HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201800050 Review Comments WPO VSMP 2018-11-27COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
VSMP Permit plan review
Project title:
Brookhill Block 3 Ice Rink VSMP
Project file number:
WP0201800050
Plan preparer:
Ryan Yauger, Bohler Engineering [ryauger@bohlereng.com]
Owner or rep.:
Alan Taylor, Riverbend Dev. [Alan@riverbenddev.com]
Rev. 1 date:
Oct. 26, 2018
Rev. 1 comments:
Nov. XX, 2018
Reviewer:
Emily Cox
County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to
act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is denied. The
rationale is given in the comments below. The application may be resubmitted for approval if all
of the items below are satisfactorily addressed. The VSMP application content requirements can
be found in County Code section 17-401.
A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
The SWPPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-405. A SWPPP must
contain (1) a PPP, (2) an ESCP, (3) a SWMP, and (4) any TMDL measures necessary.
1. Provide updated, signed registration statement that includes disturbed area from this plan (71.55).
2. Ensure approved plans get inserted into the master SWPPP on site.
B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP)
The PPP content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-404.
1. Provide a sheet that includes all PPP requirements to insert into the master SWPPP on site.
C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a
SWMP. This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The
stormwater management plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-403.
And
D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP)
Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP.
This plan is disapproved, and the reasons are provided in the comments below. The erosion control
plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 8
Sheet C-100
Comment 1: Rename the plan as discussed with the County Engineer.
Response 1: The plan has been renamed as requested.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 2: Provide overall sheet showing approved WPO plan numbers and their associated
disturbed area.
Response 2: An "Overall Key Sheet" has been added as Sheet C-107.
Rev 1: Please provide this sheet in color if possible. Also, provide registration statement to
match 71.55 acre disturbance.
Comment 3: Will need SWM maintenance agreement before plan can be approved. Contact Ana
Kilmer to start this process.
Response 3: Comment acknowledged. With approval of the county, it is the opinion of the engineer
that the agreements executed for Block 4 and the Road Plan are sufficient.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed. However, note that the SWM agreement does not include TMP's
46-18A and 46-19114. So new agreements will be needed when there is development on
those lots.
Comment 4: Ensure the SWM Report booklet is signed and sealed.
Response 4: Comment Acknowledged.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 5: Show steep slopes on all applicable sheets.
Response 5: Steep slopes have been added to all applicable sheets as requested.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 6: Show maintenance requirements from Section 9 of DEQ specifications for all SWM
facilities.
Response 6: The maintenance requirements for the level spreader have been added to the plan. See
Sheet C-907.
Rev. 1: Please show pond maintenance requirements as well, since the ponds are shown on this
plan.
Comment 7: This should be field verified within the last year.
Response 7: The date of the last field revision has been added to the plan. See Sheet C-100.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 8: Include all WPO's associated with Brookhill.
Response 8: All associated WPO's have been added to the references.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Sheet C-106
Comment 1: This is not existing. It is proposed with the greenway buffer or open space.
Response 1: For clarity in the sequential WPO plans, the existing conditions have been updated to
reflect the anticipated conditions of the site when the Ice Rink and associated access
road begin construction. As the stream buffer must be established prior to previous
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 8
phases beginning construction, it as shown as existing for this plan.
Rev. 1: Please show buffer as proposed greenway, or however it is to be worded based on the
code of development.
Sheet C-200
Comment 1: Reference the approved WPO Plan # where this pond design is located. Show pond
design is adequate for this drainage area/change in land cover. Is this clean water? Or
does it need to go to sediment basin or trap?
Response 1: This is clean water as it is outside the limits of disturbance. The area has been removed
from the plan as there is no sediment to be removed and adequacy has been proven
with the Brookhill Road Improvement Plan Phase I, WP0201800013.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 2: Where is pond 4? Is this clean water? If not, it must go to sediment basin or trap, not
pond.
Response 2: The drainage areas and labels have been revised. Sheet C-201 has been added to show
the location of the sediment basin (SB-4).
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 3: What is this hatch?
Response 3: The hatch has been added to the legend as Ernst Steep Slope Grass Mix. See Sheet C-
202.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 4: These pipes are in Phase 1? Where are pipe calculations?
Response 4: The plan has been revised and the pipes are no longer proposed in Phase 1. The pipe
calculations have been provided on Sheet C-901.
Rev. 1: A-02 to A-01 velocity is above 15 ft/s. Please revise.
Comment 5: Is this an existing pipe?
Response 5: The display of the pipe has been revised to s how it as existing.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 6: Where does this go? Matchline?
Response 6: A matchline and Sheet C-201 have been added for clarification.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 7: Is this an existing, approved sediment basin? If so, reference the approved WPO # and
show that the design is still adequate with the proposed drainage area.
Response 7: The sediment basin is proposed with WP0201700037. This information has been added
to the plan on Sheet C-201.
Rev. 1: Is Sheet C-205 for SB-4? If so, please label as SB-4 and ensure the DA matches. Also,
ensure baffles are shown on the plan since calculations show them as required. Are
there any changed proposed to SB-4 with this plan?
Sheet C-201 (Now Sheet C-202)
Comment 1: Provide wash rack.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 8
Response 1: A wash rack has been provided.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Sheet C-203 (Now Sheet C-204)
Comment 1: Provide Albemarle County paved CE detail from Design Standards Manual.
Response 1: The Albemarle County paved CE detail has been added as requested.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Sheet C-900
Comment 1: This is proposed grading?
Response 1: For clarity in the sequential WPO plans, the existing conditions have been updated to
reflect the anticipated conditions of the site when the Ice Rink and associated access
road begin construction.
Rev. 1: Provide a note on the plan to explain. Existing conditions may not be existing in the
field survey, but they are on approved plans, so are shown as existing? Is that correct?
List the approved plan numbers. Do not show any grading from plans that are not yet
approved.
Sheet C-901
Comment 1: As discussed in our meeting, please isolate the area involved only with the ice park
improvements (The ice park and the entrance road). Show how water quantity
requirements are being met for that site only. Do not include a regional plan. Analyze
each point of concentrated outfall from your site.
Response 1: The Ice Rink area and associated entrance road have been isolated to show water
quantity compliance in this phase of the development. There is a single point of
concentrated outfall, which is shown as POI-4.1.
Rev. 1: This is not correct. There is water shown going to pond 11 and eventually existing
culvert A60-A62. Sheet C-900 also says there is only one point of outfall, however,
shows two.
Comment 2: This will need to be in an easement per section 5.1 of DEQ spec. #2.
Response 2: This comment is no longer applicable due to the reduced scope of this WPO plan.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 3: Label pond 4 location
Response 3: The Pond 4 location has been labeled as requested.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Sheet C-902
Comment 1: Please label the SWM facility ID to make it easy to follow along with Sheet C-903.
Response 1: SWM Facility ID's have been labeled for clarification.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 5 of 8
Sheet C-903
Comment 1: Show the plan # where the design of the facility is located.
Response 1: The plan numbers have been added as requested.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Rheet C-904
Comment 1: What year storms are these analyzed for?
Response 1: This comment is no longer applicable as the channel computations were not associated
with the Ice Rink development and have been removed.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 2: Provide water quality narrative. This plan provides a final design for pond 4, which is
treating more than just the ice park. So, you will have an excess of nutrient credits (for
plans that have not been submitted yet). Please clarify credits needed for just the ice park
improvements and credits that are extra. Future plans may reference this WPO to show
compliance with the pond 4 design.
Response 2: A water quality narrative has been provided on Sheet C-902. Nutrient credits at this
phase of the development have been clarified on Sheet C-904.
Rev. 1: Please clarify the amount of offsite credits purchased column. This should not have
negative numbers? Note 2 states it is excess credits, however, the overall Section 1 BMP
total is still shown as only 32.99 achieved and 65.85 was proposed. Perhaps a column
needs to be added showing excess for that plan?
Comment 3: This can't be regional. This must be from each concentrated outfall from your site.
Response 3: The table is not regional as there is only one point of concentrated outfall from the site.
The table has been relocated to Sheet C-901.
Rev. 1: Please clarify what is existing and what is proposed. Is the level spreader proposed with
this plan? Or was it approved with pond 4 design? What goes to level spreader and
what goes to outfall pipe? Only the 2-year is released as sheet flow? Please clarify. Also,
if this is shown on WP0201800037 amendment 1, it cannot be approved until that plan
is approved.
Sheet C-905
Comment 1: See comment, this sheet. Please clarify what is proposed and what is existing.
Response 1: The plan has been clarified to show as existing the feature in the most recent Mass
Grading Plan, WP0201700037 — FR-1.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 2: The pond and the level spreader will need a SWM facility easement and deed.
Response 2: The easement plat and deed for the SWM facility will be provided upon approval.
Rev. 1: What is the plat number which shows these easements?
Comment 3: There is no Sheet C907.
Response 3: The reference has been removed as the information will be shown in the final site plan
for the Ice Rink development.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 6 of 8
Comment 4: Existing or proposed level spreader? Where is the design for this located?
Response 4: The level spreader is proposed with Mass Grading Plan, WP0201700037 — FR-1.
Rev. 1: This plan cannot be approved until WP0201700037 is approved, since the level
spreader is designed with that plan. What is FR-1? The County files revisions as
Amendment 1?
Comment 5: Reference the sheet these sections are located (C-904).
Response 5: The plan has been revised and this referenced information is no longer provided in this
WPO plan.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 6: There is no Sheet C907.
Response 6: Sheet C-907 has been added to the plan.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 7: Show pipe calculations for all pipes.
Response 7: Pipe computations have been provided on Sheet C-901.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 8: What is this line?
Response 8: This line is the existing property line.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 9: Show SWM facility easement around entire facility.
Response 9: The SWM facility easement has been added. See Sheet C-906.
Rev. 1: Provide DB & PG of recorded easements or easement plat number that is under review.
Comment 10: Please clarify. The pond as shown here is not existing. This plan appears to be modifying
the grading approved with WP0201700037. Therefore it is not existing. Please clearly
show what is different/proposed with this WPO plan and design.
Response 10: The plan has been revised, along with a field revision to WP0201700037, to match the
design between the two plans.
Rev. 1: This WPO cannot be approved until WP0201700037 amendment 1 is approved.
Sheet C-906
Comment 1: As discussed in meeting, ensure level spreader and outfall meet all design requirements to
be used as a VRRM facility.
Response 1: Comment acknowledged.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Comment 2: Provide easement around all SWM facilities.
Response 2: Comment acknowledged. SWM facility easements have been added to the plan.
Rev. 1: Provide DB & PG of recorded easements or easement plat number that is under review.
Comment 3: As on previous sheet, clarify what is existing and what is proposed or revised.
Response 3: Revised water surface elevations are shown in bold to clarify changes with new
Engineering Review Comments
Page 7 of 8
routings.
Rev. 1: Comment addressed.
Sheet C-200
Rev. 1: How does DA-3 get to SB-4? Is it going through the mud trap first?
Sheet C-202
Rev. 1: A swale is referenced in the DA. Please provide swale design and calculations showing it
can handle the flow.
General
Rev. 1: Provide construction records drawings policy on the plan.
Sheet C-901
Rev. 1: Overall narrative says quality, but analysis is for quantity. Please revise.
Rev. 1: Again, please clarify TWO points of outfall from the site, which go to pond 4 and pond
11. Also, under flood protection, please clearly explain the outfalls. POI 4.1 is referenced, but
calculations for pond 11 are also referenced.
Sheet C-907
Rev.1: Note on level spreader plan view references rip -rap calcs which are not provided on this
sheet.
The VSMP permit application and all plans may be resubmitted for approval when all comments have
been satisfactorily addressed. For re -submittals please provide 2 copies of the complete permit package
with a completed application form.
Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to
discuss this review.
Process;
After approval, plans will need to be bonded. The bonding process is begun by submitting a bond estimate
request form and fee to the Department of Community Development. One of the plan reviewers will
prepare estimates and check parcel and easement information based on the approved plans. The County's
Management Analyst will prepare bond agreement forms, which will need to be completed by the owner
and submitted along with cash, certificates or sureties for the amounts specified. The agreements will need
to be approved and signed by the County Attorney and County Engineer. This may take 2-4 weeks to
obtain all the correct signatures and forms.
Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance agreements will also need to be completed and recorded.
The County's Management Analyst or other staff will prepare the forms and check for ownership and
signature information. The completed forms will need to be submitted along with court recording fees.
After bonding and agreements are complete, county staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ
database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local
VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid
Engineering Review Comments
Page 8 of 8
directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the
application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the
application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county.
After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre -construction conference.
Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre -construction conference form, and pay the remainder
of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee
remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre -construction
conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre -construction conference, should
everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that
work may begin.
County forms can be found on the county website forms center under engineering;
http://www.albemarle. org/deptforms.asp?department=cdengwno