HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201300054 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2013-05-15COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701 -3819
Gregory A. Whirley
Commissioner of Highways
May 14, 2013
Mr. Max Greene
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SUB - 2013 -00054 Old Trail Village Block 29A & 35A
Dear Mr. Greene:
We have reviewed the plans for the subject project and offer the following comments:
General
1. The plans have not been sealed and signed by the design engineer.
2. The pavement structure has been shown, but the design computation needs to be provided
for review.
Sheet 3
1. The sight line needs to be shown from a point on Golf View Drive that is 14.5' from the
edge of travel way for Golf Drive and 4' from the center line of Golf View Drive. It
needs to be measured to the midpoint of the nearest travel lane on each side of the
entrance.
2. Since the sight distance is based on horizontal as well as vertical obstructions, it may be
necessary to grade the bank along the northern side of Golf Drive to the east of Golf
View Drive.
3. If the sight line extends outside of the right of way for Golf Drive, a sight line easement
will be required.
Sheet 4
1. It appears that there may be a ponding problem in at the intersection of Golf View Drive
and the future public road at the northern end of Golf View Drive. I think we need to see
some spot elevations around the radii of this intersection to make sure that the runoff will
drain properly.
2. It appears that there should be an additional DI -313 opposite of structure #13.
3. The minimum H of structure #11 is 4.5'.
4. The data for the existing DI on Golf Drive needs to be added to the plan.
5. Spot elevations need to be added to the top of curb at the intersection of Golf Drive and
Golf View Drive to make the drainage at this location more clear.
Sheet 5
L The street trees need to be located at least 30' from the end of radii at each intersection.
Sheet 6
1. There is a note to see Sheet 8 for details on VDOT standard IS -1. However, there is not a
detail on Sheet 8 or anywhere within the plans for IS -1.
2. It is noted that the storm sewer system discharges directly into a sediment trap, indicating
that the storm sewer is likely to convey sediment -laden runoff. Our preference is that the
sediment trap be located further downstream from the outlet and the sediment -laden
runoff be diverted around the storm sewer system to the sediment trap. If this cannot be
achieved, the storm sewer must be thoroughly flushed prior to street acceptance.
3. The pipe information needs to be added to pipe section 2 in the profile.
4. The invert in and invert out of pipe 2 on the profile does not match the information on the
storm sewer schedule on Sheet 4.
5. It appears that the invert information in the profile for structure #3 is off by a foot from
the information in the storm sewer schedule on Sheet 4. This is causing the grade for
pipe section 4 to be different from the information in the storm sewer schedule on Sheet
4.
6. The invert out for structure #11 should be shown on the profile.
Sheet 7
1. Structure #13 is not shown on the profile for the future public road; however, scaling the
location for structure #13 from the plan layout, it appears that the structure is not located
in the sag of profile. There needs to be more detail in regards to the intersection of Golf
View Drive and the future public road to ensure that runoff does not pond in the
intersection.
2. The contours in plan view for the future road indicate that runoff is going to flow towards
the intersection with Golf View Drive. However, the profile indicates the opposite. This
needs to be reviewed and corrected.
Sheet 10
1. I believe that there maybe more recent revisions to the VDOT details shown on Sheet 10.
This needs to be confirmed and the most recent revisions found on the internet should be
used.
Sheet 11
1. The storm sewer only needs to be designed to the 10 -year storm, but the HGL of couple
of the structures is approximately 1' from the rim elevation. It would be helpful to see
the HGL for the 100 -year storm.
2. If the storm sewer is going to discharge directly into a sediment trap, the HGL should
consider a tailwater elevation in the computations.
If you need additional information concerning this project, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Troy Austin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Culpeper District
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING