The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP201000054 Legacy Document 2010-09-15 (4)Elizabeth Marotta From: Amelia McCulley Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 1:57 PM 'To: Davis, Travis (VDH) Cc: Bill; Josh; McDaniel, Jeffrey (VDH); Elizabeth Marotta Subject: RE: TM37 Parcels.2 and 2A- Carroll Hoffman subdivision Travis, Thanks -for _your question and .your communication line with us. Section 4.2.4 is confusing at best. It's definitely not a regulation like the 25% critical slopes section is. I guess it's meant-to say that if there is a place that is suitable with less than 20% slopes, we should encourage (not require) them to use it. In --this case, it sounds like it meets -the 25% slope max and it's the best place on the property so it's allowed. Let me know if I've misunderstood anything. From: Davis, Travis (VDH) [mailto: Travis .Davis @vdh.virginia.gov] 'Sent: Tuesday, August 10, .2010 12:27 PM 'To: Amelia McCulley Cc: Bill; Josh; McDaniel, 3effrey (VDH); Elizabeth Marotta -Subject: 7M37 Parcels.2 and.2A- Carroll Hoffman subdivision Amelia, I recently received a.2 lot subdivision review for TM37 Parcel 2. The proposal consists of a 104.47 acre parcel (37 -2) and a25.71 acre parcel (37 -2A). When reviewing the paperwork, one detail caught my attention and I wantto run it by you. On parcel A, the proposed primary /reserve drainfield is on a 24 %,slope. In reading the Albemarle County code, this drainfield site complies with the critical slope ordinance. However, section 4.2:4 Location of Septic Systems, states that Health Department "shall be mindful of the intent of this section, and particularly mindful of the intent to discourage location of septic tanks and /or drain fields on slope of twenty (20) percent or greater ". With that, is there a provision or protocol in place that the Health Dept.. should follow in instances where a drainfield is proposed on slopes between20 25 %? As a side note, I did contact the soil consultant who evaluated Mr. Hoffman's property. He stated that the -- - -building--site. - _ - - Thanks, Travis T. Davis Environmental Health Spec, Senior Thomas Jefferson Health District P: 434 - 972 -6259 F: 434 - 972 -6221 Elizabeth Marotta From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) [ Joshua .Kirtley @vdh.virginia.gov] Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 10:47 AM -To: Elizabeth Marotta Subject: RE:_ 88 -14 Elizabeth: Good morning. I just wanted to.touch base with you and to give you my comments about the Ourada site and the Critical Slope waiver for TMP 88 -14. � I have reviewed the topography on the site via the GIS website and it appears that a large portion of the lot is made up of a large drainageway with critical slopes malting up the remaining portion. From a public health point of view, sewage disposal systems are prohibited by Regulation from being installed in drainageways because those areas channel and collect water. When the Health Department or licensed soil evaluator designs a system, he /she must take into account the landscape position in order to design a system that is efficient, that protects groundwater, and that promotes good health practices. It basically boils down to a physics problem: If water is already there, then how is the waste water going to be absorbed and treated by the soil? The end result most likely would be surface ponding of effluent, potential groundwater contamination, and possible human contact with raw or partially treated sewage. The is due to the soils being less desirable the lower that you go in the landscape because they are more poorly drained than the surrounding upland soils. I understand that this is probably not the ideal Parcel by either County or the Health Department standards. In the past, I have had applicants come bath to the County to get a Critical Slope waiver in order to install septic systems on slopes greater than 25% and I have not noticed any impact to the system because of the slope. Those situations were similar to this one in landscape because the bulls of the lot was unsuitable due to creek setback, poor landscape position, etc. Those lots may have had areas that required a waiver but in the end, a safer and more efficient sewage disposal system was designed and installed. If you have any questions, please let me know. My cell number is the best way to get me today. The number is (434) 960 -863. Have a great day, Josh - — Environmental- Health- :Specialist.Senior- -_ -_- 'Thomas Jefferson Health District 1138 Rose Hill Drive .Charlottesville, Virginia-22906 (434) 972 -6288 -From; Elizabeth Marotta [mailto:emarotta @albemarle.org] Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 2:17 PM 'To: Kirtley, Joshua. (VDH) Subject: RE: 88 -14 Wonderful, thank you! fail:: Inbox: TM 88, Parcel 14A (Critical Slope Issue) http: / /webmaii.eeva. net /imp /message.php'iactionii) =prmt message&i... Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 08:58:01 -0400 [07:58:01 AM CDT] From: "Craun, William (VDH)" < William.Craun @vdh.virginia.gov> To: NLOMRB @ceva.net ....... ................ ............ ... ... .. __. _ .. ... . Cc: RHiggins @albemarle.org Subject: TM 88, Parcel 14A (Critical Slope Issue) Mr. Ouranda, It was a pleasure meeting you yesterday on your lot referenced above. As we discussed; the lower area of this lot containing the less critical slopes does not appear to be suitable for subsurface -onsite sewage disposal. This is mainly due to the topography of this lower area and runoff from a large drainage way that directs surface water across it. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance in this matter. William Craun EH Onsite Supervisor Thomas Jefferson Health District 1138 Rose Hill Drive Charlottesville, Va. .22906 Click here to log into the spam filter LEX Nl!1i i E )f 1 2009/09/01 10:56 AM Old Dominion Engineering June 26, 2010 Norman L. Ourada and Margaret R. Byrne 1420 Wilton Farm Road, Apt 101 Charlottesville, VA 22911 SUBJECT: TMP 8814A; CRITICAL SLOPE ISSUES Based upon my site visit, the Albemarle County GIS map, supplemental topographical survey by Roger Ray and Associates, Inc., and the Virginia Department of Health soil investigation of the property, we recommend that the proposed house and drainfield be located in a critical slope area. The majority of the property is on critical slope with the only'area less than critical slope (adjacent to the southern edge of the property) being small and in a natural drainage concentration point receiving runoff from the uphill critical slope areas on the property and beyond. This location would be considered a drainage channel by Virginia Department of Health regulations. As a drainage channel, these areas. are prohibited from containing septic tanks, pretreatment devices, and drainfields. The onsite wastewater components in drainage channels have.the potential to cause significant degradation of public health and safety due to premature failure, flooding and potential overflow during precipitation events, and potential long travel distances during drainfield failure events (especially on this property). It is my opinion that the proposed house should not be located in the natural drainage channel but uphill on the critical slope for the following reasons: 1. The construction site located in a drainage swale would cause more siltation than a site located on the critical slope due to a the increased runoff volume through the site during precipitation events. 2. The grading required to build in the drainage channel would require significantly more alteration of the natural water drainage channel and ultimately to the natural water flow over the site than on the critical slope. 3. Location of a house in .a drainage channel subjects-the property to more water infiltration issues including flooding, general crawlspace wetness, and mold. ` Sincerely, Michael Craun PE Old Dominion Engineering 2036 Forest Drive • Waynesboro, VA 22980 PHONE (540) 942 -5600 • FAX (540) 213 -0297 - -- -j� 4 1 � T -H -pF .Ir ICHF. A UEN L ti G 9 140.0369594V SION AL .. h VIRGINIA. Albemarle County Health Department PO Box 7546 DEPART11AE 1T Charlottesville, VA 22906 17DHOF HEALTH (434) 972 -6219 Voice (434) 972 -4310 Pax Protecting You end Your Environment Private Well Construction Permit Health Department ID Number: 101 -10 -0143 Owner/ Agent Inforthm ition , Owner: Ourada, Norman & Margaret . Agent: Joshua Galloway 1421 Wilton Farm Road #101 930 Cambria Street NE Charlottesville, VA 22911 -7613 Christiansburg VA 24073 Owner Phone: (434) 977 -4941 Location Information Property Address: 2570 Red Hill Heights Tax Map: 88 -14A; Lot B Locality: Albemarle Directions: General Information i. Well Class: Class IIIC Minimum Casing Depth: 2.0 feet I Minimum Grout Depth: .20 feet Comments: This permit is issued based upon a site evaluation conducted by Bill Craun, EHS on . See following page for Construction Drawing. Notice: The Virginia Department of Health may revoke or modify this permit if, at a later date, it finds the conditions that formed the basis for issuing the permit do not substantially comply with the Private Well Regulations , 12 VAC 5 -630 -10 et seq., or if the well would threaten public health or the environment. copyfor. 'Propeny Owner or Agent please keep f orYour Yecords Page 1 of 2 �x1�--173ii I Well Construction Permit -- Drawing HD ID #: 101 -10 -0143. .Owner'1hformati6n " Ourada, Norman & Margaret Phone: (434) 977 -4941 1421 Wilton Farm Road #101 Charlottesville, VA 22911 -7613 Construction Drawing Scale drawing of the well site and related features. r 3C well with 3V drool Ir rl I tt titi� II no scale - �I $ ti E 2 Show the property lines, all existing and proposed struc ures, existing and proposed sewage systemsand - - - water supplies, slope, and any topographic features which may impact the design of the well. June 29, 2010 December 29, 2011 �Is by Willi A. Craun Issue Date Expiration Date Page 2 of 2