The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFDP201500004 Document 2015-05-22John Anderson From: John Anderson Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 6:00 AM To: 'Douglas March' Cc: Glenn Brooks Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. Follow -uU Yesterday, I returned p. 2 of FEMA MT -2 Form 1, Overview and Concurrence Form, signed by the County Engineer. I believe you now have this and other materials (including CD w/hydraulic modeling data) submitted to ACCD for review /return to RWSA for LOMR Application to FEMA for the New Ragged Mt. Dam (Floodplain Development Permit/FDP201500004). I appreciate your patience while we reviewed this material. 2 remaining items: ems: 1. Certified topographic work map is not dated. Please date (Randall P. Bass —ref. FEMA letter, 27- Oct -2011, p. 2, 4' bullet). — Please ensure LOMR Application includes dated copy to avoid (FEMA) review delay. 2. From Topographic Work Map: "Proposed Ragged Mountain Dam constructed top of dam = El 684.5, Settlement to El 683.5 is expected." From O &M Plan, p. 3, Description of facility: "The embankment crest elevation is approximately 694.5 feet NAVD 88..." Please reconcile. — please ensure LOMR Application includes revised As -built showing top of embankment Elev. = 694.5', to ensure accuracy. Thank you. It was nice to see you, yesterday. - please call if any questions: 434.296 -5832 —x3069 From: John Anderson Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 12:28 PM To: 'Douglas March' Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. My mistake —since LOMR l 00 -yr El. is the same as CLOMR, comments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 withdrawn; comments 1, 8, 9, and 10 remain. Comment #7 is Addressed. Thank you- From: Douglas March [mailto:dmarch @rivanna.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 12:02 PM To: John Anderson Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. For both the CLOMR and the LOMR 100 yr storm, the floodplain differs up and downstream from 1 -64: Downstream of 1 -64 — 673.4' Upstream of 1 -64 — 677.5' If you look on workmap, the 100 yr. is shown on both sides of 1 -64. The workmap should be the same for the CLOMR. From: John Anderson [ mailto :janderson2Ca)albemarle.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:54 AM To: Douglas March Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. Doug, thanks for writing. I'm concerned less for height of structure than Elev. of 100 -yr floodplain: CLOMR — 673.4' LOMR — 677.5' Item #3, 6 -May comments: Aug -2011, 1% Annual chance flood: 673.4' (Annotated FIRM: 677.5'); 0.2% Annual chance flood, Aug -2011: 674.8' (Annotated FIRM: 683.5') — Confirm Annotated FIRM and Topographic Work Map accurately reflect As -built conditions. I appreciate very much explanation that hydraulics are unchanged. Thanks for offer of visit to discuss, but it's better to take comments in turn (as you're doing with email), and address what may be misdirected comments on my part. I need to document response to comments in order to make recommendation of concurrence to the County Engineer. I've tried to anticipate how FEMA may (view or) review LOMR, and to state what we need as Floodplain Manager. This is a significant project, and I feel FEMA may fasten on any discrepancy between the CLOMR and LOMR. As -built height should be accurate. Going back to Elev. of 100 -yr floodplain, affected owner's acceptance of impact should align with Annotated flood Elev. if higher than (Aug -2011) design Elev. (ref /City of Charlottesville). I would ensure that VDOT /City of Charlottesville agree to impact of Annotated FIRM 100 -yr flood elevation to VDOT /City property. It seems these are required for a LOMR. If we need to meet, we can; today is problematic. Please consider comments, and if you'd like to meet to review, we have plan review slots available Th, 14 -May, 3:00 and 3:30 —would you like one of these 30 -min blocks? Thanks for your help and patience. 434.296 -5832 —0069 From: Douglas March [mailto:dmarch @rivanna.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 7:52 AM To: John Anderson Subject: RE: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. John- I went over your comments with Schnabel, seems to be some confusion on a few comments. JR Collins from Schnabel should be contacting you soon to go over with you. If it helps I can come by your office to discuss also. The hydraulic analyses done for the CLOMR will not change for the LOMR. Hydraulically, the project was built per the design, and as -built elevations are per original CLOMR. The only as -built that differs from original CLOMR is the final height of the dam (as -built height = 694.5'). But this change does not change the proposed flood elevations from the CLOMR values. Not sure where you see as -built conditions differing from "prelim plans" (are you referring to plans submitted with the CLOMR ?). I'm available this afternoon, Doug From: John Anderson [ma i Ito: Janderson2@albemarle.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 12:47 PM To: Douglas March Cc: Glenn Brooks Subject: Planning Application Review for FDP201500004 New Ragged Mt. Dam - Floodplain Development. The Review for the following application has been completed: Application Number= FDP201500004 Reviewer = John Anderson Review Status = Requested Changes Completed Date = 05/06/2015 Thanks for your patience, Doug —Also available in CV database system — 434.296 -5832 — 0069, if questions.