The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWPO201200083 Review Comments WPO VSMP 2018-12-04Short Review Comments Report for: WPO201200083 SubApplication Type: Mountain Valley Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Stream Buffer Mitigation Plan Date Completed:10/01/2012 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Denied Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:10/01/2012 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Denied Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:01/10/2013 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Denied Reviews Comments:denied as previous Division: Date Completed:04/04/2013 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Pending Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:04/04/2013 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Pending Reviews Comments:Need fees, called John Grady (28 Mar 2013) Division: Date Completed:04/25/2013 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Pending Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:04/25/2013 Reviewer:Glenn Brooks CDD Engineering Review Status:Pending Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:01/23/2018 Reviewer:Frank Pohl CDD Engineering Review Status:Denied Reviews Comments:Bond inspection rejected in email dated 01/23/18 (scanned to file). Division: Date Completed:06/07/2018 Reviewer:Frank Pohl CDD Engineering Review Status:Denied Reviews Comments:Approval can occur once 3.50 lbs/yr nutrient credits are purchased and proof of purchase is provided. Work with Ana Kilmer before starting the process of purchasing the nutrient credits (296-5832, ext. 3246). Division: Page:1 of 2 County of Albemarle Printed On:December 21, 2018 3246). Date Completed:12/04/2018 Reviewer:Kenny Thacker CDD Engineering Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:12/04/2018 Reviewer:Kenny Thacker CDD Engineering Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Page:2 of 2 County of Albemarle Printed On:December 21, 2018 � OF AL ,. vIRGI1`IZP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Project: Mountain Valley shared driveway bridge, parcels 73G5 and 73G6 Plan preparer: Collins Engineering, [scott @collins- engineering.com] Owner or rep.: Piedmont Realty & Const. [3081 Darby Rd., P.O. Box 724, Keswick, VA 22949] John Grady, Central Virginia Permitting [2575 Dudley Mtn. Rd., North Garden, VA 22959] Plan received date: 3 Apr 2013 (date application fee paid) Revision 1 (current): 18 Apr 2013 Date of comments: 3 Apr 2013 Revision 1 (current): 25 Apr 2013 Reviewer: Glenn Brooks The mitigation plan and the erosion and sediment control plan can be approved when the following documents have been received; 1. a copy of the recorded plat for shared access easements, 2. a copy of the army corps permit, 3. an original application with an original signature by the current owner of the property. The applications I have on file are signed by Scott Collins and John Grady. This project will need to be bonded and receive a grading permit. The bond amounts are $35,320 for erosion and sediment control, and $50,620 for mitigation plantings. File: E2_ esc, mp_GEB_MountainValleyBridge.doc � OF AL ,. vIRGI1`IZP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Project: Mountain Valley shared driveway bridge, parcels 73G5 and 73G6 Plan preparer: Collins Engineering, [scott @collins- engineering.com] Owner or rep.: Piedmont Realty & Const. [3081 Darby Rd., P.O. Box 724, Keswick, VA 22949] John Grady, Central Virginia Permitting [2575 Dudley Mtn. Rd., North Garden, VA 22959] Plan received date: 3 Apr 2013 (date application fee paid) Date of comments: 3 Apr 2013 Reviewer: Glenn Brooks A. Mitigation Plan (WP0201200083) 1. Approval of the subdivision plat guaranteeing shared access with the adjacent lot is required. Show the access easement on the plan to match the required plat. 2. Please see the attached graphic for the mitigation area to be considered, as discussed at the Board of Supervisors Meeting. Please revise the plan accordingly, together with any additional areas due to redesign of the bridge area. The area for the driveway to the adjacent lot should be included now, as this will be additional buffer disturbance, and the bridge and much of the driveway is now placed on this lot. 3. The bridge abutments must be designed on this plan. They should be placed sufficiently out of the channel so that channel work is not necessary. Typically this is the measurable overbank, or the 2 -10 year storm flows, which need to be computed. Together with the driveway and work area, this will set the amount of disturbance and mitigation measures in this area. The plan provided with the building permit (Alexcomm & Assoc., Inc.) appears to place abutments in the channel without these considerations. 4. Please provide the computation that set the bridge deck height. 5. Following the standards of 17 -320D, the deck and abutments need to clear the 10year storm, and the wingwalls should accommodate this flow. Please provide these computations and shown these limits on the plan. 6. In the area of the bridge, please provide a F =20' scale so the grading and placement of the wingwalls can be more specific. Define the actual existing channel in this area on the plan and show the expected limits of the design storms. The F =60' scale drawing is simply not decipherable for these details. 7. As part of any channel work for scour protection, armoring, wingwalls, etc., the debris in the channel needs to be cleaned up, and this needs to be noted on the plan. The receiving end of the channel should be restored to receive a flow which may now be faster from narrowing in the bridge. The mitigation plan should include measures to establish this transition to the shallow end of the lake. 8. The channel from Ambrose Commons Drive will need to be routed around the abutment wingwall. 9. The topography does not appear accurate, and there are already wooded areas where mitigation is proposed (see attached graphic). The mitigation plantings should not be in already established areas. 10. The plan must include a specific planting plan for the mitigation areas, in addition to the previous abutment placement and channel transitions. Plants should be not be all pines, but a native mix of shrubs, understory trees and canopy trees, following the DCR Riparian Buffers Modification and Mitigation Guidance Manual. Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 2 11. Provide the Army Corps Nationwide Permit and approval of joint permit applications. C. Erosion Control Plan (WPO201200083) 1. The silt fence is shown running down the slope, which is ineffective. This appears to be a diversion dike, and a silt trap is needed at the downhill side next to the proposed wingwall. 2. Expand the disturbed area to provide room to work on the bridge and abutments. 3. Provide ditch matting and check dams on the uphill side of the driveway. 4. Provide measures for the driveway up to the building area on the plan. This area's runoff may all run down the driveway to the lake. 5. Provide a stream crossing on the plan for construction (USC), or provide a pump - around plan detail. Attached graphic: i.�,.sia, orepav w�poan a+N•/ei+i ime0ary rtom inecommortxeem.dwpro.igainsoucw npsi 3, mid File: E1_ esc, mp_GEB_MountainValleyBridge.doc COLLINS 200 GARRETT ST, SUITE K CHARLOTTESVILLE VA 22902 434.293.3719 PH 434.293.2813 FX WWW.collins-engineering.corn Glenn Brooks, P.E. Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville,VA 22902 RE: Mountain Valley WPO Plan- Driveway Access for lots 36&37 (WPO 2012 00083) Thank you for your comments on the project referenced above. Please let this letter supplement the revised plans in response to your comments dated April 3rd, 2013. A. Mitigation Plan 1. It is acknowledged the approval of the subdivision plat is required for the use of the shared access.The access easement shown on the plans is consistent with the access easement generated by Roudabush and Gale. 2. During a meeting on April 11th, 2013 between Mr. Brooks and Mr. Murray of Collins Engineering it was determined the offsite mitigation impacts plan could be removed and the total mitigation required for this development would be the sum of the previous buffer impacts to the south (9,938sf)and the impacts resulting from the proposed shared driveway associated with this plan.The mitigation plan was revised to show the total buffer impacts(33,061sf)and the total required mitigation (66,122sf). 3. The plans have been revised and the bridge design shown on sheet 5 takes into account the 2- and 10-year storm events and no longer encroaches into the channel banks. During the meeting mentioned above it was determined the 10-year water surface elevation, calculated using Manning's equation since the downstream pond's approved water surface elevation does not back up to the bridge crossing location,would set the minimum bridge elevation. The simulated 10-year high mark is 550.98'and the bridge elevation is 556.00'. During this meeting it was also determined the limits of the 2-year storm event would dictate whether or not riprap was required around the bridge and its abutment wing walls.The bridge was lengthen to 28'to accommodate the simulated 2-year storm event, ensuring it did not impact the bridge and reducing the risk of erosion.Thus a riprap transition is no longer required. 4. Computations revealing the simulated 10-year high mark have been provided with the plans. 5. The calculations submitted show the 10-year storm event's water surface elevation passing beneath the bridge.The plans were also revised on sheet 4 to show the limits of the 2-and 10- year storm events, both of which pass under the bridge.The 2-year storm passes underneath the bridge without impacting the wing walls. 6. The plans have been revised on sheet 4 to show the requested detail. 7. A note has been added to the stream crossing detail mandating the channel be cleaned after construction and any debris be removed. During the April 11th meeting it was determined if the 2-year storm event did not encroach into the limits of the recently lengthen bridge then a riprap transition would not be required.As such,the second half of this comment is no longer applicable. 8. The plans have been revised to show the ditch outfalling into the existing riprap channel,around the abutment wing wall,via a riprap lined transition. 9. The topography now more accurately reflects current conditions and the tree line has been updated in accordance with a site visit conducted on April 11th. Mitigation plantings are outside the limits of the tree lines. 10. The mitigation plan has been revised to follow the DCR's Riparian Buffers Modification and Mitigation Guidance Manual. Also, in accordance with the meeting held on April 11th the four mitigation areas shown now have more specific planting requirements for each of the areas to assist the contractor and inspector during the installation of the plantings. 11. This comment is acknowledged and the applicant is currently seeking this permit. B. Erosion Control Plan 1. The plans have been revised to show a sediment trap at the bottom of the driveway, adjacent to the proposed wing wall. During the meeting described above, it was determined sediment trap calculations were not required to be submitted with the plans and the size shown would be adequate. The silt fence was alsomodified and is now shown downslope of the proposed diversion. 2. The limits of disturbance have been revised and are consistent with the direction provided by Engineering on April 11th 3. Check dams and blanket matting have been added to the plans for the uphill side of the driveway. 4. A sediment trap is now proposed at the base of the driveway to intercept upslope runoff directed to it via a diversion with silt fence. It was agreed upon the proposed sediment trap would not require calculations and the trap proposed is sufficiently sized. 5. The plans have been revised to include a utility stream crossing detail. If you have any questions regarding the proposed plans please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Graham Murray, PE 1 Frank Pohl From:Frank Pohl Sent:Tuesday, January 23, 2018 2:49 PM To:'Jay Jessup' Cc:Ana Kilmer; 'Scott Collins' Subject:RE: Mountain Valley Jay, I’ve confirmed that there is an agreement for the two biofilters on Lot 1. The County will need to perform a final inspection to confirm they can be released. Our main concern will be have they been maintained. Since there isn’t a SWM agreement for the other 4 biofilters, and assuming the existing owners will not execute an agreement, you have the option to submit a swm plan amendment to abandon these 4 biofilters and purchase nutrient credits in their place. Before the bond can be released, minor erosion at one (or more?) of the facilities will need to be repaired, but once repaired and the credits have been purchased, the bond can be released. Don’t hesitate to let me know if you need further assistance. Thanks, Frank From: Jay Jessup [mailto:250gto@pepsicva.com] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 1:40 PM To: Frank Pohl <fpohl@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Mountain Valley Thanks Frank, I appreciate your prompt follow up. Jay From: Frank Pohl [mailto:fpohl@albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 1:37 PM To: Jay Jessup <250gto@pepsicva.com>; Ana Kilmer <akilmer@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Mountain Valley Jay, I will have a decision regarding the WPO bond this next Tuesday and will get back with you then. Sincerely, Frank From: Jay Jessup [mailto:250gto@pepsicva.com] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:28 PM To: Ana Kilmer <akilmer@albemarle.org> Cc: Frank Pohl <fpohl@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Mountain Valley 2 Thanks Ana, If you and Frank can keep me posted on the progress I would certainly appreciate it. Jay From: Ana Kilmer [mailto:akilmer@albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:17 PM To: Jay Jessup <250gto@pepsicva.com> Cc: Frank Pohl <fpohl@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Mountain Valley Mr. Jessup: I am working on releasing the road bond only. I am copying Frank Pohl so he can address the status of the wpo bond. Thanks Ana D. Kilmer Management Analyst Community Development Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 akilmer@albemarle.org From: Jay Jessup [mailto:250gto@pepsicva.com] Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 11:57 AM To: Ana Kilmer <akilmer@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: Mountain Valley Ana, I understand from Scott that the county engineers reached out to him last week not long after this e-mail. If I understand the process correctly, as builts for both the road and the storm water were submitted to the county and it is up to your engineers to schedule a time for a site visit to confirm that those submissions match up with the work that has been done. Once that has been confirmed the bonds can be released, are my assumptions correct? Since we went through this process with VDOT last year and they have accepted the road I am hopeful that no further work will be required. The reason I am inquiring about this is that those bonds are secured by cash in account at Va National Bank which was provided by my late Mother’s estate and we are trying to tie up all the loose ends to get her estate settled in the near future. I would appreciate it if you could let me know if there are other steps in the process that need to be completed and give me a rough idea of when you think we will reach a conclusion that will allow the realease of those bonds. Thank you, Jay Jessup From: Scott Collins [mailto:scott@collins-engineering.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 10:49 AM To: Ana Kilmer <akilmer@albemarle.org>; Jay Jessup <250gto@pepsicva.com> Subject: Mountain Valley 3 Ana- I hope you had a great holiday. I just wanted to confirm that you have received our request for Mountain Valley that we submitted before the holidays for the bond release of the road bond and the SWM/E&S bond. Thanks. Scott