The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutACSA199500007 Review Comments 1995-10-20 RECEWEE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE `'i 2 3 1995 Planning Dept. Vey-, �IRpNtP MEMORANDUM TO: Wayne Cilimberg - Planning & Community Development FROM: David Hirschman- Water Resources Manage DATE: October 20, 1995 RE: VDOT Jurisdictional Area Request I spoke with Ron Conner of the Virginia Department of Health (VDH) in Lexington about this request. He had an interesting spin on the issue. Apparently, back in the 70s, VDOT had a discharge certificate to put in package plants at the rest areas. Due to all the efforts to restore the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir at that time, the Health Department basically told them they needed non-discharging systems. Mr. Conner said that VDH couldn't at that time support point source discharges at the rest areas when all the efforts had been expended, through the Crozet Interceptor and other means, to remove existing point source discharges in the rest of the watershed. In that sense, VDOT was trying to comply with reservoir protection ideals by installing the mineral oil systems in the first place. There are only two locations in Virginia where rest areas have mineral oil systems: Albemarle County and New Kent County. Mr. Conner did not have much good to say about these systems. They have had problems with odors, leaking valves (and oil getting on the floor - a health hazard in itself), and many maintenance headaches. He also said that these systems are probably nearing their useful life expectancy. Apparently, VDOT is just doing what they can to keep these things going, but they aren't operating as designed. I discussed the following alternative solutions with Mr. Conner: 1. Construct Alternative Zero-Discharge System: There are some systems that recycle wastewater. However, Mr. Conner suggested that these need a complete treatment plant on-site and are very operator-intensive, not to mention expensive. They require careful signage to separate potable water from recycled wastewater. Most likely, the operation of one of these plants would also entail the periodic hauling of sludge. The public safety of a system like this depends heavily on the reliability of the operator and the Smooth operating of the plant. 2. Spray Irrigation: This probably wouldn't (and shouldn't) be permitted because it's still a discharge in the reservoir watershed. MEMORANDUM Wayne Cilimber, Planning & Community Development October 20, 1995 Page Two 3. Package Plants: Mr. Conner said VDH probably wouldn't recommend that a permit be granted because of the reservoir issue. VDH would probably tell VDOT to just limp along with the current system (if no other alternatives existed). 4. Mass Drainfield: There is too much flow at the facilities and the soils aren't suitable. If reservoir protection was the guiding principal when the mineral oil systems were developed, it seems that this philosophy should prevail to decide what should replace the faulty systems. The only alternatives to hooking to the Interceptor that respect this are: an on-site recycling plant, permanent pump and haul, or spray irrigation on land outside the reservoir watershed (this would also entail hauling of waste on County roads). It is my opinion that pipelines are much preferable, from a public health and safety point of view, than hauling waste around the County in tanker trucks. This reasoning eliminates pump and haul and spray irrigation. While Mr. Conner did not sound optimistic about the feasibility of a recycling plant, perhaps this alternative should be explored a little more thoroughly. I discussed this with Taylor Turner III of R. Stuart Royer and Associates, and he may be looking into it. It will be particularly important to evaluate whether these systems (1) require the hauling of sludge, and (2) pose operation and maintenance issues that diminish their attractiveness. Let me know if you need any additional information at this time. DJH/ctj File:david/vdot.ju4 ALBVARH O \TY SERV Lc Ai OR TY P.O 3 0 X 1009 168 SPOTNAP RD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902 • (804) 977-4511 FAX (804) 979-0698 October 20, 1995 Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Director of Planning and Community Development a flwfl, I'`rt,:� Albemarle County Office Building a� Charlottesville, Virginia Re: Interstate 64 Rest Areas Dear Wayne: You have asked for comments from the Service Authority concerning Virginia Department of Transportation's request for water and sewer service to the Interstate 64 rest areas. It is my understanding that their application has been amended and they now seek water and sewer to existing structures for the westbound facility and sewer only to existing structures at the eastbound rest area. The Service Authority offers the following comments. Sewer Our engineering staff sees no technical problems with VDOT connecting to the Crozet Interceptor. If approved by the Board of Supervisors, VDOT would have to design, install, and operate at its expense all facili- ties from the rest area to the interceptor. Connection would have to be made at a point acceptable to this authority and Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. The effect of these connections on the capacity of the interceptor is insignificant. You and I have discussed the prospect of VDOT building sewage treatment plants at these facilities if they are unable to connect to public sewer. Allowing that to happen would be contrary to one of the primary purposes for the Crozet Interceptor - ELIMINATION OF POINT SOURCE DISCHARGES FROM THE WATERSHED. Water Water service could be provided to the westbound lane rest area. The connection point would be at the intersection of Route 250 and West Leigh Drive. In studying the question of water service to this rest area, you should know that there are several existing subdivisions now served by central well systems which could potentially be served by further extensions of a water main which would serve VDOT. These are Peacock Hill, Langford Farm, and Glenair. Residents of Peacock Hill and Glenair have previously expressed concern about the reliability of their water systems and have made inquiries to ACSA about the possibility of service. If we can provide you with any additional information concerning this matter please let me know. Very truly yours, J.W. Brent Executive Director JWB/lbt c.c: Board of Directors Paul Shoop Arthur Petrini „„),E&AlBE,yg4`F RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY r P.O. BOX 979 • CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902-0979 • (804) 977-2976 F OGCF ��C • REUSE TO: WAYNE CILIMBERG, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FROM: ARTHUR D. PETRINI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR A6 g7 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL AREA DATE: OCTOBER 24, 1995 The Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (RSWA), at their October 23, 1995 regular meeting, has directed me to proceed with a jurisdictional area request for the Ivy Sanitary Landfill located at 6876 Dick Woods Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903. This request is for a sewage force main that would run from the landfill to the Crozet sewage interceptor. As addressed in the accompanying memo from Joyce Engineering (our consultant), the health and safety of the area will best be served by a pump station and force main. Per our conversation with R. Stuart Royer & Associates, Inc., which firm is representing the VDOT Rest Stop Modifications, the RSWA would like to process its request along with the VDOT request. Both projects could use part of the same route and therefore some economic savings could occur. Equally important would be the acquisition and/or use of existing right-of-ways once instead of twice. Please call me should you require further information. ADP/ldb PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER f . • COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM To' File° \ / No. From Y (f.r� R e: �"T v4.4 Sl c�+1..\ L �-r.,* DOCUMENTATION OF VERBAL COMMUNICATION TELEPHONE Meeting Personal Contact DATE' 10111PItiC TIME' ;•'00 LOCATION• ^ PARTICIPANTS• A, 944v4n:, FM c•rAo.Gcsco (/i,+31/4 bye-.c....d' 15an-1`,re-' q.v �7./ by se,�w\G�.-, ?'"".,Q DISCUSSION• K( 2\14 1 r # a-v^ a vt�,r`h4 �b..��• " IM+c""�+-;\.- 6 l•.v'Ac•rww� o�\ \ .l 1 \_ 4C -4.4c, \to —�nis ww-ta K 6- 41) 61" 1-C 1ACe vi1S - l b.cc bar fruit ..Fsl vey•A } do l,rY:,� iwyo a., C 1 :� (1� ... (G.9ti Rio-G,,,A,\cw• • w► ox ors- C• - es)PV� i&kr4'i k \I\ CMOk44...44.. ?.444.4-, 1-P I M-i iVN•ALA-4)1- - 4D CU�•.t a.-1-444 .e CAVi e- �h,s� W4-►o•AA 1?e.. -RNA-_a^ � .,F r . N^ GLu.-4w od- A G S k res dibw, �+- rc •-v s atc.escl� .e ,{M��tt- l�..�1 r_c�t.s��S �► va\ - fit. 6-v1, \Az) GPY.'hro\ oV" 01"' w A ;n s�4 V+ V- vr~; • cl 6-9) �• cIu, e✓ 6C AC4N bc.1rK•pA f �-1 1 2W/V\ e-4-6-V-P14 % COPIES TO* ATTACHMENTS •