Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUB201300030 Review Comments Road Plan and Comps. 2013-06-24�A 6 ` ! .-� 4 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper, Virginia 22701 -3819 Gregory A. Whirley Commissioner of Highways June 24, 2013 Mr. Michael Koslow Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: SUB - 2013 -00030 Westlake Hills Subdivision, Phase 1 Dear Mr. Koslow: We have reviewed the road plans entitled Westlake Hills Subdivision, Phase I dated 2128.113 with revisions dated 5120/13 as submitted by Collins Engineering and offer the following comments: 1. The plans need to be signed by the design engineer. 2. On Sheet 4 of the plans, the sight lines for the intersection of Guadalupe Drive and Colorado Road appear to originate at approximately 10' from the edge of the travel way. The standards require that the sight lines originate at 14.5' from the edge of the travel way. This needs to be corrected and the potential need for sight line easements will need to be verified. 3. It is noted that the proposed waterlines within this development are located approximately 2 to 3 feet from the edge of pavement. This will place the proposed waterlines very near the tire path of vehicles traveling on these streets. The proposed waterlines should be located outside of the paved surface. Waterlines and associated appurtenances such as valves pose potential long term maintenance issues for VDOT. 4. On Sheet 6, it appears that the storm sewer between structures 24 and 26 may be shown as radial pipe. All storm sewer within this project should be straight runs from structure to structure. 5. It appears that the storm sewer could run from structure 32 to 30 rather than from 32 to 26. This would eliminate an unnecessary crossing of the Eastern Avenue Connector. 6. On sheet 8 it appears that the pavement designs are adequate based on an assumed CBR value of 5. However, the pavement design table should be revised to accurately reflect VDOT's Pavement Design Guide. The 2.15 Equivalency Value for BM -25 is only applicable when there is a total depth of asphalt of 6" and that depth of asphalt is placed directly on subgrade. If not placed directly on subgrade, the equivalency value for both the SM -9.5 and the BM -25 is 2.25 if the total depth of asphalt is at least 4.5 "; otherwise the equivalency value for the SM -9.5 and BM -25 layers should be 1.67. Please refer to note 1 in the Footnotes for Appendix III of the Pavement Design Guide. 7. On sheet 13, several of the drop inlets are graphically shown located in the paved surface of the turn lanes and tapers instead of the curb lines. It is understood that the Eastern Connector is shown only for information purposes, but the inlets should be shown at the correct locations if they are going to be shown. 8. On sheet 14, the invert out elevation of the 18" culvert under the Connector Road is labeled incorrectly on the profile. 9. On sheet 15, a safety slab (SL -1) should be called for on structure 2. 10. On sheet 15, there should be at least a 0.10 foot drop across structure 16. 11. On sheet 16, there are several inverts in the calculations that do not correspond with the inverts shown on the storm sewer profiles. The inverts of pipes 5, 7, 9, 11, and 14A do not match the profile inverts. The most significant discrepancy is found in structure 14 (pipe 14A) where there is a difference of 0.90 feet in elevation of the invert, which results in a 0.50% grade of the pipe in the profile and a 3.00% grade of the pipe in the calculations. If additional information is needed concerning this project, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, %wv %u&-,, Troy Austin, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Culpeper District VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING