CONFLICT_00070

[kerrymcmahon]

WHAT: Stormwater Fast track sites in conflict with new FR AW0445182 map book sites that are in concept design

ACTION: Please review the overlaps and reshape where possible or provide a list of sites that cannot be reshaped.

DATA: pw:\SHAVMPWX.shacadd.ad.mdot.mdstate:SHAEDMS01\Documents\Areawide Projects\AW-82 TMDL\02 Implementation & Monitoring\Conflict Resolution and Planning Research\04 Tree Conflicts\Frederick\CONFLICT_00070_FR_AW0445182\20151118_FR_AW0445182_Conflicts.zip

[acganser]

Only the tree site with STRU_ID = 100261UT exceeds .5 acres in area, assuming a 50 ft buffer around the EFF_BMP_Planned sites. Is the SWM BMP SITE_NAME = FR-SRF-0003 at a phase in design where you have a firm LOD/LOC that we could use to clip our site? If not, is a 50' buffer sufficient between these sites and our trees?

[acganser]

The following tree sites (by STRU_ID) will not be able to move forward because of the SWM BMP contract, so we will be putting them 'on hold'.

100107UT 100072UT 100171UT 100297UT 100299UT 100311UT 060220UT 100330UT 100341UT 100380UT 100381UT 100382UT 100392UT 100394UT 100397UT 100281UT 100282UT

[kerrymcmahon]

Please hold off on putting anything on hold. Let me find out the real status of these sites

[kerrymcmahon]

Kristin, the tree team is willing to place all of these sites on hold, however, some our stormwater sites may not be moving forward. Please zoom into EACH polygon for conflict 00070 in the PLANNING_CONFLICT featureclass, and see which ones the tree team can keep from the list above. In addition, their highest quality site, 100261UT, should be considered.

[klangway]

I've reviewed each of the 13 sites you listed - FYI, a number of these Susie reviewed for this same issue (she placed her own shapes). There is only 1 site that will NOT be used for SWM and can go directly to trees: FR-SRF-0006. Please note, I am up to date on data downloads, but do not see these tree sites that we are in conflict with, so maybe the SWM team does not have the latest tree data, so I don't know which tree site is 100261UT, I'm assuming it's the one in conflict with SRF-003. We will most likely place a swale along the shoulder edge at this location. Assume 50' from shoulder edge for approximate BMP & LOD limits, planting can happen behind swale. Access to tree site will need to be u/s or d/s of swale.

[nbyers1]

Kristin, the footprints in the current database and in the conflict database Kerry posted for this conflict do not match. Unless you request/suggest otherwise, I will assume that the current database shapes are the most accurate and will have 100261UT revised based on the current database shape for SRF-003.

Kerry, please place the following tree sites on hold in the database: -100392UT -100299UT -100330UT -100397UT -100311UT -100341UT -100382UT -100381UT -060220UT

Thanks, Natalie

[kerrymcmahon]

sites deemed to be placed on hold are now updated in the database.

Natalie, can you provide a reshape of site 100261UT

[nbyers1]

The designers are just getting set up on this contract and don't have design files together yet. I will provide the reshape as soon as it is available.

[mparlakian]

Natalie,

We are shifting SWM site FR-KSL-1011 near 100133UI, 100137UT and 100199UT. It would potentially impact 100133UI (after existing pavement is removed) and 100137UT. The current location of FR-KSL-1011 is not feasible due to high DA and limited area.

[klangway]

Matt - we shouldn't get rid of KS-1011, just add comments that there is little room and it will go in the pool. Please create a new BMP footprint in the location of the proposed BMP and give it a new name.

Thanks. Kristin

[mparlakian]

Natalie,

We understand now that what we thought to be tree conflict (pattern along the ramp being removed) is just pavement removal, not plantings. It looks like there will not be much of a conflict... just possibly with 100137UT. A new BMP footprint is being added called FR-MP-1009. FR-KSL-1011 will remain and most likely reshaped to treat runoff from the east side of the ramp. It will remain in a current concept package.

Matt

[nbyers1]

The revised shape for 100261UT has been sent to Kerry for entry into the database.