DOCSLIB.ORG

Big Creek Watershed Study Update City of Alpharetta Engineering / Public Works 1790 Hembree Road Alpharetta , Georgia 30009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Big Creek Watershed Study Update City of Alpharetta Engineering / Public Works 1790 Hembree Road Alpharetta , Georgia 30009 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL October 10, 2011 JOB NO. ATTENTION: Ms. Jill Bazinet TO: Ms. Jill Bazinet P.E. RE: Final Draft Big Creek Watershed Study Update City of Alpharetta Engineering / Public Works 1790 Hembree Road Alpharetta , Georgia 30009 WE ARE SENDING YOU ATTACHED ELECTRONICALLY UNDER SEPARATE COVER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: SHOP DRAWINGS PRINTS PLANS CERTIFICATION COPY OF LETTER PAYROLLS REPORT CD COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 10.10.2011 Final Draft Big Creek Watershed Study Update THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW FOR APPROVAL NO EXCEPTION TAKEN SUBMIT COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION FOR YOUR USE/FILES MAKE CORRECTIONS NOTED RETURN CORRECTED COPIES AS REQUESTED AMEND AND RESUBMIT RESUBMIT COPIES FOR APPROVAL FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT REJECTED - (SEE REMARKS) RETURN APPROVED COPIES REMARKS: COPY TO: File SIGNED: Amanda Lester IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE 580 W. Crossville Road Suites 101-102 Roswell, Georgia 30075 October 10, 2011 Jill Bazinet P.E. City of Alpharetta, Georgia Engineering / Public Works 1790 Hembree Road Alpharetta, GA 30009 Re: Final Big Creek Watershed Study Update Dear Ms. Bazinet: River To Tap (R2T) is pleased to provide the attached final draft of the Big Creek Watershed Study Update for the Cities of Alpharetta and Roswell. This update includes information and activities related to water supply watershed protection that have been implemented since the Big Creek Watershed Study was developed in 2000. The final draft identifies updated land use percentages for the Department of Community Affairs Part 5 Criteria for Environmental Planning. John West of the DCA was contacted to confirm that the impervious percentages would not limit the Cities ability to comply with the Part 5 Criteria. Other updates in the final draft include best management practices identified specifically within Wills Park a City of Alpharetta owned property. R2T, Inc. is committed to providing the municipalities with a quality Big Creek Watershed Study Update that will be used to comply with existing State and regional plans and regulations. Please call me at (770) 569‐7038 ext. 103 if you have any questions on our qualifications, the scope of work, project schedule or cost. Sincerely, R2T, INC. Amanda Lester cc: Kimberly Ajy Project Engineer Project File 580 W. Crossville Road Suites 101-102 Roswell, Georgia 30075 Big Creek Watershed Study Update Executive Summary This study presents an update to the Big Creek Watershed Study prepared by Camp Dresser & McKee in 2000 under the guidance of the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC). The purpose of this document is to ensure that active participants, including the Cities of Alpharetta and Roswell, comply with the current federal, state, and local requirements. The Big Creek basin is located in Cities of Alpharetta, Roswell, Milton, Johns Creek, Cumming, and Forsyth, Fulton and Cherokee Counties of Georgia. The watershed provides recreational and scenic value to the various jurisdictions and serves as a water supply source for the City of Roswell. The southern portion of the watershed is more developed than the northern portion as it lies within the Cities of Alpharetta and Roswell. Developed areas in the northern portion of the watershed are primarily within the City of Cumming. The watershed occupies an area of approximately 99 square miles at the Roswell water treatment plant intake. The characteristics of the Big Creek watershed summarized in this study include location, soil type, topography and land use. Water quality data from the Cities of Alpharetta and Roswell are included to summarize the health of the streams within the Big Creek watershed. Potential pollution sources within the watershed have also been identified using GIS mapping and local resources. Historically, ordinances and regulations regarding water quality varied between jurisdictions located in the watershed. However, each jurisdiction in the Big Creek watershed is now a member of the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (District). One of the District’s goals is to provide consistency and regulatory compliance and accountability among jurisdictions in the greater Atlanta area to benefit water quality. The watershed management requirements of the District are identified in Section 3 of this report. The official code of Georgia and the Georgia Planning Act establishes requirements for small water supply watersheds. The requirements for these watersheds are identified in this study, as well as necessary measures the Big Creek jurisdictions can take to meet these requirements. Future land use conditions that are managed by improved ordinances and include stormwater best management practices (BMPs) throughout the watershed provides the best opportunity to achieve water quantity, water quality and community goals. Recommendations for source and treatment controls to implement within the Big Creek watershed are identified in Section 6 and are presented by three categories in Table EX.1, including Public Awareness and Public Involvement, Non‐structural Measures and Structural Measures. i TableEX.1 Big Creek Watershed Study Recommended BMPs for Big Creek Watershed Newsletter Public Awareness and Public Awareness to Reduce FOGs Public Involvement School Education Activities Homeowner Education Workshops Septic Tank Elimination Program Increased Water Quality Monitoring Debris Removal from Structures Non‐structural Measures Bacteria Source Tracking Neighborhood of Environmental Excellence Greenspace Acquisition and Management Stormwater Detention Basin – Wills Park Stormwater Detention Basin – Liberty Square Stormwater Detention Basin – Carriage Station Stormwater Detention Basin Retrofits Structural Measures Rain Gardens – Wills Park, Waller Parks Rain Barrels – Wills Park, Waller Parks Stream Bank Restoration (Various Locations) Disconnect Impervious Surfaces Reduce Impervious Surfaces Low Impact Development/Redevelopment and Green Infrastructure Alum Treatment of Regional Detention Ponds ii Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 4 Section 2 Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Description of the Watershed ............................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Topography ......................................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Climate ................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4 Soils ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.5 Land Use ............................................................................................................................................ 11 2.5.1 Existing Land Cover .................................................................................................................... 11 2.5.2 Future Land Cover ...................................................................................................................... 11 2.6 Potential Pollution Sources ............................................................................................................... 14 2.7 Sanitary Sewer Overflows and Septic Tanks ..................................................................................... 17 2.8 Water Quality Data ........................................................................................................................... 17 2.8.1 Water Quality Monitoring.......................................................................................................... 19 Section 3 Regulatory Review....................................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 24 3.2 Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District....................................................................... 25 3.3 Part 5 Environmental Criteria ........................................................................................................... 26 3.3.1 Requirement ‐ 1 Area within a Seven Mile Radius .................................................................... 26 3.3.2 Requirement – 2 Areas outside a Seven Mile Radius ................................................................ 27 3.3.3 Requirement 3 – Entire Watershed ........................................................................................... 28 Section 4 Estimating
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chattahoochee River Pedestrian Bridge: Environmental Assessment
    Project No: NA Fulton County P.I. Number 0009640 State Route (SR) 9 at Chattahoochee River in Roswell - Enhancements ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO 42 USC 4321 et. seq. And 49 USC 303 (for 4(f), if applicable) May 20, 2020 NEPA DATE Eric Duff DATEDAT State Environmental Administrator APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ADVANCEMENT TO AVAILABILITY/PUBLIC HEARING PHASE Digitally signed by JENNIFER L JENNIFER L GIERSCH GIERSCH Date: 2020.06.24 11:59:12 -04'00' DATE FOR: MOISES MARRERO DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ǣ͝Ȁ͚͞Ȁ͚͚͘͘ȁǣ ͗ǣ͘͘͘͘͜͡͞ǡǣ ȋ Ȍǣ͝Ȁ͙͙Ȁ͚͙͘͠ 7KHHQJLQHHURIUHFRUG (25 DVVHUWVWKDW ȀǣǤǤ͝Ȁ͚͟Ȁ͚͚͘͘ ǣǤǤ͝Ȁ͚͟Ȁ͚͚͘͘ SODQVLQFRUSRUDWHRUZLOOLQFRUSRUDWHFRPPLWPHQWV 7KH*'27SURMHFWPDQDJHU 30 DVVHUWVWKDW ǣ Ǥ Ǥ͝Ȁ͚͟Ȁ͚͚͘͘ ǣ͝Ȁ͚͞Ȁ͚͚͘͘ WKHVHFRPPLWPHQWVDUHIHDVLEOH LIDSSOLFDEOH ǡ *'2730(ND2NRQPNSDHWRB 6LJQDWXUH'DWH(NDNSDHWR Ǥ (25BBB BBB ǣ͝Ȁ͚͟Ȁ͚͚͘͘ 6LJQDWXUH'DWH Ǥ Ȁ ȋ Ȍ ǫ Ǧ͙ ȋȌ͙ Ǧ ͚͚͘͘ Ǧ Ǧ͚ ͙ Ǧ͜ Dz Dz Dz ͚͘ȋ͘Ǥ͚͘͘ Ȍ Ǧ͛ ͚ ͠͠ȋ͘Ǥ͚͜͜ Ȍ Ǧ͙ǡǦ͙ǡǦ͚ Dz Dz Dz ͙͘͘ Ǧ͜ ͚ Ǧ Dz Dz Dz ͘Ǥ͙͛ ǡ ǡ Ǧ͝ ȋȌ͜ Ǧ͙ǡǦ͙ǡǦ͛ Dz Dz Dz Ǧ͞ Ǧ͙ Dz Dz ͟ǡ Ǧ͟ ͙ Ǧ Dz ͚͙͛͘ ͙͞ǡ Ǧ͠ ǦǦ Dz ͚͙͘͡ Ǥ ȋ ǡȌ Ǥ ǯ Ǧ͙ ͙͘͟Ǥ͚͛Ǥ ͡Ȁ͙͡Ȁ͚͙͘͞ Ǥ ȋ ǣ ǡ Ȍ Ǥ ǫ Ǥ Ǧ͙ ǡ Ǥ ͙͜ ǡ Ǥ ǣ͝Ȁ͚͞Ȁ͚͚͘͘ȁǣ ͗ǣ͘͘͘͘͜͡͞ǡǣ ȋ Ȍǣ͝Ȁ͙͙Ȁ͚͙͘͠ Ǥ ǡ ǡ ǡ Ǥ ǯ ȋǡ ǡ ǥȌ Ǥ ǫ Ȃ Ǧ͙ ͙͘͜͜͜ ͚͜ ͚͚͙͘ ͙͚͙͙͘͘͠͠ǡ͚͡͞ Ȃ Ǧ͚ ͙͆͜ǡ͚͜͟ ͙͙͛͛͘͘͘͘ ͚͚͙͘ ͘Ǥ͙͚͙͘͘͘͠Ǥ͘͠ Ȃ Ǧ͛ ͆͠͞ǡ͘͘͘ ͙͙͛͛͘͘͘͘ ͚͚͙͘ Ȃ Ǧ͜ Ǧ ͙ ͚͚͙͘ Ǧ͝ ȋ Ȍ Dz Ǥ Ǧ͞ Dz Ǥ ȋǣǦȂ ǢȂǯȌ Ǧǡǡ Ǥ ȋǤǤȀ ȀȀǤȌ Ǧ͙ ȋǤǤȌ ̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸ ͛͘Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ Ǧ͚ Ǧǡ ǡ Dz ǡǡǤ ̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸̸ ͛͘ Ǥ Ǧ Ǥ Ǧǡ ǡ ͟ Ǧ͛ Ǧ Dz ǡǡǤ to advertising for opportunity to hold a Public Hearing Open House.
    [Show full text]
  • Cobb County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 1 OF 4 Cobb County COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ACWORTH, CITY OF 130053 AUSTELL, CITY OF 130054 COBB COUNTY 130052 (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) KENNESAW, CITY OF 130055 MARIETTA, CITY OF 130226 POWDER SPRINGS, CITY OF 130056 SMYRNA, CITY OF 130057 REVISED: MARCH 4, 2013 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 13067CV001D NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: August 18, 1992 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: December 16, 2008 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: March 4, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose of Study 1 1.2 Authority and Acknowledgments 1 1.3 Coordination 3 2.0 AREA STUDIED 5 2.1 Scope of Study 5 2.2 Community Description 10 2.3 Principal Flood Problems
    [Show full text]
  • Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation for Fifty-Eight Stream Segments in the Coosa River Basin for Fecal Coliform
    Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation for Fifty-Eight Stream Segments in the Coosa River Basin for Fecal Coliform Submitted to: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia Submitted by: The Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Atlanta, Georgia January 2004 Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation January 2004 Coosa River Basin (Fecal coliform) Table of Contents Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Watershed Description......................................................................................................1 1.3 Water Quality Standard.....................................................................................................9 2.0 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 15 3.0 SOURCE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 16 3.1 Point Source Assessment ............................................................................................... 16 3.2 Nonpoint Source Assessment........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 250/Monday, December 31
    76916 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 250 / Monday, December 31, 2012 / Rules and Regulations Location and case Date and name of newspaper Effective date of Community State and county No. where notice was published Chief executive officer of community modification No. Texas: Tarrant City of Keller (11– June 24, 2011, July 1, 2011, The Honorable Pat McGrail, Mayor, City October 31, 2011 ........... 480602 (FEMA Docket 06–2181P). The Fort Worth Star-Tele- of Keller, 1100 Bear Creek Parkway, No.: B–1225). gram. Keller, TX 76248. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. ADDRESSES: The final BFEs for each 10, Environmental Consideration. An 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) community are available for inspection environmental impact assessment has at the office of the Chief Executive not been prepared. James A. Walke, Officer of each community. The Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for respective addresses are listed in the elevation determinations are not within Mitigation, Department of Homeland table below. Security, Federal Emergency Management the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Agency. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering [FR Doc. 2012–31348 Filed 12–28–12; 8:45 am] flexibility analysis is not required. Management Branch, Federal Insurance BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Regulatory Classification. This final and Mitigation Administration, Federal rule is not a significant regulatory action Emergency Management Agency, 500 C under the criteria of section 3(f) of Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Executive Order 12866 of September 30, (202) 646–4064, or (email) SECURITY 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • 137 CHAPTER 5 NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT What Are
    Chapter 5 Natural Resources Element (June 20, 2005 Draft) 137 Roswell, Georgia, Comprehensive Plan 2025 CHAPTER 5 NATURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT What are the natural features which make a township handsome? A river, with its waterfalls and meadows, a lake, a hill, a cliff or individual rocks, a forest, and ancient trees standing singly. Such things are beautiful; they have a high use which dollars and cents never represent. If the inhabitants of a town were wise, they would seek to preserve these things, though at a considerable expense… Henry David Thoreau, Journal, 1861 (Quoted in Dramstad, Olson, and Forman 1996) The Natural Resources Element provides the City with the opportunity to inventory natural and environmentally sensitive resources; to consider the issues, problems and opportunities associated with those resources; and to develop goals, policies and strategies for their appropriate use, conservation and protection that are consistent with those established for other Plan elements. An assessment of natural resources must be conducted to consider how they can most wisely and responsibly be utilized, developed, managed or preserved in order to yield maximum long- range benefits to the community. The assessment should also consider the potential vulnerability of the community's natural resources to land development and other human activities and evaluate whether protecting them is important to the future health and economic well being of the community. Levels of community support for conservation of various natural resources should also be considered. The results of this assessment should be considered in the development of needs and goals and an associated implementation strategy that sets forth any special treatment or protection to be provided these resources over the planning period.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood-Inundation Maps for Big Creek from the Mcginnis Ferry Road Bridge to the Confluence of Hog Wallow Creek, Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia
    Prepared in cooperation with the cities of Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia Flood-Inundation Maps for Big Creek from the McGinnis Ferry Road Bridge to the Confluence of Hog Wallow Creek, Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3338 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Left, Big Creek Greenway in Alpharetta, Georgia; right, Vickery Creek Trail in Roswell, Georgia (photographs by Jonathan W. Musser, U.S. Geological Survey). Flood-Inundation Maps for Big Creek from the McGinnis Ferry Road Bridge to the Confluence of Hog Wallow Creek, Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia By Jonathan W. Musser Prepared in cooperation with the cities of Alpharetta and Roswell, Georgia Pamphlet to accompany Scientific Investigations Map 3338 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.
    [Show full text]
  • Cobb County, Georgia and Incorporated Areas
    VOLUME 4 OF 4 Cobb County COBB COUNTY, GEORGIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER ACWORTH, CITY OF 130053 AUSTELL, CITY OF 130054 COBB COUNTY 130052 (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) KENNESAW, CITY OF 130055 MARIETTA, CITY OF 130226 POWDER SPRINGS, CITY OF 130056 SMYRNA, CITY OF 130057 REVISED: MARCH 4, 2013 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 13067CV004C NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may revise and republish part or all of this FIS report at any time. In addition, FEMA may revise part of this FIS report by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS report. Therefore, users should consult with community officials and check the Community Map Repository to obtain the most current FIS report components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: August 18, 1992 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: December 16, 2008 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: March 4, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose of Study 1 1.2 Authority and Acknowledgments 1 1.3 Coordination 3 2.0 AREA STUDIED 5 2.1 Scope of Study 5 2.2 Community Description 10 2.3 Principal Flood Problems
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 76, No. 229/Tuesday, November 29, 2011
    Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules 73537 (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. ADDRESSES: The corresponding made final, and for the contents in those 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map buildings. Dated: November 18, 2011. (FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each Comments on any aspect of the Flood Sandra K. Knight, community is available for inspection at Insurance Study and FIRM, other than Deputy Associate Administrator for the community’s map repository. The the proposed BFEs, will be considered. Mitigation, Department of Homeland respective addresses are listed in the A letter acknowledging receipt of any Security, Federal Emergency Management table below. comments will not be sent. Agency. You may submit comments, identified National Environmental Policy Act. [FR Doc. 2011–30709 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am] by Docket No. FEMA–B–1233, to Luis This proposed rule is categorically BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering excluded from the requirements of 44 Management Branch, Federal Insurance CFR part 10, Environmental and Mitigation Administration, Federal Consideration. An environmental DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Emergency Management Agency, 500 C impact assessment has not been SECURITY Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, prepared. Federal Emergency Management (202) 646–4064, or (email) Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood Agency [email protected]. elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis 44 CFR Part 67 Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering flexibility analysis is not required. [Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002; Internal Management Branch, Federal Insurance Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Agency Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • 222 CHAPTER 8 URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT Urban Design Has Been
    Chapter 8 Urban Design Element (June 20, 2005 Draft) 222 Roswell, GA, Comprehensive Plan 2025 CHAPTER 8 URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT Urban design has been a key public policy concern in Roswell for more than three decades. The architectural design of development within the Historic District has been reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission (see Chapter 6 of this Comprehensive Plan), formerly established as an Civic Design Commission before the Historic Preservation Act of 1980. In addition, for more than two decades, a Design Review Board has reviewed the architecture, site design, landscaping. Long before the adoption of design guidelines was the “trendy” thing for proactive municipalities to do, Roswell prepared, adopted, and implemented design guidelines for selected areas of the City. Together, these programs of architectural and site design review have helped Roswell to preserve its past, ensure quality development, and guide its future in a way that maintains and enhances its character. An Urban Design Element is not required by State rules for local planning, but given it’s past emphasis on urban design, Roswell prepared and adopted an Urban Design Element in 2000, as a part of its 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In 2000, the need to recognize all adopted design guidelines was the primary concern of the Urban Design Element. Another concern at that time related to the character and design of the City as a whole. Having divided the City into different design districts, there was some concern that the City and its Design Review Board might be losing sight of its character as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Work Program Appendix 3 Appendix 3 November 2017
    COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM APPENDIX 3 APPENDIX 3 NOVEMBER 2017 2040 COMMUNITY WORK PROGRAM The purpose of the Community Work Program is to identify specific implementation actions the local government, or other entities, intend to undertake over the course of the next five (5) year planning period. This includes, but is not limited to, new facilities, expansion of facilities, new ordinances, revisions of existing ordinances, administrative actions, community improvements or investments, infrastructure, financing arrangements, or other programs or initiatives to be put in place to implement the plan. To facilitate the division of work among various County Divisions, the community work program is segmented by the following elements: Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Community Facilities, Natural and Historic Resources, Human Services, Economic Development, Public Safety, Disaster Resilience, Intergovernmental Coordination, Military Compatibility, and Place-Making. The following are abbreviations that are used throughout the Community Work Program ACFB Atlanta Community Food Bank EMA Emergency Management Agency ACS American Cancer Society ESG Emergency Solutions Grant AHA American Heart Association GDOT Georgia Department of Transportation ALA American Lung Association HOME Home Investment Partnership Act ARC Atlanta Regional Commission HPC Historic Preservation Commission BOC Board of Commissioners IS Information Services CAO County Attorney’s Office KCB Keep Cobb Beautiful CCES Cobb County Extension Services KSU Kennesaw State University CCID
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive System-Wide Recreation Master Plan 2001 - 2010
    COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM-WIDE RECREATION MASTER PLAN 2001 - 2010 For The CITY OF ROSWELL RECREATION COMMISSION JANUARY 2001 Prepared By ROBERT G. BETZ AICP, INC. Lilburn, Georgia INTRODUCTION The Roswell recreation system is an excellent example of what can be accomplished through the application of sound planning principles, the timely expenditure of acquisition and development dollars and the exercise of diligence in system-wide operation and maintenance practices. It is truly one of the finest systems in the southeastern United States. This, the Comprehensive System-Wide Recreation Master Plan is the fifth update to the original Action Plan for Recreation, prepared in 1969. With the exception of the 1992 Update to the Master Recreation Plan that covered an eight-year period, updates have been prepared at roughly five-year intervals. Each update has focused on the identification of land acquisition needs, making improvements to existing parks and facilities and establishing development priorities for new parks. A system-wide recreation master plan is an expression of a community's objectives, needs and priorities for leisure space, facilities, programs and service delivery. As such, it provides guidance for municipal policy formulation and the decision-making process as relates to the quality and location of recreation opportunities. It is therefore the intent of the 2000 Update to the Master Recreation Plan to accurately reflect community desires while presenting imaginative new recreational opportunities that are both functional and realistic and practical to implement. The preparation of the Comprehensive System-Wide Recreation Master Plan (the 2000 Plan) encompasses the ten-year period beginning in fiscal year 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • HUC-8, HUC-10, HUC-12 Hierarchy
    Attachment 10: Metro Water District HUC-8, HUC-10, HUC-12 Hierarchy River System Major River Basin HUC‐8 River Basin HUC‐8 # HUC‐10 Name HUC‐10 # HUC‐12 Name HUC‐12 # Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Chattahoochee River‐Mossy Creek 313000103 White Creek‐Chattahoochee River 31300010301 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Chattahoochee River‐Mossy Creek 313000103 Mossy Creek 31300010302 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Chattahoochee River‐Mossy Creek 313000103 Mud Creek 31300010303 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Chattahoochee River‐Mossy Creek 313000103 Flat Creek‐Chattahoochee River 31300010304 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Chattahoochee River‐Mossy Creek 313000103 Limestone Creek‐Lake Sidney Lanier 31300010305 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Little River‐Wahoo Creek 313000104 Wahoo Creek 31300010401 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Little River‐Wahoo Creek 313000104 West Fork Little River 31300010402 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper Chattahoochee River 3130001 Little River‐Wahoo Creek 313000104 East Fork Little River 31300010403 Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint (ACF) Chattahoochee Upper
    [Show full text]