Agenda - 02-20-2001-9f - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

I 49 I Mr. Craig Benedict November 17, 2000 ' Page 7 As Dr. Stewart's report indicates, this subdivision, in and of itself, will not have any consequential effect on the transmission of sound from I-40. Dr. Diehl desires to provide the additional ' coverage in plantings by way of a further screening effect, and through the variety of the plantings used, to enhance an appropriate atmosphere for this entire neighborhood. Ultimately, according to Dr. Stewart, the significant sound coming from the I- 40 corridor is transmitted along the southwestern boundary, where the terrain is such that the highway is actually higher than the I subject property and that of the neighbors to the northeast. There is simply nothing within the parameters of this subdivision that would affect, either adversely or favorably, the volume of sound ' from the highway. i Possible Stream and Related Water Run-off. It is my I understanding that, according to the applicable maps, as well as I County definitions, the property does not contain a perpetual stream. At best, a spring may be found which, on an intermittent I basis, provides for some water flow through the subject property. Figure 8 depicts the location of the supposed spring in question. This photo was taken during the recent dry season, and, as is I obvious, there was no water flowing at that time. Nonetheless, I provisions have been made in the revised plan for a 30-foot-wide drainage easement suitable for any off-flow that might be generated I by this spring. In addition, there will be no clearing or grading through this 30-foot storm drainage easement in order to protect the natural conditions and ensure that there will be no increase in ' runoff, either from the impact of the development or the natural spring as it may from time to time exist. Fig. 8: source of occasional spring