HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201800171 Correspondence 2019-03-27 (7)i `'
March 26, 2019
Adam J. Moore, PE
VDOT
1601 Orange Rd
Culpeper, VA 22701
Charlottesville, VA 2294:3 www.timmons.com
RE: Lewis & Clark Drive Extension — Road Plan Review — SUB-2018-00171— Rev.2 - Comment
Response Letter
Dear Mr. Moore:
We have reviewed all of your comments from February 22, 2019 and made the necessary
revisions. Please find our responses to the comments below in bold lettering.
Hydraulics:
1. The plan descriptions for riprap at the outlet ends of the culverts should make reference
to VDOT Std. EC-1 so we can be assured of proper placement and bedding for the riprap.
VDOT standard detail EC-1 has been added to plan sheet C1.2 and has been referenced at all
culvert outlets.
2. Standard culvert size nomenclature for culvert #2 should be span x height in the plan's
computations, and profiles.
Culvert size nomenclature has been revised per the comment above.
3. Culvert #2 appears to be oversized without explanation. The HW/D for the 10-year
design storm does not need to be less than 1.0. VDOT does not want to accept
structures larger than necessary due to future maintenance and replacement costs.
Culvert #2 size has been reduced.
4. The culvert analysis calculations should only consider the opening area above the
countersunk, part of the culvert. See VDM Section 8.3.7.2 for further explanation.
Calculations have been updated to account for the 6" countersunk part of culvert.
S. Culvert profiles should clearly demonstrate countersinking requirements have been
met.
Countersinking requirements have been noted on culvert profiles.
6. Culvert #1 is considered a Major Culvert according to Chapter 12 of the VDM. The 100
year base flood elevations shall not be increased over the existing conditions by more
OV111l J II::::: Ill III II:II 11Allll J ' U11?,VII:Y]1NG J (pq,'S J J �,6.DII�' Illl a➢�,II,q,6.Dll� : Il',II°�Aq�,ll','
than 1.0 ft. unless the upstream property inundated by the proposed 100 year culvert
headwater is completely within the Developers site and is surrounded by a permanent
floodplain easement.
Upstream area is owned by UVA Foundation. A permanent floodplain easement has been
shown around the upstream 472.5 elevation.
7. Please provide culvert analysis discharge computations for review.
Culvert computations are inlcuded in calcuations book.
8. The plans provided do not address the culvert undercut and bedding recommendations
from item #8 of the Executive Summary of the attached Geotechnical Engineering
Report provided by the Timmons Group (02/18/2019).
Culvert notes have been added to culvert profiles withundercut and bedding requirments
consistent with the Geotechnical Report.
9. The plan and profile descriptions for culvert #1 should also reference VDOT standard
BCD-30 and the appropriate BCW standards.
Plan and profile descriptions have been revised to reference VDot Standard BCD-30 detail.
10. The plan and profile descriptions for culvert #2 should also reference VDOT standard
BCS-20 and the appropriate BCW standards.
Plan and profile descriptions have been updated to reffence appropriate BCW standards for
wing walls.
11. All plans, calculations, and geotechnical reports should be signed and sealed.
Acknowledged
Land Use:
1. In reply to previous comment #1 response; the post widening section does not appear
to have a 20' clear zone on the northbound side.
Typical sections have been updated to show future gaudrail. Guardarail will be used in future
condition where clear zone of 20' is not provided due to fill slopes.
2. Previous comment requested that pavement at the end of the eastern curb return at
the Quail Run entrance be tapers in to the proposed pavement; this appears to have
been drawn in but hatching was not added to this area indicating pavement.
Hatching has been added in the above area.
3. The western curb return at the Qual Run entrance; please remove radius and wipe -
down curb to flush.
Curb has been updated to wipe -down to flush.
4. The required Geotechnical report for the large culvert was received on 18 February
2019 and forwarded to the Culpeper District Structure & Bridge and Hydraulic sections
for review. Comments will be forwarded once they are received.
Acknowledged. All have been signed and sealed.
S. Please continue cross -sections and profiles through the intersection with existing Lewis
& Clark Drive.
Cross -sections and profiles have been continuted through intersection to extents of pavment
removal and replacment.
6. Provide crossdrains (CD-1/CD-2) where applicable on profiles.
Crossdrains have been added to the road profile sheets.
7. Label UD-4s on typical sections.
Underdrains have been labeled on the typical sections.
8. The proposed path along Lewis & Clark must be sidewalk (concrete), otherwise it will
not be eligible for VDOT maintenance.
Path has been widened to 10' shared use path and will remain asphalt.
9. Remove the stub entrance as entrances must have an associated site plan.
Entrance has been removed.
10. Provide a baseline and stationing for the extension of Lewis & Clark Drive.
Stationing has been added to the Grading and Drainage sheets and is also included on on the
layout sheets as well.
Traffic Engineering:
11. According to VDOT Guidelines, crosswalks shall start and end at curb ramps where curb
is present. Each cross walk is to have its own curb ramp. The southern crosswalk is to be
shifted slightly further south and runs through the median creating a refuge island and
2-stage crossings. The eastern and western crosswalks shall have the standard curb
ramps, should be maintained in the same locations as shown in plan and should be at
the radial turn.
The southern crosswalk has been removed. The northern crosswalk has been shifted north to
run through the median as a pedestrian refuge.
12. For Southbound traffic approaching the intersection, the merge condition beyond the
intersection should be revised to a lane drop before the intersection. The 2-thru
approaching lanes are to become 1-thru lane and for other thru lane is to be hatched -
out. The ROW for (2) receiving lanes is to be reserved for any future roadway widening.
The layout has been revised accordingly.
13. Proposed directional arrows along Lewis & Clark Drive should be removed.
Proposed directional arrows are shown for informational purposes not to be stripped and
have been labeled as such in the striping legend.
14. It is recommended to maintain one crossing point along Lewis and Clark Dr; as a result,
remove the existing northern crosswalk and maintain the proposed crosswalk only. If
two crossings are desired, the existing northern crossing should be relocated slightly
further north and runs through the median creating a refuge island and 2-stage
crossings.
A southern crosswalk has been removed and northern crosswalk has been located farther
north as a 2-stage crossing.
15. Northbound right turn lane should be considered to accommodate future developments
on the eastern side of Lewis and Clark Drive.
The parcel to the north is developed as a small office building. No future connections or
redevelopment is currently considered. Future parcels to the east of Lewis and Clark Drive
will have separate entrances. Therefore not turn lane is necessary.
16. This intersection is to operate via Two-way stop signs on the side street. Remove stop
bar markings on Lewis and Clark. If Four-way stop condition is desired, it needs to be
justified via an Engineering study and submitted to VDOT/TE for review and approval.
Stopbar markings have been removed.
We have included PDF copies of the plans and calculations for your review. If you have any
questions or comments, please feel free to give me a call at 434.295.5624.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Showalter, PE
Project Engineer