Read the tables aloud
Read both Silverwood tables out loud — every line item and both totals. Numbers in English, at speed. This is Unit 2 work and it should now be automatic.
The real numbers
Silverwood Dr. — existing impervious surface
| Surface | Area |
|---|---|
| Aggregate concrete patio, front entry | 593 SF |
| Asphalt driveway | 1,318 SF |
| Lower concrete patio, staircases and landing | 667 SF |
| Flagstone patio | 332 SF |
| Aggregate concrete bedroom entry | 53 SF |
| Total | 2,963 SF |
Silverwood Dr. — proposed impervious surface
| Surface | Area |
|---|---|
| MSI Atlantic Blue paver — patio, landing, staircase | 1,119 SF |
| Artificial turf | 90 SF |
| Total | 1,209 SF |
That is a reduction of 1,754 SF — 59% of the existing area. It is a genuinely strong result, and on a stormwater-sensitive site in Contra Costa County it is the number a planner cares most about.
Now: how many different English sentences can you build that say it? You need at least four, because you will say it to four different audiences — the planner, the client, the contractor, and a written memo.
Placing a number against a limit
Four framings of the same fact
| Framing | Sentence | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Absolute | Proposed impervious surface is 1,209 SF. | A table caption — no argument, just the figure |
| Comparative | Impervious surface is reduced from 2,963 SF to 1,209 SF. | A planner — shows direction of travel |
| Proportional | The proposal reduces impervious surface by 59%. | A client — memorable, persuasive |
| Against a limit | Proposed impervious surface does not exceed the permitted coverage. | A compliance memo — answers the actual question |
The fourth is the one that matters and the one most often missing. A planner is not asking “did it get better?” — they are asking “is it under the limit?” A 59% reduction that still exceeds the cap is a failure, and a small reduction that comes in under it is a pass.
Lead with the comparison for context, but always close against the limit.
Direction and magnitude
Precise, and not interchangeable.
Say it four ways
Complete the compliance paragraph. One word per gap.
Existing impervious surface on the site totals 2,963 square feet. The proposal reduces this 1,209 square feet, a of 1,754 square feet, or 59 per cent. The proposed figure therefore does not the permitted lot coverage and falls the limit set by the ordinance. The design complies.
Rewrite each sentence using the word given, keeping the same meaning. Do not change the word given.
The new impervious area is a lot smaller than the old one. REDUCED
The proposed coverage is below what the ordinance allows. EXCEED
The wall is three feet high, so it is fine without engineering. UNDER
You can start work as long as the stamped plans are on site. PROVIDED
The design meets the rear setback because the wall is at eighteen feet. COMPLIES
Four audiences, one number
Task card
The same 59% reduction, told four ways
Say it to the planner, the client, the contractor and then write the memo sentence.
- Planner: lead comparative, close against the limit.
- Client: lead proportional — they want to know it is a good result.
- Contractor: they only care what changes on the ground. Say that.
- Memo: one sentence, all three moves, no adjectives.
Which framing did you default to?
Under pressure, most designers reach for the proportional framing — it sounds best. But it is the one a planner can do least with. Which did you reach for?
Before the next lesson
Homework. Write the against-the-limit sentence for one of your other projects — Wooster or Colonial. You will need to find the relevant limit yourself.