stormwater for a period of
time to allow for sediment to settle out of the water before exiting the site area.
The sediment basin will also be used as a permanent stormwater detention
basin. The sediment basin should be installed at the location shown in
accordance with the drawings. The sediment basin should be installed as early
as possible in the land -disturbing activities.
Minimum Standard 3.17 — Stormwater Conveyance Channel
A stormwater conveyance channel will be used to convey stormwater runoff from
a curbcut at the edge of the parking areas into the sediment basin. The
stormwater conveyance channel should be installed at the location shown on the
drawing and in accordance with the cross section provided in the drawings.
Minimum Standard 3.18 — Outlet Protection
Outlet protection will be utilized at the outlet end of the outlet pipe for the
sediment basin. The outlet protection is designed for the minimum tailwater
condition. Outlet protection should be installed at the location shown on the
drawings prior to placing the stormwater pipes in service.
All temporary erosion and sediment control devices shall be removed within thirty days
after reaching final site grade or after they are no longer needed. Trapped sediment
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 5
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
and areas disturbed by removing of these devices must be permanently stabilized by
seeding, fertilizing, liming and mulching to prevent further erosion and sedimentation.
PERMANENT STABILIZATION
Minimum Standard 3.29 — Surface Roughening
Surface Roughening will be performed on all permanently seeded surfaces with a
slope of greater than 3H:1 V to loosen the soil surface, reduce runoff velocities,
increase infiltration, and aid in establishing vegetation.
Minimum Standard 3.32 - Permanent Seeding
Permanent seeding should be performed within seven (7) days upon reaching
the final grade at any area of the site. Temporary seeding should be performed
within seven (7) days for any areas that will remain dormant for more than thirty
(30) days. However, it is not likely that temporary seeding should be needed on
this site.
The planned land disturbance will result in an area of permanent seeding of
15,100 square feet (0.347 acre). All disturbed areas (besides pavements and
structures) resulting from site grading and construction will be stabilized via
permanent seeding after finish grading is completed. Permanent seeding should
be performed using a Minimum Care Lawn Mix as per Table 3.32-C of the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. Agricultural lime shall be
applied at a rate of 2 tons/acre. Fertilizer (10-20-10) shall be added at a rate of
1000 Ibs/acre.
Minimum Standard 3.35 - Mulching
Mulching shall be performed for all seeded areas. Mulching should be performed
as described by Minimum Standard 3.35 of the Virginia Erosion & Sediment
Control Handbook. Fiber mulch should be used if hydroseeding is performed
using an application rate of 45 pounds per 1000 square feet. Otherwise, a straw
or hay mulch should be utilized with an application rate of 80 pounds per 1000
square feet.
EROSION CONTROL MAINTENANCE
Erosion and sediment control measures will be checked at the intervals specified by the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and after each event of significant
rainfall. Inspections will be performed by a Responsible Land Disturber to be
determined by the Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church or Zion Church Builders.
Zion Church Builders has been selected as the construction manager.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 6
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
Mr. Jeff Dillon, pastor, of the Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church will be responsible
for ensuring that all inspections, maintenance and repairs are performed. For
emergency contact, you may contact Mr. Jeff Dillon via telephone at (540) 662-2562.
Construction Entrance — Check periodically and top -dress stone as needed.
Silt Fence — Check after each rainfall event for damaged fence, end runs and
undercutting beneath fence. Repairs should be accomplished promptly.
Culvert Inlet Protection — Check after each rainfall event and repair as needed.
Remove and properly dispose of sediment when sediment exceeds half of the height of
the protection device.
Temporary Sediment Basin — Check after each rainfall event and repair as needed.
Remove and properly disposed of sediment when sediment exceeds half of the wet
storage.
Stormwater Conveyance Channel — Check after each rainfall event and repair as
needed. Repair lining as necessary if erosion occurs. Repairs should be accomplished
promptly.
Outlet Protection — Check after each rainfall event and repair as necessary. Repairs
should be accomplished promptly.
Permanent Seeding — Check periodically. Reseed immediately once it becomes clear
that seed has not germinated properly. Permanently seeded areas will require
maintenance including re -seeding, re -mulching, etc. if a proper permanent vegetative
cover is not established. Permanent vegetative cover shall consist of a well
established, uniform vegetation that is mature enough to survive and will inhibit erosion.
STORM WATER RUNOFF CONSIDERATIONS
The site was delineated into drainage areas for analysis of pre -development and post -
development storm water runoff. The drainage areas are labeled and shown on the
accompanying drawings.
In general, the new site grading does not affect the drainage area boundaries. The
receiving channel is the existing drainage swale located near the southeast corner of
the property.
STORM WATER RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
Storm water runoff calculations have been performed using WinTR-55 and SEDCAD 4
for Windows computer software. These software programs utilize the SCS TR-55
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
0
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 7
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
method. A Type 11, 24 hour rainfall was used for each of the following storm events: 1-
year, 2-year and 10-year. The intensity for each of these storm events was obtained
from the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14 Rainfall Data.
The NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Data is included in Appendix B of this report.
The times of concentration were calculated by the software using measured flow
lengths and ground characteristics from the plan view of the project site. Copies of the
computerized reports are attached in the appendices of this report.
WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS
The subject area of the project site was previously a stormwater basin and also included
a gravel access road. Therefore, the site is being considered as a re -development site.
The Virginia Runoff Reduction Re -Development Spreadsheet for Water Quality is
included in Appendix C of this report.
Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs)
In order to address the water quality component of the stormwater requirements, a
Level 1 Bio-Retention facility is planned along the southern edge of the new parking
area. A gravel diaphragm is planned for pre-treatment prior to entering the Bio-
Retention facility.
The designed Level 1 Bio-Retention facility does not currently meet the Virginia Storm
Water Quality Requirements. It is currently planned to purchase offsite nutrient credits
to make up the difference between the required reduction and the reduction achieved
on the subject site. If this option is not available or becomes too expensive, the plan
would be amended to provide additional onsite treatment.
Stormwater BMP Maintenance
Level 1 Bio-Retention — For the Bio-Retention facility, a maintenance agreement and
deed restrictions are required to ensure that the facility is properly maintained over the
life of the property. In addition, the following maintenances tasks should be performed
as shown below in Table 9.7 of the Virginia DEQ BMP Specification #9.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
Table 9.7. S:.iggested Annual Maintenance Activlfies for Bioretention
Page 8
Maintenance Tasks
Frequency
Mweing of grass filter stfips and biQretention wrf cover
loaSt 4 tgMOS a ydar
•
Spot %v**4in , erosion ropair, !rash rcnwal, and mulch taking
_Al
— --vice during gro-A-ing seasan
•
Add relnforcernent planting to maintain desired the vegetation
density
As needed
•
Rerrove invasive plants using re,-ornmended control mcftds
•
Staoilize the contnbuting drainage aron to provent oras7on
•
Spring ahspection and c eanup
•
Supplemeni mulch to maintain a 3 inch layer
Annua,ly
•
Prune trees arui shrubs
•
Renv-ve sediment in pre-treatment cults and inflow points
Once every 2 to 3 years
•
Replace the mulch layer
Every 3 years
WATER QUANTITY CONSIDERATIONS
Pre -Development Conditions
The quantity of stormwater runoff was calculated for the pre -development site
conditions assuming that the grassed surfaces were in a good condition with the
appropriate soil type (A, B, C, or D) assigned.
The storm water runoff calculations identify that the following runoff quantities are
generated during the 1-year, 2-year, and 10-year storm events:
1-Year Storm Event
2.48 cubic feet per second
2-Year Storm Event
3.48 cubic feet per second
10-Year Storm Event
8.30 cubic feet per second
The Pre -Development Stormwater Calculations are included in Appendix D of this
report.
Post -Development Conditions
The storm water runoff calculations identify that the following runoff quantities are
generated during the 1-year, 2-year, and 10-year storm events:
1-Year Storm Event 1.12 cubic feet per second
2-Year Storm Event 1.80 cubic feet per second
10-Year Storm Event 4.10 cubic feet per second
The planned site grading ultimately results in lower peak flow rates during the 1-year, 2-
year, and 10-year storm events.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative Page 9
& Stormwater Management Narrative
Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Winchester, Virginia
The Post -Development Stormwater Calculations are included in Appendix E of this
report.
Receiving Channel Adequacy
The receiving channel for the post -development stormwater is an existing natural,
grassed swale near the southeast corner of the property. The subject swale was
evaluated for adequacy using the 1-year storm event criteria set by the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality regulations. The analysis requires stormwater
calculations for the 1-year storm event for all of the following conditions:
• Forested
• Pre -development
• Post -development
The 1-year Storm Event Stormwater Calculations are included in Appendix F of this
report.
The 1-year storm event calculation data is then utilized to check the adequacy of the
channel based on the VDEQ guidelines for a natural channel. The channel adequacy
calculations were performed in an Excel spreadsheet. The DEQ Channel Protection
Spreadsheet is included in Appendix Fof this report. As shown by the spreadsheet, the
project design has achieved a peak discharge of less than or equal to the required
target peak discharge. Therefore, the receiving channel is adequately protected.
Lighthouse Engineering Consultants, LLC
File No.: 2018-012 August 20, 2018
•
•
appendix A
WebSoilSurvey Custom
Soil Resource Report
n
•
United States
Department of
Agriculture
NRCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Frederick
County, Virginia
Additions to Cornerstone United
Pentecostal Church
August 14, 2018
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
•
u
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
0 •
Contents
Preface.................................................................................................................... 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8
SoilMap................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
MapUnit Legend................................................................................................
11
MapUnit Descriptions..........................................................................................11
Frederick County, Virginia...............................................................................13
513—Carbo silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes.................................................13
1413—Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes ..........................14
1613—Frederick-Poplimento, very rocky loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes ........
15
3213—Oaklet silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes ..............................................
17
Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................19
Suitabilities and Limitations for Use....................................................................19
LandManagement..........................................................................................19
Erosion Hazard (Off -Road, Off-Trail)...........................................................19
SoilReports........................................................................................................24
SoilErosion.....................................................................................................24
RUSLE2 Related Attributes.........................................................................24
Conservation Planning................................................................................25
References............................................................................................................
27
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
• •
Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
0
LJ
Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
7
•
0
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
9
39° 13' 36" N
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
746730 746M 746850 746910 746970
3
Map Scale: 1:2,610 if prated on A landscape (11" x 8.S') sheet
� Meters
N 0 35 70 140 210
IV
0 100 200 400 600
Map pro)ecbon: Web Mercabr Caner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
9
39° 13' 48" N
0
� I
•
•
0
390 13 36' N
747030 747090 747150 747210 747270
3
m
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
r.r
Soil Map Unit Lines
A
Soil Map Unit Points
Special
Point Features
V
Blowout
0
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
r
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
'{
Landfill
A.
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
as
Mine or Quarry
®
Miscellaneous Water
0
Perennial Water
V
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
—g,
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
r
Sodic Spot
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP INFORMATION
ti
Spoil Area
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:15,800.
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
�r
Wet Spot
Other
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
Special Line Features
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Water Features
scale.
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
+ r+
Rails
measurements.
,.
Interstate Highways
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
US Routes
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Major Roads
Local Roads
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
Background
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
.
Aerial Photography
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Frederick County, Virginia
Survey Area Data: Version 12, Oct 3, 2017
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 9, 2011—Mar 10,
2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
10
u
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
5B Carbo sill: loam, 2 to 7 percent 1.5 4.6%
slopes
14B Frederick-Poplimento foams, 2 22.4 69.0%
to 7 percent slopes
16B Frederick-Poplimento, very 4.6 14.3%
rocky foams, 2 to 7 percent
slopes
32B Oaklet sift loam, 2 to 7 percent 3. 112.1 %
slopes
Totals for Area of Interest 32.4 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
11
• •
Custom Soil Resource Report
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
12
•
Custom Soil Resource Report
0
Frederick County, Virginia
513—Carbo silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. kh8r
Elevation: 900 to 2,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 55 degrees F
Frost -free period. 160 to 190 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Carbo and similar soils: 85 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Carbo
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material. Residuum weathered from limestone
Typical profile
H9 - 0 to 9 inches: silt loam
H2 - 9 to 26 inches: clay
H3 - 26 to 36 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to lithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
13
• 0
Custom Soil Resource Report
14B—Frederick-Poplimento loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: kh6h
Elevation: 900 to 2,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 55 degrees F
Frost -free period. 160 to 190 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Frederick and similar soils: 45 percent
Poplimento and similar soils: 40 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Frederick
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum from limestone
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam
H2 - 7 to 12 inches: silty clay loam
H3 - 12 to 25 inches: clay
H4 - 25 to 72 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
14
0 •
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Poplimento
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landfonn position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum from limestone
Typical profile
H1- 0 to 5 inches: loam
H2 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam
H3 - 9 to 50 inches: clay
H4 - 50 to 60 inches: silty clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
16B—Frederick-Poplimento, very rocky loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: kh6p
Elevation: 900 to 2,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 55 degrees F
Frost -free period. 160 to 190 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Frederick and similar soils: 40 percent
Poplimento and similar soils: 35 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
15
i
Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Frederick
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material. Residuum from limestone
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam
H2 - 7 to 12 inches: silty clay loam
H3 - 12 to 25 inches: clay
H4 - 25 to 72 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Poplimento
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum from limestone
Typical profile
H1- 0 to 5 inches: loam
H2 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam
H3 - 9 to 50 inches: clay
H4 - 50 to 60 inches: silty clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
16
0 •
Custom Soil Resource Report
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
3213—Oaklet silt loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol.• kh7t
Elevation: 500 to 1,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 36 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 55 degrees F
Frost -free period. 160 to 190 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Oaklet and similar soils: 85 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Oaklet
Setting
Landform: Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material. Residuum derived from limestone
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam
H2 - 5 to 11 inches: silt loam
H3 - 11 to 31 inches: clay
H4 - 31 to 63 inches: clay
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 7 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
17
i
Custom Soil Resource Report
•
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
ii3
•
Soil Information for All Uses
Suitabilities and Limitations for Use
The Suitabilities and Limitations for Use section includes various soil interpretations
displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the
selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by
aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This
aggregation process is defined for each interpretation.
Land Management
Land management interpretations are tools designed to guide the user in evaluating
existing conditions in planning and predicting the soil response to various land
management practices, for a variety of land uses, including cropland, forestland,
hayland, pastureland, horticulture, and rangeland. Example interpretations include
suitability for a variety of irrigation practices, log landings, haul roads and major skid
trails, equipment operability, site preparation, suitability for hand and mechanical
planting, potential erosion hazard associated with various practices, and ratings for
fencing and waterline installation.
Erosion Hazard (Off -Road, Off -Trail)
The ratings in this interpretation indicate the hazard of soil loss from off -road and
off -trail areas after disturbance activities that expose the soil surface. The ratings
are based on slope and soil erosion factor K. The soil loss is caused by sheet or rill
erosion in off -road or off -trail areas where 50 to 75 percent of the surface has been
exposed by logging, grazing, mining, or other kinds of disturbance.
The ratings are both verbal and numerical. The hazard is described as "slight,"
"moderate," "severe," or "very severe." A rating of "slight" indicates that erosion is
unlikely under ordinary climatic conditions; "moderate" indicates that some erosion
is likely and that erosion -control measures may be needed; "severe" indicates that
erosion is very likely and that erosion -control measures, including revegetation of
bare areas, are advised; and "very severe" indicates that significant erosion is
expected, loss of soil productivity and off -site damage are likely, and erosion -control
measures are costly and generally impractical.
19
• •
Custom Soil Resource Report
Numerical ratings indicate the severity of individual limitations. The ratings are
shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations
between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative impact on the
specified aspect of forestland management (1.00) and the point at which the soil
feature is not a limitation (0.00).
The map unit components listed for each map unit in the accompanying Summary
by Map Unit table in Web Soil Survey or the Aggregation Report in Soil Data Viewer
are determined by the aggregation method chosen. An aggregated rating class is
shown for each map unit. The components listed for each map unit are only those
that have the same rating class as listed for the map unit. The percent composition
of each component in a particular map unit is presented to help the user better
understand the percentage of each map unit that has the rating presented.
Other components with different ratings may be present in each map unit. The
ratings for all components, regardless of the map unit aggregated rating, can be
viewed by generating the equivalent report from the Soil Reports tab in Web Soil
Survey or from the Soil Data Mart site. Onsite investigation may be needed to
validate these interpretations and to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site.
20
39" 13 48" N
39° 13 36" N
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map —Erosion Hazard (Off -Road, Off -Trail) 3
746730 746790 746850 746910 746970
3
Map Scale: 1:2,610 fi panted on A landscape (11" x8.5") sheet
Meters
N
N 0 35 70 140 210
Feet
V
0 100 200 400 600 Map projection: Web Mercator Caner coordinates: WG584 Edge tics: UTM Zom 17N WGS84
21
39' 13' 48" N
o_
•
•
0
39' 1T 3r N
747030 747090 747150 747210 747270
3
h
ro
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Rating
Polygons
0
Very severe
0
Severe
0
Moderate
0
Slight
0
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating
Lines
.�
Very severe
. r
Severe
Moderate
�r
Slight
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating
Points
®
Very severe
13
Severe
E3
Moderate
0
Slight
11
Not rated or not available
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
i--+-4
Rails
Interstate Highways
Custom Soil Resource Report
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
. Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:15, 800.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Frederick County, Virginia
Survey Area Data: Version 12, Oct 3, 2017
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Feb 9, 2011—Mar 10,
2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
•
22
•
Custom Soil Resource Report
Tables —Erosion Hazard (Off -Road, Off -Trail)
Map unit
symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Component
name (percent)
Rating reasons
(numeric
values)
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
5B
Carbo silt loam, 2
Slight
Carbo (85%)
1.5
4.6%
to 7 percent
slopes
Slight
Frederick (45%)
22.4
69.0%
14B
Frederick-
Poplimento
foams, 2 to 7
percent slopes
Poplimento
(40%)
16B
Frederick-
Slight
Frederick (40%)
4.6
14.3%
1 Poplimento,
very rocky
loams, 2 to 7
Poplimento
(35%)
percent slopes
32B
Oaklet silt loam,
Slight
Oaklet (85%)
3.91
12.1 %
2 to 7 percent
slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
32.4
100.0%
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
Slight 32.4
-..
Totals for Area of Interest 32.4
Rating Options —Erosion Hazard (Off -Road, Off -Trail)
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff.- None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Higher
100.0%
100.0%
23
•
Custom Soil Resource Report
•
Soil Reports
The Soil Reports section includes various formatted tabular and narrative reports
(tables) containing data for each selected soil map unit and each component of
each unit. No aggregation of data has occurred as is done in reports in the Soil
Properties and Qualities and Suitabilities and Limitations sections.
The reports contain soil interpretive information as well as basic soil properties and
qualities. A description of each report (table) is included.
Soil Erosion
This folder contains a collection of tabular reports that present soil erosion factors
and groupings. The reports (tables) include all selected map units and components
for each map unit. Soil erosion factors are soil properties and interpretations used in
evaluating the soil for potential erosion. Example soil erosion factors can include K
factor for the whole soil or on a rock free basis, T factor, wind erodibility group and
wind erodibility index.
RUSLE2 Related Attributes
This report summarizes those soil attributes used by the Revised Universal Soil
Loss Equation Version 2 (RUSLE2) for the map units in the selected area. The
report includes the map unit symbol, the component name, and the percent of the
component in the map unit. Soil property data for each map unit component include
the hydrologic soil group, erosion factors Kf for the surface horizon, erosion factor T,
and the representative percentage of sand, silt, and clay in the mineral surface
horizon. Missing surface data may indicate the presence of an organic surface
layer. .
Report—RUSLE2 Related Attributes
Soil properties and interpretations for erosion runoff calculations. The surface
mineral horizon properties are displayed. Organic surface horizons are not
displayed.
RUSLE2 Related Attributes —Frederick County, Virginia
Map symbol and soil name Pct. of Slope Hydrologic group Kf T factor Representative value
map unit length
(ft) % Sand I % Silt % Clay
5B—Carbo silt loam, 2 to 7
Lpercent slopes
Carbo 85 190 D .43 2 20.5 54.51 25.0
24
• •
Custom Soil Resource Report
RUSLE2 Related Attributes —Frederick County, Virginia
Map symbol and soil name Pct. of Slope Hydrologic group Kf T factor Representative value
map unit length
(ft) % Sand I % Silt % Clay
14B—Frederick-Poplimento
loams, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Frederick r
Poplimento
16B—Frederick-Poplimento,
very rocky foams, 2 to 7
percent slopes
Frederick
Poplimento
3213—Oaklet silt loam, 2 to 7
percent slopes
Oaklet
45
401
40
35
190
190
190
190
B
C
B
C
, .28
-
L.32
.28
.32
5
-
15
5
5
42.1
42.1
37.9
37.91
20.0
20.0
42.1
37.91
20.0
42.1
37.91
20.0
85 190 C
Conservation Planning
37 3 26.0 52 0 22.0
This report provides those soil attributes for the conservation plan for the map units
in the selected area. The report includes the map unit symbol, the component
name, and the percent of the component in the map unit. It provides the soil
description along with the slope, runoff, T Factor, WEI, WEG, Erosion class,
Drainage class, Land Capability Classification, and the engineering Hydrologic
Group and the erosion factors Kf, the representative percentage of fragments, sand,
silt, and clay in the mineral surface horizon. Missing surface data may indicate the
presence of an organic surface layer. Further information on these factors can be
found in the National Soil Survey Handbook section 618 found at the url http://
www.nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nresl42p2_054223#00 .
25
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil properties and interpretations for conservation planning. The surface mineral horizon properties are displayed. Organic
surface horizons are not displayed.
Conservation Planning —Frederick County, Virginia
Map symbol and soil
Pct. of
Slope
USLE
Runoff
T
WEI
WEG
Erosion
Drainage
NIRR
Hydro
Surface
name
map
RV
Slope
Fact
LCC
logic
Depths
Kf
Frag-
Sand
Silt
Clay
unit
Length
or
Group
ft.
in.
Fact
ments
RV
RV
RV
or
RV
513—Carbo silt loam, 2 to
7 percent slopes
85
5.0
190
Very high
2
48
6
Class 1
WeII drained
0-9
0 20
Carbo
2e
D
.43
54
25
14B—Frederick-
Poplimento loams, 2 to
7 percent slopes
Frederick
Class 1
Class 1
Well drained
Well drained
45
40
5.0
5.0
190
190
Medium
Medium
5
5
48
48
6
6
2e
B
0-7
.28
5
42
37
20
Poplimento
2e
C
0-5
.32
5
42
37
20
16B—Frederick-
Poplimento, very rocky
loams, 2 to 7 percent
slopes
Frederick
40
5.0
190
Medium
5
48
6
Class 1
Well drained
6s
B
0-7
.28
5
42
37
20
Poplimento
35
5.0
190
Medium
5
48
6
Class 1
Well drained
6s
C
0-5
.32
5
42
37
20
32B—Oaklet silt loam, 2
to 7 percent slopes
85
5.01190
1 High
3
48
6
Class 1
Well drained
2e
C
0-5
Oaklet
, .37
5
26
52
22
•
L�
26
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142 p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres 142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://wwvv.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
27
• •
Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detai I/soils/scientists/?cid=nres 142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nresl42p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nresl42p2_052290.pdf
m
•
•
.Appendix B
NOAA Atlas 14
Rainfall Data
•
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3
Location name: Winchester, Virginia, USA'
( �+ Latitude: 39.2286°, Longitude:-78.1378'
" Elevation: 708.02 ft*`
source: ESRI Maps
c. source: LISGS
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
G.M. Bonnin. D. Martin, B. Lin, T. Parzybok, M.Yekta. and D. Riley
NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland
PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)'
Average recurrence interval (years)
ation �� � � 100 200 500 1000
�1���-�1� �
0.327
0.390
0.474
0.541
0.630
0.702
0.775
0.851
0.964
1.05
5-min
(0.292-0.367)
(0.349-0.438)
(0.423-0,531)
(0.481-0.604)
0.557-0.700
(0.618-0.779
(0.678-0.858)
(0.740-0.940)
(0.830-1.07)
(0.897-1.16)
0.510
0.611
0.740
0.838
0.967
1.07
1.17
1.28
1.43
1.54
10-min
(0.456-0,572)
(0.547-0.686)
(0,660-0.828)
(0.745-0.935)
(0.855-1.08)
(0.940-1.19)
1 (1.02-1.30)
1 (1.11-1.41)
(1.23-1.57)
(1.31-1,70)
15-min 0.626 11 0.748 11 0.910 11 1.03 1.20 1.32 1.45 11 1.59 11 1.78 11.93
(0.559-0.702) (0.670-0.839) 1 (0.812-1.02) 1 (0.918-1.15) (1.06-1.33) (1.17-1.47) (1,27-1.61) 1 (1.38-1.76) (1.53-1.97)
30-min 0.831 1.00 1.25 1.44 7.69 1.90 2.11 2.33 2.65 2.91
/0.743-09321 (0899-1131 (112-1401 (128-1611 (150-188) (167-2111 11.85-2.341 (2.03-2.58) (2.28-2.931 (2.48-3.21)
1.02
1.24
1.57
1.83
2.20
2.51
2.83
3.18
3.68
4.10
60-min
(0.908-1.14)
1 (1.11-1.39)
1 (1.40-1.76)
1 (1,63-2.05)
(1.95-2.45)
(2.21-2.78)
1 (2.47-3.13)
(2,76-3.51)
(3.17-4.06)
(3.49-4.52)
1.21
1.47
1.88
2.21
2.69
3.08
3.52
4.00
4.70
5.29
2-hr
(1.08-1.35)
1 (1,32-1.65)
1 (1.68-2.10)
1 (1.96-2.46)
(2.38-2.99)
(2.71-3.42)
1 (3.08-3.89)
(3.47-4.41)
(4.04-5.17)
(4.51-5.82)
3-hr 1.31 1.58 2.01 2.35 2.86 3.29 3.76 4.27 11 5.04 15.69
(1,17-1.47) (1.42-1.78) (1.80-2.25) (2.10-2.63) (2.53-3.18) 1 (2.90-3.65) (3.29-4.15) 1 (3.71-4.71) (4.32-5.54)
6-hr 1.63 1.97 2.47 2.89 3.49 4.01 4.57 5.19 6.11 6.89
(1 48-1 831 (1 78-2 20) (2 22-2 76) (2 58-3.21) (3.11-3 871 11 13 55-4 431 (4.01-5.031 11 (4.52-5.70) 11 (5.26-6.70) 11 (5.87-7.55)
2.01
2.41
3.01
3.52
4.28
4.92
5.65
6.45
7.66
8.69
12-hr
(1.81-2.24)
(2.18-2.69)
(2,72-3.35)
(3.16-3.90)
(3.81-4.71)
1 (4.35-5.41)
1 (4.95-6.18)
1 (5.60-7.04)
(6.55-8.33)
(7.36-9A5)
2.393.58
4.16
5.02
5.74
6.51
7.35
8.58
9.60
24-hr
(2.22-2.58)
(2.66-310)
(3.31-3.86)
(3.85-4.49)
(4.61-5.39)
1 (5.25-6.16)
1 (5.92-6.98)
1 (6.63-7.88)
1 (7.64-9.20)
(8.45-10.3)
2.76
3.31
4.13
4.80
5.80
6.64
7.55
8.54
9.99
11.2
2-ddy
(2.57-2.98)
(3.08-3.58)
(3.83-4.45)
(4.44-5.18)
(5.33-6.23)
(6.06-7.13)
(6,84-8.10)
(7.67-9.16)
(8.86-10.7)
(9.83-12.1)
2.
10.4
3-day
(2.7493.18)
(3.29 3381)
(4. 8-4 73)
(4.73 5.50)
(5. 6 6.60)
(6. 207053)
(7.22 8352)
(8,07-9.61)
(9.27-- .2)
(1 .2-12.5)
4-day 3.13 3.76 4.66 5.41 6.48 f 7.37 8.32 9.34 10.8 12.0
(2.92-3.38) (3.50-4.05) (4.34-5.01) (5.02-5.82) (5.99 6 96) (6 78 7.92) (7.61-8.94) (8.47-10.1) (9.67-11.7)
7 da 3,64 4,36 5.34 6.13 7.23 8.12 9.05 10.0 11.4 12.4
y !Z dn.Z Qtl !d n7-d r71 !d QR-S 7Z1 /5 71-h 571 /R 7n-7 751 l7 Sn-R 711 !R 31A 711 !9 1d-1n 81 (1(1 -1-19 21 111 2-1341
4.16
4.95
5.98
6.80
7.94
8.84
9.76
10.7
12.0
13.1
10 day
(3.90A.45)
(4.65-5.30)
(5,61-6.39)
(6.36-7.27)
(7.408.48)
(8.20-9.44)
(9.02-10.4)
(9.85-11.5)
(11.0-12.9)
(11.8-14.0)
5.62
6.64
7.80
8.69
9.87
10.8
11.7
12.5
13.6
14.5
20-day
(5.32-5.95)
(6.28-7.03)
(7,37-8.26)
(8.21-9.21)
(9.30-10.5)
(10.1-11.4)
(10.9-12.4)
1 (11.7-13.3)
1 (12.7-14.5)
0 3.4-15.4)
30day 97111 8212.5 11
27) (7.71-8.55) (8. 09.87) (9.80-10.9) (11.0-1.2) (118-13.2) (126-14.1) (13.4-15.0) (14
(6.573-16.2) (15.0-17.1)
45 day 8.64 10.1 ) 11.5 12.6 13.9 14.8 15.7 16.5 17.4 18.1
(8.25-9.06) (9.66-10.6 (11.0-12.1) (12.0-13.2) 1 (13.2-14.5) 1 (14.1-15.5) 1 (14.9-16.4) 1 (15.6-17.3) (16.4-18.3) (17.0-19.1)
60 day 910.3 12.1 13.6 14.7 16.1 17.0 17.9 ) 18.6 19.5 20.1
(9.0-10.8) (11.6-12.6) (13.0-14.2) (14.1-15.4) (15.4-16.8) (16.2-17.8) (17.0-18.7 (17.7-19.5) (18.5-20.5) ll9.1-21.1)
Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS).
Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90 % confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates
(for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5 % . Estimates at upper bounds
are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.
Back to Top
LJ
•
1D
7S
20
e
iis
m
C
0
Y
5
PF graphical
PUS-bai,ed depth -duration -frequency (DOF) calves
Latrtudo 10 2286', tangrtuda •78 1.718'
Mratran r4
Vi . _ . I
7 7 S 10 2.1f 50 100 700 500 1000
Awaraga rvrun•ance tntwval 4yeaml
kl" 445 ]d Voy4W. ?. 1Fe►PM 3 [:raatad IGMTI Thu Aug A 2G 16 04 ME
Back to Top
Average recurrerrc
interval
(years)
t
Z
_ 5
10
- - 25
50
100
200
500
1000
IDuration
f
, 7 �$Xy
... fd~
.
t 5-am
—
.04mo
— T�1y
— eWnkr
— 10-clay
-- 6arr
— 454&y
12.ry
Nt nay
r4fif
Maps & aerials
Small scale terrain
Caaar LA ao4
Stephensatt,
i
f
Large scale terrain
'� • �) AO/%,wr Hwri*urn �itA�llf�
Phil
' Hal ttiT'at•
�•w
•
Vela 5hingtan, a. C..$ • �nrt ,-
Harri;oiil�ury • -
5 to u � wrl
I R 6 I N I A
Large scale mmo
It in tl 0
• .••.
' An ti apd
Wasf�irtgtr.m
tHortisonburg —
0 •
Back to Top
US Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Weather Service
National Water Center
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Questions?: HDSC.Questionsna noaa.gov
Disclaimer
•
•
Ayyenditx C
Virginia Runoff Reduction
Re -development Spreadsheet
for Water Quality
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet
DEQ Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Re -Development Compliance Spreadsheet - Version 3.0
BMP Design Specifications List: 2011 Stds & Specs
Site Summary
Project Title: Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Date: 43325 Total Rainfall (in): 43
Total Disturbed Acreage: 3.59
Site Land Cover Summary
Pre-ReDevelopment Land Cover (acres)
A soils
B Soils
C Soils
D Soils
Totals
%of Total
Forest/Open (acres)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
Managed Turf (acres)
0.00
3.19
0.00
0.00
3.19
89
Impervious Cover (acres)
0.00
0.40
0.00
0.00
0.40
11
3.59
100
Post-ReDevelopment Land Cover (acres)
A soils
B Soils
C Soils
D Soils
Totals
% of Total
Forest/Open (acres)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
Managed Turf (acres)
0.00
2.33
0.00
0.00
2.33
65
Impervious Cover (acres)
0.00
1.26
0.00
0.00
1.26
35
3.59
100
Site Tv and Land Cover Nutrient Loads
Final Post -Development
Post-
(Post-ReDevelopment
Post-
Development
Adjusted Pre-
& New Im
Impervious)
P 1
ReDevelopment
(New Impervious)
ReDevelopment
Site Rv
0.46
0.31
0.95
0.31
Treatment Volume (ft3)
6,037
3,071
2,966
3,071
TP Load (lb/yr)
3.79
1.93
1.86
11.93
Total TP Load Reduction Required (lb/yr) 1.90 0.39 1.51
Final Post -Development Load
(Post-ReDevelopment & New Impervious)
Pre-
ReDevelopment
TN Load (lb/yr)
27.13
16.61
Pre-
ReDevelopment
Final Post -Development
Post-ReDevelopment TP
TP Load per acre
TP Load per acre
Load per acre
(lb/acre/yr)
(lb/acre/yr)
(lb/acre/yr)
0.71
1.06
0.71
C � J
•
Summary Print
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet
Site Compliance Summary
Maximum % Reduction Required Belo 200
Pre -Re Development Load
Total Runoff Volume Reduction (ft')
497
Total TP Load Reduction Achieved (lb/yr)
0.43
Total TN Load Reduction Achieved (lb/yr)
3.57
Remaining Post Development TP Load
(lb/yr)
3.36
Remaining TP Load Reduction (lb/yr
Required
11
•
Summary Print
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet
-- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- - -- - -------
Drainage Area Summary
D.A. A
D.A. B
D.A. C
D.A. D
D.A. E
Total
Forest/Open (acres)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Managed Turf (acres)
2.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.33
Impervious Cover (acres)
1.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.26
Total Area (acres)
3.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.59
Drainage Area Compliance Summary
D.A. A
D.A. B
D.A. C
D.A. D
D.A. E
Total
TP Load Reduced (lb/yr)
0.43
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.43
TN Load Reduced (lb/yr)
3.57
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.57
•
Summary Print
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet
Drainage Area A Summary
Land Cover Summary
A Soils
B Soils
C Soils
D Soils
Total
% of Total
Forest/Open (acres)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
Managed Turf (acres)
0.00
2.33
0.00
0.00
2.33
65
Impervious Cover (acres)
0.00
1.26
0.00
0.00
1.26
35
3.59
BMP Selections
Managed Turf
Impervious Cover
BMP Treatment
TP Load from
Untreated TP Load
TP Removed
TP Remaining
Downstream Treatment
Practice
Credit Area
Credit Area
3
Volume (ft)
Upstream
to Practice (Ibs)
(Ib/yr)
(Ib/yr)
to be Employed
(acres)
(acres)
Practices (Ibs)
6.a. Bioretention #1 or Micro-Bioretention
#1 or Urban Bioretention (Spec #9)
0.05
0.35
1,243.28
0.00
0.78
0.43
0.35
Total Impervious Cover Treated (acres)
0.35
Total Turf Area Treated (acres)
0.05
Total TP Load Reduction Achieved in D.A.
(lb/yr)
0.43
Total TN Load Reduction Achieved in D.A.
(Ib/yr)
3.57
1r
u
0
Summary Print
Virginia Runoff Reduction Method Worksheet
Runoff Volume and CN Calculations
1-year storm
2-year storm
10-year storm
Target Rainfall Event (in)
2.39
2.87
4.16
Drainage Areas
RV & CN
Drainage Area A
Drainage Area B
Drainage Area C
Drainage Area D
Drainage Area E
CN
74
0
0
0
0
RR (ft')
497
0
0
0
0
1-year return period
RV wo RR (.s-in)
0.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
RV w RR (ws-in)
0.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CN adjusted
73
0
0
0
0
2-year return period
RV wo RR (ws-in)
0.83
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
RV w RR (ws-in)
0.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CN adjusted
73
0
0
0
0
10-year return period
RV wo RR (ws-in)
1.71
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
RV w RR (ws-in)
1.68
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CN adjusted
73
0
0
0
0
Summary Print
•
E
.Appendix D
Pre -Development Stormwater
Calculations
in
WinTR-55 Current Data Description
--- Identification Data ---
User: REb Date: 8/16/2018
Project: CORNERSTONE Units: English
SubTitle: SITE PLAN Areal Units: Acres
State: Virginia
County: Frederick. NOAA_b
Filename: C:\Users\BELS090214\AppData\Roaming\WinTR-55\CORNERSTONE PRE POST COMBINED.w55
--- Sub -Area Data ---
Name Description Reach Area(ac) RCN Tc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRE-CON AREA TO BASIN Outlet 3.59 72 0.1
Total area: 3.59 1acl
--- Storm Data --
Rainfall Depth by Rainfall Return Period
-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr i-Yr
,ini [in) (in) tin) (in) (in) (in)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.8 3.5 4.1 5.0 5.7 6.5 2.4
Storm Data Source: Frederick. NOAA_b County, VA iNRCS,
Rainfall Distribution Type: Type II
Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph: <standard>
WinTR-55, Version i. ij.1 f F�age 1 8/16/2018 6.37:16 AM
0 .
8 CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA b County, Virginia
Storm Data
Rainfall Depth by Rainfall Return Period
1-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr 1-Yr
(in, (in) tin) (in) (in) (in) (in)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.8 3.5 4.1 5.0 5.7 6.5 2.4
Storm Data Source: Frederick NOAA b County;=VA (NRCS)
Rainfall Distribution Type: Type II _
Dimensionless Unit Hydrograph: <standard>
WinTR-55, Version 1.00,10 171-'Lqe 1 8/16/2018 6:37:16 AM
•
RFH CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA b County; Virginia
Watershed Peal: Table
Sub -Area Peak Flow by Rainfall Return Period
or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr 1-Yr
Identifier (cfs) (cfs) (cfs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SU6AREAS
PRE -CON 3.48 8.30 2.30
REACHES
OUTLET 3:48 8.30 2.30
WinTR-55, Version 1.00,10 Pale 1 8/16/2018 6:37.:16 AM
0 .
Si3 . CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA_b County, Virginia
Hydrograph Peak/Peak Time Table
Sub -Area Peak Flow and Peak Time (hr) by Rainfall Return Period
or Reach 2-Yr 10-Yr 1-Yr
Identifier (Cfsi. (cfs) (cfs)
(hr) (hr) (hr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SU6AREAS
PRE -CON 3.48 8.30 2.30
11.95 11.94 12.02
REACHES
CUTLET 3.48 8.30 2.30
WinTR-55, Version 1.00-10 Page 1 8/16/2018 6:37:16 AM
REB CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA_b County, Virginia
Sub -Area Summary Table
Sub -Area Drainage Time of Curve Receiving Sub -Area
Identifier Area Concentration Number Reach Description
(ac) (hr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRE-CON 3.59 0.100 72 Outlet AREA TO BASIN
Total Area: 3.59 (ac)
WinTR-55. Version 1.00.10 Paqu i 8/16/2018 6:37t16 AM
I:f:Fi CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA b County, Virginia
Sub -Area Time of Concentration Details
Sub -Area
Flow
ManningsIs
End Wetted
Travel
Identifier/
Length
Slope
n
Area Perimeter VR,tocity
Time
-----------------------------------------..
lfti
(ft/ft:t
Isq ft) �ftl ('ft/sec)
--------.----------..------.----.-----_.-.-.-.
(hr)
PRE -CON
SHEET
100
0.0151
0.011
0.024
SHALLOW
79
0.0085
0.025
0.011
CHANNEL
130
0.0307
Time of Concentration
0.1
WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 o�u,. 1 8/16/2018 6:37:16 AM
REP CORNERSTONE
SITE PLAN
Frederick NOAA b County, Virginia
Sub -Area Land Use and Curve Number Details
Sub -Area Hydrologic Sub -Area Curve
Identifier Land Use Soil Area Number
Group (ac)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRE--CON Open space; grass cover 50', to 75c tfair) B 3.189 69
Paved; curbs and storm sewers B .405 98
'Dotal Area / Weighted Curve Number 3:59 72
WinTR-55, Version 1.00.10 1mle 1 8/16/2018 6:37:16 A14
.Appendix E
Post -Development
Stormwater Calculations
SEDCAD 4 for Window
. ,..h, 1Q.Q D-Jo l C. n.uoh
n
-2YR-24 HR Pt
ANALYSIS
rib
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window,
r...,.,.c.,hr goo❑ oar, .�. .. �r
•
Genera/ Information
Storm Information;
Storm Type:
NRCS Type II
Design Storm:
2 yr - 24 hr
Rainfall Depth:
2.800 inches
Filename CORNERSTONE-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13.2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windos
Structure Networking;
Type
Stru
#
(flows
into)
Stru
#
Musk. K
(hrs)
Musk. X
Description
Channel
#1
=_>
#2
0.000
0.000
1 C&G
Channel
#2
=_>
#3
0.000
0.000
GRASSED SWALE
Pond
I #3
=_>
End
0.000
0.000
1 POND
101
Chan l
19 #1
Chan l
#3
Pond
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window*
rnm,roJN 14oa U-1. I Gh..n.
•
Structure Summary:
Immediate
Total
Peak
Total
Contributing
Contnbubng
Runoff
Area
Area
Discharge
Volume
(ac)
(ac)
(CfS)
(ac-ft)
# 1 1.263
1.263
4.81
0.27
tit 2.331
3.594
5.39
0.33
In
5.39
0.33
# 3 0.000
3.594
Out
1.80
0.33
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-1 B sc4 Printed OB-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windom
ti
Structure Detail:
Structure #1 iNonerodible Channel)
OG
Triangular Nonerodible Channel Inputs:
Material: Asphaltic Concrete, Machine Placed
Left Right Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard
Sideslope Sideslope Slope (%) Manning's n Mult. x
Ratio Ratio Depth (ft) % of Depth (VxD)
20.0:1 0.5:1 1.9 0.0140 0.30
Nonerodible Channel Results:
w/o Freeboard w/ Freeboard
Design Discharge:
4.81 cfs
Depth:
0.33 ft 0.63 R
- Top Width:
6.70 It '- 12.85 It
Velocity:
-- 4.39 fps ------
-----------------
X-Sectlon Area:
1.09 sq ft
Hydraulic Radius:
0.163
Froude Number:
1.92
Str Acture #Z. L�eyetated Channel)
GRASSED SWALE
Trapezoidal Vegetated Channel Inputs:
Material: Grass mixture
Left Right Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard Limiting
Sideslope Sideslope Slope (%)
Bottom Retardance Mult. x Velocity
Width (ft) Ratio Ratio Classes Depth (ft) °k of Depth
(VxD) (fps)
4.40 3.0:1 3.0:1 2.8 D, 8 0.30 5.0
Vegetated Channel Results:
Stability
Class D w/o
Freeboard
Stability
Class D w/
Freeboard
Capacity
Class B w/o
Freeboard
Capacity
Class B w/
Freeboard
Design Discharge: 5.39 cfs
5.39 cfs
Depth: 0.47 ft
0.77 R I
0.88 ft
1.18 ft
Top Width: 7.21 ft
9.01 ft I
9.71 ft
11.51 ft
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window
r.,.,...:..+,. ,00a o-i. i c,h—,h
0
Stability Stability
Class D w/o Class D w/
Freeboard Freeboard
Capacity Capacity
Class 8 w/o Class B w/
Freeboard Freeboard
Velocity:
1.98 fps
0.86 fps
X-Section Area:
2.72 sq ft
6.24 sq ft
Hydraulic Radius:
0.369
0,625
Froude Number:
0.57
0.19
Roughness Coefficient:
0.0641 ,
0.2093
Structure .#3(Pongi)
POND
Pond Inputs:
Initial Pool Elev: 697.95
Initial Pool: 0.15 ac-ft
Straight Pipe
Barrel Barrel Entrance Tailwater
Barrel Manning's Spillway
Diameter Length Loss Depth
Slope (%) n Elev
(in) (ft) Coefficient (ft)
12.00 25.00 1.00 0.0150 697.95 0.90 0.00
Pond Results:
Emergency Spillwa
Spillway Elev Crest Length Left Right Bottom
(ft) Sidesiope Sideslope Width (ft)
698.50 10.00 2.00:1 2.00:1 10.00
Peak Elevation: 69B.64
Dewater rime: 0.79 days
Dewatering time is calculated from peak stage to lowest spillway
Elevation -Capacity -Discharge Table
Area
Capacity
Discharge Dewater
Elevation
Time
(ac)
(ac-ft)
(cfs)
(hrs)
697.00
0.150
0.000
0.000
697.05
0.151
0.008
0.000
697.10
0.152
0.015
0.000
697.15
0.153
0.023
0.000
Filename- CORNERSTONE-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windole
Area
Capacity
Discharge
Dewater
Elevation
Time
(ac)
(ac-ft)
WS)
(hrs)
697.20
0.154
0.030
0.000
697.25
0.154
0.038
0.000
697.30
0.15S
0.046
0.000
697.3S_
0.156
0.054
0.000
697.40
0.157
0.061
0.000
697.45
0.158
0.069
0.000
697.50
-
0.159
0.077
0.000
697.SS
-
0.160
0.085
0.000
-
-
697.60
0.161
0.093
0.000
- --
697.65
0.162
0.101
0.000
697.70
0.162
0.109
0.000
697.75
0.163
0.117
0.000
697.80
0.164
0.126
0.000-
697.8S
0.165
0.134
0.000
-- --_
697.90
0.166
0.142
0.000
-------
697.95
0.167
0.151
0.000
Spillway *1
698.00
0.168
0.159
0.038
5.40
698.05
0.169
0.167
0.076
2.6S
698.10
0.171
0.176
0.130
.... ._....... -
5.05
698.15
0.172
0.184
0.213
2.05
698.20
0.174
0.193
0.295
1.00
696.25
a175
0.202
0.378
0.65
698.30
M176
0.211
0.460
0.50
698.35
0.178
0.219
0.543
0.35
698.40
0.179
0.226
0.635
0.35
696.45
0.181
0.237
0.751
0.30
698.50
0.182
0.246
0.866
-0.25
SpNlway #t2
698.55
0.184
0.256
1.190
US
698.60
0.185
0.265
1.514
0.1S
698.64
0.186
0.272
1.796
0.10
Peak Stye
698.65
0.187
0.274
1.657
698.70
0.188
0.283
2.201
698.75
0.190
0.293
2.545
69B.80
0.191
0.302
2.893
698.85
0.193
0.312
3.252
698.90
0.194
0.322
3.610
698.95
--
0.195
0.331
3.969
699.00
0.197
0.341
4.270
699.05
0.196
--
0.351
4.360
699.10
0.200
0.361
13.660
699.15
0.201
0.371
13.750
Filename CORNER STONE-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window
Area
Capacity
Discharge Dewater
Elevation
Time
(ac)
(ac-ft)
(cfs) (hm)
699.20
0.203
0.381
17.658
699.25
0.204
0.391
17.855
699.30
0.205
0.402
22.456
699.35
0.207
0.412
22.570
699.40
0.206 _
0.422
27.338
699.45
0.210
0.433
27.452
699.50
0.211
0.443
32.098
699.55
0.213
0.454
32.197
699.60
0.214
0.465
37.926
699.65
0.216
0.475
38.016
699.70
0.217
0.486
44.169
699.75
0.219
0.497
44.259
699.80
0.220
0.506
50.833
699.85
0.222
0.519
50.910
699.90
0.223
0.530
57.893
--699.95
0.225
0.541
57.970
700.00
0.226
0.553
65.371
Detailed Discharge Table
Combined
Elevation
Straight Pipe
Emergency
Total
(cfs)
Spillway (cfs)
Discharge
(cfs)
697.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.05
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.10
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.15
0.000
-
0.000
0.600
697.20
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.25
0.000
_0.000
0.000
- 697.30
0,000
0.000
0.000
697.35
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.40
0.000
0.000
0.000
-697.45
--- ---0.000
------0.000
0.000
697.50
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.55
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.60
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.65
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.70
0.000
0.000
0.000
Y697.75
0.000
0.000
0.000
r777b97.80
0.000
0.000
0.000
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-18 sC4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window
r.......,..n� icon a>..,oi. i c,.h-h
Elevation
Straight Pipe
(cfs)
Emergency
Spillway (cfs)
Cwbined
Total
pLscha rge
(ds)
697.85
697.90
697.95
0.000
- - _-0.000
0.000
0.000
- 0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
696.00
(1)>0.036
0.000
698.05
(2)>0.076 --
- 0.000
_0.038
0.076
698.10
(3)>0.130
0.000
0.130
698.15
698.20
690.25
(3)>0.213
(3)>0.295
(3)>0.378
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.213_
0.295
0378
698.30
690.35
(3)>0.460
(3)>0.543
0.000
0.000
0.460
0.543
698.40
698.45
(3)>0.635
(3)>0.751
0.000 -
0.000
- - - 0.635
0.751
698.50
(3)>0.666
0.000
--- 0.866
698.55
(3)>0.982
0.206
1.190
690.60
(3)>1.097
0.417
1.S14
698.65
(3)>1.232
0.625
1.BS7
698.70
(3)>1.366
0.633
2.201
698.75
(3)>1.503
1.042
2.545
698.80
(3)>1.643
1.250
2.893
698.85
(3)>1.793
1.458
3.252
696.90
(3)>1.944
1.667
3.610
696.95
(3)>2.094
1.875
3.969
699.00----
(3)>2.186
2.063
4.270
699.05
699.10
699.15
699.20
699.25
699.30
(2)>2.276
(2)>2.366
(2)>2.456
(1)>2.546
(2)>2.743
(5)>3.102
2.083
11.294
11.294
15.112
15.112
19.3SS
4.360
13.660
13.750
17.658
17.855
22.456
699.35
(S)>3.21S
19355 __-
- - 22.570
699.40
(5)>3.329
24.006
27338
699.45
(S)>3.443
24.008
27.452
699.50
-_ 699.55
(5)>3.557
- - (5)>3.656
28.541
28.541 -
32.098
-_ 32.197
699.60
(5)>3.747
34.179
37.926
699.65
(S)>3.837
34.179
38.016
699.70
699.75
699.80
(6)>3.927
(6)>4.017
(6)>4.107
40.242
40.242
46.726
44.169
-_- 44.259
50.833
Filename- CORNERSTONE-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window*
rn. .i,h, 1aaa Pa—s. I z,h,—K
•
1 C,
Combined
Elevation
Straight Pipe
Emergency
Total
(cfs)
Spillway (cfs)
Discharge
(cfs)
699.85
(6)>4.184
46.726
50.910
699.90
(6)>4.262
53.631
57.893
699.95
(6)>4.339
53.631
57.970
700.00
(6)>4.417
60.955
65.371
Filename: CORNERSTONE-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windows
r.....,—* loon oo.. — , z�o—o,
u
11
Subwatershed Hydrology Detail:
Stru
#
SWS
#
SWS Area
(ac)
Time of
Cone
(hrs)
Musk K
(hrs)
Curve
Musk X UHS
Number
Peak
Discharge
(cfs)
Runoff
Volume
(ac-ft)
#1
1
1.263
0.057
0.000
0.000 98.000 TR55
I 4.61
0.270
1.263
4.81
0.270
#2
1
2.331
0.073
0.000
0.000 61.000 TR55
0.89
0.057
3.594
5.39
0.327
#3
3.594
5.39
0.327
Subwatershed Time of Concentration Details;
Stru
SWS
Land Flow Condition
Slope {%}
Vert. Dist
Horiz. Dist.
Velocity
Time (hrs)
#
#
(ft)
(ft)
(fps)
#1
1
7. Paved area and small upland
1.51
1.51
100.00
2.470
0.011
gullies
7. Paved area and small upland
gullies
1.92
7.70
402.00
2.780
0.040
6. Grassed waterway
2.39
1.29
53.97
2.310
0.006
#1
1
Time of Concentration:
0.057
#2
1
3. Short grass pasture
3.01
11.00
365.01
1.380
0.073
#2
1
Time of Concentration:
0.073
Filename CORNERSTONE-7.5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13.2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window
r�
U
-30YR-24 HR P
ANALYSIS
rlb
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windova
•
Genera/ Information
Storm Information:
Storm Type:
MRCS Type 11
Design Storm:
10 yr - 24 hr
Rainfall Depth:
4.100 inches
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 06-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window*
('... ,hl IC= P--- 1. 1 Gh..nh
Structure Networking:
Type
Stru
#
(flows
into)
Sbu
#
Musk. K
(hrs)
Musk. X Descripbon
Channel
#1
=_>
#2 !
0.000
0.0001 C&G
Channel
I #2
=_>
#3 !
0.000
0.000 I GRASSED SWALE
Pond
#3
=_>
End I
0.000
0.000 I POND
#1
162 Chan l
16, #Z
Chant
#3
Pond
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windos
r' n-l" 10091 pomuw 1 Q--K
•
4
Structure Summary;
Immediate
Total
Total
Contributing
Contributing
peak
Runoff
Area
Area
Discharge
Volume
(ac)
(ac)
WS)
(ac-R)
# 1 1.263
1.263
7.10
0.41
#2 2.331
3.594
10.18
0.57
In
10.18
0.57
# 3 0.000
3.594
Out
4.10
0.57
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5.18 sc4 printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window*
f'rnmmnhl 100013-1. 1 Gh—k
5
Structure Detail:
Structure #Nonerodible Channel)
OG
Triangular Nonerodible Channel Inputs:
Material: Asphaltic Concrete Machine Placed
Left Right Freeboard Freeboard Freeboard
Sideslope Sideslope Slope (%) Manning's n Mult. x
Ratio Ratio Depth (ft) % of Depth (VxD)
20.0:1 0.5:1 1.9 0.0140 0.30
Nonerodible Channel Results:
w/o Freeboard w/ Freeboard
Design Discharge:
7.10 cfs
Depth:
0.38 ft 0.68 ft
Top Width:
7.75 ft 13.90 ft
Velocity:
4.64 Fps ---
X-Section Area:
1.47 sq ft
Hydraulic Radius:
0.188
Froude Number:
1.96
Structure #2-EVe etated Channel
GRASSED SWALE
Trapezoidal Vegetated Channel Inputs:
Material: Grass mixture
Left Right Freeboard
Bottom g Retardance Freeboard Freeboard
Limiting
Width (ft) Sideslope Sideslope Slope {%} Classes Depth (ft) °� of Depth Mult. x
Ratio Ratio
Velocity
(fps)
(VxD)
4.40 3.0:1 3.0:1 2.8 D, 8 0.30 5.0
Vegetated Channel Results:
Stability
Class D w/o
Freeboard
Stability
Class D w/
Freeboard
Capacity
Class 8 w/o
Freeboard
Capacity
Class B w/
Freeboard
Design Discharge: 10.18 cfs
10.18 cis
Depth: 0.61 ft
0.91 ft
1.06 ft
1.36 ft
L. Top Width: 8.05 ft
9.85 ft
10.78 ft
12.58 ft
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24.7-5-18.sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windove
C�
Stability Stability
Gass D w/o Class D w/
Freeboard Freeboard
Capacity Capacity
Gass B w/o Class 8 w/
Freeboard Freeboard
Velocity:
2.69 fps
1.26 fps
X-Section Area:
3.78 sq ft
8.08 sq ft
Hydraulic Radius:
0.459
I 0.726
Froude Number:
0.69
0.26
Roughness Coefficient:
0.0547
0.1585
4tructure #3 (Pond)
Pond Inputs:
Initial Pool Elev: 697.95
Initial Pool: 0.15 ac-ft
Straight Pipe
Barrel Barrel Entrance Tailwater
Barrel Mannmg's Spillway
Diameter Length Loss Depth
ft Slope (%) n Elev
(in) () Coefficient (ft)
12.00 2500 1.00 0.0150 697.95 0.90 0.00
Pond Results:
Emeroencv SDillwa
Spillway Elev Crest Length Left Right Bottom
(ft) Sideslope Sidestope width (ft)
698.50 10.00 2.GO: 1 2.00:1 10.00
Peak Elevation: 698.98
Dewater Time: 0.78 days
Dewatering time is calculated from peak stage to lowest spillway
Elevation -Capacity -Discharge Table
Area
Capacity
Discharge Dewater
Elevation
Time
(ac)
(ac-ft)
(cfs) (hrs)
697.00
0.150
0.000
0.000
697.50
0.159
0.077
0.000
697.95
0.167
0.151
0.000 Spillway # 1
698.00
0.168
0.159
0.038 5.45
Filename CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Window
I^ -.Ai Nt t000 Pamela 1 Crh.wah
7
Area
Capacity
Discharge
Dewater
Elevation
Time
(ac)
(ac-R)
(cfs)
(hrs)
698.50
0.182
0.246
0.866
12.35 Spillway #2
698.98
0.196
0.337
4.100
1.00 Peak Stage
699.00
0.197
0.341
4.270
699.50
0.211
0.443
32.098
700.00
0.226
0.553
65.371
Detailed Discharge Table
Combined
Elevation
Straight Pipe
Emergency
Total
(cfs)
Spillway (cfs)
Discharge
(cfs)
697.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.50
0.000
0.000
0.000
697.95
0.000
- _ - 0.000
0.000
696.00
(1)>0.038
0.000
0.038
698.50
--
(3)>0.866
0.000
0.866
699.00
(3)>2.186
2.083
- -4.270
699.50
(S)>3.557
28.541
32.098
700.00
(6)>4.417
60.955
65.371
Filename: CORNERSTONE-10-24-7-5-18 sc4 Printed 08-13-2018
SEDCAD 4 for Windom
•
.Subwatershed Hydrology Detail:
Stru
#
SWS
#
SWS Area
(ac)
Time of
Conc
(hrs)
Musk K
(hrs)
_ Curve ` —�-
Musk X UHS
Number
Peak
Discharge
(cfs)
Runoff
Volume
(ac-ft)
#1
1
1.263
0.057
0.000
0.000 98.000 TR55
7.10
0.407
1.263
( 7.10
0.407
#2
1
2.331
0.073
0.000
0.000 61.000 TR55
3.08
0.168
E
3.594
( 10.18
!�
0.575
#3
E
3.S94
10.18
0.575
Subwatershed Time of Concentration Details:
Stru
SWS
Land Flow Condition
Slope (°h)
Vert. Dist.
ft)
Horiz. Dist.
(ft)
Velocity
(fps)
Time (hrs)
#1
1
7. Paved area and small upland
1.51
1.51
100.00
2.470
0.011
gullies
7. Paved area and small upland
1.92
7.70
402.00
2.780
0.040
gullies
6. Grassed waterway
2.39
1.29
53.97
2.310
0.006
#1
1
ilme of Concentration:
0.057
#2
1
3. Short grass pasture
3.01
11.00
365.01
1.380
0.073
#2
1
Time of Concentration:
0.073
Filename CORN ERSTONE-10.24.7.5-1B.sc4
Printed 08-13-2018
appendix F
1 Year Stormwater
Calculations & DEQ
Stormwater Protection
Spreadsheet
Time of Conceno (Tc)
Project: CORNERSTONE
Location: SITE
Present -FORESTED
Sheet Flow
Manning's Roughness Coeff. (n):
Flow Length, L (total L <= 100 ft):
One Yr. 24HR Rainfall, P:
Land Slope, s:
Tc:
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Surface Description:
Flow Length, L-
Watercourse Slope, s:
Average Velocity, V:
Tc:
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Surface Description:
Flow Length, L•
Watercourse Slope, s:
Average Velocity, V:
Tc:
Total Tc:
Mon Aug 07:56:43 2018
By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Checked: Date:
Segment ID:
1
0.020
100.00
ft
2.40
in
2.88
%
0.033
hr (2.0 min)
Segment ID: 2
Unpaved
204.00
ft
2.88
%
2.74
ft/s
0.021
hr (1.2 min)
Segment ID: 3
Unpaved
135.00
ft
2.20
%
2.39
ft/s
0.016
hr (0.9 min)
0.069
hr (4.1 min)
Runoff Hydrograph: TR-55 Tabular Hydrograph Method
Mon Aug 20 08:01:08 2018
Input Data:
Rainfall Distribution Type:
Type II
Rainfall Depth:
2.40
in
Base Flow:
0.00
cfs
la/P Interpolation:
Off
Subarea Downstream Area
CN
Tc Tt
Name Subareas (acre)
(hr) (hr)
SrrE FOREST CHANNEL 3.59
55
0.10 0.00
Computed Results:
Peak Discharge (Op):
0.20
cfs
Time to Peak:
12.10
hrs
Runoff Volume:
0.01
acre-ft
Graphical Peak Discharge Mon Aug 20 08:14:03 2018
Project: CORNERSTONE By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Location: SITE FORESTED Checked:
FORESTED
1. Data:
Drainage area: .................... A = 3.5900Acres
Runoff Curve Number: ............. CN 55
Time of Concentration: ........... Tc a 0.10
Storm Type: ....................... = II
Pond and swamp areas spread
throughout watershed ............... = 0.00 percent of A
0.0000 Acres
2. Frequency ........................yr = 1
3. Rainfall,P(24-hour).............. in - 2.40
4. Initial abstraction, la............ - 1.6364
5. Compute la/P....................... - 0.681 B
6. Unit peak discharge, qu...... csm/in = 540.00
7. Runoff,Q.........................in = 0.0652
8. Pond do swap adjustment factor .... Fp = 1.00
9. Peak Discharge,gp...............cfs = 0.1975
Time of Concentro (TO
Project: CORNERSTONE
Location: SITE
Present
Sheet Flow
Manning's Roughness Coeff. (n):
Flow Length, L (total L <= 100 ft):
One-yr 24-hr Rainfall, P:
Land Slope, s:
Tc:
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Surface Description:
Flow Length, L:
Watercourse Slope, s:
Average Velocity, V:
Tc:
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Surface Description:
Flow Length, L:
Watercourse Slope, s:
Average Velocity, V:
Tc:
Total Tc:
Runoff Curve Number and Runoff
Project: CORNERSTONE
Location: SITE
Present
1. Runoff Curve Number (CN)
Cover description
PRE -CONSTRUCTION 1YR
CN (weighted): 72.0
Total Area: 3.590 Acre
2. Runoff
Return Period: 1 YEAR
Rainfall, P: 2.40
Runoff, Q: 0.4775
Runoff Volume: 0.1429
Mon Aug 2*:36.04 2018
By:
RB Date: 08/20/18
Checked: Date:
Segment ID: 1
0.020
100.00
ft
2.40
in
2.88
x
0.033
hr (2.0 min)
Segment ID: 2
Unpaved
204.00
ft
2.88
x
2.74
ft/s
0.021
hr (1.2 min)
Segment ID: 3
Unpaved
135.00
ft
2.20
x
2.39
ft/s
0.016
hr (0.9 min)
0.069
hr (4.1 min)
Mon Aug 20 08:25:47 2018
By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Checked: Date:
CN Soil Group Area(Acre)
72 B 3.590
in
in
Acre -Ft
Graphical Peak Discharge Mon Aug 20 08:34:46 2018
Project: CORNERSTONE By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Location: SITE Checked: Date:
Present
1. Data:
Drainage area: .................... A - 3.590OAcres
Runoff Curve Number: ............. CN 72
Time of Concentration: ........... Tc = 0.10
Storm Type: ....................... = II
Pond and swamp areas spread
throughout watershed ............... = 0.00 percent of A
0.0000 Acres
2. Frequency ........................yr = 1
3. Rainfall,P(24-hour).............. in = 2.40
4. Initial abstraction, la............ = 0.7778
5. Compute la/P....................... = 0.3241
6. Unit peak discharge, qu...... csm/in = 925.93
7. Runoff,Q.........................in = 0.4775
8. Pond & swap adjustment factor .... Fp = 1.00
9. Peak Dischorge,gp...............cfs = 2.4801
Time of Concentration (Tc)
•
Mon Aug 20 09:53:018
Project: CORNERSTONE
By:
RB Date.. 08/20/18
Location: SITE POST
Checked:
Date:
Developed
Sheet Flow
Segment ID:
1-1
Manning's Roughness Coeff. (n):
0.020
Flow Length, L (total L <- 100 ft):
100.00
ft
One-yr 24-hr Rainfall, P:
2.40
in
Land Slope, s:
1.51
Tc:
0.039
hr (2.3 min)
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Segment ID: 1-2
Surface Description:
Paved
Flow Length, L:
402.00
ft
Watercourse Slope, s:
1.92
%
Average Velocity, V:
2.82
ft/s
Tc:
0.040
hr (2.4 min)
Channel Flow
Cross Sectional Flow Area, a:
4.40
SgFt
Wetted Perimeter, Pw:
0.00
ft
Hydraulic Radius, r:
0.00
ft
Channel Slope, s:
2.39
S
Manning's Roughness Coeff. (n):
0.025
Velocity, V:
0.00
ft/s
Flow Length, L:
54.00
ft
Tc:
0.000
hr (0.0 min)
Total Tc:
0.079
hr (4.7 min)
Runoff Curve Number and Runoff Mon Aug 20 09:51:28 2018
Project: CORNERSTONE
By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Location: SITE POST
Checked: Date:
Developed
1. Runoff Curve Number (CN)
Cover description
CN Soil Group Area(Acre)
POST -CONSTRUCTION 2YR
79 B 3.590
CN (weighted): 79.0
Total Area: 3.590 Acre
2. Runoff
Return Period:
1 YEAR
Rainfall, P:
2.40
in
Runoff, O:
0.7712
in
Runoff Volume:
0.2307
Acre -Ft
Graphical Peak Discharge Mon Aug 20 08:55:01 2018
Project: CORNERSTONE By: RB Date: 08/20/18
Location: Srre POST CN-79 Checked: Date:
Developed
1. Data:
Drainage area: ................... A = 3.590OAcres
Runoff Curve Number: ............. CN m 79
Time of Concentration: ........... Tc 0.08
Storm Type: ....................... = II
Pond and swamp areas spread
throughout watershed ............... = 0.00 percent of A
0.0000 Acres
2. Frequency ........................yr = 1
3. Rainfall.P(24-hour) ..............in = 2.40
4. Initial abstraction, la............ = 0.5316
5. Compute to/P....................... = 0.2215
6. Unit peak discharge, qu...... csm/in = 969.62
7. Runoff,O.........................in = 0.7712
8. Pond & swap adjustment factor,...Fp = 1.00
9. Peak Discharge,gp...............cfs = 4.1943 into pond out of pond 1.12 efs into channel. (See SedCadd Structure Summary)
*iw & "PO2 em",
Pounding r0ill, Virginia 24637
Phone: (276) 964-6047 Email: eticClighthouseenginceringconstiltants.com
Mobile: (423) 502.0fi; 3 Website: nivAv.lighthouseengineeringconsul,ants.com
CHANNEL PROTECTION TO A NATURAL WATERWAY CALCULATIONS
1-YEAR 24 HOUR STORM EVENT
Project Name: Cornerstone United Pentecostal Church
Site Area 3.59 acres
Improvement Factor (I.F.) 0.8 Based on Site Area (0.8 if >1 acre, 0.9 if <1 acre)
QPRE-DEVELOPED (QP) 2.48 cfs Input from hydrographs
RVPRE-DEVELOPED (RVp) 6225 cf Input from hydrographs
QFORESTED A) 0.2 cfs Input from hydrographs
RVFORESTED (RVF) 435 cf Input from hydrographs
Target Flow Rate Determined by Pre -Development Equation: 1. F. *(Q p *RV p )IRV o
RVDEVELOPED (RVD) 10049 cf Input from hydrographs
Target QDEVELOPED (Target QD) 1.22902 cfs
Minimum QDEVELOPED (Min. QD) 0.00866 cfs
Actual ()DEVELOPED (Actual QD) 1.12 cfs Input from hydrographs
Actual QD < Target QD? YES
Qrx.ei„pca< l.F.*(QP«-ar.�i„pia* RVP,•-n�•,�•i„peal/RVrk.�•h,xa
Under no condition shall Qr, 1, p,a be greater than Qp„_D„,,„p„, nor shall Qr,,,,ti,p,a be required to
be less than that calculated in the equation (QF,,,,,, * RVF,,,,,,)/RV0,-,,1„p,a; where
I.F. (Improvement Factor) equals 0.9 for sites > I acre or 0.9 for sites < 1 acre.
QD,,,i„p,a = The allowable peak flow rate of runoff from the developed site.
RVr,, 1,, a = The volume of runoff from the site in the developed condition.
QP-rk,,,,,p,.a = The peak flow rate of runoff from the site in the pre-devcloped condition.
RVP„ D,,d,,[w d = The volume of runoff from the site in pre -developed condition.
QF_, = The peak flow rate of runoff from the site in a forested condition.
RVF,,,,,,, = The volume of runoff from the site in a forested condition; or
lyceum ent Appi-Oxial Fort,,
PLEASE REWEW THE ATTACHED DOCU M,\,TT : N TRTSDOCU
YES UR APPROVAL PLEASE FjVrTIA�, AyyD PR.0 V£DE raE DA. TE A>��� EEO.0
YOUR APPROVAL.
hn afs fate Tine
Candice
Mark
Dave
Tyler
i e
fohn
COMMENTS..
Received by Clerical Staff (Date &, Tprner};
(S:Qllrce on BlackboxtForm€IDocument Approvsl Form-6/7/2016)