integrated Site Design Point System Exercise

Similar documents
iswm TM Criteria Manual City Date here December 2009 Revised 1/2015 Revised 1/14/15

iswm TM Criteria Manual City Date here

PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF TOWN AND COUNTRY STORMWATER PROGRAM

Chapter 4. Drainage Report and Construction Drawing Submittal Requirements

iswm TM Criteria Manual City of Azle Section 14 City of Azle Subdivision Ordinance DRAFT-June Chapter 1

Design Specifications & Requirements Manual

Design Specifications & Requirements Manual

Site Design Checklist and LID Calculations Worksheet. Draft Revision December 2004

Stormwater Management Studies PDS Engineering Services Division ES Policy # 3-01

3.3 Acceptable Downstream Conditions

Stormwater Control Plan for Post Construction Requirements Exhibit 4

Public Notice U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk District

CITY OF AUSTIN'S REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR CREEK PROTECTION

ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE ZONED UNINCORPORATED AREAS ARTICLE 1500 OF PUTNAM COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Page 149 ARTICLE 1500 DRAINAGE AND STORM SEWERS

STREAM AND BUFFER AREA PROTECTION/RESTORATION

Appendix E. Coordinating Erosion and Sediment Control With Low-Impact Development Planning

PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT NEWCASTLE FIRE STATION OLD STATE HIGHWAY

3.0 Planning and Submittal Requirements

RUBONIA SUBDIVISION DRAINAGE AND ROADWAY IMPROVMENTS PREPARED BY: MANATEE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION

PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF TOWN AND COUNTRY STORMWATER PROGRAM

Chapter 3 Dispersion BMPs

CHECKLIST FOR STREETS, INLETS, AND STORM SEWER DESIGN

Chapter 7. Street Drainage. 7.0 Introduction. 7.1 Function of Streets in the Drainage System. 7.2 Street Classification

SECTION 4 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS

Chapter 6. Hydrology. 6.0 Introduction. 6.1 Design Rainfall

PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF TOWN AND COUNTRY STORMWATER PROGRAM

Instructions for Notice of Ground Disturbance Form:

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR IMPROVEMENT PLAT APPROVAL

City of Katy Pine Forest Public Workshop. November 7, 2017

Incorporating Restoration Planning and Transportation Controls into the Valley Creek Watershed Act 167 Stormwater Management Plan

6.0 Runoff. 6.1 Introduction. 6.2 Flood Control Design Runoff

LOT GRADING. LOT GRADING REQUIREMENTS The following lot grading requirements came into effect on May 1, 2007:

HYDROLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS. 22 nd Annual Nonpoint Source Pollution Conference Saratoga Springs, NY

Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District Statement of Policy for Maintenance of Stormwater Sewer Systems

CITY OF ASTORIA PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS FOR IN-FILL DEVELOPMENT

COON CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT PERMIT REVIEW. Spring Lake Park Schools Westwood Middle School st Avenue NE, Spring Lake Park, MN 55432

CHAPTER 6 ADDITIONAL STANDARDS APPLYING TO SHORELAND AREAS AND PUBLIC WATERS

Planning Considerations for Stormwater Management in Alberta. R. D. (Rick) Carnduff, M. Eng., P. Eng. February 20, 2013.

Fort Collins Amendments to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Criteria Manual

Sustainable Water Resource Practices

Appendix A Stormwater Site Plan Report Short Form

NCTCOG iswm Workshop. Integrated Design Criteria Rules of Thumb / Lessons Learned. April 27, 2018 Richardson, TX

ENGINEERING REVIEW CHECKLIST City of Mount Clemens

GCG ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERING AND LAND SURVEYING 84 Main Street Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887

DUBUQUE COUNTY SMART PLAN Watershed Management

Chapter 4. Drainage Report and Construction Drawing Submittal Requirements

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) Checklist

CITY UTILITIES DESIGN STANDARDS MANUAL

Example 1: Pond Design in a residential development (Water Quantity calculations for a Wet Pond and Wet Extended Detention Pond)

CITY OF JENKS EARTH CHANGE PERMIT APPLICATION

Design Example Residential Subdivision

Woodhills Bay Colony Stormwater Master Plan

OVERALL UTILITY PLANS 1. Provide a typical section depicting the roadway (proposed/future), utility locations, and separation for

Review Zone Application for D&R Canal Commission Decision

PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY

PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF TOWN AND COUNTRY STORMWATER PROGRAM

CITY OF EAST LANSING POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE MANUAL CHAPTER II CITY OF EAST LANSING STORMWATER POLICY & PROCEDURES MANUAL

Stormwater Management Manual Revision History

SECTION STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN, GRADING, AND WATER QUALITY TECHNICAL CRITERIA TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 402 STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA 400-1

VILLAGE OF BELLAIRE WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

POLICY FOR NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AREAS

Ordinance No Lot Surface Drainage

Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program Development Policies Comparison Project APPENDIX M. SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING APPROVAL & SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT Date: June 4, 2015

Appendix E.2 Preliminary Hydrology Report

Management Practices Survey

FORT COLLINS STORMWATER CRITERIA MANUAL Hydrology Standards (Ch. 5) 1.0 Overview

Water Quality: 1.0 Water Quality Protection Volume and Peak Flow 2.0 Construction SWP3 Guidelines and Form

City of Glendale Stormwater Management Plan Checklist

BMP 5.6.1: Minimize Total Disturbed Area - Grading

CLEARWATER TOWNSHIP WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

Schedule A DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE Watercourse Protection Bylaw

CHATHAM PARK EXCEPTIONAL DESIGN EVALUATION

Preliminary Drainage Study: Town of Hillsboro Pedestrian & Traffic Safety Project Traffic Calming Project UPC# 70587

Chapter 3: Permit Procedures and Requirements

CODE CONSOLIDATION PHASE II SUMMARY OF CHANGES Effective February 1, 2011, Ordinance s

CCSD#1 Stormwater Standards

Municipal Stormwater Ordinances Summary Table

Plan Name Plan No. Submitting Firm Contact Engineer. Review Date ESI Team ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS INSTITUTE PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST CITY OF ALEXANDRIA

SCOPE. UNIFIED STORMWATER ORDINANCE Flood Damage Prevention Stormwater Pollution Control Unified Development Code Others DESIGN CRITERIA MANUAL

WATER CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND COMPATIBLE UNITS

Module 10b: Gutter and Inlet Designs and Multiple Design Objectives

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT & PLANNING APPROVAL STAFF REPORT Date: February 7, 2013

Items in this checklist identify the base requirements that are to be provided by the design professional.

PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK CITY OF TOWN AND COUNTRY STORMWATER PROGRAM

November 9, Tredyffrin Township Stephen Burgo, PE Township Engineer 1100 Duportail Road Berwyn, PA

MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF MANAGERS REVISIONS PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 103D.341. Adopted April 24, 2014 Effective June 6, 2014

STORM DRAINS AND IRRIGATION

Contents. Drainage Analysis: Hunters Trace, Westpointe, and Hunters Creek

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT & SUBDIVISION STAFF REPORT Date: July 11, 2013

CRITERIA FOR STORMWATER DESIGN

Table Related Arlington County Standards, Specification and Policies

the 2001 season. Allison brought high winds and street flooding to Houston, after

CCSD#1 Stormwater Standards

Appendix A. Transportation integrated Stormwater Management (TriSWM) Guide

MS4: The Planner s Strategy OCTOBER 17, 2016

Chapter 8. Inlets. 8.0 Introduction. 8.1 General

Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU) Stormwater Plan Review Checklist

BANKS TOWNSHIP WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

MOBILE SOUTH BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION, UNIT ONE, RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 2, 3 & 4 OF THE RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 4 & 12

Transcription:

This exercise consists of an undeveloped area and two different plans for development. Review each development plan and score using the iswm Point System for integrated Site Design Practices. Note that the information is somewhat limited to represent the amount of information typically available at the Concept Review stage. Answer as best you can with the information presented. Proposed Development Site Existing Conditions Total area of site is 28 acres 17 acres are covered with trees and a small creek All C and D soil types Not within a FEMA floodplain Step 1. Determine how many points would be required circle the Minimum Required Points based on your analysis of the site: Table.4 integrated Site Design Point Requirements (excerpt) Percentage of Site(by Area) with Natural Features Prior to Proposed Development Minimum Required Points for Water Quality Protection (WQP) > 50% 50 20 50% 0 < 20% 20

Step 2. Fill out Table.5 on the following page based on your analysis of Development Plan # 1. Development Plan #1 8 total lots Curb and gutter streets of standard width Inlets and pipe system shown in pink 9. acres to remain natural

Development Plan #1 Table.5 Point System for integrated Site Design Practices (excerpt) Percent of iswm Eligible Practice Practice Area Using Maximum No. Practice Points Conservation of Natural Features and Resources 1 Preserve/Create Undisturbed Natural Areas 8 2 Preserve or Create Riparian Buffers Where Applicable 8 Avoid Existing Floodplains or Provide Dedicated Natural Drainage Easements 8 4 Avoid Steep Slopes Actual Points Earned (% practice used * max. points) 5 Minimize Site on Porous or Erodible Soils Lower Impact Site Design 6 Fit Design to the Terrain 4 7 Locate Development in Less Sensitive Areas 4 8 Reduce Limits of Clearing and Grading 6 9 Utilize Open Space Development 8 Incorporate Creative Design (e.g. Smart 10 Growth, LEED Design, Form Based Zoning) 8 Reduction of Impervious Cover 11 Reduce Roadway Lengths and Widths 4 12 Reduce Building Footprints 4 1 Reduce the Parking Footprint 5 14 Reduce Setbacks and Frontages 4 15 Use Fewer or Alternative Cul de Sacs 16 Create Parking Lot Stormwater Islands 5 Utilization of Natural Features 17 Use Buffers and Undisturbed Areas 4 18 Use Natural Drainageways Instead of Storm Sewers 4 19 Use Vegetated Swale Design 20 Drain Runoff to Pervious Areas 4 Subtotal Actual site points earned 100 Step. Compare the Actual site points earned from Table.5 with the Minimum Points Required from Table.4. Does Development Plan #1 meet the requirements? Yes No

Step 4. Fill out Table.5 on the following page based on your analysis of Development Plan # 2. Development Plan #2 80 total lots Natural drainage easements left open Alternative cul de sacs used Drainage swales between houses 1 acres to remain natural Standard street widths are used

Development Plan #2 Table.5 Point System for integrated Site Design Practices iswm Practice No. Practice Conservation of Natural Features and Resources Percent of Eligible Area Using Practice Maximum Points 1 Preserve/Create Undisturbed Natural Areas 8 2 Preserve or Create Riparian Buffers Where Applicable 8 Avoid Existing Floodplains or Provide Dedicated Natural Drainage Easements 8 4 Avoid Steep Slopes Actual Points Earned (% practice used * max. points) 5 Minimize Site on Porous or Erodible Soils Lower Impact Site Design 6 Fit Design to the Terrain 4 7 Locate Development in Less Sensitive Areas 4 8 Reduce Limits of Clearing and Grading 6 9 Utilize Open Space Development 8 Incorporate Creative Design (e.g. Smart 10 Growth, LEED Design, Form Based Zoning) 8 Reduction of Impervious Cover 11 Reduce Roadway Lengths and Widths 4 12 Reduce Building Footprints 4 1 Reduce the Parking Footprint 5 14 Reduce Setbacks and Frontages 4 15 Use Fewer or Alternative Cul de Sacs 16 Create Parking Lot Stormwater Islands 5 Utilization of Natural Features 17 Use Buffers and Undisturbed Areas 4 18 Use Natural Drainageways Instead of Storm Sewers 4 19 Use Vegetated Swale Design 20 Drain Runoff to Pervious Areas 4 Subtotal Actual site points earned 100 Step 5. Compare the Actual site points earned from Table.5 with the Minimum Points Required from Table.4. Does Development Plan #2 meet the requirements? Yes No

Exercise Answer Step 1. Determine how many points would be required circle the Minimum Required Points based on your analysis of the site: = 60.7% Using Table.4, a site with 60% existing natural features would need to score at least 50 points for Water Quality Protection. Table.4 integrated Site Design Point Requirements (excerpt) Minimum Required Points Percentage of Site(by Area) with for Water Quality Natural Features Prior to Proposed Protection Development (WQP) > 50% 50 20 50% 0 < 20% 20 Note regarding Steps 2 through 5 on the following pages: The entries provided in the tables reflect estimates based on the limited data provided for the exercise, which is generally intended to simulate the Concept Plan Review stage where information about the site and proposed development plans may be somewhat vague. Since the information is incomplete, your answers may not agree with those provided in the tables. In addition, more extensive training of plan review staff is necessary to effectively implement the Point System in jurisdictions.

Step 2) Fill out Table.5 based on your analysis of Development Plan # 1. Development Plan #1 Table.5 Point System for integrated Site Design Practices (excerpt) Percent of iswm Eligible Practice Practice Area Using Maximum No. Practice Points Conservation of Natural Features and Resources Actual Points Earned (% practice used * max. points) 1 Preserve/Create Undisturbed Natural Areas % 8 2.64 2 Preserve or Create Riparian Buffers Where Applicable 10% 8 0.8 Avoid Existing Floodplains or Provide Dedicated Natural Drainage Easements 0% 8 0 4 Avoid Steep Slopes 90% 2.7 5 Minimize Site on Porous or Erodible Soils Lower Impact Site Design 0% 0 6 Fit Design to the Terrain 0% 4 0 7 Locate Development in Less Sensitive Areas 0% 4 0 8 Reduce Limits of Clearing and Grading 0% 6 0 9 Utilize Open Space Development 0% 8 0 Incorporate Creative Design (e.g. Smart 10 Growth, LEED Design, Form Based Zoning) 0% 8 0 Reduction of Impervious Cover 11 Reduce Roadway Lengths and Widths 0% 4 0 12 Reduce Building Footprints 0% 4 0 1 Reduce the Parking Footprint 0% 5 0 14 Reduce Setbacks and Frontages 0% 4 0 15 Use Fewer or Alternative Cul de Sacs 0% 0 16 Create Parking Lot Stormwater Islands 0% 5 0 Utilization of Natural Features 17 Use Buffers and Undisturbed Areas 0% 4 0 18 Use Natural Drainageways Instead of Storm Sewers 0% 4 0 19 Use Vegetated Swale Design 0% 0 20 Drain Runoff to Pervious Areas 0% 4 0 Subtotal Actual site points earned 100 6.14 Step. Compare the Actual site points earned from Table.5 with the Minimum Points Required from Table.4. Does Development Plan #1 meet the requirements? Yes No

Step 4) Fill out Table.5 based on your analysis of Development Plan # 2. Development Plan #2 Table.5 Point System for integrated Site Design Practices (excerpt) Percent of iswm Eligible Practice Practice Area Using Maximum No. Practice Points Conservation of Natural Features and Resources Actual Points Earned (% practice used * max. points) 1 Preserve/Create Undisturbed Natural Areas 46% 8.7 2 Preserve or Create Riparian Buffers Where Applicable 50% 8 4 Avoid Existing Floodplains or Provide Dedicated Natural Drainage Easements 100% 8 8 4 Avoid Steep Slopes 100% 5 Minimize Site on Porous or Erodible Soils Lower Impact Site Design 0% 0 6 Fit Design to the Terrain 100% 4 4 7 Locate Development in Less Sensitive Areas 0% 4 0 8 Reduce Limits of Clearing and Grading 10% 6 0.6 9 Utilize Open Space Development 50% 8 4 Incorporate Creative Design (e.g. Smart 10 Growth, LEED Design, Form Based Zoning) 0% 8 0 Reduction of Impervious Cover 11 Reduce Roadway Lengths and Widths 0% 4 0 12 Reduce Building Footprints 0% 4 0 1 Reduce the Parking Footprint 0% 5 0 14 Reduce Setbacks and Frontages 0% 4 0 15 Use Fewer or Alternative Cul de Sacs 100% 16 Create Parking Lot Stormwater Islands 0% 5 0 Utilization of Natural Features 17 Use Buffers and Undisturbed Areas 100% 4 4 18 Use Natural Drainageways Instead of Storm Sewers 100% 4 4 19 Use Vegetated Swale Design 100% 20 Drain Runoff to Pervious Areas 100% 4 4 Subtotal Actual site points earned 100 46. Step 5. Compare the Actual site points earned from Table.5 with the Minimum Points Required from Table.4. Does Development Plan #2 meet the requirements? Yes No

Answer Discussion Based upon the answer provided above, neither development proposal met the minimum requirements based on the designs and information presented. Development Plan 2; however, was clearly closer to meeting the minimum score and could likely meet the minimum with minor adjustments as the project progressed to the Preliminary Plan Review stage. The Concept Plan Review meeting provides an opportunity to discuss the project with the applicant at an early stage, determine an initial project score, and provide input on potential modifications necessary to improve project performance before significant investments in design and engineering have been incurred.