HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201600008 Plan - As-built 2023-03-17 (4)SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
Glenmore K20I — Phase 2
Road & Utility
As -Built Documentation
Submission Packet
July 18", 2022
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
February 21, 2023
Mr. Frank Pohl, P.E.
County Engineer
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
RE: Glenmore K2C-II Phase 2 —Road and Utility As -Built Submittal Packet
Dear Mr. Pohl,
Attached you will find the As -Built Submittal Packet for the completion of the Glenmore K2C-II Phase 2
subdivision and VSMP.
Contents:
o As -Built Certification Letter from Professional Engineer
o Certification of Completion Form by Owner
o CBR Test Reports
o Compaction Tests Reports
o Stone Inspection Reports
o Pavement Inspection Reports
o Pond Embankment Compaction Report
o Pipe Trench Certification Letter
o Pipe Interior Video Report
o Recorded Plats
If you have any questions, please contact us by phone at 434-227-5140 ext 3 or via email at iustin(cilshimp-
engineerino.com.
Best Regards,
Michael Chandler
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
As -Built Certification Letter from Professional Engineer
Letter provided by Shimp Engineering, P.C.
SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Fowsed Engineering
February 24, 2023
David James
Albemarle County
Dept. of Community Development
401 McIntire Rd
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Engineer's Certification of Improvements Letter— Glenmore K2CII — Phase 2
SUB201600061
Dear Mr. James,
I have reviewed the as -built surveys, inspections and conditions of the Glenmore K2CI1 Subdivision Phase
2 improvements. Based on these, I can confirm that the roadways were installed in accordance with the
approved plans for the project, except as noted. Specifically, we have surveyed the following.
Road A (Drumin Road):
• The roadway horizontal and vertical geometry is per the plans.
• The roadway base aggregate was installed per the plan.
• The base coat of asphalt was installed per the plan.
• The top coat of asphalt was installed per the plan.
• The traffic and road signs were installed per the plan.
• All stormwater conveyance channels are installed per the plan.
Road C (Bothwell Lane):
• The roadway horizontal and vertical geometry is per the plans.
• The roadway base aggregate was installed per the plan.
• The base coat of asphalt was installed per the plan.
• The top coat of asphalt was installed per the plan.
• The traffic and road signs were installed per the plan.
• All stormwater conveyance channels are installed per the plan. nm.
• All stormwater grated inlets were installed per the plan.0
Best Regards, kA� v?,l ,-125
Justin Shimp, P.E.
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
February 21, 2023
Dan Ratzlaff
Manager of Engineering Compliance
Albemarle County
Dept. of Community Development
401 McIntire Rd
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Engineer's Certification Letter — Glenmore K2CI1— Phase 2 — Pond B
WP0201600059[W PO201600008
Dear Mr. Ratzlaff,
I have reviewed the as -built surveys and conditions of the SWM Facilities (Pond B) at Glenmore K2CII
Subdivision Phase 2, WPO201600059/WPO201600008.
• 1 hereby certify that the SWM Facility Pond B is constructed in an acceptable manner that meets
the intent of the approved plans dated 04-15-2016 with approval date 07-25-2016. While it is not
constructed exactly as proposed in the approved plans, the SWM Facility appears to be functioning
as designed. We report the following specifically.
o The pond size and shape are not constructed exactly per the approved plan; however, they are
constructed in a manner that meets the intent of the SWM Plan. This has been verified with
routing calculations.
o The pond side slopes are constructed per the approved plans.
o The top of the dam is constructed 0.4-ft lower than the approved plan, however the bottom of
the pond is constructed 1.59-ft lower at the lowest point. Theses elevations and areas have
been verified to be adequate based on the routing calculations.
o The emergency spillway is constructed 0.12-ft higher and 5.0-ft narrower than the approved,
however the elevation and width meet the intent of the SWM Plan. This has been verified with
routing calculations.
o The primary spillway location material & dimensions are per the approved plan.
o The primary spillway invert was constructed 1.06-ft higher than the approved plans. An 8"
PVC pipe was installed with an invert at the lowest point of the pond to promote full drain
down. With this revised configuration, the pond is constructed in a manner that meets the
intent of the SWM Plan. The runoff is still released at rates compliant with the stormwater
regulations. This has been verified with routing calculations. Appropriate trashracks have also
been installed over each of the orifices.
o The primary spillway culvert is installed with a slope of 3.60% rather than the approved 1.05%.
However, the slope does not cause any adverse effects. The material used is CMP rather than
the approved HDPE however the size is per the approved plan and all discrepancies have
been shown to be adequate and meet the intent of the SWM Plan per the
calculations.
o There is adequate outlet protection at the culvert outfall.
Sincerely,
Justin Shimp, P.E.
Shimp Engineering, P.C.
SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
February 21, 2023
Dan Ratzlaff
Manager of Engineering Compliance
Albemarle County
Dept. of Community Development
401 McIntire Rd
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Engineer's Certification Letter — Glenmore K2CII — Phase 2 — Pond E
WP0201600059[WPO201600008
Dear Mr. Ratzlaff,
I have reviewed the as -built surveys and conditions of the SWM Facilities (Pond E) at Glenmore K2CII
Subdivision Phase 2, WP02016000591WPO201600008.
I hereby certify that the SWM Facility Pond E is constructed in an acceptable manner that meets
the intent of the approved plans dated 04-15-2016 with approval date 07-25-2016. While it is not
constructed exactly as proposed in the approved plans, the SWM Facility appears to be functioning
as designed. We report the following specifically.
o The pond size and shape are not constructed exactly per the approved plan; however, they are
constructed in a manner that meets the intent of the SWM Plan. This has been verified with
routing calculations.
o The pond side slopes are constructed per the approved plans.
o The top of the dam is constructed 3.0-ft higher than the approved plan, however the bottom of
the pond is constructed 0.04-ft higher than proposed. Theses elevations and areas have been
verified to be adequate based on the routing calculations.
o The emergency spillway is constructed 2.30-ft higher than the approved plan, however the
elevations meet the intent of the SWM Plan. This has been verified with routing calculations.
o The primary spillway location material & dimensions are per the approved plan.
o The primary spillway rim was constructed per the approved plan, while the invert was
constructed 0.04-ft higher than the approved plan. The orifice was constructed to be 11"x6"
rather than the approved 11"x4" with an invert 0.04-ft higher than the approved plan, however
they are constructed in a manner that meets the intent of the SWM Plan. The runoff is still
released at rates compliant with the stormwater regulations. This has been verified with
routing calculations. Appropriate trashracks have also been installed over each of the orifices.
o The primary spillway culvert is installed with a slope of 1.13% rather than the approved 0.99%.
However, the slope does not cause any adverse effects. The material and size is per the
approved plan and all discrepancies have been shown to be adequate and meet the f
the SWM Plan per the as -built routing calculations. ti
o There is adequate outlet protection at the culvert outfall.
Sincerely,
Justin Shimp, P.E. yCl No. 4 183
Shimp Engineering, P.C. ,ems 2 ��►l8
Certification Form Completed by Owner
To Be Provided Upon Completion by: Glenmore Partners
Certificate of Completion
This certifies that I/We, Glenmore Partners, LLC ,
developer(s) of Glenmore Highlands K2CII - Phase 2 Subdivision,
have completed installation of all subdivision improvements and all construction conforms to the
requirements of the Albemarle County Code and to plans as approved by the County of
Albemarle, and any discrepancies have been documented and approved by the County. Me
also certify that that all of the construction costs for the improvements, including those for
materials and labor, have been paid to the person constructing the improvements.
By: awiA�
(Signature)
(Print Name)
.�Larw...cr
(Print Title)
State of V r 1ill 'Ot
OWCounty of�—
Z I& -
(Date)
Z
The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn before me this day of
FG6r✓.../ , ZvZ3 by
Notary Public
/ /
My Commission Expires: 7 11 / 27
g"''•,,
Registration #: 793 5�6 76
�pHEN
9� • "' "" c((
••.`9,L't
NOTARY
P#783567
i - n ; MY COryrMIS s '
v5roe. xw..uinrov
PI
1/208 N-
�
., ..
C T
H OF ,.•
CBR Test Reports
Testing provided by Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc.
1
GEO-TERRAIN ORGANIZATION, INC.
"YOUR GALS FOUNDED ON OUR INFORMATION"
August 19, 2019
Glenmore Partners
P.O. Box 645
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Attn: Mr, Jess Achenbach
RE: California Bearing Ratio Test Results
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
Albemarle County, Virginia
GTO Project No.:19G-207-030
Dear Mr. Achenbach
As requested, Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc. (GTO) has obtained representative samples of pavement
subgrade soils at locations estimated using the civil engineering consultant produced plans for the
Glenmore subdivision of the above referenced project. Samples were obtained where feasible based
upon previous investigation and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests were performed to verify the
required pavement design thicknesses for the proposed development
The testing includes the subdivision Road A, Station 19+75 to 22+25, and Road C, all. Design
parameters were established based upon the traffic count provided by the civil 8ngineering consultant
and laboratory testing performed on samples of proposed subgrade soils. The following results were
obtained by performing CBR testing in general accordance with Virginia Test Method (VTM) 8.
➢ The soils on site generally classify as sandy silts, with traces to little gravel and rock fragments,
and mica. As tested, these materials have an average soil support values, confirmed by an
average CBR value of 5.9.
➢ In paved areas, the soil upto six (6) inches below planned subgrade elevationsfor controlled fills
should be compacted to ninetyfive percent (95%) of its maximum dry density as determined by
VTM-1 (AASHTO T-99) Specifications. The final six (6) inches up to subgrade should be
compacted to at least one hundred percent (100%) of its maximum dry density. Moisture
contents of the subgrade should conform to the moisture specifications set in the VDOT Road
and Bridge Specification manual.
➢ Any sidewalk, curb and gutter, and driveway areas should also be treated as above
➢ The following recommended pavement section is based on the VDOTVaswani design method for
Secondary Road Pavement, using the above mentioned average CBR value of 5.9. This value
should be representative of the soils that may be encountered at pavement subgrades. The
resiliency factor for the soil, given by the site location in Albemarle County and soil
classifications, is 1.5, and the thickness equivalency factor used is 1.67. The design traffic
volume is estimated to be 230 and 180 vehicles per day, one direction, for Road .A and Road C,
i 130-A INTERSTATE BUSINESS PARK FREDERICKSBURG, VA 22405 0 GFFICE: 540-36B-5724 0 FAX: 540.368-5725
Glenmore Partners
Re: California Bearing Ratio Test Results
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
August 19, 2019
respectively. This traffic volume was assumed to contain five (5) percent heavy truck traffic. If
the minimum pavement design shown on the approved plans is greater than the designs listed
below in thickness, the plan designs shall be utilized.
Pavement Sections for Road A. station 19+75 to 22+25•
Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course, VDOT SM-9.5 2.0 inches
Aggregate Subbase Course, VDOT 21AB 6.0 inches
Pavement Sections for Road C•
Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course, VDOT SM-9.5 2.0 inches
Aggregate Subbase Course, VDOT 21AS 6.0 inches
➢ Subgrades that have been exposed to weather changes or disturbances should be scarified
approximately six (6) inches and recompacted to 100% of Maximum Dry Density immediately
prior to the placement of the aggregate base course. The roadway subgrade is also subject to
proofroll utilizing fully loaded tandem axle dump truck or similar pneumatic tire equipment to
verify stability prior to the placement of the aggregate base course.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you in this capacity. If you have any questions regarding this
letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
C:/GTO Documents/GTO Geotechnical 2019/19G-207-030/Glenmore Phase 2 CBR Letter &19-19.doc
Virginia Department of Transportation — Pavement Design Guide ® 1996 (rev2000)
Appendix IV
Flezible Pavement Design Worksheet for New Subdivision Streets
This sheet is intended for use and submission in conjunction with VDOT's Subdivision Street Requirements
County _h4Ns4{ %Ca.�y I Date:
I Subdivision I /.: It iW. rD i ') — —I
Street Name � / 9f 7 22 t 2 T
Developer Phone: 3S�Zy1'S�1/o
ADT Projected traffic for the street segment considered, as defined in the Subdivision Street Requirements.
CBRD Design CBR = Average of CBRT x 2/3 and modified only as discussed in the Pavement Design Guide.
CBRT CBR value of the subgrade sample, taken and tested as specified in the Pavement Design Guide
DME VDQT District Mattntals Engineer
EPT Equivalent projected traffic
HCV Number of Heavy Commercial Vehicles (e.g. trucks, buses, etc., with 2 or more axles and 6 or more tires).
%HCV Percentage of the total traffic volume composed of Heavy Commercial Vehicles.
RF Resiliency Factor = Relative value of the subgrade soil's ability to withstand repeated loading.
SSV Soil support value of subgrade (SSV = CBRD x RF)
Da Thickness index of proposed pavement design computed by the Conventional Pavement Design Method
Da Thickness index required, based on Design ADT and SSV, determined by Anoendix IL
ep Leternun tgnAD1..
SteppDetermine:Design Values
r
SSl/:�.ADT
3J
Sam
Sam le DBRT Resiliency Factor
°/aHCV = 100 x HCV x ADT)
�% �`
1 Source
Value
# Z
/. {
or
' "`
Table I
Note: For
# 3 is 0 Appendix I
bo
20 x HCV
# 1 • DME a roved RF
/.
Note: For %HC V D 5%, use ADT
IEPT»T'
# For preliminary designs, use the lowest RF
# value in the equation
Design ADT
Use greater of ADT or EPT
L2_
/O
CBRD x RF =
, ggqy-nJ �';SSV"..:
7
- Step3::PavementDesign -(Check appropriate box and show proposed pavement design below.)
❑ (A) Limited to Design, ADT 5 400 . Show pavement material notation and thickness from Appendix IV Tables A and B.
.................. —.--- _.__...__---------- _..__..-------- __..-----
___._________
❑ (B) Show pavement section as developed in the Pavement Design Guide. DR =
(See Appendix III for material notations and thickness equivalency values (a)), from Appendix 11
Description of Proposed Pavement Section
Material Notation
Thickness, h a
(a x h)
Surface
PSGN-9•S-.4
Z.a /.67
3. S
Base
Subbase
DP must equal or exceed the value of D . D- = s(a a h)
26
Virginia Department of Transportation --Pavement Design Guide ® 1996 (rev2000)
Appendix IV
Fieidble Pavement Design Worksheet for New Subdivision Streets
This sheet is intended for use. and submission in conjunction with VDOT's Subdivision Street Requirements
County
Date: f Lp
Subdivision
lily._ 2—
Street Name
Developer
Phone: 403Y-
ADT Projected traffic for the sheet segment considered, as defined in the Subdivision Street Requirements.
CBRD Design CBR = Average of CBRT x 2/3 and modified only as discussed in the Pavement Design Guide.
CBRT CBR value of the subgrade sample, taken and tested as specified in the Pavement Design Guide
DME VDOT District Materials Engineer
EPT Equivalent projected traffic
HCV Number of Heavy Commercial Vehicles (e.g. trucks, buses, etc., with 2 or more axles and 6 or more tires).
%HCV Percentage of the total traffic volume composed of Heavy Commercial Vehicles.
RF Resiliency Factor = Relative value of the subgrade soil's ability to withstand repeated loading.
SSV Soil support value of subgrade (SSV = CBRD x RF)
DP Thickness index of proposed pavement design computed by the Conventional Pavement Design Method
Da Thickness index required, based on Design ADT and SSV, determined by Appendix Z
`�"
to lieeNne. est AbS
u
°'
�`
Step Z
Determine Design Values
u
-CBR
ADT
I I
Sample
D/BRT
ResiliencyFactor
0/*HCV = 100 x HCV x ADT)
or
20 x HCV
Note: For %HCV D 5%, use ADT
SZr:
# 1
7 (
Source
Value
# 2
Table 1
Ar
Note: For
%HCV>S%,
EP'PADT
# 3
0
Appendix I
1.0
#V
DME approved RF
jr
#
#
CBRD x
2
For preliminary designs, use the lowest RF
value in the equation
RF 'SSV
Design ADT
Use greater of ADT or EPT
(J U
.-Step-3.:Pavement.Design (Check appropriate box and show proposed pavement design below.)
❑ (A) Limited t0 Design. ADT .1400 - Show pavement material notations and thickness from Appendix IV Tables A and B.
...................... --------------•----..-..-•------------------------------------•----------...---S ...
❑ (B) Show pavement section as developed in the Pavement Design Guide. DR -
(see Appendix in twmaterial notations and thickness equivalency values (a)). from Appendix 11
Description of Proposed Pavement Section
Material Notation
Thickness, h
a
(a x h)
Surface
7.0
1 F7
, 3 iy
Base
�i4
6 C)
/• O
D
Subbase
Dp must equal or exceed the value of DR.
Dp =1; (a x h) = 9 3
26
BEARING
RATIO
TEST
REPORT
VTM-008
(2005)
ego
2
160
1s
a
v 120
1.2
c
m
n
o
N
d
�
N
O
y
` 80
0.8
d
c
a
40
o.a
0
0 0.1
0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 24
48
72
96
Penetration
Depth
(in.)
Elapsed Time
(hrs)
__-.--------Molded ----- --
Soaked---__ —_--
CB"A) -----
Linearity
Correction
Surcharge
Max.
Swell
Density Percent of Mosture
Density
Density ''. Percent of Moisture
(pef) Max. Dens. l%)
(Kf) Max. Dens. (%)
O.f01n. 0.20 In.
(in.)
(Ibs.)
(%)
10 1 100.1 18.2
105.7 98.7 27.4
6.1 5.6
0.000
10
1.5
-- --------
------------
J3:
I
Material Description
USCS
Max.
Dens.
Optimum
Moisture
LL
PI
Brown sandy Silt, trace mica and rock fragments
ML
107.1
18.2
0
0
Project No: 19G-207-030
Test Description/Remarks:
Project: Gienmore 2 Subdivision COT
Standard Proctor Compaction
Source of Sample: Road A, Station 20+00 Depth: subgrade
Sample Number: A
Date: 8-19.19
BEARING RATIO TEST REPORT
Geo-Terrain Or anization
Figure
Moisture -Density Relationship Test
130
120
110
V
O.
T
0
p
-___
C—
—
100
ZAV for
Sp.G. _
2.65
1
90
80
12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Water content, %
-e---- Rock Corrected —C�-- Uncorrected
Test specification: ASTM D 698-91 Procedure A Standard
ASTM D4718-15 Oversize Corr. Applied to Each Test Point
Elev/
Depth
Classification
Nat.
Moist.
Sp.G.
LL
PI
^/o >EN
USCS
AASHTO
subgrade
ML
A-4(0)
17.6
2.65
0
0
6.6
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS
UNCORRECTED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 107.1 pcf
104.4 pcf
Brown sand}Silt. trace mica and rock
fragments
Optimum moisture = 18.2 %
1 19.4 %
Project No. 19G-207- Client: Red Dirt Developments
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
Remarks:
o Source of Sample: Road A. Station 20+00 Sample Number: A
I,
Geo-Terrain Organization
Figure
BEARING
RATIO
TEST
REPORT
VTM-008
(2005)
200
1
160
0.8
y
a
U 120
0.6
c
Y
�
.N
o
d
�
y
O
N
A
N 80
0.4
C
a
ao
0.z
0
0
0 0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 24
48
72
96
Penetration
Depth
(in.)
Elapsed Time
(hrs)
- - - Molded _
Soaked
CBR (°k)
Linearity
Max.
F�(Prl.sfl)tyPercent Moisture
Density Percents. Molsture
ty Percen
_
0.10 in. 0.20 In.
Correction
Surcharge
(148.)
Swell
s.
Max. Dens. (%)
(pcf) Max. Dens. (%)
(in.)
(,/O)
O
112.0 100 16.8
110.9 99 25.5
7.1 6.5
0.000
10
1
2A
- --
3
- - - - -
-- - - --
--
-------
Material Description
uses
Max.
Dens.
Optimum
Moisture
LL
PI
e
%
Brown and Reddish Brown sandy Silt, trace mica, rock fragments, and clay
ML
112.0
16.9
35
2
Project No: 19G-207-030
Test Description/Remarks:
Project: Gienmore 2 Subdivision COT
STandard Proctor Compaction
Source of Sample: Road A and Road C Intersection
Sample Number: B Depth: subgrade
Date: 8-19-19
BEARING RATIO TEST REPORT
Geo-Terrain Or anization
Figure
Moisture -Density Relationship Test
130
120
--- -----
--- -
a
-
- o
110
V
CL
C
N
:
100
—
ZAV for
--
Sp.G. _
2.65
90
I
80
10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25
Water content, %
—f-- Rock Corrected p-- Uncorrected
Test specification; ASTM D 698-91 Procedure A Standard
ASTM D4718-15 Oversize Corr. Applied to Each Test Point
Elev/
Depth
Classification
Nat.
Moist.
Sp.G.
LL
PI
%>
#4
%
No.200
USCS
AASHTO
subgrade
ML
A-4(2)
18.6
2.65
35
2
6.3
67.9
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS
UNCORRECTED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 112.0 pcf
109.5 pcf
Brown and Reddish Brown sandy Silt, trace
mica. rock fragments, and clay
Optimum moisture = 16.9 %
17.9 %
Project No, 19G-207- Client: Red Dirt Developments
Remarks:
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
I
o Source: Road A and Road C Intersection Sample No.: B
I
i
i
Geo-Terrain Organization
Figure
10(
9C
ec
7C
W 60
Z
E
Z 50
w
U
0_
a 40
20
10
0
Particle Size Distribution Report
HIM
I
III
millililimililill
Ml
111
��I�
IN
�NYIMINE
IIII
I�
II■���IN�I�I
YII0
IA
I
Nh�l�l�l
ICI
%+3"
0.0
Fine
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.*
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
.375
100.0
#4
93.7
#10
90.6
#40
85.7
#200
67.9
4.9 17.8
Material Description
Brown and Reddish Brown sandy Silt, trace mica, rock
fragments, and clay
Atterberg Limits
PL= 33
LL= 35
P1= 2
Coefficients
D90= 1.4125
D85= 0.3840
DB0=
D50=
D30=
D15=
DW
CU=
Cc=
Classification
USCS= ML
AASHTO=
A-4(2)
Remarks
(no specification provided)
Source of Sample: Road A and Road C Intersection Depth: subgrade
Sample Number: B
Client: Red Dirt Developments
Geo-Terrain Organization
I Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
!, �,
Date: 8-19-19
BEARING
RATIO
TEST
REPORT
VTM-008
(2006)
200
2
I
160
1.6
a
V 120
1.2
C
.w
a)
e'
�
d
O
y
« 80
0.8
dt
C
ae
ao
0.4
D
o
0 0.1
0.2
0.3
0
6 0.5
0 24
48
72 96
Penetration
Depth
(in.)
Elapsed Time
(hrs)
Molded
Soaked
CBR_{°k)
Linearity
Max.
F--""-
Density Percent of Moisture
Density Percent of Moisture
Correction
Surcharge
(Ibs.)
Swell
__
0.101n 0.201n.
Max,
(PC ax. Dons. (%1
(Pcf) Max. Dens. %)
(In.)
(%)
1 O
106.9 100 18.9
105.6 98.8 28.1
5.0 4.9
0.000
10
1.3
3 ❑
Material Description
USCS
Max.
Dens.
Optimum
Moisture
LL
PI
C
Brown sandy Silt, trace mica and rock fragments
ML
106.9
18.9
0
0
Project No: 19G-207-030
Test Description/Remarks:
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
Standard Proctor Compaction
Source of Sample: Road C, Station 10+00 Depth: subgrade
Sample Number: C
Date: 8-19-19
BEARING RATIO TEST REPORT
Geo-Terrain Or anization
Figure
Moisture -Density Relationship Test
120
110
100
�
o
of
-------------
a
N
90
-
- -
-- -
- - - -,
-- ----
--------- _ -
_— —
ZAV for
Sp.G. _
2.85
_
80
-
- --- —
70
i
13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Water content, %
—�-- Rock Corrected p-- Uncorrected
Test specification: ASTM D 698-91 Procedure A Standard
ASTM 04718-15 Oversize Corr. Applied to Each Test Point
Elevl
Depth
Classification
Nat
Moist.
Sp.G.
LL
PI
% >
#4
% <
No.200
USCS
AASHTO
subgrade
ML
A-4(0)
17.5
2.65
0
0
5.1
74.7
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS UNCORRECTED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 106.9 pcf 104.8 pcf
Optimum moisture = 18.9 % 19.8 %
Brown sandy Silt, trace mica and rock
fragments
Project No. 19G-207- Client: Red Dirt Developments
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
.c Source of Sample: Road C. Station 10+00 Sample Number: C
Remarks:
:
Figure
j Geo-Terrain Organization
Particle Size Distribution Report
101
9(
8(
7(
6(
5(
4C
3C
2C
1C
0
mop
MM
li�imilillillo�iiin
��iUS
�MINIMUM
llimililillimillilli
111
llloillililloillilill
llimilillillol
I
llimillillilmillilillm
�III�
��I
Ylmlll
%t3. Coarse Fine Coan
0.0 1 0.0 5.1 1 2.4
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.'
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
.375
100.0
#4
94.9
# 10
92.5
#40
90.6
#200
74.7
% Fines
Fine Silt
15.9 74.7
Material Description
Brown sandy Silt, trace mica and rock fragments
Atterbem_ Limits
PL= 0
LL= 0
P1= 0
Coefficients
D90= 0.3770
D85= 0.1955
060=
D50=
D30=
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
Classification
USCS= ML
AASHTO=
A-4(0)
Remarks
' (no specification provided)
Source of Sample: Road C, Station 10+00 Depth: subgrade
Sample Number: C
Client: Red Dirt Developments
Geo-Terrain Organization Project: Glenmore2Subdivision COT
Date: 8-19-19
BEARING
RATIO
TEST
REPORT
VTM-008
(2005)
200
2
so
1.6
a)
a
v 120
L2
C
-A..
N
o
y
N
�
4)
3
C
O
h
A
.�. 80
0.8
m
c
li
a0
0,
0
0
0 0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 24
48
72
96
Penetration
Depth
(in.)
Elapsed Time
(hrs)
_ _ _ _ - Molded _ _ _ _ _--
__ Soaked
-_. ...--_-__----_
CBR (%)
— __._
Linearity
Max.
Pereent of Moisture
F:(�P-c,;nyMax. Dens.
Density Percent of Moisture
0.101n. 0.20 in.
Correction
Surcharge
(Ibs.)
Swell
M
(Pcf) Max. Dens. (y,l
(in.)
M
1 0
106.3 100 18.1
105.0 98.8 28.7
5.4 5.2
0.000
10
1.3_
20
3 ❑
- ------ --
----- --
-
- -
---- --
Material Description
USCS
Max.
Dons.
Optimum
Moisture
LL
PI
Brown and Reddish Brown sandy Silt, trace mica, rock fragments, and clay
ML
106.3
18.0
40
4
Project No: 19G-207-030
Test Description/Remarks:
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
Standard Proctor Compaction
Source of Sample: Road C, Station 14+85 Depth: subgrade
Sample Number: D
Date: 8-19-19
BEARING RATIO TEST REPORT
Geo-Terrain Organization
Figure
Moisture -Density Relationship Test
120
110
- _
I
------ ---
100
ZAV for
Sp.G. _
_ -
0
C
90
2.65
8(]
70
- ----- - --
,
r
.
13.5 15 16.5 18 19.5 21 22.5
Water content, %
�- Rock Corrected --p-- Uncorrected
Test specification: ASTM D 698-91 Procedure A Standard
ASTM D4718-15 Oversize Corr. Applied to Each Test Point
Elevl
Depth
Classification
Nat.
Moist.
S G.
P
LL
PI
%>
#4
%
No.200
USCS
AASHTO
subgrade
ML
A-4(4)
18.9
2.65
40
4
5.0
72.3
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS UNCORRECTED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 106.3 pcf 104.3 pcf
Optimum moisture = 18.0 % 18.8 %
Brown and Reddish Brown sandv Silt; trace
mica. rock fragments, and clay
Project No. 19G-207- Client: Red Dirt Developments
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
i
I
o Source of Sample: Road C. Station 14+85 Sample Number: D
Remarks:
Figure
Geo-Terrain Organization
Particle Size Distribution Report
I
IYsI,�1
1�YIIII
�II�I
I11�
,�Itl
p�I
p
A
IN
% #3"
SIEVE
SIZE
PERCENT
FINER
SPEC.*
PERCENT
PASS?
(X=NO)
.375
100.0
#4
95.0
#10
92.8
#40
85.3
#200
72.3
- (no specification provided)
Source of Sample: Road C, Station 14+85
Sample Number: D
Geo-Terrain Organization
FIne sift
13.0 72.3
Material Description
Brown and Reddish Brown sandy Silt, trace mica, rock
fragments, and clay
AtterbergLimits
PL= 36
LL= 40
PI= 4
Coefficients
D90= 0.9452
Dfl5= 0.4054
D60=
1350=
DgO=
D15=
D10=
Cu=
Cc=
Classification
USCS= ML
AASHTO=
A-4(4)
Remarks
Depth: subgrade
Client: Red Dirt Developments
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
Date: 8-19-19
Moisture -Density Relationship Test
130
120
110
CIL
'p
_.___. _--
100
ZAV for
Sp.G. _
-
-- --
—G-
i
2.65
90
80
10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25
Water content, %
—�-- - Rock Corrected —o-- - Uncorrected
Test specification: ASTM D 698-91 Procedure A Standard
ASTM D4718-15 Oversize Corr. Applied to Each Test Point
Elev/
Classification
Nat.
%>
%<
Depth
Moist.
G
Sp..
LL
PI
#4
No.200
USCS
AASHTO
-4'
14.6
2.65
10.6
ROCK CORRECTED TEST RESULTS
iUNCORRECTED
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Maximum dry density = 113.9 pcf
109.7 pcf
Brown and Reddish Bron sandy Silt, trace
mica and rock fragments
Optimum moisture = 16.1 %
17.7 %
Project No. 19G-207- Client: Red Dirt Developments
iRemarks:
Project: Glenmore 2 Subdivision COT
o Source of Sample: Cut from Lots Along Road C Sample Number: 2
Geo-Terrain Organization
Figure
Soil Compaction Test Report
Testing provided by Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc.
♦Aa
GEO-TERRAIN ORGANIZATION, INC.
L°YOUR GOALS FOUNDED ON OUR INFORMATION"
June 28, 2019
Glenmore Partners
P.O. Box 645
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Attn: Mr. Jess Achenbach
RE: Soil Subgrade Stability and Compaction - Road A and C
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
Albemarle County, Virginia
GTO Project No.: 19G-207-030
Dear Mr. Achenbach:
As requested, Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc. (GTO) has visited the above referenced project site on
various occasions to check stability of the subgrade soils of the proposed road for the project.
Observations included the stability of the proposed subgrade under dynamic loading (proofroll) for the
new Road A, station 19+75 to 22+25, and Road C, all, as well as compaction testing in general
accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation requirements.
Our staff has exercised the degree of care normally associated with a project of this type. All Inspections
were performed in general accordance with 2012 IBC Section 1704 requirements for special
inspections. Afully-loaded, pneumatic -tired tandem axle dump truck was observed on -site at proposed
subgrade elevations to proofroli the proposed roadway. Minimal deflection and rutting within the cut to
grade and the backfilled subgrade section of the proposed roadway was observed. This observation
indicates an acceptable condition for the roadway subgrade.
GTO personnel checked the in -place density of the soil subgrade. The subgrade soils were checked by
our laboratory for maximum dry density. In addition, field density testing using nuclear methods (ASTM
D2922) were performed to check backfill placement. Test results indicate soil subgrade as of June 24th,
2019 appears to conform to project specifications with regards to in -place density. Please see the field
test results listed below and the attached laboratory data sheets enclosed for additional information.
Summary of Soil Subgrade Density - Road A
ation
Elevation.
Dry
De
Moisture
Maximum
Percent
422+25
(%)
Density
Compaction
tion
17
110.9
17.0
113.9
97.4
Station
22+50
Subgrade
114.0
16.4
113.9
100+
100-A INTERSTATE BUSINESS PARK FREDERICKSBURO, VA 22405.DFFICE: 540-368-57240 FAX: 540-3ra-5725
Southern Development
Re: Soil Subgrade Stability and Compaction
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
June 28, 2019
Page 2
Summary of Soil Subgrade Density - Road C
Location
Elevation.
Dry
Density
Moisture
Maximum
Density
Percent
(PO
N
Compaction
Station
12+75
1
111.4
17.4
113.9
97.8
Station
12+75
Subgrade
113.7
16.1
113.9
99.8
Based upon the laboratory test results (113.9 pcf maximum dry density, 16.1 percent optimum
moisture), and field test results, It appears the soil subgrade for the Glenmore Phase 2 subdivision
roadways has been prepared to a satisfactory condition with regards to soil density and moisture.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you in this capacity. If you have any questions regarding this
letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
C:/GTO Documents/GTO Geotechnical 2018/18G-012-136/Glenmore 2 Proofroll Compaction Letter 6-28-19.doc
Stone Inspections Reports
Testing provided by Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc.
A A 1
GEO-TERRAIN ORGANIZATION, INC.
"YOUR GOALS FOUNDED ON OUR INFORMATION"
August 20, 2019
Glenmore Partners
P.O. Box 645
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Attn: Mr. Jess Achenbach
RE: Stone Subbase Depth and Compaction - Road A and C
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
Albemarle County, Virginia
GTO Project No.:19G-207-030
Dear Mr. Achenbach:
As requested, an engineering representative of Geo-Terrain Organization, Inc. (GTO) has visited the
above referenced project site on various occasions to check the Virginia 21A stone base conditions for
the new Road A, station 19+75 to 22+25, and Road C, all.
Our staff has exercised the degree of care normally associated with a project of this type. On July 1n,
2019, GTO personnel observed the stone base already placed. The stone subbase area was proofrolled
using the available fully loaded, tandem axle on -road dump trucks delivering stone to the site and
observed by GTO personnel. In addition, thickness was checked at the proposed compaction test
locations and was found to be in excess of eight inches at every location. The area appeared to be
stable and sufficiently prepared to test for in -place density.
GTO personnel checked the stone base placement. The Virginia 21A stone was tested for maximum dry
density using the one -point proctor method (VTM-12), resulting in a weight of 146.5 pounds per cubic
foot at an optimum moisture of 8.0 percent. In addition, field density testing using nuclear methods
(ASTM D2922) were performed to check backfill placement. Test results indicate stone base as of
September 3,tl, 2019 appears to conform to project specifications with regards to in -place density.
Please see the field test results listed below for additional information.
Summary of Stone Base Density - Road A and C
Location
Elevation
Dry
along
Below
Density
Moisture
Maximum
Percent
roadway
Base Elev.
(pcf)
(°�)
Density
Compaction
(station)
(ft)
(Pcf)
A, 20+50
0
140.8
7.0
146.5
96.1
A, 21+75
0
143.0
7.5
146.5
97.6
C, 10+25
0
142.1
6.8
146.5
97.0
1 OD -A INTERSTATE BUSINESS PARK FREDERICKSBURG, VA 22405 • OFFICE: 540-368-5724 0 FAX: 540-368-5725
Glenmore Partners
Re: Stone Subbase Depth and Compaction - Road A and C
Glenmore Phase 2 Subdivision COT
August 20, 2019
Page 2
C, 12+00
0
140.3
7.2
146.5
95.8
C, 14+25
0
1 144.4
7,3
1 146.5
1 98.6
Based upon the test results, it appears the stone subbase for the new development area has been
prepared to a satisfactory condition with regards to soil density and moisture.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you in this capacity. If you have any questions regarding this
letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfull mitte ,
Geo-Terr an
ati c.
P e . Fa ra, P.E.
eotechnical Engineer 2.
C:/GTO Document Folder/GTO Geotechnical 2019/19G-207-030/Glenmore 2 Stone Letter 8-20-19.doc `
Pavement Inspection Reports
Testing and Certification provided by S.L. Williamson Company, Inc.
S.L.WILLIAMSON COMPANY, INC.
ASPHALT PAVING AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION leg
Surface Weight Weight Weight
Date Phase House # Dry Under SSD Volume Gmb Gmm
% Gmm
Oct-22
1 1
413
1 955
1 559.6
1 958.6
1 399
1 2.39
1 2.592
92.3
Oct-22
1 1
518
1 864.2
1 508
1 866.2
1 358.2
1 2.41
1 2.592
93.1
Oct-22
2
560
766.4
456.9
775.1
318.2
2.41
2.592
92.9
Oct-22
2
720
858.1
510.1
866.5
356.4
2.41
2.592
92.9
Oct-22
2
745
1187.1
698.4
1192.9
494.5
2.40
2.592
92.6
Oct-22
3
818
839.9
503.3
854.2
350.9
2.39
2.592
92.3
Base Weight
Date Phase House # Dry
Weight Weight
Under SSD
Volume
w17, Z
Average; 92.7
Gmm % Gmm
Jun-17
1 1 1
413 1
1907.4
1 1150
1 1913.5
1 763.5
1 2.50 1
2.633 1
94.9
Jun-17
1 1 1
518 1
1829
1 1106.3
1 1832.1
1 725.8
1 2.52 1
2.633 1
95.7
May-19
2
560
2137.6
1301.4
2140.8
839.4
2.55
2.650
96.1
May-19
2
720
1565.3
938.9
1568.3
629.4
2.49
2.650
93.8
May-19
1 2 1
745 1
1757.8
1 1053.6
1 1765.3
1 711.7
1 2.47 1
2.650
93.2
Apr-22
1 3 1
818 1
1487.9
1 885.6
1 1498.2
1 612.6
1 2.43 1
2.648
91.7
Average! 94.2
TEL 434-295-6137 • 800-868-6137 • FAX 434-977-7852 I 1230 RIVER ROAD • CI-IARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901
www.slwilliamson.com
i ``:
UNIO
ONVONrasla 3nHISNOD z 3sy HIM
AD sumn--Z � rill I � ® ), L_ � __ / • \/`1 /,.
�n d
rM3 do SIM
'XI
31v
\1
it 0 j
3)WOHMSM
Jo SlImll WKOnsmw z 3SVHd K
Z MyHd 'NM
01
SY 3Nn Awim i'm
W W iV d333P9 N3jrll1 3HI 'INNIVINIVO 311M TV Z 53SVIld 810J 91146A4 IIV e
? IIJY iY 'I JSYHd Wd OWHVP) ONY 9111CV89 IIY jMIONJ N�IIIG I 3SVHd
Asphalt Concrete Density Acceptance Test Report - Method A
Acceptance by Plugs/Cores
Production Date:
9/30/19
Project/Schedule Number.
Glenmore
Test Section (Lot) #:
Base
Total paved length (11):
1,975
Calculated tonnage:
543.13
Asphalt Mix Type:
Control Strip Information:
1. Control Strip Number and Date:
3. Min Longitudinal Joint Density:
BM-25
Acceptance Testing Results By Plugs/Cores:
Route & Direction:
County:
From (Station, MP):
Application Width (ft):
Asphalt Producer:
Job Mix ID:
Glenmore Phase 2
Albemarle
15
SLWCO
7017-2019-52A
2. CS Density: lbs/ft3
Ibs/ft3 (= 95%CS Density)
Lane(s):
Paving Contractor:
To (Station, MP):
Application Rate (Ibs/sy):
Asphalt Plant:
Nuclear Gauge Serial #:
Daily Gmm: 2.65 Plant Lot & Sample #(s) for Grant testing:
SLWCO
330
Shadwell
Sub
Distance Offset
(ft) (ft)
Thickness Weight in 1120
Weight in Air [A] SSD Weight [C]
(in) [B]
Grab (A/(C-
Volume (C-B) %Gmm
B))
Bonus Eligiblelot
Longitudinal Joint Density
Left(lbsffl Right(Ibs/ft')
1
2.75 1 1304.2 792 1308.2
516.2 1 2.53 1 95.5%
FALSE
2
i
1
1
i i i
3.5 1 1716.9 1 1034.6 1 1723.6
1 1 1
i i
689 1 2.49 1 94.0%
1 1
FALSE
i
i
1
3
FALSE
4
FALSE
5
FALSE
6
FALSE
7
1
1 1 1
1 1
FALSE
1
Pay Factor from S315HP1 Table III-4A:
Feld Level II
Technician:
Inspector:
David Wyant
Averages: 2.510 94.7% I Percent of sub lots meeting
bonus criteria
Comments: Cores cut from project, tested and compared to design Grain. Date:
9/29/19
Pond Embankment Compaction Report
Provided by: Stevenson Consulting
Field Density Inspection
Time of Arrival:11:00 AM
Trip Charge*:
*will be billed in accordance with contract
Time of Departure: 3:00 PM
Mileage*: 24
Total Time On Site: 4.00
Other:
Travel Time*: 1
Total Time: 5.00
Prepared by Stevenson Consulting, Inc. • 2116 Berkmar Dr., Suite B, Charlottesville, VA 22901 • 540.552.1575
W WW.STEVENSONCONSULTING.NET
This report constitutes a summary of observations and tests performed by our field representative and is subject to review and revision
by our managers and engineers. The statements made herein do not constitute a certification. Approval of work for final acceptance
can only be made by our managers and engineers. Interpretations based on this data are the responsibility of others.
STEVENSON CONSULTING, INC.
Project: Glenmore K2C11 Detention Ponds
Permit #:
Location: Albemarle County, VA
Client Name:Red Dirt Developments
Contractor:
DAILY FIELD REPORT
Day & Date:Wednesday,12/28/2022
Project #:7-1981
Representative:John Kessler
Temp Range:34
Weather: Clear
Description of Work:
Location:
Field Density Inspection
Glenmore, K2C II
A, B, C, D, & E POND EMBANKMENTS
Tests Performed: 15
Problems/Non-Compliances/Failing Tests: No
INSPECTION FINDINGS:
A Stevenson Consulting, Inc. representative was requested to perform field density tests on compacted structural fill that had been previously
placed.15 field density tests were performed today utilizing the nuclear test method ASTM D6938. The field density tests indicate relative
compaction to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density in accordance with Stanadard Proctor at the locations and elevations tested. The
specification requirement for this project is 95 percent compaction according to the same standard. The field density test locations and elevations
are based on data supplied by others; Stevenson Consulting cannot be responsible for structures located off of the observed engineered pad,
misaligned utilities, stakeout errors causing uncontrolled fill to be placed within structural areas, or other concerns due to incorrect locations and
elevations. Field density tests were referenced to test results performed in .our lab Field density test results were reported to the contractor.
Please see the attached sketch for the approximate limits of fill placement and field density test locations.
This testing was conducted on a spot-check basis since we were not present on site while filing and compaction was in progress. Thus, field density
test results indicate relative compaction only at the location and grade tested. Spot density test results included in this report are intended to assist
in evaluating whether the work is in general compliance. Spot testing on a periodic basis is not intended to provide adequate data to evaluate full
compliance with earthwork compaction requirements
The professional engineer is represented on site solely to observe operations of the contractor identified, form opinions and report those
opinions to the client. The presence and activities of the engineer's representative do not relieve the contractor's obligation to meet contractual
requirements. The contractor retains sole responsibility for site safety and the methods and sequence of construction. We have performed our
services in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. We make no warranty; either expressed or implied, as to the
professional services provided.
This report is the instrument of service of a professional engineer. Any conclusions drawn from this report should be discussed with the
professional engineer involved.
STEVENSON CONSULTING, INC.
FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Project Name
Glenmore K2C11 Detention Ponds
Project #
7-1981
Date
December 28, 2022
Technician
John Kessler
Client Job #
Weather
Clear
Client's Name
Red Dirt Developments
Permit
Temp (r)
34
General Contractor
TESTS
Test# Test Depth Moisture
(inches) %
Dry
Density
Proctor #
Excavator
%of %of
Proctor Proctor
Spec. Actual
Pass/Fall
Elevation
Below
Finish
Grade (Ft)
Is This A
Retest?
Depth of Fill Placed (Inch)
0
Location: Grid Coordinates or Roadway Station
1
6
26.7
96.9
102
95
95.0
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT A, A-01
2
6
25.1
100.8
102
95
98.8
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT A, A-02
3
6
24.5
97.6
102
95
95.7
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT A, A-03
4
6
25.6
98.5
102
95
96.6
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT B, B-01
5
6
22.7
99.4
102
95
97.5
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT B, B-02
6
6
22.6
97.1
102
95
95.2
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT B, B-03
7
6
29.3
98.4
102
95
96.5
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2B ll, POND EMBANKMENT B, B-04
8
6
22.4
99
102
95
97.1
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2B ll, POND EMBANKMENT C, C-01
Test Location
Established By: Contractor
PROCTOR INO ' a
Proctor #
Depth of Elevation of Compaction
Test Established by: Contractor Equipment Used:
Visual Description
Test Conducted
Vibratory On
Tests performed in: your Laboratory
Maximum Density (PCF)
# of
Intermittent Basis Passes 6
❑ Material Suppliers Laboratory
Opt. Moisture (%) Proctor
89.4 Dark brown silt
89.4
29
Standard
102 Red shale
102
23
Standard
REMARKS
Reported To:
FR015.LB-202103
STEVENSON CONSULTING, INC.
FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Project Name
Glenmore K2C11 Detention Ponds
Project #
7-1981
Date
December 28, 2022
Technician
John Kessler
Client Job #
Weather
Clear
Client's Name
Red Dirt Developments
Permit
Temp (r)
34
General Contractor
TESTS
Test# Test Depth Moisture
(inches) %
Dry
Density
Proctor #
Excavator
%of %of
Proctor Proctor
Spec. Actual
Pass/Fall
Elevation
Below
Finish
Grade (Ft)
Is This A
Retest?
Depth of Fill Placed (Inch)
0
Location: Grid Coordinates or Roadway Station
9
6
25.6
98.8
102
95
96.9
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT C, C-02
10
6
26.8
98.6
102
95
96.7
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT C, C-03
11
6
18.5
85.7
89.4
95
95.9
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT D, D-01
12
6
20.1
88.5
89.4
95
99.0
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT D, D-02
13
6
23.4
86
89.4
95
96.2
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT D, D-03
14
6
28.2
85.1
89.4
95
95.2
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT E, E-01
15
6
32
85
89.4
95
95.1
Pass
0
NO
Glenmore K2C ll, POND EMBANKMENT E, E-02
Test Location
Established By: Contractor
" PROCTOR O ' a
Proctor #
Depth of Elevation of Compaction
Test Established by: Contractor Equipment Used:
Visual Description
Test Conducted
Vibratory On
Tests performed in: ® Our Laboratory
Maximum Density (PCF)
# of
Intermittent Basis Passes 6
❑ Material Suppliers Laboratory
Opt. Moisture (%) Proctor
89.4 Dark brown silt
89.4
29
tandard
102 Red shale
102
23
tandard
REMARKS
Reported To:
FR015.LB-202103
� Site Photos
STEVENSON CONSULTING, INC.
Pipe Trench Installation Certification Letter by Contractor — Phase 2
Letter provided by Goodman Excavating — Dino Goodman
February 10, 2023
Mr. David James
County of Albemarle
Dept. of Community Development
Re: Pipe Installation Certification Letter — Glenmore K2CII — Phase 2
SUB201600061 1 WPO201600059
Dear Mr. James,
Please accept this letter as certification that all conveyance pipes and manhole structures on this site were
installed according to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) standards. Specifically, the
following methods and standards were implemented.
• Excavation
o All utilities on -site were located by Miss Utility to ensure there were no unknown conflicts
before excavation.
o Survey stake -outs were performed to locate the pipe install locations per the plan.
o Excavation of trenches was performed with care to ensure no damage occurs to any
existing utilities. Any existing utilities within the trench were physically located and extra
care was taken to excavate material around utility to avoid damage.
o Trenches were excavated with sloped sides and/or trench boxes were placed when depth
of excavation required.
o Trenches were excavated to appropriate depth to accommodate pipe bedding material and
appropriate width to accommodate, backfill compaction beyond the extremity of the pipe.
• Foundation
o The trench foundation was physically verified to be adequate material before placement of
the pipe bedding.
o Pipe bedding was placed per the VDOT Road and Bridge Specifications Section 302 with
4"-8" of Class 1 #25 aggregate.
o Pipe bedding was uniformly compacted across the trench bottom. Care was taken to
ensure contact between the bedding material and the bottom of the entire length of pipe
Pipe Placement
o The pipes were placed beginning at the downstream end. Pipe sections were aligned and
firmly joined with leak -resistant methods.
o Pipe invert elevations and pipe lengths were verified before placement of backfill.
• Backfill
o Class 1 #25 backfill material was knifed into the area along the bottom edge of the pipe.
o Class 1 #25 backfill material was placed in 6" loose lifts and compacted along the sides of
the pipe and 6"-12" above the pipe.
o Regular onsite excavated material was placed above the Class I backfill in 6° loose lifts
and compacted.
o Backfll material was compacted using rolling and tampering equipment.
Regards,
Dino Goodman
Goodman Excavating
Z -to -43
Pipe Interior Video Report
Videos and Report Provided by: Tristate Utilities
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
Number of Taps
Num Cracks /
Fractures
Number of Deposits
Number of
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
211S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tatewifi ies.aom 0
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number U03190703RO2609
ALBEMARLE Customer RED DIRT
COUNTY DEVELOPMENTS
Job Number
Date 8/9/2019 11:05
DRUMIN RD City Charlottesville, VA
A9 Rim to Invert (U) 6.0
Rim to Grade (U)
A8 Rim to Invert (D) 0.0
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Survey Downstream
15 Width
Circular Material Polyethylene
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed 28.4
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Media Label
Post Rehabilitation
Sewer Category
Survey
Jetting
Date Cleaned
Dry
Location Code
UPSTREAM
STRUCTURE HAS NO
Location Details
FRAM / LID
0 Number of Roots
0 Number of Broken /
Holes / Collapse
0 Truck Number
0 Struct Grade
Overall Grade
DVD
SW
8/9/2019 11:05
Easement/Right of Way
0
0
file ///downtown/. ..nmore%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAI-A9-To-A8--08-15-2019--094141-7802/HTMLReports/TitlePage.htmI [ 10/1/2019 10:34:11 AM]
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
Number of Taps
Num Cracks /
Fractures
Number of Deposits
Number of
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
211S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tateWifi ies.aom 0
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number U03190703RO2609
ALBEMARLE Customer RED DIRT
COUNTY DEVELOPMENTS
Job Number
Date 8/9/2019 10:56
DRUMIN RD City Charlottesville, VA
A10 Rim to Invert (U) 14.0
Rim to Grade (U)
A9 Rim to Invert (D) 6.0
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Survey Downstream
15 Width
Circular Material Polyethylene
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed 72.7
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Media Label
Post Rehabilitation
Sewer Category
Survey
Jetting
Date Cleaned
Dry
Location Code
DOWNSTREAM
STRUCTURE HAS NO
Location Details
FRAM / LID
0 Number of Roots
0 Number of Broken /
Holes / Collapse
0 Truck Number
0 Struct Grade
Overall Grade
DVD
SW
8/9/2019 10:57
Easement/Right of Way
0
0
fi1e///d0wnt0wn/ more%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAJ-A10-To-A9--08-15-2019-094148-3013/HTMLReports/TitlePage.html[10/1/201910�3428AM]
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
2111 S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tateWifi iam.m
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number
ALBEMARLE Customer
COUNTY
Job Number
Date
DRUMIN RD City
All Rim to Invert (U)
Rim to Grade (U)
A10 Rim to Invert (D)
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Sun
15 Width
Circular Material
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Post Rehabilitation
Survey
Jetting
Dry
Number of Taps 0
Num Cracks / 0
Fractures
Number of Deposits 0
Number of 0
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
Media Label
Sewer Category
Date Cleaned
Location Code
Location Details
Number of Roots
Number of Broken /
Holes / Collapse
Truck Number
Struct Grade
Overall Grade
U03190703RO2609
RED DIRT
DEVELOPMENTS
8/9/2019 10:42
Charlottesville, VA
3.0
14.0
Downstream
Polyethylene
120.6
DVD
SW
8/9/2019 10:43
Easement/Right of Way
0
0
Reverse Setup ID
Sheet (Group)
file:///downtown/... ore%o20K2C-II°/u2OStorm%2OPhase°/u2O2/AAK-All-To-AIO--08-15-2019--094156-8148/HTNU ReportsfritlePage.htm][10/l/2019 10:34:46 AMl
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
2111 S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbislateWiafiamom
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number
ALBEMARLE Customer
COUNTY
Job Number
Date
DRUMIN RD City
B6 Rim to Invert (U)
Rim to Grade (U)
B5 Rim to Invert (D)
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Sun
15 Width
Circular Material
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Post Rehabilitation
Survey
Jetting
Dry
Number of Taps 0
Num Cracks / 0
Fractures
Number of Deposits 0
Number of 0
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
Media Label
Sewer Category
Date Cleaned
Location Code
Location Details
Number of Roots
Number of Broken /
Holes / Collapse
Truck Number
Struct Grade
Overall Grade
U03190703RO2609
RED DIRT
DEVELOPMENTS
8/9/2019 10:18
Charlottesville, VA
12.5
0.0
Downstream
Polyethylene
0
DVD
SW
8/9/2019 10:18
Easement/Right of Way
0
0
Reverse Setup ID
Sheet (Group)
file:///downtown/...le=ore%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAL-B6-To-B5--08-15-2019--094204-933/HTMLReports/TitlePage.html [ 10/ 1 /2019 10:34:57 AM]
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
Number of Taps
Num Cracks /
Fractures
Number of Deposits
Number of
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
211S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tateWifi ies.aom 0
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number U03190703RO2609
ALBEMARLE Customer RED DIRT
COUNTY DEVELOPMENTS
Job Number
Date 8/9/2019 10:03
DRUMIN RD City Charlottesville, VA
B7 Rim to Invert (U) 3.5
Rim to Grade (U)
B6 Rim to Invert (D) 5.0
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Survey Downstream
15
Width
Circular
Material
Polyethylene
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
130.2
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Media Label
DVD
Post Rehabilitation
Sewer Category
SW
Survey
Jetting
Date Cleaned
8/9/2019 10:03
Dry
Location Code
Easement/Right of Way
DOWNSTREAM
STRUCTURE DEPTH
Location Details
= 12.5FT
ME
0
Number of Roots
0
0
Number of Broken /
0
Holes / Collapse
0
Truck Number
0 Struct Grade
Overall Grade
file///downtown/ more%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAM-B7-To-B6-08-1 5-2019--09421 1-5589/HTMLReports/TitlePage.httnl[10/1/201910:35:13AMI
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
211S A.o». %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tatewifi ies.aom
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number
ALBEMARLE Customer
COUNTY
Job Number
Date
DRUMIN RD City
E2 Rim to Invert (U)
Rim to Grade (U)
E1 Rim to Invert (D)
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater Direction of Sun
15 Width
Circular Material
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Post Rehabilitation
Survey
Jetting
Dry
Number of Taps 0
Num Cracks / 0
Fractures
Number of Deposits 0
Number of 0
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
Media Label
Sewer Category
Date Cleaned
Location Code
Location Details
Number of Roots
Number of Broken /
Holes / Collapse
Truck Number
Struct Grade
Overall Grade
U03190703RO2609
RED DIRT
DEVELOPMENTS
8/9/2019 09:11
Charlottesville, VA
4.9
0.0
Downstream
Polyethylene
34.2
DVD
SW
8/9/2019 09:11
Easement/Right of Way
0
0
Reverse Setup ID
Sheet (Group)
file ///downtown/...nmore%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAN-E2-To-E1--08-15-2019--094219-8071/HTMLReports/Tit1cPage.html[ 10/1/2019 10:35:26 AM]
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
2111 S A.Ch o %• V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks 8 Defects
wwwbisleteWifi ies.aom 0
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number U03190703RO2609
ALBEMARLE Customer RED DIRT
COUNTY DEVELOPMENTS
Job Number
Date 8/9/2019 08:51
DRUMIN RD City Charlottesville, VA
E3
Rim to Invert (U)
4.0
Rim to Grade (U)
E2
Rim to Invert (D)
4.9
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater
Direction of Survey
Downstream
me
15
Width
Circular
Material
Polyethylene
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
145.5
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Media Label
DVD
Post Rehabilitation
Sewer Category
SW
Survey
Jetting
Date Cleaned
8/9/2019 08:51
Dry
Location Code
Yard
Location Details
Number of Taps 0
Num Cracks / 0
Fractures
Number of Deposits 0
Number of 0
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
Number of Roots 0
Number of Broken / 0
Holes / Collapse
Truck Number
Struct Grade
Overall Grade
Reverse Setup ID
Sheet (Group)
file:///downtown/... nmore/o20K2C-II%20Storm%20Phase%202/AAO-E3-To-E2--08-15-2019--094226-17894rFNMReports/TitlePage.html[10/1/2019 10:35:35 AM]
Surveyor Name
Owner
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Sewer Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Tape Measured
Length
Year Laid
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
• PIPE LINING 6"- 96" Diameter (CIPP)
Pipe Cleaning 8 Video Inspection
No Dig Point Repair Systems
AUAY
211S A.Ch � %. V� •Excavation - Sliplining -Grouting
757-366-9505 • Trenchless Repair of Pipe leaks & Defects
wwwbi-tatewifi ies.aom 0
Project Information
NATHAN BROWN Certificate Number U03190703RO2609
ALBEMARLE Customer RED DIRT
COUNTY DEVELOPMENTS
Job Number
Date 8/9/2019 08:21
DRUMIN RD City Charlottesville, VA
E5
Rim to Invert (U)
3.2
Rim to Grade (U)
E4
Rim to Invert (D)
0.0
Rim to Grade (D)
Stormwater
Direction of Survey
Downstream
me
15
Width
Circular
Material
Polyethylene
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
9L5
Year Renewed
Not Controlled
Media Label
DVD
Post Rehabilitation
Sewer Category
SW
Survey
Heavy Cleaning
Date Cleaned
8/9/2019 08:25
Dry
Location Code
Yard
Location Details
Number of Taps 0
Num Cracks / 0
Fractures
Number of Deposits 0
Number of 0
Capped/Abd Taps
OM Grade
Number of Roots 0
Number of Broken / 0
Holes / Collapse
Truck Number
Struct Grade
Overall Grade
Reverse Setup ID
Sheet (Group)
file ///downtown/...nmore%20K2C-II%2OStorm%2OPhase%202/AAP-E5-To-E4--08-15-2019--094235-5361/HTMLReports/TitlePage.html[ 10/1/2019 10:35:44 AM]
Surveyor Name
r=i
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Pipe Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Total Length
Year Constructed
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
Custom 1
Custom 3
Custom 5
Custom 7
Custom 9
DAN1EL
HUTCHINSON
GLENMORE
HIGHLANDS
BOTHWELL LN
B6
B5
Stormwater Pipe
Certificate Number U-0321-70401206
Customer RED DIRT
DEVELOPMENT
PO Number 221046
Date 9/8/2022 16:47
City SHADWELL
Rim to Invert (U)
Rim to Grade (U)
Rim to Invert (D)
Rim to Grade (D)
Direction of Sun
15 Width
Circular Material
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
Year Renewed
Not Controlled Media Label
Post Rehabilitation Survey Consequence of
Failure
Light Cleaning Date Cleaned
Dry -No Precipitation Location Code
During Survey
Location Details
Custom 2
Custom 4
Custom 6
Custom 8
Custom 10
0
0
Polyethylene
33.4
ME
9/8/2022 16:48
Local rural streets with
light traffic, town and city
back streets, estate streets
and curbside parking
areas.
Reverse Setup ID
Imperial Units (US) Truc
Work Order
Coatina Method
Sheet (Group)
Number
Pressure Value
Project
221046 POST -TV
GELNNIORE
HIGHLANDS
Yes
CCTV
No
Laser
No
Sidewall
No
Sonar
No
Zoom
No
Other
No
Inspection Status Complete Inspection
Reviewed By Reviewer Certificate
Number
Taps 0 Roots 0
Cracks / Fractures 0 Broken / Holes / 0
Collapse
Deposits 0 Obstruction 0
Abandoned Survey 0
Structure Peak 0 Structure Peak
Score Grade
Structure Mean 0 Structure Mean
Score Grade
Service Peak Score 0 Service Peak Grade
Service Mean Score 0 Service Mean Grade 1
Created with the report generator
Project: 221046 POST -TV GELNMORE
HIGHLANDS
Date: 9/8/2022 4:47:00 PM
Pipe Segment Reference:
Street: BOTHWELL LN
Upstream MH: B6
Length Surveyed: 33.4
Downstream MH: B5
Run Number:
Direction of Survey: Upstream
Height (Diameter): 15
Material: Polyethylene
Distance
Fault Observation
Time
Picture
0
Access Point End of Pipe
00:01:01
0.0
Severity: None
00:01:01
Remarks: B5
r
Miscellaneous Water Level
00:1:10
0.0
Severity: None
00:1:10
Percent:0
r
Access Point Catch Basin
00:03:29
33.4
Severity: None
00:03:29
Remarks: B6
POSM Logo Registered Trademark
Created with the report generator
Project: 221046 POST -TV GELNMORE
HIGHLANDS
Date: 9/8/2022 4:47:00 PM
Pipe Segment Reference:
Street: BOTHWELL LN
Upstream MH: B6
Length Surveyed: 33.4
Downstream MH: B5
Run Number:
Direction of Survey: Upstream
Height (Diameter): 15
Material: Polyethylene
U ID Number: B6
(0.0) AEP - Access Point End
of Pipe Remark: B5
(0.0) MWL - Miscellaneous
Water Level
(33.4) ACB - Access Point
Catch Basin Remark: B6
Total Distance: 33.4
® ID Number: B5
f I POSM Logo Registered Trademark
Created with the i — report generator
Nassco C.C.T.V. Defect Code Information
Grade
Structural
O&M
Overall
5
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Overall
0
0
0
Number of Defects
0
0
0
Pipe Rating
0000
0000
0000
Pipe Ratings Index
0
0
0
Nassco C.C.T.V. Defect Code Information
Circumferential
Value
Cont
Location
DistanceVideo
Code
Joint
Ref
Defect
Dimension
At /
%
To
1st
2nd
From
0
00:001:01
AEP - Access Point End of Pipe
61
00:1:10
MWL -Miscellaneous Water
0
70
Level
0
00:03:2
ACB -Access Point Catch
33.4
209
Basin
6
t POSM Logo Registered Trademark
Created with the
report generator
Surveyor Name
r=i
Drainage Area
Pipe Segment
Reference
Street
Comments
Upstream MH
Grade to Invert (U)
Downstream MH
Grade to Invert (D)
Pipe Use
Height (Diameter)
Shape
Lining Method
Total Length
Year Constructed
Flow Control
Purpose
Pre -Cleaning
Weather
Additional Info
Custom 1
Custom 3
Custom 5
Custom 7
Custom 9
DAN1EL
HUTCHINSON
GLENMORE
HIGHLANDS
BOTHWELL LN
E2
El
Stormwater Pipe
Certificate Number U-0321-70401206
Customer RED DIRT
DEVELOPMENT
PO Number 221046
Date 9/8/2022 12:50
City SHADWELL
Rim to Invert (U)
Rim to Grade (U)
Rim to Invert (D)
Rim to Grade (D)
Direction of Sur%
15 Width
Circular Material
Pipe Joint Length
Length Surveyed
Year Renewed
Not Controlled Media Label
Post Rehabilitation Survey Consequence of
Failure
Light Cleaning Date Cleaned
Dry -No Precipitation Location Code
During Survey
Location Details
Custom 2
Custom 4
Custom 6
Custom 8
Custom 10
5
0
Downstream
Polyethylene
50.3
9/8/2022 12:51
Local rural streets with
light traffic, town and city
back streets, estate streets
and curbside parking
areas.
Reverse Setup ID
Imperial Units (US) Truc
Work Order
Coatina Method
Sheet (Group)
Number
Pressure Value
Project
221046 POST -TV
GELNNIORE
HIGHLANDS
Yes
CCTV
No
Laser
No
Sidewall
No
Sonar
No
Zoom
No
Other
No
Inspection Status Complete Inspection
Reviewed By Reviewer Certificate
Number
Taps 0 Roots 0
Cracks / Fractures 0 Broken / Holes / 0
Collapse
Deposits 0 Obstruction 0
Abandoned Survey 0
Structure Peak 0 Structure Peak
Score Grade
Structure Mean 0 Structure Mean
Score Grade
Service Peak Score 0 Service Peak Grade
Service Mean Score 0 Service Mean Grade 1
Created with the report generator
Project: 221046 POST -TV GELNMORE
HIGHLANDS
Date: 9/8/2022 12:50:00 PM
Pipe Segment Reference:
Street: BOTHWELL LN
Upstream MH: E2
Length Surveyed: 50.3
Downstream MH: E1
Run Number:
Direction of Survey: Downstream
Height (Diameter): 15
Material: Polyethylene
Distance
Fault Observation
Time
Picture
0
Access Point Manhole
00:00:26
0.0
Severity: None
00:00:26
Remarks: E2
r
Miscellaneous Water Level
00:00:38
0.0
Severity: None
00:00:38
Percent:0
r
Access Point End of Pipe
00:02:36
50.3
Severity: None
00:02:36
Remarks: E1
POSM Logo Registered Trademark
Created with the report generator
Project: 221046 POST -TV GELNMORE
HIGHLANDS
Date: 9/8/2022 12:50:00 PM
Pipe Segment Reference:
Street: BOTHWELL LN
Upstream MH: E2
Length Surveyed: 50.3
Downstream MH: E1
Run Number:
Direction of Survey: Downstream
Height (Diameter): 15
Material: Polyethylene
ID Number: E2
(0.0) AMH - Access Point
Manhole Remark: E2
(0.0) MWL - Miscellaneous
Water Level
(50.3) AEP - Access Point End
of Pipe Remark: E1
Total Distance: 50.3
® ID Number: E1
f I POSM Logo Registered Trademark
Created with the i — report generator
Nassco C.C.T.V. Defect Code Information
Grade
Structural
O&M
Overall
5
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Overall
0
0
0
Number of Defects
0
0
0
Pipe Rating
0000
0000
0000
Pipe Ratings Index
0
0
0
Nassco C.C.T.V. Defect Code Information