HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200900021 Review Comments 2009-04-10County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:Summer Frederick, Current Development planning and zoning review
From:Max Greene. Current Development engineering review
Date:10 April 2009
Subject: Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve Park Improvement (SDP200900021) critical slope waiver
request
The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed. The engineering analysis of the request follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The main disturbance of critical slope is a stream crossing for access to the new pedestrian and equine trails for
the above - mentioned County Park expansion. There is an additional critical slope area approximately 600
square feet in total proposed to be disturbed in the horse trailer area. The property is approximately 213.9
acres in total and the proposed parking lot and access way expansion appears to be approximately 4 acres of
disturbance. The Stream crossing is disturbing critical slopes on both sides of the stream and a mitigation plan
will replace the buffer disturbance.
Areas Acres
Total property 213.9
Rita] site 4 acres approximately
Critical slopes 0.3 8% of site
Critical slopes disturbed 0.3 100% of critical slopes
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable alternative
locations:
This disturbance is not exempt.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 - 4.2:
movement of soil and rock'
Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of
soil.
excessive stormwater runoff'
Stormwater runoff will be reduced in this area, as the slopes will be eliminated.
siltation "
Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper stabilization
and maintenance will ensure long term stability.
loss of aesthetic resource
This area is not visible from the roads and houses in the area.
septic effluent"
Public sewer does not service this site, however, the site will have a pump and haul vault toilet.
Based on the review above. there are no engineering concerns which prohibit the disturbance of the critical
slopes as shown.
pF A
o tom
IRGIN
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
April 14, 2009
David Anhold
Via email: danhold @hughes.net
RE: SDP2009 -21 Patricia Ann Bryom Preserve Park Improvement - Prelim
Dear Sir:
The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above.
Preliminary comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development
and other agencies, as applicable, are attached:
Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer)
Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner)
Albemarle County Division of Planning (E911)
Albemarle County Division of Planning (Architectural Review Board)
Albemarle County Division of Planning (Historic Preservation)
Albemarle County Division of Planning (Water Protection)
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue
Albemarle County Service Authority
Virginia Department of Health
Virginia Department of Transportation
Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed,
and should not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to
identify all issues that could affect approval of the proposed project.
Please make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approval by
the Site Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested revisions, please submit
in writing justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (8) full size copies and
one (1) 11" x 17" copy to the Department of Community Development including responses to
each of the attached comments of the Site Review Committee by April 27, 2009. Failure to
submit this information by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will
resume when revisions are submitted along with a reinstatement fee of $65.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional
information.
Sincerely,
Summer Frederick
Senior Planner
Zoning & Current Development
nt
I1id4"Tli
VI, 41C
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
To:David Anhold
CC:Robert Crickenberger
From: Summer Frederick, Senior Planner
Division: Current Development
Date:March 14, 2009
Subject: SDP2009 -21 Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve Improvements - Prelim
The Planner for the Current Development Division of the Albemarle County Department
Community Development will recommend approve the plan referred to above when the
following items have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those
that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added
or eliminated based on further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable
reference to the Albemarle County Code.]
1. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(a)] Please provide magisterial district information.
2. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(a)] One datum reference for elevation is required.
3. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(a)] Please provide the following information for adjacent parcels;
owner, zoning, tax map and parcel number, and present use of parcels.
4. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(b)] Please provide maximum acreage occupied by each use.
5. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(b)] A schedule parking including maximum amount required and
amount provided must be included on plan.
6. Sec. 18- 32.5.6(b)] Please provide maximum amount of impervious cover on the
site.
Please contact Summer Frederick at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3565 for further information.
1
Service Auth4brit Y
TO: Summer Frederick
FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer
DATE: April 10, 2009
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve Park
SDP200900021
TM 6 -28D
The below checked items apply to this site.
X 1. This site plan is not within the Authority's jurisdictional area for:
X A. Water and sewer
B. Water only
C. Water only to existing structure
D. Limited service
2. A inch water line is located approximately distant.
3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is
Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
4. An inch sewer line is located approximately distant.
5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
7.and plans are currently under review.
8.and plans have been received and approved.
9. No plans are required.
10. Final and plans are required for our review and approval prior to
granting tentative approval.
11. Final site plan may /may not be signed.
12. RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections.
13. City of Charlottesville approval for sewer.
Comments: No comment.
The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows:
meter locations water line size
waterline locations sewer line size
sewer line locations expected wastewater flows
easements expected water demands
168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698
vwvw.serviceauthoriy.org
roe er.,
rnaN«
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
Front: Max Greene, Current Development engineering review
Date:7 April 2009
Subject: Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve Park (SDP200900021)
The preliminary site plan has been reviewed. The plan will require changes to meet the intent of
the County Code. The following is a list of comments designed to help the consultant meet the
minimum requirements of the County Code.
1. Entrances to parking areas will meet standards of 5% or flatter for safe and convenient
access. [18- 4.12.15.C, VDOT requires 4% of flatter]
2. The State Water protection requires fore -bays on all stormwater detention /control
structures. [VSMH]
3. Curbing waiver is not an Engineering issue.
4. A mitigation plan is required for the stream buffer disturbance. [ 17 -317]
5. Topographic information needs to be updated to within a year of submittal. [ 18- 32.6.6,
14 -302, Policy for date] All topography should be at least visually field verified by the
designer within the last year.
6. Show sight distances at the entrance per VDOT requirements. [VDOT]
7. Please check the culverts for adequate cover.
8. Travelway will be designed to meet or exceed the VDOT standards for the projected daily
traffic count. [18- 4.12.17.d] Gravel surface is not deemed equivalent per [18- 4.12.15.a]
Application #:SDP200900021 Short Review Comn nts
Project Name: Patricia Ann Byrom Forest Preserve Park Improvement - Prelim I [Preliminary — Non - residential
Date Completed:04/08/2009
Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION.
Date Completed:04/10/2009
Reviewer:James Barber Fire Rescue
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments: Must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Approval is subject to field inspection
and verification.
Date Completed:04/07/2009
Reviewer:Max Greene Engineer Z &CD
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments: SRC 4/16/09
Date Completed:04/08/2009
Reviewer:Max Greene CommDev- Current Development
Review Status:Administrative Approval
Reviews Comments: The critical slope is exempt per 18- 4.2.6.c for access ways without reasonable alternatives.
Date Completed:04/08/2009
Reviewer:Max Greene CommDev- Current Development
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments: The curb and gutter request does not appear to have anything to do with Storm Water Management
or an existing use in the rural area per section 18- 4.12.15.g There are no engineering issues.
Date Completed:03/30/2009
Reviewer:Scott Clark Planning
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments: The proposed work is located only on the portion of the parcel not covered by the ACE conservation
easement. Therefore, no objection.
PROP' 1 00 minty of AlhPmarlP Printed On TIIPSdav Anril 14 7009
ov ALp ,
111kfet-
RG1
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:Pat Mullaney, Parks and Recreation
Cc:Glenn Brooks, Amy Pflaum, David Benish
From:Tamara Jo Ambler — Natural Resources Manager
Division:Planning
Date:July 21, 2008
Subject:Stream Buffer Mitigation Plan for Patricia Anne Byrom Forest Preserve Park
This documentation is intended to serve as the stream buffer mitigation plan for this County project. On November 14,
2007 Community Development staff provided written support to the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department
for access to this park through TMP 6 -28B, where a new crossing of an intermittent tributary to Buck Mountain Creek
would need to be constructed (see attached memorandum). The crossing of one or more streams would be necessary under
all alternatives to establish a trail head for the park, and this location was determined to minimize impacts to natural
resources. Section 17 -320 of the County Water Protection Ordinance allows this road crossing of an inteiuiittent stream
with the criteria that the crossing is designed to pass the 10 -year storm and that stream buffer vegetation is mitigated at a
2:1 ratio based upon the square footage of buffer area disturbed.
The proposed road crossing will be 229.09 feet in length and 22 feet in width. The road will be utilized by horse trailers,
which accounts for the significant width. The resulting area of stream buffer impact is approximately 5,040 square feet or
0.12 acre (see attached diagram). Therefore, the resulting square footage to be mitigated is 10,080 square feet or 0.23 acre.
The 2007 aerial photography accurately illustrates several areas within the stream buffer on the park property that lack
adequate stream buffer vegetation and provide opportunity to be planted with mitigation plantings. The attached diagram
shows that this combined area within the stream buffer at least 16,899 square feet — this area provides more than ample
opportunity to complete mitigation on site.
The specific planting options for mitigation at this site are:
Option 1 — Plant 76 landscape quality (1 -2" caliper) trees or shrubs
Option 2 — Plant 138 pine or hardwood seedlings with tree tubes and mats
Option 3 — Plant 278 pine or hardwood seedlings without tree tubes and mats
The chosen option (or combination of options) for new plantings is at the discretion of Albemarle County Parks and
Recreation. Similarly, the new plantings can be planted anywhere within the stream buffer on the park property, at the
discretion of Parks and Recreation. The attached plant list can be referenced to aid in the selection of plant species. Once
the planting is complete, the Community Development Department should be notified to close out the file. If any
significant changes to the proposed crossing are anticipated that would affect the quantity of mitigation, the Community
Development Department should be contacted to revise the plan.
Thank you very much, and please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.
Attachments: November 14, 2007 correspondence
Diagram of impact and mitigation areas
Plant list
ornL1
Itor
I 'kGINP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:Pat Mullaney, Parks and Recreation
From: Tamara Jo AmbledDivision: Planning
Date:November 14, 2007
Subject: Proposed Access to Patricia Byrom Forest Preserve Park through TMP 6 -28B
After reviewing the proposed access road and trail head location in the field on November 13,
2007 I have concluded that this proposal minimizes impacts to natural resources and can be
supported by staff, based upon the following information:
Parks and Recreation staff have investigated two other available alternatives for establishing
a trail head to provide access to the park, through TMP 6 -28 and TMP 6 -28A1. Both alternatives
are located on steep slopes and would require the construction of a new access road from Route
810. Construction of the new access would require substantial grading to serve the intended
purpose. The proposed alternative through TMP 6 -28B will utilize an existing gravel farm
entrance that is substantially more level and will require minimal grading to utilize as a park
entrance.
Buck Mountain Creek will not be crossed to provide access into the parcel. An intermittent
tributary to Buck Mountain Creek that flows through the parcel will need to be crossed to gain
access to the portion of the parcel that will be developed as a trail head. The topography in the
area of the proposed stream crossing is relatively flat, which will minimize impacts both to the
stream channel and the stream buffer. It's important to note that crossing of one or more streams
would be required under all alternatives to establish a trail head.
The existing stream buffer along the intermittent tributary is characterized by herbaceous
weeds, grasses, and some canopy and understory trees. There is ample opportunity to enhance
the buffer through new woody plantings of shrubs and trees to mitigate for the stream crossing
through the buffer.
The Parks and Recreation Department has committed to maintain the full 100' buffer on the
stream, and no trail head development (other than the stream crossing) will encroach into the
stream buffer. There is approximately 5 acres of relatively flat land to be utilized for the
trailhead, which should provide adequate room for the park to build the planned improvements as
conceptualized without encroaching on the stream buffer.
i4;•• - . 4 ., , ...t.fa„.•,46:'. - :;fi'telli.,.r4l,00 ;:, 0., ... ,...
i
1
Interm
trib to Buck
Mt. Creek
4k'Buck Mountain
Creek
o-r'' u AheY t
4 x 7. _ .v, r _ wL; ;;. t
7 '+ 1 j
Ct 's t.M - r- a. x r s i 2.t .
r 1 t
11
i t 1 '
y 1 > f!t a,4 1
yy
411 J
y,.
i'
s c.f
J , A 1 .4i . Yi I , ' 4 .
r , r } 1 " •rsi 1n O, h +' 4 `• r
y j t' -, J" - s@YV! .
a
r
la.n P. `w I t v t 7 'R ,a
ry air, ' y . tt P.; 4 f s t I x.,.. tt. v.' { - s -
a.1 ! . y' t, i
1 >... 14 ' : \ w4!'.'.1 i . ' c ` v. ,.. : x
Photograph 1 - View of existing farm entrance from Route 810 to TMP 6 -28B. No stream cross are
required to utilize this existing entrance.
rr
m. t,..1 f.
r1,
i i...;'>r 1.'• a '11; • •
Buck Mt
Creek
existing entrance
t
HS
1
o t
Photograph 2 - View from existing entrance looking along Route 810 south /west.
I c' + r y` j 4 t , ' I..'t
I A':
4. Ht:
v Sit y I j } ^
V
Con of intermittent trib i
and Buck Mt. Creek i
existing entrance
r
I
c -,i f r 4 u'
w Y' '
1 .
f yr+SY '
i f c L". v'ti 1d f sF y ,. t +9Y x tx`
t
r f F r ,,a »+ci19 i''jr!Y} 1a
w.
r }
ak
vv `'y ylt O v 41W1 tr iJ j ' 1 e
r
S i1 t t y if
4 '
Vt1.4%*"W`Pt.e'
b`m 1 °, J " >,:
Tt i s. 5 *ix .id !1A •"r• 1e
t'
r r
r i rr-l' a. S1• w - r 'Sl AA,rt4w'!'P+.,la 4. L t, '} : r
s qtr fS,4+4Fh ^ ..Fg 9 1 ' q 7 .4 } *"41 a i.* ryk
tis- :,
r,
PL
k
r S• -r i ' 42 z)'' Iz°i
I is{.JC i t. o T , F t Pit r 6
3f`5 li
Ta"'! 4F1 r rt" '4 j4 w i:4,ti Y • ;' 1,' b . -_ ki:;!qi r `' '9` 1 ,, wr / 1 y , 4 i.:
A a rY Vii' ; }- , }Sr3 a ?;• +: S4 a i c 'Z "" h }
y c e .i. r .11 } 2 r ' , 3. r.i`!t' te " 1 . 0y y 4,c
y
Y,,r L. ,. >•.rtt jry I,'
7 4rlil. fr ' C y h fh`x vl 1i ir j 4 J .,,- y y .t .o x 1 r r { Y- Y dv i L }, 7 t t1'. }3 '
7 \ .t:.: =„, 0 - , v.; } . oY. pi ,i}tS 3 k 1 k t N , - r i xt :
a ,
rr ji" d1u x 4u
t
7 4r e. " ' T z ,5
talitr 4 ..d i
r t f' ^, , yyr lat144 { ,'
Photograph 3 - View from existing entrance and Route 810 looking north /east. Another existing dr
is shown
t N, t s . ;r I ` „ , 1 p Ftra 'i ,,J ° yl',11' i' v+:,f t t 3 y 1 1 + to vti cf r
st ki tY Ip-1' Y 7 tr t 'Ne ' 1 z
Z i ik J 1 i t "•`, 4 Av 1 I .:t r s •
1 I t , A Hsi`'tilfr.1 -f ryr 'iii ( 1 lit x F h
k G .} v l j
ri H ;n „,
t 1'S gN i37r 4!i I'' k _ 'l, 1t
K- I r •e A-
54.4: j-, rc' { s i i 4. iY a'k n 5 E a
1 I h' i _ ; » I v ! CN ; W e
s c ,fit. ; , 4>,
r
rF .
1 • 4p.t r t N-,7,-,'7,4?-t,..m.4.14: y i i
v o d. - . :ht i may-f ,•
r ,a 1 ! , 'qn ..rr •
Yth ,' , Fn t i"' 9,,,b."4-`-'-... v `e -
r '.
s •Y i s
v '1 }•T
t.Ir f x 1
f
r ,
t
i ••
4
1. 14..' Fri ,: -1 :,
f qi.' ` ' -.
Photograph 4 - Representative view of stream to be crossed to access proposed County property
r.
fi t
t ill fm .
i v r Co
r t t>5 ,
rtIZ. t 1 6+ v ;
t s,
71 C .'.
r
t
rrY14u`' , 4frFld T
I
i
i
r,.Y
i•r l
v ! q-4, J
1
r 4 , 0 '
t',E
v J /
I/ I 1
r
r I f
J i
f
r
JP) ,
1 ,4ie 1' 1r •' .f / 1 1
r i y
i I 1 {, /
ri
i
J,$+5 r'
t ii l Ir .f f J ,
s;.4';,(,', •
H' r l S 4
M1 1 rJ 7 +l!1 I f ihAs
I 1 ' 'r/ l } /
l 1 /
a JJ 't 5 1
J tti r I / { J f1 al 1 tl ( i!
Y I ? 1 j ,. i
J / /v N R aj Fl3s i,
3t p/
J '',;;:i.
t''t r h f1 t r1f J/ fe / Jfypy ' / „1J"'yr { i rr .t!"' e N7 /Y3 ar
r f ( t4 i • i t
t'
V 1 r y iv11': t r : 5
N
I 6 i r v 'r t, U t J
n i J c
i SH Yt yy ,t 7I11 / r
X / ,
J W y - + # r r . - isrt, LS ,a e y , I ' s` t%vtF` la..'vjj/ fir
r. t r l ms't rY77 ' M /, k c ro J A j 1 l ) '
J
t
r d) 1. /f A/ 4 (P f 4 Y z r ' . , 15 t r
Y
r''t 1 4 i 1 / rtt ,,r/ tty'
f t
y'. i (/
il a.
y JI'l r rj t 1 I' jr F r It aAw }kp eirJt 'V i4
Y /
1 r ,r t . Yf
J l , ' I - 14 17/ epresent f '1 , rl';. . 1: ... (` 11''' " /@! - : /
f / ''A' 7J r 1 Y
Photograph 5 - Rative view of existing stream buffer
COMMONWE LTH V c1 ' ! A
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY OFFICE
701 VDOT WAY
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911
DAVID S. EKERN, P.E.
COMMISSIONER
April 15` 2009
Mr. Glenn Brooks
Depaitaient of Engineering and Development
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Subject: Site Review Meeting Comments April 16, 2009 site review meeting
Dear Mr. Brooks:
Below are VDOT's comments on the Site Plans for the April 16''', 2009 Site Review Committee
Meeting:
SDP -2009 -00016 North Fork Regional Pump Station — Preliminary (Gerald Gatobu)
1. There are proffers by both the North Fork Research Park and Northpoint to add an
additional southbound lane to route 29 at the location where this plan proposes a gravity
sewer. No plans have been reviewed for the widening of the road but efforts need to be
made to avoid conflicts. If widening takes place to the outside of Route 29, a 12 foot lane
and a 13 foot shoulder will be added. Utility structures must be placed outside of these
lanes and shoulders. Proposed structures 27 and 28 appear to be conflicting. It is
recommended that if the line must be placed within the VDOT Right of Way, it is located
in the outer 3 to 5 feet of the Right of Way in accordance with VDOT's Land Use Permit
Manual, 24VAC 30 -150 -1310.
2. Final plans will need to include a pavement design and entrance profile. A detail for the
pavement widening will be required and a design for the break in the guardrail needs to
be shown on the plan.
SDP - 2009 -00017 Humagen Fertility Diagnostics —minor (Gerald Gatobu)
Final plan needs to include design and drainage details for the pipe proposed within the
existing Route 1146 Right of Way.
SDP - 2009 -00018 Blue Ridge Shopping Center — Major (Elizabeth Marotta)
An easement is needed from the existing DI on Route 250 to the first structure off the
ROW around the 24 inch pipe.
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
SDP - 2009 -00019 Lacy Mechanical Inc. — Major (Elizabeth Marotta)
No comments
SDP - 2009 -00020 Tabor Presbyterian Church Addition - Prelim (Summer Frederick)
1. The number of seats in the addition and the ITE trip generation numbers need to be
shown on the plan.
2. Sight distances need to be shown on the existing and proposed entrances in accordance
with the Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways 24VAC 30 -71 -130.
3. The proposed one way entrance needs to be dimensioned as shown in 24VAC -30 -71 -160
of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways Commercial /Private
Entrance Design Illustrations. The minimum width is 14 feet and the minimum radii are
12.5 feet. The selected dimensions of the entrance need to accommodate the design
vehicle and should be increased accordingly. One way signs will also need to be shown
on the plan. Recommended dimensions for curb returns can be found in Appendix F of
the VDOT Road Design Manual.
4. The two existing entrances need to be evaluated and upgraded to the current standards if
found to be substandard in accordance with the requirements of section 24VAC- 30 -71-
140.
5. Tabor Street is paved with surface course asphalt. The entrances into the site must be of
the same material as the road back to the ROW line or the easement line as indicated in
24VAC 30 -71 -80 of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways.
6. Profiles for entrances need to be shown as a CG-1 1 standard.
7. Entrance pipes should be a minimum of 15 inches in diameter for all entrances. In order
to approve the use of 12 inch pipes, a hydraulic analysis will need to be submitted
showing the 12 inch pipe will not cause water to overtop the road in significant storm
events as described in VDOT's Drainage Manual section 8.3.3.1.
l
SDP - 2009 -0002
i
Park Improvements - Preliminary (Summer Frederick)
1. The connection to Route 810 needs to show a profile in accordance with the CG -11
standard.
2. Erosion control stone should be placed at each end of the proposed pipe.
3. Sight distances need to be shown at the proposed entrance in accordance with the
requirements of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways, 24VAC 30 -71-
130.
SDP - 2009 -00022 Preddy Creek Park Improvements - Preliminary (Summer Frederick)
1. The connection to Route 641 needs to show a profile in accordance with the CG -11
standard.
2. Erosion control stone should be placed at the oulet end of the proposed pipe.
3. Sight distances need to be shown at the proposed entrance in accordance with the
requirements of The Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways, 24VAC 30 -71-
130.
SUB - 2009 -00049 Free Bridge Subdivision —Final (Patrick Lawrence)
Access easements should be provided from Olympia Drive to TMP78 -9A, Residue TMP -
78-57B and TMP 78 -10A through the proposed lots E, F and Residue of TMP -78 -11 for
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District April 24, 2009
706 Forest St, Ste G
Charlottesville, VA 22903
975-0224
TO:Summer Frederick
Planning Department
RE:Soils Report and Comments for:
Patricia Byrom Forest Preserve Park
55 CO
z W
O A w Off
N
w
CO CID 0 4.&0
1 ,co
w rn
O 0 W
c j A O
o
w p
Tr .
w cn
m
Il•o
o pcCIP4ICI
co
CD to A VAooCD
T n
O
pp—V 1'_A
3
il
O 8fe °
w .
COP*,
co
CO v ,......}0 Or S6 01 .
E. W V w
3 o w A
n ofiN
0 ._. w w CO
Z
p
Ill NJ m 3.‘ O W w 4 rn ao
N
n V
C7
Irili.
i It .0N
7-F")NI ' ':1
w
s . t1
C
co '4
0 1 )L a
a,
g 0)` 7 ) :
2- !\\---0.\//6/ ,/
7 m
C
p
im\:1 /
V fh "
m n rn R.
u, o 0 0
m
o° 3 rn f o
fit. N
11
o,o
0
7 d =' .,( ei
O 7
o o_ -.< 5
0
VII' w co
V /
rn
r'''')
cn K
CD 7 o c>
fl_ n c0 O p m O Q
o n al N !n ,,,,
O v O
to C O, -
coN
I c.,
1
m 1 --- -
il
z m n pOx,.rn
CO
0
ry
O I
W
0
USDA United States Mural Prepared by: Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water
Department of Resources Conservation District
Agriculture Conservation 434 - 975 -0224
Service
Soils Report
SOILS REPORT FOR: Patricia Byrom Forest Preserve Pk
Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map Unit: 7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Braddock is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is
loam about 8 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest
permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil
is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land
capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is O. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Chester is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam
about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is
moderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded
and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability
classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is D. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Hayesville is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is
loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability
is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is
not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is
2e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 61E Myersville -Rock outcrop complex, 25 to 45 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Myersville is a steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is silt loam about 7 inches thick.
The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a
moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded.
The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 7e. The
Virginia soil management group is D. This soil is not hydric.
No description available for Rock Outcrop.
Map Unit: 81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Thurmont is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is
loam about 10 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest
permeability is moderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is
Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 4/27/09
not flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 60 inches. The land capabilityclassificationis3e. The Virginia soil management group is L. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 81D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Thurmont is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about
10 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability ismoderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded
and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 60 inches. The land capability classification is4e. The Virginia soil management group is L. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 82C Thurmont very stony loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Thurmont is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer isloamabout10inchesthick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest
permeability is moderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is
not flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 60 inches. The land capabilityclassificationis6s. The Virginia soil management group is L. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 82D Thurmont very stony loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Thurmont is a moderately steep to steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about
10 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderately low content of organic matter. The slowest permeability ismoderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded
and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 60 inches. The land capability classification is6s. The Virginia soil management group is L. This soil is not hydric.
Map Unit: 87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes
Description Category: Virginia FOTG
Tusquitee is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer isloamabout9inchesthick. The surface layer has a high content of organic matter. The slowest permeability ismoderatelyrapid. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not
flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capabilityclassificationis4s. The Virginia soil management group is G. This soil is not hydric.
Local Roads and Streets - Dominant Condition
Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map
Symbol Soil Name Rating
7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Very limited
percent slopes
I4C Chester loam, 7 to 15 Very limited
percent slopes
36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
61E Myersville -Rock outcrop Very limited
complex, 25 to 45 percent
7 "homas Jefferson SWCD 2 4/27/09
slopes
81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 Very limited
percent slopes
8I D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 Very limited
percent slopes
82C Thurmont very stony Very limited
loam, 7 to 15 percent
slopes
82D Thurmont very stony Very limited
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to Somewhat limited
15 percent slopes
Septic Tank Absorption Fields - Dominant Condition
Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map
Symbol Soil Name Rating
7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
61E Myersville -Rock outcrop Very limited
complex, 25 to 45 percent
slopes
81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 Somewhat limited
percent slopes
81D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 Very limited
percent slopes
82C Thurmont very stony Somewhat limited
loam, 7 to 15 percent
slopes
82D Thurmont very stony Very limited
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to Somewhat limited
15 percent slopes
Mapunit Hydric Rating
Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map
Symbol Soil Name Rating
7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric
Thomas Jefferson SWCD 3 4/27/09
percent slopes
14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric
percent slopes
36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric
percent slopes
61E Myersville -Rock outcrop Not hydric
complex, 25 to 45 percent
slopes
81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric
percent slopes
81D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 Not hydric
percent slopes
82C Thurmont very stony Not hydric
loam, 7 to 15 percent
slopes
82D Thurmont very stony Not hydric
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to Not hydric
15 percent slopes
Soil Shrink -Swell - Dominant Soil
Top Depth : 0
Bottom Depth : 0
Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map
Symbol Soil Name Rating
7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 1.5
percent slopes
14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 1.5
percent slopes
36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 1.5
percent slopes
61E Myersville -Rock outcrop 1.5
complex, 25 to 45 percent
slopes
81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 1.5
percent slopes
81D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 1.5
percent slopes
82C Thurmont very stony 1.5
loam, 7 to 15 percent
slopes
82D Thurmont very stony 1.5
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to 1.5
15 percent slopes
Corrosion Concrete - Dominant Condition
Thomas Jefferson SWCD 4 4/27/09
Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia
Survey Status: Published
Correlation Date: 12/01/1981
Distribution Date: 10/21/2002
Map
Symbol Soil Name Rating
7B Braddock loam, 2 to 7 Moderate
percent slopes
14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 High
percent slopes
36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Moderate
percent slopes
61E Myersville -Rock outcrop Moderate
complex, 25 to 45 percent
slopes
81C Thurmont loam, 7 to 15 High
percent slopes
81D Thurmont loam, 15 to 25 High
percent slopes
82C Thurmont very stony High
loam, 7 to 15 percent
slopes
82D Thurmont very stony High
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
87C Tusquitee stony loam, 7 to Moderate
15 percent slopes
1 "homas Jefferson SWCD 5 4/27/09