The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP200200133 Correspondence 2003-03-07 Francis MacCall From: David C Wyant[nflsj16@juno.com] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 4:13 PM To: GBROOKS@albemarle.org Cc: FMACCALL@albemarle.org; mgraham@albemarle.org; JKELSEY@albemarle.org; PSHIFFL@albemarle.org; mchambers@albemarle.org Subject: Re: Greenbrier Service Center, Eng. Dept. approval Thanks for your approval. I told him today about those several items when I stopped by the job on the way back from Richmond. This was probably my third time of telling him. Also, Jim Towe heard me tell him today. I even defined the boundaries for him today. Thanks again, David On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:01:43 -0500 Glenn Brooks <GBROOKS@albemarle.org> writes: > Dave, >Thank you for the calculation and plan received yesterday afternoon. > The > Engineering Department grants approval. Please caution the owner of >your > assumption made with the plan that the land disturbance will remain > below > 10,000 square feet. Disturbance greater than this will require an > erosion > control plan. Please also remind him that he will need to call the > Engineering Department for an inspection of the biofilter system > before and > during construction. 1 } Francis MacCall From: Glenn Brooks Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 12:57 PM To: 'David C Wyant' Cc: Mark Graham; Jack Kelsey; Francis MacCall Subject: Greenbrier Service Center, plans and detention computations Mr. Wyant, I received your revised plans and computations today at 12:15. I'm sorry, I cannot make much sense of them. I will try to explain. Please revise accordingly. - (Once again, I know Mr. Hicks is impatient to be finished, so I am giving responses very quickly, less than 1 hour after receipt it in this case.) 1. I still cannot tell what you are doing with the existing riser structure. There is no detail on the plans, which I did not ask for, so you do not need to add. I expected to get this in your routings, but your routings show only results. They do not give the structures or basin data (orifices,weirs, spillways, pipes, elevations, basin areas, etc.)that were used to generate the tables. 2. I have noted the new sheet 4 showing drainage areas, but the areas continue off of the sheet. I thought we discussed putting them on the county's aerial topo, maybe on 8.5"x11"?Also, I cannot match the drainage areas with the computations. The plan notes areas"A"through "F", but I cannot find these referenced in the routings. I find areas 1 and 2 for the Greenbrier site routings. Then there are areas 1 and 2 for the"entire basin". Since there are no acreages on the drainage map, I cannot match anything. 3. It does not appear that the modified rational method was used, since all of the times to peak and storm durations are 5 min. I am unsure of the methodology being used. Please see the Virginia Stormwater Management Handbook, section 5- 4.4, for an explanation of the modified rational method. 4. How is the overflow from the upstream basin being handled? Perhaps when the"entire basin" routing is clarified, and its drainage area, it will explain this? Glenn Brooks Albemarle County Engineering 1 Page l of 3 Francis MacCall From: Wayne Cilimberg Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 2:33 PM To: Francis MacCall Subject: FW: Greenbrier Service Center, comments for revision, 12 Feb 2003, SD P-02-133 (2414) FYI: Original Message From: Mark Graham Sent:Thursday,February 13,2003 1:41 PM To:Bob Tucker _ Cc: Glenn Brooks;Jack Kelsey;Wayne Cilimberg Subject:FW: Greenbrier Service Center, comments for revision, 12 Feb 2003, SD P-02-133 (2414) Bob, I understand the applicant is under a tight timeframe on this and you made assurances about review times. As such, I'm making you aware of the status and letting you know there are things still needed before we can recommend approval. Glenn has been doing an excellent job and giving very prompt attention to this project, but he continues to experience plans that are far from complete. Glenn is doing a lot of"hand holding"that he shouldn't need to and, despite that hand holding, still doesn't have the information needed to be able to approve the plan. For example, he still doesn't have a drainage map needed to verify the adequacy of drainage structures and the engineer still doesn't have the necessary easements worked out. Short of Glenn actually completing the plans himself, I'm afraid the applicant may claim we are delaying his approval, while I feel we are doing everything we can to expedite the process. We can't ignore the ordinance requirements. If you have questions regarding the specific issues, I believe the following chain of emails will help you understand Engineering's remaining issues. As I'll be out of the office next week, I'm also copying Jack and Wayne on this. Original Message From: Glenn Brooks Sent:Thursday,February 13,2003 10:54 AM To: 'David C Wyant' Cc:Mark Graham;Jack Kelsey;Sherry Short;Pam Shifflett;Francis MacCall Subject:RE: Greenbrier Service Center, comments for revision, 12 Feb 2003, SD P-02-133 (2414) David, Your responses have asked questions, so I will try to answer them: I don't find any drainage area limits on sheet 4. There are funny arrows. It also appears drainage areas may encompass more than just what you have on your survey. Regarding the 8" PVC pipe; Please look at the computations I gave you for the upstream basin from Rio Laser Wash. That basin discharges over the spillway during the 10yr storm. The 8" pipe you supplied does not capture this, and so serves little purpose. It is not shown on the plans, but I guess you intended to connect this to the 6" underdrain outlet from the Rio Laser Wash bio-filter basin. When you perform routing computations, perhaps you can use the outlet hydrograph from that basin, together with your contributing drainage areas. Or, perhaps it makes little difference, and you can just account for all the drainage areas including the ones drainage through upstream systems. Your routing model should clarify these concerns for you. 3/11/2003 Page2of3 Regarding the stormwater facility easement and access. This must be independent of, and not in addition to, the waterline easement. It must be platted. I cannot read what is on the plans. You appear to be using the same line type as your underdrain pipes. Regardless, this must be on a plat, in addition to the site plan. Regarding the grading permit: When you claim, for the applicant, that disturbed area will be less than 10,000sf, a grading permit is not necessary. One will not be issued. Of course, if an erosion control inspector goes on site, and sees the disturbance is greater than 10,000sf,work will be halted, and an erosion control plan and grading permit will be required. Original Message From:David C Wyant[mailto:nflsj 16@juno.com] Sent:Wednesday,February 12,2003 11:09 PM To: GBROOKS@albemarle.org Cc:mgraham@albemarle.org;JKELSEY@albemarle.org; SSHORT@albemarle.org;PSHIFFL@albemarle.org; FMACCALL@albemarle.org Subject:Re: Greenbrier Service Center,comments for revision, 12 Feb 2003,SD P-02-133 (2414) Below are comments at this time to your response. Thanks, David >I received your revised plans and computations yesterday for the > Greenbrier > Service Center project. Below are the remaining comments, from the >original >nine. The previous numbering scheme is preserved. >In order to turn this around as fast a possible, I am once again > sending >these comments via e-mail. > 3. Detention routing computations and maps have not yet been >received. >Please provide drainage area maps and routing computations. It is >recommended that off-site water be separated by piping though/under >the > facility. In response to your e-mail query about a routing > standard, the > County does not have one. You may refer to the Design Manual, found >on the > County web-site for general requirements. >A drainage map for the Greenbrier Service Center was provided on sheet 4. The arrows indicate the flow to the biofilter area from all directions on the parcel. See if this map is sufficient. Also, the details on sheet 3 for the biofilter show the off-site runoff from above passing through the biofilter underground in an 8-inch PVC pipe and connecting into the drop inlet. None of the off-site runoff is being directed into this proposed biofilter as you suggested. The flow for the 8-inch pipe is shown in the computations. See if this meets your approval. I will provide additional routing computations shortly. > 6. Please provide an easement for access to, and around the >bio-filter and >outlet structures and pipes. The plan is not clear, but it need not 3/11/2003 Page 3 of 3 >be >revised at this point. This may addressed adequately on a separate > easement >plat, which can be conditioned on the release of the stormwater >management >bond. > The biofilter easement is shown on sheet 2. It exists everywhere that the permanent waterline easement does not. So the biofilter area is surrounded by either the biofilter easement or the waterline easement. Is this sufficient? > 7. Please have the owner complete a stormwater facility >maintenance > agreement. Please contact Sherry Short(296-5861) if you need > assistance. >A stormwater facility maintenance agreement with a $16 check to the Clerk of the Circuit Court was submitted Monday with the plans and computations. I left them with Brandi for Sherry. Sherry and I also spoke to each other about the agreement. >By your response to previous comments, you will not be providing an >erosion > control plan, and so a grading permit will not be issued. As such, >the > stormwater management bond cannot be posted prior to a grading >permit being >issued,but must be posted prior to signing the final site plan >mylar >documents. That bond amount is $8000. Please have the applicant > contact >Pam Shifflett(296-5861) for details and options about how to post >this >bond. >Since there is no E& S Plan, who does Hicks get a grading permit from? Also, I will get Hicks to get the forms from Pam and secure his bond. Thanks, David Wyant 3/11/2003