HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB200800138 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2011-01-27Philip Custer
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. [ Joel .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 3:10 PM
To: djensen @wwassociates.net
Cc: Philip Custer
Subject: RE: Engineering review of Westhall Phase V plans
David,
They are fine. I spoke with Phil about these a couple weeks ago and they will need to come
in for a permit but I don't have comments on them.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
VDOT Culpeper
Land Development
434 - 589 -5871
- Joel .denunzio(@vdot.virginia.gov
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: David Jensen [ mailto :diensenowwassociates.netl
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 3:07 PM
To: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Cc: 'Philip Custer'
Subject: RE: Engineering review of Westhall Phase V plans
Thanks Joel,
How about the proffered drainage improvements in Park Street (shown on the last couple of
sheets of the plan)? Are these OK with VDOT? Please advise.
Thanks,
David M. Jensen, PE
Vice - President
Office Phone: 434.960.7549
Main: 434.984.2700
Fax: 434.978.1444
3040 Avemore Square Place
Charlottesville, VA 22911
diensen(a@wwassociates.net
www.wwassociates.net
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. [ mailto: Joel .DeNunzio(@VDOT.virginia.govl
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 2:57 PM
To: dlensen(a@wwassociates.net
Cc: Philip Custer
Subject: RE: Engineering review of Westhall Phase V plans
David,
1
The changes to the plan for the sidewalk tie in are fine. Please do not show posted speed
limit signs for speeds under 25 mph. The statutory speed limit is 25 and VDOT does not post
below that.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
VDOT Culpeper
Land Development
434 - 589 -5871
joel.denunzio (@vdot.virginia.gov
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: David Jensen [ mailto :djensen (@wwassociates.netl
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:33 AM
To: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Subject: FW: Engineering review of Westhall Phase V plans
Joel,
Have you had a chance to review this plan /plat? Please advise.
Thanks,
David M. Jensen, PE
Vice - President
Office Phone: 434.960.7549
Main: 434.984.2700
Fax: 434.978.1444
3040 Avemore Square Place
Charlottesville, VA 22911
diensen (@wwassociates.net
www.wwassociates.net
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Philip Custer fmailto:pcuster (@albemarle.orgl
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 11:30 AM
To: diensen (@wwassociates.net
Cc: Gerald Gatobu; Mark Graham; Glenn Brooks
Subject: Engineering review of Westhall Phase V plans
Good morning,
I have completed my reviews of the final plat and construction set for Westhall Phase V (WPO-
2010- 00062, SUB - 2008 - 00138), received 17 and 21 December 2010. I apologize for the delay in
getting these comments to you.
I had been waiting to speak with a representative from the Army Corps of Engineers regarding
the existing permit because it appears the modification to the pond on TMP 56 -53 was
incorporated into the SWM design after ACE approval had been granted.
All technical engineering aspects of the subdivision plat have been satisfied, but there are
a few administrative issues that must be addressed before the plat can be signed: all bonds
(ESC, SWM, and Road) must be posted, the deed of drainage easements must be approved by the
county attorneys office, and all offsite easement plats must be recorded.
4
There is still one remaining technical issue with the construction set and that is regarding
the adequacy calculations of the existing channels on site. In essence, more detail is
required on the calculations of the existing cross - sections and some analysis is needed on
the reach of the channel downstream of the forebay facility before E -E. This channel is much
smaller and steeper than E -E, F -F, and G -G. I am aware that this section of the stream is
within the ROW of the future eastern connector and at some point it will be piped when TMP
56 -53 is developed. However, the timing of this construction is unknown and considering the
nearly ten -fold increase of the 2 -year storm discharges in this section, I don't think we can
ignore this section of the channel. A pipe (with easement) from the forebay to the pond,
bypassing the existing stream, is likely the quickest path to obtain county approval.
Please note that there is precedent of me being overruled in similar circumstances (where
future development can be expected on top of a questionable downstream channel). Also, on a
previous project, the county has accepted an MS -19 analysis when the engineer has verbally
certified that the channel is adequate. I have copied the Director of Community Development,
Mark Graham, on this email in case he wishes to weigh in.
I understand the owner of the property is eager to get started on this project and I will do
my best to help expedite the process. I am currently out of the office but can answer emails
and am available on my cell phone (301- 788 - 0064). Please let me know if you have any
questions.
Thanks,
Phil
3