Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202200029 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2022-07-12From: John Anderson To: Ben Hol Cc: Ammv George; Jim Taggart; Tim Duncan Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP202200029 S.L. WILLIAMSON ASPHALT PLANT AT RED HILL QUARRY - FINAL - DIGITAL . [ Engineering review comments] Date: Tuesday, July 12, 2022 1:31:35 PM The Review for the following application has been completed Application Number = SDP202200029 Reviewer = John Anderson Review Status = See Recommendations; comments, below Completed Date = 07/12/2022 This email was sent from County View Production Ben, Thanks for your patience. I copy RGA since: 1) Engineering is last reviewer to comment; 2) we were alerted the WPO plan was submitted, earlier today. Engineering hopes to review the WPO plan application, expeditiously. Ammy, Tim, Thank you for submitting the WPO plan, for coordinating with Jen Smith, earlier today, and for coordinating with Engineering and Planning on S.L. Williamson asphalt plant at Red Hill quarry: CV comments: Sheet 4: Provide existing spot shot elevations to delineate /establish there is an existing berm along west edge of (S.L. Williamson) lease area not precisely reflected by existing topographic contours. FSP does not indicate proposed change to berm along west edge of lease area. Without such grade change, existing topography will direct site storm runoff to proposed settling basins, which then in turn may (on rare occasion) fill to the point that detained volume crests proposed settling basin rim (please provide spot elev. for each proposed settling basin to establish low point of rim, sheet 8), at which point, given existing topography, Engineering anticipates shallow flooding of the asphalt plant could occur (as it may at present) prior to breaching overall perimeter lease area berm. This is important: existing perimeter grade prevents storm runoff reaching a stream to the west without first passing through a settling basin. The manner of settling basin pass -through is via shallow flooding with detained basin volume first breaching existing settling basin rim, and then (which may occur infrequently, or perhaps never during a 10-yr storm event) ponded elevation may rise until such point detained runoff may crest lease area perimeter elevation. During site visit 4/15/22, Engineering observed no trace or pattern of detained storm runoff escaping lease area. Rather, ponded runoff level does not appear to exceed existing settling basin capacity. Drawdown of settling basin ponded volume appears to occur via infiltration to earth, or evaporation. Ref email to Applicant (J. Anderson to Planning Div. coordinator /RGA: April 19, 2022 4:27 PM; ISP/FSP review comments, SDP202100092) for additional information. The purpose of discussing settling basin elevations with RGA in such detail is to affirm Engineering understanding of design, which is: site storm runoff will in fact reach one of two proposed settling basins depicted on sheet 8 prior to reaching the stream to the west (unnamed tributary to North Fork Hardware River). Also, item 2 , below (from 4/19/22 Engineering review comment email). 2. -C7 [Now Sheet8 Grading Plan with SDP202200029] a. Provide spot elevations that indicate all site storm runoff reaches proposed settling basins, and that establishes relative grade as close as possible to existing vertical interval between rims of existing settling basins and perimeter site grade before slope falls steeply to the creek. (Rev. 1) Addressed via revised Grading plan sheets: 9A, 9B, 9C, 9D, sent via email July 11, 2022 2:37 PM. b. With WPO plan: (Rev. 1) Persists. Note: Email states the WPO plan is submitted (July 12, 2022 11:07 AM, Tim Duncan to J. Anderson). Items i., it., below, will be evaluated with WPO plan application. i. Provide mitigation plan (with proposed plantings) for proposed improvements within landward 50' of stream buffer. ii. Compare (via table) existing volume and proposed volume of settling basins. Total proposed settling basin volume should exceed total existing settling basin volume. iii. Recommend submit WPO plan /application at earliest convenience. iv. Note: site visit 15-Apr by county engineering indicates volume of existing settling basins, existing basin rim elev., inlet design, site perimeter elevation, and circulation patterns appear to provide adequate storm runoff management for routine operations at the plant, and as discussed /outlined in correspondence with RGA (email, Friday, April 15, 2022 1:03 PM), design that mimics current basin volume, rim elevation/s, and site perimeter elevation are goals that may alleviate nearly entirely storm runoff concerns relative to adjacent stream water quality. 3. An approved WPO plan (ESC, SWM, Mitigation) is required prior to FSP approval. (Rev. 1) Persists. Note: Settling basins are not SWM facilities, per se, but rather serve an industrial site runoff settling /filtering function. Water evaporates from basins. Ex. settling basins have no outlet. Engineering anticipates similar design with WPO plan: details that provide basin volume, profiles, with no outlet." Thanks, again, best, J. Anderson John E. Anderson, PE I Civil Engineer II Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902 434 296 S832 ext 306