HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO200800038 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2008-09-24ALg�,��
�'IRGINZ�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: WPO- 2008 - 00038, Westhall V Road Plan
Plan preparer: Mr. Doug March, PE; W & W Associates fax 434.978.1444
Owner or rep.: Shiflett Farm, LLC fax 434.975.3542
Date received: 9 May 2008
(Rev. 2) 21 August 2008
Date of Comment: 23 June 2008
(Rev. 2) 24 September 2008
Engineer: Phil Custer
The Road Plans for Westhall V, received on 21 August 2008, have been reviewed. This letter comments
on the third submittal made to the County for the WPO and road plans. The second submittal was
reviewed under an alternative review procedure with just a checklist. All comments that were addressed
with the second submittal are stated as so.
The plans can be approved after the remaining comments have been addressed.
A. Road Plan comments WPO- 2008 -00038
1. VDOT approval is required.
(Rev. 2) VDOT approval has not yet been received. A copy has been sent to VDOT.
2. The drainage easement between structures D 12 and D9 needs to be 20ft in width.
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
3. Deflection angles should not be sharper than 90 degrees in inlet structures. Inlet D5 appears to
have an angle sharper than 90 degrees.
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
4. The planting strip adjacent to the 6 spaces in Rella Court should be 2ft in width exclusive of the
curb. [DM]
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
5. It appears that a low point exists in the parking lot of Rella Court away from Structure D12. The
grading should be modified. [DM]
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
6. The maximum grade for parking areas is 5%. It appears that the spaces on the west side of Rella
Court are all over this limit. [4.12.15]
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
7. In the profile, please show the locations of the VDOT crossdrains. [DM]
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
8. On sheet R -3, please provide the latest General Construction Notes for Streets from the design
manual available online. [DM]
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
9. Inlets 19 and 23 are not placed in a sag condition according to the profile of Summerdean Road.
The inlets appear to be located at Sta. 18 +25 but the low point is 18 +53. Engineering review
would prefer the low point being farther away from the intersection.
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
10. Engineering review policy is to have 100% capture on inlets where overland flow does not drain to
stormwater management facilities. Inlets 12, 8, 15, 18, 23, 19, 21, and 22 need to be sized using a
storm with 6.5in/hr intensity because in case of failure the inlets flow to the stream rather than to
the pond. Spread width requirements are reviewed with only a 4 in/hr intensity. [DM]
(Rev. 2) Calculations appear to be correct. However, there are a number of discrepancies in
inlet throat length between the two calculation tables and the drainage profiles (3A, 15, 18, 19,
and 25).
11. Overland flow relief (a graded swale) should be shown from structure 5 so the houses are not
flooded by a failed inlet. [DM]
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
12. The radius of the horizontal curve on Summerdean Road needs to be called out.
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
13. Because Rella Court is slated to be a private street, it needs to be designed to VDOT standards. A
plan and profile, similar to the other roads, will be needed in this set. [DM]
Comment was addressed with the second submittal.
14. The spread for inlet 12 appears to be larger than the maximum 1Oft. [DM]
(Rev. 2) Comment has been addressed.
15. A road bond has not been calculated at this time. To request a road bond, the applicant must
complete a Subdivision Road Bond Estimate Request and a Schedule of Completion for
Bonded Improvements.
(Rev. 2) The applicant has not submitted any of the forms needed to complete a bond. Please
note that the final plat cannot be approved until a road bond is posted.
The following are items that I have noticed during my review that are subject to VDOT review and
approval. If VDOT has no concerns with the following items, then these comments may be ignored.
1. It appears that many of the K's are smaller than the allowed value for the roadways given the
design speeds. [DM]
2. Many of the sag curb inlet calculations seem to be incorrect. The longitudinal slope of the gutter
should be assumed to be O.00lft/ft for the approach spread calculation for sag inlets. The
longitudinal slope should not matter when the capacity of the inlet throat is calculated. For
instance, the spread from the right approach of structure 23 (with a 0.001ft/ft longitudinal slope) is
12.5ft not 5.77ft as specified in the table. [DM]
File: E3_rp_PBC_08 -038 Westhall V Road Plans.doc