search

kerrymcmahon / Frederick-County-Stormwater

0 stars 0 forks source link

CONFLICT_00209 #7

Open kerrymcmahon opened 8 years ago

kerrymcmahon commented 8 years ago

WHAT: Stormwater Fast track sites in conflict with needs replating tree sites

FR-KSL-1002 and FR-KSL-1001 in conflict with 100230UT

image

kerrymcmahon commented 8 years ago

Hi Stacey, The site is 100230UT, it's just split in to two by an existing outfall. We placed BMP footprints (FR-KSL-1001 & FR-KSL-1002) at the low points, just adjacent to the outfall ditch - please confirm you can see these footprints in your data (EFF_BMP_PLANNED).

Back in September, not long after our SWM/Tree coordination meeting, we were provided with a number of sites that needed to be replanted and were told we could proposed BMPs in these locations as long as we reviewed them quickly. We reviewed them quickly and Kerry updated the GIS data so your team would have our latest info. We have been planning to use these sites since then and our team is ready to prepare designs for these now. The design phase will take a couple months, but by the end of the spring we will have a concept level LOD, which will be available in the GIS data for your team to utilize in reshaping both pieces of 100230UT.

I'm concerned that the other "needs replanting" sites we were given back in September may be moving forward as tree sites as well. Could your team please review your sites that need replanting and verify you are not moving any forward that have BMPs currently proposed in the same location? We have only reviewed the sites that were provided to us by your team on 9/28/15.

We look forward to your response. Please contact me with any questions. Thanks, Kristin

kerrymcmahon commented 8 years ago

-----Original Message----- From: Stacey Young Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 3:16 PM To: Kristin Langway Cc: klangway@wtbco.com; Kerry McMahon; Jessica Seipp; Natalie Byers; Sheila Mahoney Subject: RE: Needs Replanting Sites for SWM

Hi Kristin

For that particular site (100230UT), we have no current planting contracts looking to use it, so you are fine to move forward with it, and we will remove it from our pool of sites for now, until we have an updated LOD from you. I have instructed our teams to double check that they have run conflicts on the remaining needs replanting sites for the other districts using the most up to date copy of the database.

Thank you, Stacey

Consultant for the Maryland State Highway Administration Office of Environmental Design (Water Programs Division) Phone: 410-462-9176 Email: syoung4@sha.state.md.us

kerrymcmahon commented 8 years ago

Matt,

Thanks for the input. We will put tree sites 100044UT (in conflict with FR-KSL-1001 & 1002), 100137UT (in potential conflict with FR-MP-1009), and 100170UT (in conflict with FR-MP-1007) as 'crew day' sites in our D7 establishment contract, which means we can be flexible about changing their shape or pulling them out part way through. Please let us know when the LODs are finalized and we will adjust our shapes accordingly and notify the contractor.

If any of the other SWM sites are considered to move forward, a new conflict should be opened at that time.

Thanks! Natalie

kerrymcmahon commented 8 years ago

CONFLICT reopened because two out of three sites were in the Frederick establishment conflict.

LODs will be provided to the tree team.

Natalie, please advise as to which database edits need to be made.

nbyers1 commented 8 years ago

No database edits needed until the LODs are available.

klangway commented 7 years ago

Hi Natalie, We have some sites we want to send to final design that conflict with tree sites. Can you please review the following list and let me know if there are any issues with these moving forward? FRGr2-JMT-2364 conflicts with 100424UT FR-KSL-1001 & 2 (from thread above) conflicts with 100044UT FR-MP-1001 conflicts with 100222UT

Thanks for your help! Kristin

nbyers1 commented 7 years ago

Kristin,

Thanks for the heads up on these sites. 100424UT is in an establishment contract, so we will contact you prior to each work season to see if construction is scheduled for that site during the upcoming season. 100044UT is being maintained under 'crew days' in an establishment contract, so we will also be checking in regularly on this site. 100222UT is currently not in any contract so it is fully available to you.

Thanks, Natalie