HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPO201300079 Correspondence 2014-10-30 Glenn Brooks
From: Glenn Brooks
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:13 AM
To: 'DHines @bohlereng.com'
Cc: Mark Graham
Subject: 5th street sediment collection areas
Attachments: 140516 Variance Request Justification Letter& Exhibit.pdf
Daniel,
I received your SWPPP at 5pm yesterday. It looks fine.
This morning, please provide the required variance request for the"sediment collection areas" shown the erosion and
sediment control plan,so I can finalize the WPO/VSMP approval. It should be like the attached document you submitted
for the mud traps.
Glenn Brooks, P.E.
County Engineer
Albemarle County
Glenn Brooks
From: Glenn Brooks
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:23 AM
To: 'DHines @bohlereng.com'; 'Stephen Werner'
Cc: Mark Graham; Sarah Baldwin
Subject: RE: 5th St. Station - Retaining Wall Design
I received the preliminary stream restoration plan and schedule for Moores Creek yesterday. This is approved for
purposes of the proffer and site plan approval.
This plan is titled "Final Plan Moore's Creek Erosion & Buffer Program 5th Street Development—Albemarle County,
Virginia".
Please note,a final plan for construction would need to be a WPO application, either including this on a prior erosion
and sediment control plan by amendment,or creating a new plan for this work.
Glenn Brooks, P.E.
County Engineer
Albemarle County
From: Glenn Brooks
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 9:00 AM
To: 'DHines @bohlereng.com'
Cc: Mark Graham
Subject: RE: 5th St. Station - Retaining Wall Design
Attached is the review of the plan set I received yesterday.
As this memo repeats, I need a SWPPP,a PPP, and a variance request for the sediment collection areas. Please use the
current WPO application form when submitting;
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Development/forms/Engineering a
nd WPO Forms/WPO VSMP Virginia Stormwater Management Program Application.pdf
I am expecting to be out with inspections today, so I may not be available for a discussion when you stop by. Mark may
be available. If by"close this out",you are referring to the WPO/VSMP approval,the attached memo is exactly what is
needed. If you mean the site plan, please consult Planning. If you mean the zoning proffers, consult Sarah in Zoning,
and please submit the completed stream restoration document. If you mean the road plans, we await the sealed
retaining wall plans as discussed below, and VDOT approval of road and bridge plans.
From: DHines @bohlereng.com [mailto:DHines @bohlereng.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 6:21 PM
To: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene
Cc: Mark Graham
Subject: RE: 5th St. Station - Retaining Wall Design
Thanks Glenn! I will bring the wall plans by tomorrow afternoon. If you have .2 mi:, stop by, I'd like to
discuss the plan approva' ;`--.tegy and what is needed to close this out.
Thanks!
1
Daniel R.Hines,P.E. name '�-
Project Manager
Bohler Engineering
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201 I Warrenton,VA 20186
P : 540-349-4500 I M : 540-454-9642 I dhines @bohlereng.com
From: Glenn Brooks [mailto:GBROOKS(aalbemarle.orq]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 4:50 PM
To: Daniel Hines; Max Greene
Cc: Mark Graham
Subject: RE: 5th St. Station - Retaining Wall Design
Please submit hard copies. I received your other plans today and hope to get to them tomorrow morning.
From: DHines(a>bohlereng.com [mailto:DHines @bohlereng.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 2:52 PM
To: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene
Cc: Mark Graham
Subject: 5th St. Station - Retaining Wall Design
Glenn & Max,
I just received the retaining wall plans for 5th Street and wanted to get them to you to show that they have been done. I
am going to go through and review to make sure that they match up with the site plans that have been submitted. In a
quick/cursory review they appear to be pretty good.
Is this acceptable for your needs to approve of the site plans? Do you want us to submit hard copies for your files as
well? I know we still will need a building permit for these before construction.
Thanks!
Daniel R.Hines,P.E.
Project Manager
Bohler Engineering
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201 I Warrenton,VA 20186
P : 540-349-4500 I M : 540-454-9642 I dhines @bohlereng.com
2
r✓
BOHLER ENGINEERING
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201,Warrenton,VA 20186
Professional Engineering Services Telephone:(540)349-4500 Fax: (540)349-0321
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
VIA: Hand Delivery
TO: Albemarle County RE: WPO 2013-00079
401 McIntire Road WPO Phase II & Stormwater Management Plan —
Charlottesville,VA 22902 3rd Submission
5tth Street Station
(434)296-5832 5th Street SW&Avon Street Ext.
Charlottesville,VA 22902
Albemarle County
ATTN: Glenn Brooks DATE: October 24,2014
JOB NO: V122001
WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑Shop drawings ❑Copy of letter Attached ❑ Prints ❑Change order
COPIES JOB# DATE REVISION REVISION SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION
DATE
1 V122001 10/17/14 Check# Check in the amount of$600.00 made
002201 payable to Albemarle County
1 V122001 12/10/13 1-3 of 3 Application for Review of SWM/BMP
1 V122001 10/24/14 1-7 of 7 Comment Response Letter
2 V122001 9/30/14 Stormwater Management Report
2 V122001 12/13/13 3 10/23/14 1-34 of 34 WPO Phase II&SWM
These Are Transmitted: ®For approval ❑For your use DAs requested
❑For review and comment ['Approved as submitted ['Approved as noted
❑ Returned for corrections
REMARKS:
Please find enclosed the above mentioned items for the 5th Street Station project in Charlottesville,VA.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office at (540)
349-4500.
COPY TO: SIGN
aniel R. Hines, P.E.
File
•
TM vftiyf
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201
L O H L E R Warrenton,540. 4 .4500
PHONE 540.349.4500
E N G I N E E R I N G
October 24, 2014
Via Hand Delivery
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Attn: Glenn Brooks
Re: WPO Phase II & E&S Plan
WPO2013-00079
5th Street Station
5th Street SW & Avon Street Ext.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Albemarle County
BE# V122001
Dear Mr. Brooks:
Bohler Engineering is pleased to submit on behalf of S.J. Collins, the revised Water Protection Ordinance
Plan for 5`h Street Station in Charlottesville, VA. The following is our comment response letter
addressing comments received from you dated October 7, 2014. Each comment is addressed and
responded to as follows:
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP):
Comment 1: Rev.2: A SWPPP document has not been provided. A registration statement was
received. Please ensure the disturbed acreage for permitting matches all final plans for
stormwater and erosion control to be attached to the permit. Please provide copies of all
SWPPP documents.
Response 1: Comment acknowledged. All SWPPP documents will be provided under separate cover.
Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP):
Comment 1: Rev.2: A PPP was not received.
Response 1: A PPP will be provided as part of the SWPPP documents.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW,BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
'"" Glenn Brooks
BO H L E R 5th Street Station
F. N G [ N E F. R T N c; WPOPhasell & E&S
10/24/14
Page 2 of 7
Erosion and Sediment Control:
Comment 2: It is not clear what is being constructed with this plan. All the road improvements are
shown as complete. Therefore,this plan could not be permitted until after the road is
constructed.
Rev.2: Please show what is being constructed with this plan. Many sheets do not appear
to show any measures for this phase, but appear to show measures and notes from the
phase 1 plan. It is unclear which is which. The notes refer to fill, retaining walls, and the
roadwork, which is not shown on this plan. It appears a phase 2b is needed which shows
how the diversions and traps work with the retaining walls and fill, which are mentioned
in notes.
Response 2: As discussed, this plan proposes the balance of the Erosion Control limits within the
stream buffer area beyond what was previously approved with the WPO Phase I plan. In
addition, this plan proposes the various elements of the SWM system.
Comment 3: Provide sediment trapping measures. Fencing is not sufficient.
Rev.2: There appears to be only one trap designed for this phase, ST-5. Please show the
drainage area to this trap. The other devices also need to be designed and variances
requested where necessary. A variance is necessary for the"mud trap". The"variable
sediment collection area"devices also require variances and design. It is unclear how
volumes and outfall will be maintained in these devices.
Response 3: The proposed drainage area has been provided on Sheet 4H. A variance for the "mud
trap" has been previously requested and approved for this project. The variable sediment
traps have also been sized and added to the plan to show the contractor and inspector
what the dimensions and depth need to be for those facilities as they adjust with
construction. Please see sheet 7C.
Comment 4: Provide protection for wall construction. There is not enough protection for Moores
Creek and the wall construction.
Rev.2: Please include the walls and fill in some stage on this drawing so that we can tell
if protection measures are provided.
Response 4: Phase 3 Erosion and Sediment Control sheets from the Wegman's Final Site Plan have
been provided for information only to show perimeter control measures as they pertain to
the wall construction. Please see Sheets 18A-18K.
Comment 6: Fencing is shown over rip-rap and concentrated discharges, which is not acceptable.
Rev.2: Silt fence is now also shown over outfall pipes. This is the preferred location.
Response 6: Comment acknowledged.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
Glenn Brooks
BO H L E R "" 5`h Street Station
F N G I N F F R I N G WPO Phase II & E&S
10/24/14
Page 3 of 7
Comment 7: Clarify how this plan fits in with other erosion and sediment control plans, mitigation
plans, and stormwater plans.
Rev.2: no change
Response 7: As discussed, this plan proposes the balance of the Erosion Control limits within the
stream buffer area beyond what was previously approved with the WPO Phase I plan. In
addition,this plan proposes the various elements of the SWM system. This plan works in
relationship with the Wegmans Site Plan, the Bent Creek Parkway plan, and the
previously approved WPO Phase I and Buffer Mitigation plans.
Comment 8: Adequate channels narrative on sheet 7 is referencing an out-of-date design manual. We
must follow"9VAC25-870-66 Water quantity".
Rev.2: This reference is now in the booklet and narrative, which must be corrected.
Response 8: The narrative and analysis have been updated to reference and prove adequacy under the
9VAC25-870-66 code. Please see the narrative in the SWM Report.
Stormwater Prevention Plan:
Comment 1: There is not enough detention storage for on-site areas.
Rev.]: This was not checked with this revision.
Rev.2: The vault systems need more details to verify volumes, ensure maintenance, and
inlet and outlet details.
a. Provide dimensions for spaces between pipes and on the sides which are used for
storage in stone.
b. Provide dimensions for the two header pipes.
c. Show all pipes leading into and out of the facility in the details to match plan
views. For example, Vault A shows a 48" CMP in section B1-B2, but this does
not appear in the plan view. The plan views shows two 15", a 36", a 30" and an
unknown from STM A7.
d. Provide drawdown computations for the under-drain outlets. Correct the direction
of flow on the plans for Vault A.
e. Provide a configuration which allows unclogging the orifices without being
submerged. If the 12"/18"/8"/6" pipe inlets leading out of the vaults become
clogged,there is no way to get to them.
f. If the intent is to provide the stub-out for a future connection to Vaults B, show
size and location.
Response 1:
a. As requested, the vaults have been further dimensioned in plan and profile views
to aide in review.
b. The header pipes have been dimensioned.
c. Cross sections have been revised in order to show all of the pipes leading into the
vaults. Please see Sheets 13A, 14A, and 15A.
d. Drawdown computations have been provided in the separate SWM Report. Also
the direction of flow arrow at Vault A has been corrected.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
BB O H L E R t� 5th S th Street Brooks
trreeee t Station
F N G I N E F R T N G WPO Phase II & E&S
10/24/14
Page 4 of 7
e. A trash rack inside the vaults has been proposed in order to keep the pipes from
clogging. In addition, a manhole access point has been added above the outfall
pipes. Please see Sheet 13A.
f. The future connection stubs have been removed for Vault B with this revision.
The future site plan for the development of this parcel shall show the storm pipe
connections to the vault.
Comment 2: System A+B areas should assume forested conditions prior to development. The previous
clearing was an unfinished project.
Rev.]: The BMP computations are still unresolved. It is safe to say the removal rate is
above 75% for each on-site drainage area. The 47 acres on the computation provided was
not found on a drainage area map. The on-site areas and treatment appears to be for three
or four separate drainage areas and discharges that do not add up to this. A removal rate
could be provided for each discharge point, and each facility result compared to the
targets. This might indicate that future development on Avon may need its own site
treatment in future. Areas like floodplains and buffers, which are not developed, are not
part of the project disturbed or developed area, and should not be included in treatment
area computations.
Rev.2: Not addressed. Please correct computations per the type IIC criteria. I will try to
give some specifics;
a. Section 2 of the report is using an area of 71.41 acres, but this is not found on any
drainage area map.
b. The report determines pollutant loads to be 167.71 lbs/yr, but there are no details
on how this is computed, or what it is compared to.
c. The BMP's-in-series sheets contain drainage areas for each BMP, but there is no
plan sheet which shows these devices or their drainage areas, or any details or
sizing for that matter.
d. Areas like floodplains and buffers, which are not developed, are not part of the
project disturbed or developed area, and should not be included in treatment area
computations, pre or post. Sheets 9 and 10 are showing areas which encompass
Moores Creek, land across Moores Creek, untouched hillsides above the
development, etc.
e. The computations claim removal rates of 35% for extended detention basins. I
am doubtful that this number will be achieved. I find nothing in specification
3.07 that suggests that a facility deep underground was the intent of this BMP,
which suggests to me that the removal rate attributed is from studies of above
ground facilties with the pools and vegetated buffers specified. I am hopeful that
the surface sand filters and filterras will sufficiently cover treatment, so this does
not become an issue.
f. The vault systems still appear to be set up like infiltration trenches combined
with detention in the pipes. The details still specify perforated pipes and an open
stone layer. This is problematic, as it may destabilize the fill under the parking
areas, and the retaining wall which holds it all up.
g. The filterra summary table and sand filter summary table contain only results.
There are no plans, details or maps to explain any of the numbers or labels.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
•
'" Glenn Brooks
B O H L E R `'P' `"` 5`h Street Station
F N G I N F F R I N G WPO Phase II &E&S
10/24/14
Page 5 of 7
h. The county spreadsheet is no longer valid, as it is not per the required state type
IIC criteria.
Response 2:
a. The overall drainage area of 71.41 acres has been updated to reduce the
applicable area per comment 2(d). The drainage area has been labeled on the
plan. Please see Sheet 8.
b. The BMP computations have been revised to follow the type IIC criteria as noted
in comment 2(h).
c. For information only sheets have been included from the Wegman's Final Site
Plan that show the devices and drainage areas. An overall BMP Sheet has also
been provided that shows the overall areas going to each measure. Please see
Sheets 9A, 9B, and 18A— I 8M
d. The overall drainage area of 71.41 acres has been updated to reduce the
applicable area as noted. The drainage area(59.42 acres)has been labeled on the
plan. Please see Sheet 8.
e. As discussed,the 35% accounted for in the vaults is taken off the remaining load
after passing through the filterras and sand filters. This credit is acceptable per
our meeting on 10/17/14.
f. After review, the closest point from Vault A to the retaining wall is 100'+. An
underdrain system has been proposed within the vault section to pull the water
into the storm system. In addition, the vault is completely in the proposed fill
which is specified to be compacted to a 98% compaction rate. With all of these
factors, very little water is anticipated to be infiltrated into the ground. What
does infiltrate will be over 100' away from the retaining walls. Further, the
retaining walls are designed to that anticipate some minor ground water getting to
them. The stone backfill and drainage weep holes/pipes collect that groundwater
and pass it through the wall in a safe manor.
g. Details have also been provided along with the grading plans from the Wegmans
Site Plan and the Bent Creek Parkway plan.
h. For information only sheets have been included from the Wegmans Final Site
Plan that show plan views and details for the Filterra units and sand filters. Please
see Sheets 18A-18M.
i. Comment acknowledged. The revised spreadsheet has been provided in the
SWM Report.
Comment 3: All facilities, incl. level spreader, need maintenance access
Rev.1: not addressed.
Rev.2: Not addressed completely. There were no details for the sand filters or stilling
basins. Access to these is not shown.
Response 3: For information only sheets previously submitted with the Wegman's Final Site Plan
have been added showing details for the sand filters and pre-treatment wells. Please see
Sheet 19. Maintenance access to the sand filters is provided through the manholes at the
structure. The level spreaders have been removed and replaced with a standard rip-rap
bed which does not need maintenance access.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
B O H L E R `--° thGlenn Brooks
5th Street Station
F N G I N F F R I N G WPO Phase II & E&S
10/24/14
Page 6 of 7
Comment 4: These are non-standard sand filters. Use state approved standards, or provide DEQ
approval for these systems at the desired removal efficiency. Demonstrate WQV is
captured in filters. Demonstrate extended detention will not inundate filters. There is
currently no way to replace for rust, or easily inspect or clean, or replace media. Design
for these and provide structural certifications.
Rev.]: The sand filters are not a state standard. The DC Sand Filter referenced (VSMH 3)
is limited to 1.25 acres. For larger areas you would need to use a different, separate vault
placed in the drainage system closer to the inlets where drainage areas to each vault could
be limited to 1.25 acres. That said, if you can produce a copy of approval from DEQ for
this system, we would proceed with that approval, and review the details of the system
setup.
Rev.2: Partially addressed. Standard sand filters and filterras are now used,but they are
not on plans but for incidental placement in the drainage area maps and vault details.
Please provide details and plans for all facilities, including specific drainage areas.
Response 4: For information only sheets, previously submitted with the Wegman's Final Site Plan
have been added showing details and plans for all facilities, including drainage areas.
Please see sheets 5A-5K and 18A-18M.
Comment 5: The in-stream flow splitter is a clogging problem and the pond may be below the water
table. I just don't see this as approvable at all. Per the zoning, build a in-line pond
upstream of the culvert and pay the Army Corps fees necessary for disturbance, or
request a variance/ZMA.
Rev.1: This has been addressed by removal of this system.
Response 5: Acknowledged.
Comment 6: Provide DEQ approval for the landfill pond.
Rev.1: not addressed.
Rev.2: not addressed.
Response 6: DEQ approval is anticipated any day now. We will provide their approval as soon as it
is received.
Comment 7: Provide scaled sections and profiles through facilities. Manufacturer's generic drawings
are not adequate.
Rev.]: Scaled drawings have been provided. If the filter can be approved by DEQ, some
details in need of addressing;
a. The end pipes appear to allow bypass of the filters
b. Filling the bmp manhole with stone prevents maintenance access to outlets.
c. There is no practical way of cleaning these giant vaults. It appears an Austin surface
filter is more appropriate for this size, allowing machine access for maintenance.
d. Groundwater data is required before approval. A wet sand filter may become
anaerobic. Even if groundwater can be lowered, it is not clear a filter this size
underground will ever dry out sufficiently to be effective.
e. Credit cannot be given for water quality in extended detention if it follows the filters.
Extended detention with no biological component is simply a settling chamber, and
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
Glenn Brooks
B0 H L E R - - 5th Street Station
E N G I N E E R I N G IZAI WPO Phase 11 &E&S
10/24/14
Page 7 of 7
this has likely already occurred sufficiently in the prior treatment. Place any
detention before the filters.
Rev.2: Continue the profiles on sheets 13B, 14B and 15B through the systems, showing
existing and proposed grades, and pipes in and out.
Response 7: Profiles have been extended to show systems, existing and proposed grades, and pipes in
and out. Please see Sheets 13B, 14B, and 15B.
Should you have any questions regarding this project or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me at(540)349-4500.
Sincerely,
Bohler Engineer'
411P,
Daniel R. Hines, P.E.
cc: Dan Tucker, S.J.Collins
DRH/Is
H:\12\V122001\Permitting\Jurisdictional Letters\County WPO Phase 11&E&S 3rd Review\141024 WPO Phase II&E&S 3rd Review CRL.doc
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
BOHLER ENGINEERING
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201,Warrenton,VA 20186
Professional Engineering Services Telephone:(540)349-4500 Fax:(540)349-0321
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
VIA: Hand Delivery
TO: Albemarle County RE: WPO 2013-00079
401 McIntire Road WPO Phase II & Stormwater Management Plan —
Charlottesville,VA 22902 3rd Submission
5th Street Station
(434)296-5832 5th Street SW&Avon Street Ext.
Charlottesville,VA 22902
Albemarle County
ATTN: Glenn Brooks DATE: October 1,2014
JOB NO: V122001
WE ARE SENDING YOU ❑Shop drawings ❑Copy of letter Attached ❑ Prints ❑Change order
COPIES JOI3# DATE REVISION REVISION SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION
DATE
1 V122001 9/11/14 Check# Check in the amount of$600.00 made
002187 payable to Albemarle County
1 V122001 12/10/13 1-3 of 3 Application for Review of SWM/BMP
1 V122001 10/1/14 1-6 of 6 Comment Response Letter
2 V122001 9/30/14 Stormwater Management Report
2 V122001 12/13/13 2 10/1/14 1-34 of 34 WPO Phase II&SWM
These Are Transmitted: ►1 For approval ❑For your use DAs requested
❑For review and comment DApproved as submitted ❑Approved as noted
❑Returned for corrections
REMARKS:
Please find enclosed the above mentioned items for the 5th Street Station project in Charlottesville,VA.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact this office at (540)
349-4500.
COPY TO: SIGNED:
676 ° /
Daniel R.Hines, .E.
File
Registration Statement
General VPDES Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities (VAR10)
(Please Type or Print All Information)
1. Construction Activity Operator: (General permit coverage will be issued to this operator. The Certification in item#12 must be
signed by the appropriate person associated with this operator:)
Name: 5-4 .STt- i .S7a:6'orl ,
Contact:, (.14n,•.1e.s Lc,<—
Mailing Address: A' ,,St a•.r,e. S;
City: i"oI.0.^,�j 0940^17_ State: C3,9 Zip: r Phone: 7700- {,92 ! to
Email address(If available): C_4 pph 4 a) . / t.i • 9 f..kee j
Indicate If DEC may transmit general permit correspondence electronically: Yes g No❑
2. Existing General Permit Registration Number(for renewals only): VAR10E976
3. Name and Location of the Construction Activity:
Name: 5th Street Station
Address(if available):North Interstate 64 Between 5th Street and Avon Street Extended
City:Charlottesville State: VA Zip: 22092
County(if not located within a City): Albemarle County
Latitude(decimal degrees): 38° 0' 36" _Longitude(decimal degrees):-78° 30' 03"
Name and Location of all Off-site Support Activities to be covered under the general permit:
Name:
Address(if available):,
City: State: Zip:
County(if not located within a City):
Latitude(decimal degrees): Longitude(decimal degrees):
4. Status of the Construction Activity(chock only one): Federal❑ State❑ Public❑ Private 0
5. Nature of the Construction Activity(e.g.,commercial,Industrial,residential,agricultural,oil and gas,etc.):
Commercial
6. Name of the Receiving Water(s)and Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC):
Name:Moore's Creek Name:
HUC:.1.R15 HUC: I�
it
7. If the discharge is through a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System(MS4),the name of the MS4 operator:
li
Albemarle County
8. Estimated Project Start and Completion Date:
Start Date(mm/dd/yyyy): 6/1/14 Completion Date(mm/dd/yyyy):,6/30/19
9. Total Land Area of Development(to the nearest one-hundredth acre): 86.9 AC
Estimated Area to be Disturbed(to the nearest one-hundredth acre): 62.0 AC
10. is the area to be disturbed part of a larger common plan of development or sale? Yes❑ No t}
11. A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP)must be prepared In accordance with the requirements of the General
VPDES Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities prior to submitting this Registration Statement.
By signing this Registration Statement the operator is certifying that the SWPPP has been prepared.
12. Certification: "I certify under penalty of law that I have read and understand this Registration Statement and that this document s j
and all attachments were prepared in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and is
evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those persons
directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief true,
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information Including the possibility of
fine and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Printed Name: )+ 1 J. CD I i f1 S Title: Manager'
Signature:, , Date: SP.1/ill'
(Please sign in I . This C flcation must be signed by the appropriate person associated with the operator identified in
item#1.)
r,€
01/2014 Page 1 of 1
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OPERATOR PERMIT FEE FORM
(Please Typo or Print All Information)
Instructions:Applicants for a Construction Activity Individual Permit are required to pay permit application fees. Fees are
also required for registration for coverage under a Construction Activity General Permit Fees must be paid when
applications for state permit Issuance, reissuance, modification or transfer are submitted.Applications will be considered
incomplete if the proper fee is not paid and will not be processed until the fee is received.
The fee schedule for state permits Is included with this form. Fees for state permit issuance, reissuance, maintenance,
modification and transfer are included. Once you have determined the fee for the type of application you are submitting,
complete this form. The original copy of the form and your check or money order payable to "Treasurer of Virginia"
should be mailed to:
Department of Environmental Quality
Receipts Control
P.O.Box 1104
Richmond,VA 23218
A copy of this form and a copy of your check or money order should accompany the permit application (or registration
statement).You should retain a copy for your records.
Construction Activity Operator:
Name: 5.4
Contact: 'f aek.5 LG..
Mailing Address: 5 314/ Xf ray r2 rah 'r^j
City: f 2) State:,67,9 Zip: .302/.?,Phone: 77o - 692 2—,cr.y PIP
(
Email address(if available): (2. pele.c.►� d Cep T/j0 r e fri o.
Name and Location of the Construction Activity:
Name: Sth Street Station
City: Charlottesville State: VA Zip:22902
County:Albemarle County
Type of State Permit: ❑Construction Activity Individual Permit ®Construction Activity General Permit
(from Fee Schedule)
Type of Action: ❑ New issuance ®Reissuance ❑Maintenance
❑Modification "'Transfer
Amount of Fee Submitted (from Fee Schedule): $6,100.00
Existing General Permit Registration Number(if applicable):. VAR [ 0 E 9 7(
FOR DEQ USE ONLY
Date: DC#:
01/2014 Page 1 of 1
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE
A.Individual Permits,The fee for filing a state permit application for a Construction Activity Individual Permit issued by the Board is as
follows: (NOTE: Individual permittees pay an annual permit maintenance fee instead of a reapplication fee. The permittee is billed
separately by DEQ for the annual permit maintenance fee.)
TYPE.OF STATE PERMIT ISSUANCE
individual Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities $15,000
B. Registration Statements. The fee for filing a state permit application (registration statement)for coverage under a Construction
Activity General Permit issued by the Board, including a state or federal agency that does not administer a project in accordance with
approved annual standards and specifications,is as follows:
TYPE OF STATE PERMIT ISSUANCE
General!Stormwater Management-Small Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Areas within common plans $290
of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage less than one acre)
General/Stormwater Management-Small Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than one acre and $2,700
less than five acres)
General/Stormwater Management-Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than five acres and $3,400
less than 10 acres)
General/Stormwater Management-Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sate with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and $4,500 -
less than 60 acres)
JGeneral/Stormwater Management-Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and $6,100
less than 100 acres)
General I Stormwater Management-Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within $9,600
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 100 acres)
The fee for filing a state permit application(registration statement)for coverage under a Construction Activity General Permit issued by
the Board for a state or federal agency that administers a project in accordance with approved annual standards and specifications Is as
follows:
TYPE OF STATE PERMIT ISSUANCE I._
Construction General I Stormwater Management—Phase I Land Clearing("Large"Construction Activity— I
Sites or common plans of development or sale equal to or greater than 6 acres) $750
Construction General/Stormwater Management—Phase li Land Clearing("Small'Construction Activity-- $450
Sites or common plans of development or sale equal to or greater than 1 acre and less than 5 acres)
01/2014 Page 1 of 2
valnie 'vase
C. State Permit Modification or Transfer Fees. The following fees apply to the modification or transfer of a Construction Activity
individual Permit or a Construction Activity General Permit Issued by the Board.The fee assessed shall be based on the total disturbed
acreage of the construction activity. In addition to the state permit modification fee, modifications resulting in an increase in total
disturbed acreage shall pay the difference in the initial Construction Activity General Permit tee paid and the Construction Activity
General Permit fee that would have applied for the total disturbed acreage in Section B above.
TYPE OF STATE PERMIT MODIFICATION
General/Stormwater Management—Small Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Areas within common $20
plans of development or sale with land disturbance acreage less than one acre)
General/Stormwater Management—Small Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than one and less $200
than five acres)
General l Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than five acres and $250
less than 10 acres)
General/Stormwater Management--Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and $300
less than 50 acres)
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and $450
less than 100 acres)
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within t
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage $700
p equal to or greater than 100 acres)
1
Individual Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities $5,000 1,
D.State Permit Maintenance Fees. The following annual state permit maintenance fees apply to each state permit identified below,
including expired permits that have been administratively continued. No annual state permit maintenance fee is required for coverage 4
under a Construction Activity General Permit for a state or federal agency that administers a project in accordance with approved annual 5
standards and specifications.
TYPE OF STATE PERMIT MAINTENANCE
General/Stormwater Management—Small Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Areas within common $50
plans of development or sale with land disturbance acreage less than one acre) -
General/Stormwater Management—Smaq Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than one and less $400
than five acres) �:
i
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within t
}
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than five acres and $500
less than 10 acres)
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 10 acres and $650
less than 50 acres) §
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within i
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 50 acres and $900 4
less than 100 acres) t
I
General/Stormwater Management—Large Construction Activity/Land Clearing(Sites or areas within $1;400
common plans of development or sale with land-disturbance acreage equal to or greater than 100 acres) I
1
F
individual Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities $3,000
01/2014 Page 2 of 2
Wool 'oar,
Instructions for Completing the Registration Statement
General VPDES Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities (VAR!O)
GENERAL stormwater pollution prevention plan or comply with other permit
conditions).
A.Coverage Under this General Permit.
The entitles that are considered operators will commonly consist of the
Any operator applying for coverage under this general permit who is owner or developer of a project(the party with control of project plans
required to submit a Registration Statement (see Section B below) and specifications)or the general contractor(the party with day to day
must submit a complete Registration Statement to the Department. operational control of the activities at the project site which are
The Registration Statement serves as a Notice of Intent for coverage necessary to ensure compliance with the general permit).
under the General VPDES Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from
Construction Activities(VAR10). Provide the legal name(do not use a colloquial name),contact,mailing
address, telephone number, and email address (if available) of the
B.Single-family Residences. construction activity operator;general permit coverage will be issued to
this operator. Indicate If the Department may transmit general permit I
Operators with an existing stormwater discharge or proposing a new correspondence electronically.
stormwater discharge associated with the construction of a single-
family residence separately built, disturbing less than one acre and Item 2:Existing General Permit Registration Number.
part of a larger common plan of development or sale Is not required to
submit a Registration Statement, provided that the stormwater For reapplication only,provide the existing general permit registration
management plan for the larger common plan of development provides number for the construction activity. This Item does not need to be
permanent control measures (i.e.,siormwa€er management facilities) completed for new construction activities applying for general permit
encompassing the single family residence. coverage.
Operators of these types of discharges am authorized to discharge Item 3: Name and Location of the Construction Activity
under this general permit immediately upon the general permit's Information.
effective date of July 1,2014.
Provide the official name,street address(if available),city or county(If
C.To Apply for Permit Coverage. not located within a City)of the construction activity. Also,provide the r
latitude and longitude in decimal degrees of the approximate center of
1. New Construction Activities. Any operator proposing a new the construction activity(e.g.,N 37.5000,W 77.6000). ,
stormwater discharge from construction activities shall submit a I
complete Registration Statement to the Department prior to the Name and Location of Off-site Support Activity Information. 1
commencement of land disturbance,unless exempted by Section B
above. Any operator proposing a new stormwater discharge from This general permit also authorizes stormwater discharges from l
construction activities in response to a publto emergency where the support activities (e.g., concrete or asphalt batch plants, equipment 11
related work requires Immediate authorization to avoid imminent staging yards, materiel storage areas, excavated material disposal ll
endangerment to human health or the environment Is Immediately areas, borrow areas) located on-site or off-site provided that (I) the
authorized to discharge under this general permit and must submit a support activity Is directly related to a construction activity that Is
complete Registration Statement to the Department no later than 30 required to have general permit coverage;(ii)the support activity Is not il
days after commencing land disturbance; documentation to a commercial operation, nor does it serve multiple unrelated t
substantiate the occurrence of the public emergency must construction activities by different operators; (Iii) the support activity II
accompany the Registration Statement. does not operate beyond the completion of the construction activity it IL
supports; (iv) the support activity is identified in the registration ,
2. Existing Construction Activities. Any operator that was statement at the time of general permit coverage; (v) appropriate h
authorized to discharge under the general permit issued in 2009, control measures are Identified in a SWPPP and implemented to
and who intends to continue coverage under this general permit, address the discharges from the support activity areas; and (vi) all k
shall submit a complete Registration Statement to the Department applicable slate, federal, and local approvals are obtained for the ii
on or before June 1,2014,unless exempted by Section B above. support activity. 1
r
D.Where to Submit Registration Statements. Provide the official name,street address(if available),City and County
(If not located within a City) of all off-site support activities to be ip
All Registration Statements should be submitted to: covered under this general permit. Also, provide the latitude and
longitude In decimal degrees of the approximate center of the off-site
Department of Environmental Quality support activities (e.g., N 37.5000, W 77.6000).Also, If an off-site
Office of Stonnwater Management,10'"Floor support activity Is going to be covered under this general permit the
P.O.Box 1106 total land area of the off-site support activity and the estimated area to
Richmond,VA 23218 be disturbed by the off-site support activity need to be Included in Item i
#9. I
UNE-BY-LINE INSTRUCTIONS R
Item 4:Status of the Construction Activity. I
Item 1:Construction Activity Operator Information. r
Indicate the appropriate status (Federal, State, Public, or Private) of 1
"Operator" means the owner or operator of any facility or activity the construction activity. I
subject to the Stormwater Management Act and regulations. In the t
context of stormwater associated with a large or small construction Item 5:Nature of the Construction Activity. y
activity, operator means any person associated with a construction t
project that meets either of the following two criteria:(I)the person has Provide a brief description of the construction activity, such as i
direct operational control over construction plans and specifications, commercial,residential,agricultural,oil and gas,etc.This list Is not all i
including the ability to make modifications to those plans and inclusive. 1
specifications or el)the person has day-to-day operational control of s
those activities at a project that are necessary to ensure compliance item 6:Receiving Waters(s)and HUC Information. l
with a stormwater pollution prevention plan for the site or other state &
permit or VSMP authority permit conditions(i.e.,they are authorized to Provide the name of the receiving water(s)and corresponding HUC for
direct workers at a site to carry out activities required by the all stormwater discharges including any stormwater discharges from
off site support activities to be covered under this general permit.
01/2014 Page 1 of 2
1
I
r
Hydrologic Unft Code or HUC Is a watershed unit established in the gather complete and accurate Information for permit application
most recent version of Virginia's fith order national watershed boundary requirements; and where authority to sign documents has been
dataset. assigned or delegated to the manager In accordance with
corporate procedures:
item 7:MS4 information.
b. For a partnership or sole proprietorship:by a general partner or
if Stormwater is discharged through a municipal separate storm sewer the proprietor,respectively.
system(MS4),provide the name of the MS4 operator.The name of the
MS4 operator Is generally the Town,City,County,Institute or Federal c.For a municipality,stale,federal,or other public agency:by either
facility where the construction activity Is located. a principal executive officer or ranking elected official.For purposes
of this part,a principal executive officer of a public agency includes:
item It Construction Activity Start and Completion Data
information. (i)The chief executive officer of the agency,or
Provide the estimated start date(month/day/year)of the construction (fl)A senior executive officer having responsibility for the overall
activity. Provide the estimated completion date (month/day/year) of operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency.
the construction activity. 'i
item 9:Construction Activity Area Information.
Provide the total area (to the nearest one-hundredth acre) of the 'l
development (i.e.., the total acreage of the larger common plan of
development or sale).include the total acreage of any off-site support "
activity to be covered under this general permit. ,
Provide the estimated area(to the nearest one-hundredth acre)to be
disturbed by the construction activity. Include the estimated area of
land disturbance that Will occur at any off-site support activity to be
covered under this general permit.
Item 10:Common Plan of Development or Sale Information.
indicate If the area to be disturbed by the construction activity is part of
a larger common plan of development or sale,Larger common plan of
development or sale is defined as a contiguous area where separate
and distinct construction may be taking place at different limes on - ii
different schedules.Plan Is broadly defined as any announcement or
documentation, including a sign,public notice or hearing,sales pitch,
advertisement, drawing, permit application, zoning request, etc., or
physical demarcation such as boundary signs,lot stakes,or surveyor
markings indicating that construction activities may occur.
item 11:Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP). r
A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP)must be prepared In F
accordance with the requirements of the General VPDES Permit for
Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities(VAR10)prior to
submitting this Registration Statement. By signing this Registration
Statement the operator is certifying that the SWPPP has been
prepared.
Item 12:Certification.
1.
A properly authorized Individual associated with the operator Identified
in Item 1 of the Registration Statement Is responsible for certifying and
signing the Registration Statement. Please sign the Registration
Statement In INK.
State statutes provide for severe penalties for submitting false s.
information on the Registration Statement. State regulations require
that the Registration Statement be signed as follows:
I
a. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the 1
purpose of this part,a responsible corporate officer means: )
(I) A president, secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the
corporation In charge of a principal business function,or any other a
person who performs similar policy-making or decision-making t-
functions for the corporation,or t
ii
(II) the manager of one or more manufacturing, production, or
1.
operating facilities, provided the manager is authorized to make
management decisions that govern the operation of the regulated
facility including having the explicit or implicit duty of making major
capital investment recommendations, and initiating and directing 1
other comprehensive measures to assure long-term compliance
with environmental laws and regulations;the manager can ensure
that the necessary systems are established or actions taken to
01/2014 Page 2 of 2
TM rr0'
B O H L E R 28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201
Warrenton,VA 20186
PHONE 540.349.4500
E N G I N E E R I N G
October 1,2014
Via Hand Delivery
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,North Wing
Charlottesville,VA 22902-4596
Attn: Glenn Brooks
Re: WPO Phase II&E&S Plan
WPO2013-00079
5th Street Station
5th Street SW&Avon Street Ext.
Charlottesville,VA 22902
Albemarle County
BE#V122001
Dear Mr. Brooks:
Bohler Engineering is pleased to submit on behalf of S.J. Collins,the revised Water Protection Ordinance
Plan for 5th Street Station in Charlottesville, VA. The following is our comment response letter
addressing comments received from you dated January 15, 2014. Each comment is addressed and
responded to as follows:
Erosion& Sediment Control:
Current Comments:
Comment 1: The large black lines on all the sheets obscure the plan details and lines for control
measures.I find this plan almost illegible because of this. Please correct.
Response 1: The large black lines are the drainage divide lines for the various inlets. These have
been moved to the respective site plan and road improvement plan under the Phase
III E&S for final site stabilization. The E&S plan here within only shows what is
created for the Phase II E&S design.
Comment 2: It is not clear what is being constructed with this plan. All the road improvements are
shown as complete. Therefore, this plan could not be permitted until after the road is
constructed.
Response 2: The road improvements are shown for reference purposes. This plan has been
clarified to show the E&S necessary for the ultimate clearing and grading limits.
Comment 3: Provide sediment trapping measures.Fencing is not sufficient.
Response 3: Sediment traps, basins, and various other measures are proposed to control the site
runoff during construction.
Comment 4: Provide protection for wall construction. There is not enough protection for Moores
Creek and the wall construction.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
Glenn Brooks 5th Stree t
Station
\ t, t N 1 I 1a I N WPO Phase 11&E&S
10/1/14
Page 2 of 6
Response 4: Wire supported silt fencing has been provided below the wall areas. Uphill of the
walls,diversion dikes and trapping measures have been proposed to limit the runoff
to the wall construction area.
Comment 5: SSF and double X lines are not state approved symbols or standards, and this plan has no
variances.
Response 5: The SSF and double X lines have been clarified in the legend. This has been
provided to help designate the difference between standard silt fencing and wire-
supported silt fencing.
Comment 6: Fencing is shown over rip-rap and concentrated discharges,which is not acceptable.
Response 6: The fencing location measures have been added per discussion with Max.
Comment 7: Clarify how this plan fits in with other erosion and sediment control plans, mitigation
plans,and stormwater plans.
Response 7: This plan is the Phase II E&S which will manage the added clearing limits within
the stream buffer area. Further, this plan also proposes the SWM pond and
underground vault systems and their associated outfalls for the site.
Comment 8: Adequate channels narrative on sheet 7 is referencing an out-of-date design manual. We
must follow"9VAC25-870-66 Water quantity".
Response 8: The adequate outfall narrative has been updated to reflect the appropriate outfall
requirement for the appropriate stormwater management regulations. This project
has been grandfathered under the old regulations in place prior to July 1,2014.
Original Comments:
Comment 1: No Adequate limits and perimeter measures out of work areas (stream areas must be
protected below walls. Not clear how this happens.)
Response 1: Perimeter protection has been provided below the walls and around the limits of clearing
and grading. Sediment basins and traps have been placed such that the wall construction
can take place while the traps and basins collect the drainage before reaching the wall
areas and discharge the runoff beyond the walls.
Wire supported silt fencing has been proposed at the limits of the clearing and
grading below the wall. Sediment trapping measures and diversion dikes are
proposed uphill of the walls to minimize the runoff to the wall construction areas.
Comment 2: All stages protected adequately(SF not adequate as a sole protection).
Response 2: Adequate protection has been provided for the phases. A separate WPO plan has
been submitted for the site disturbance. This plan identifies the final phase of
control as the site is being stabilized.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOH LERENGI N EERING.COM
B O H L E R�-
r4) Glenn Brooks
r° 5`h Street Station
►. N (; 1 N 1. I Iz 1 a <. WPO Phase II&E&S
10/1/14
Page 3 of 6
Comment 3: Adequate channels not addressed.
Response 3: Moore's Creek is an adequate channel
- A separate WPO plan has been submitted for the E&S Phase 1 site disturbance. This
plan identifies the E&S Phase 2 as the site is being stabilized and the overall site
construction efforts have been completed For the stabilized site; individual inlet
protection, perimeter silt fencing, outlet protection; and final seeding measures are
adequate.
- The site clearing and grading are proposed with a separate WPO plan. This plan
shows the final stabilization and SWM features. The wall construction will be
protected by several sediment basins and traps that have been placed such that the
wall construction can take place while the traps and basins collect the drainage
before reaching the wall areas and discharge the runoff beyond the walls. The
County directed us to submit this as a separate plan for file keeping purposes.
- The SWM design has been updated in this plan.
Comment 4: This plan shows only limits and fence. There do not appear to be any sediment trapping
measures shown.
Response 4: This plan has been revised to show the Phase II measures associated with extending
the limits of clearing beyond the initial early clearing and grading stage.
Comment 5: There is not enough protection for Moores Creek and the wall construction.
Response 5: Wire supported silt fencing has been proposed at the limits of the clearing and
grading below the wall. Sediment trapping measures and diversion dikes are
proposed uphill of the walls to minimize the runoff to the wall construction areas.
Comment 6: This plan does not match the stormwater plan.
Response 6: This plan is the stormwater plan for the site.
Stormwater Management:
Comment 1: There is not enough detention storage for on-site areas.
Rev 1: This was not checked with this revision.
Response 1: Adequate detention storage has been provided.
Comment 2: System A+ B areas should assume forested conditions prior to development. The
previous clearing was an unfinished project.
Rev 1: The BMP computations are still unresolved. It is safe to say the removal rate is
above 75% for each on-site drainage area. The 47 acres on the computations provided
was not found on a drainage area map. The on-site areas and treatment appears to be for
three or four separate drainage areas and discharges that do not add up to this. A removal
rate could be provided for each discharge point, and each facility result compared to the
targets. This might indicate that future development on Avon may need its own site
treatment in future. Areas like floodplains and buffers, which are not developed, are not
part of the project disturbed or developed area, and should not be included in treatment
area computations.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
B O H L E R - ,,,,,, Glenn Brooks
flio■ 5 Street Station
1 N c, I v I I Ir t r . WPO Phase II&E&S
10/1/14
Page 4 of 6
Response 2: The three (3) vault systems have been designed assuming a good wooded condition.
Please refer to the Pre-Development computations within the SWM Report.
The BMP computations have been updated per the recent discussions and changes
to the design concept. The BMP maps and computations account for the full site
area exclusive of the stream buffer and floodplain areas. The BMP computations
are shown in the Stormwater Management Report.
Comment 3: All facilities, incl. level spreader,need maintenance access.
Rev 1:Not Addressed
Response 3: The Flow Splitter has been removed The level spreaders are intended to act more like
rip-rap stilling basins that allow the runoff to dissipate into the wetland areas that they
are adjacent to.
The flow splitters have been removed and replaced with stilling basins which
require no maintenance.
Comment 4 These are non-standard sand filters. Use state approved standards, or provided DEQ
approval for these systems at the desired removal efficiency. Demonstrate WQV is
captured in filters. Demonstrate extended detention will not inundate filters. There is
currently no way to replace for rust, or easily inspect or clean, or replace media. Design
for theses and provide structural certifications.
Rev 1: The sand filters are not a state standard. The DC Sand Filter referenced (VSMH
3) is limited to 1.25 acres. For larger areas you would need to use a different, separate
vault placed in the drainage system closer to the inlets where drainage areas to each vault
could be limited to 1/25 acres. That said, if you can produce a copy of approval from
DEQ for this system, we would proceed with that approval, and review the details of the
system setup.
Response 4: These sandfilters have been designed as Washington D.C. Underground Vault Sandfilters
in accordance with the VA Stormwater Management Handbook standard 3.12A. Tables
have been provided in the SWM Report showing that the WQV is captured in the
sandfilter areas. These filters have been designed to capture the first flow and
completely fill up before spilling into the vault area. The extended detention is secondary
and will be used after the runoff has filtered through the sandfilter or in the event that the
sandfilter is full, the extended detention will capture the overflow volume. The depth of
the filters and vault has been reduced to provide better maintenance opportunities. Also,
the size of the vaults is such that accessibility within the vaults is good for maintenance
purposes.
The sandfilter design has been revised per recent discussions with the County. Now
a system of sandfilters and Filterra structures are proposed. The BMP
computations are shown in the Stormwater Management Report.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOHLERENGINEERING.COM
B O H L E R. , '411011 5th Brooks
LIE
5t'Street Station
1_ N C I N F_ I H I N <. WPO Phase II&E&S
10/1/14
Page 6 of 6
Comment 8: The plans are too big for storage in county files. Please separate all the computations into
a sealed package.Clarify all storage volumes used and assumptions and sizing, and outlet
structures, after revised hydrology per above. There were not enough plan detail to verify
computations for structures.
Rev 1: Partially addressed.There are still narratives and computations in the plan sheets.
Response 8: A separate report has been provided with the computations removed from the plan set.
Additional information has been provided in the report as requested
A separate report has been provided with the information. The SWM Narrative has
been removed along with the BMP computations. Other computations associated
with the storm outfalls, rip-rap,and E&S are still shown in the plans as they will be
important for the contractors to reference.
Should you have any questions regarding this project or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me at(540)349-4500.
Sincerely,
Bohler Engineering
:57
Dam ...17M.
cc: Dan Tucker,S.J.Collins
DRH/Ib
H:\12\V122001\Pennitting\Jurisdictional Letters\County WPO Phase II&E&S 2nd Review\141001 WPO Phase II&E&S 2nd Review CRL.doc
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOH LERENGIN EERING.COM
B O H L E R``-- Glenn Brooks
f 5 Street Station
I N, t, I N I I R I N G WPO Phase II do E&S
10/1/14
Page 5 of 6
Comment 5: The in-stream flow splitter is a clogging problem and the pond may be below the water
table. I just don't see this as approvable at all. Per the zoning, build a in-line pond
upstream of the culvert and pay the Army Corps fees necessary for disturbance, or
request a variance/ZMA.
Rev 1: This has been addressed by removal of this system.
Response 5: The in-stream flow splitter has been removed as well as the BMP pond adjacent to
Moore's Creek. An alternate facility and location are being evaluated
Comment 6: Provide DEQ approval for the landfill pond.
Rev. 1: Not addressed.
Response 6: Approval from DEQ for the landfill pond will be obtained
DEQ approval is expected anytime. Documentation of such shall be provided.
Comment 7: Provide scaled sections and profiles through facilities. Manufacturer's generic drawings
are not adequate.
Rev 1: Scaled drawings have been provided. If the filter can be approved by DEQ, some
details in need of addressing;
a. The end pipes appear to allow bypass of the filters
b. Filling the bmp manhole with stone prevents maintenance access to outlets.
c. There is no practical way of cleaning these giant vaults. It appears an Austin surface
filter is more appropriate for this size, allowing machine access for maintenance.
d. Groundwater data is required before approval. A wet sand filter may become
anaerobic. Even if groundwater can be lowered, it is not clear a filter this size
underground will ever dry out sufficiently to be effective.
e. Credit cannot be given for water quality in extended detention if it follows the filters.
Extended detention with no biological component is simply a settling chamber, and
this has likely already occurred sufficiently in the prior treatment. Place any
detention before the filters.
Response 7: Scaled sections of the vaults have been provided See sheets 14A, 15A, and 16A.
A scaled typical section of the vault has been provided along with a design table
which references the appropriate size and design criteria. The system will have a
bypass associated with the sand filters.
The BMP manhole for Vault A has been modified so that it is not filled with stone.
The sandfilters have been modified as requested.
The sandfilters have been pulled up close to the surface as requested. Groundwater
was not identified in many of the borings. Additional data shall be provided if
needed.
Credit for the extended detention is very limited and has been designed as allowed
in the handbook. Since the system is in series, it should be noted that the
underground detention gets a very small removal volume and credit per the
calculations.
CIVIL AND CONSULTING ENGINEERS • PROJECT MANAGERS • SURVEYORS • ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
WWW.BOH LERENGI N EERING.COM
'w•Ilar .•40011
Glenn Brooks t'`1 t'6 ? i . '/7
From: Glenn Brooks
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 3:50 PM
To: 'DHines @bohlereng.com'; Max Greene
Cc: Max Greene
Subject: RE: 5th Street Meeting
Regarding the stormwater management system, my discussions with DEQ have tended toward leaving the decision
local. I have not seen that they are willing to step in with a decision that this system is in keeping with the non-
proprietary standards,or to approved it as a proprietary system. I suggest going with another system or layout, and
supplementing with additional smaller measures at the source. The large end-of-pipe layout is not in keeping with the
non-proprietary filter system in my assessment.
Glenn Brooks, P.E.
County Engineer
Albemarle County
From: DHines@bohlereng.com [mailto:DHines@a�bohlereng.com]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 10:21 AM
To: Max Greene
Cc: Glenn Brooks
Subject: 5th Street Meeting
Gentlemen,
Thank you for meeting with us yesterday. I have reached out to Mr. Cooper and will try to get confirmation of whether
or not the proposed layout is acceptable. Hopefully we can get this across the finish line very soon.
Max,following up our meeting yesterday, I would like to go ahead and get on your calendar for Tuesday 9/23. Are you
available either that morning or afternoon to meet and run through the WPO Plan and comments? Please let me know
what will work best for you.
Thanks!
Daniel R.Hines,P.E.
Project Manager
BOHLER
E N C I N E F R I N G
28 Blackwell Park Lane,Suite 201 I Warrenton,VA 20186
P : 540-349-4500 I M : 540-454-9642 I dhines@@bohlereng.com
Serving the East Coast
Visit our new website!
Confidentiality Note:This e-mail,and any attachment to it,contains confidential information intended only for the use of the designated recipients,
which information may also be privileged.If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient,the document has been received in error and any
use,review,dissemination,distribution,disclosure or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.If you have received this e-mail in error,please
notify the sender via reply e-mail and immediately delete this e-mail from your system.
1
p,Rtif
Nore
'
o Federal Emergency Management Agency
°� Washington, D.C. 20472
44 ND S-z
June 20, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO:
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Case No.: 13-03-1957R
The Honorable Thomas Foley Community Name: Albemarle County, VA
Albemarle County Executive Community No.: 510006
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mr. Foley:
We are providing our comments with the enclosed Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)on a proposed
project within your community that, if constructed as proposed, could revise the effective Flood Insurance Study
report,Flood Insurance Rate Map, Flood Boundary and Floodway Map for your community.
If you have any questions regarding the floodplain management regulations for your community, the National Flood
Insurance Program(NFIP) in general, or technical questions regarding this CLOMR, please contact the Director,
Mitigation Division of the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) Regional Office in Philadelphia, PA, at
(215)931-5512, or the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (1-877-FEMA MAP).
Additional information about the NFIP is available on our Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Sincerely,
__
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
List of Enclosures:
Conditional Letter of Map Revision Comment Document
cc:
The Honorable Satyendra Singh Huja
Mayor, City of Charlottesville
Mr. Glenn Brooks
Albemarle County Engineer
Mr. Anthony Edwards
City of Charlottesville Engineer
Mr. Daniel R. Hines, P.E.
Bohler Engineering
Page 1 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 'Case No.: 13-03-1957R I CLOMR-APP
,• '�4ARTAT'
J-Ipt
Federal Emergency Management Agency
°3.." .4*7 Washington, D.C. 20472
v��tgND SEGJ
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT
COMMUNITY INFORMATION PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION BASIS OF CONDITIONAL REQUEST
BRIDGE FLOODWAY
Albemarle County FILL HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
Virginia NEW TOPOGRAPHIC DATA
COMMUNITY (Unincorporated Areas)
COMMUNITY NO.: 510006
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE: 38.012,-78.501
IDENTIFIER 5th Street Station SOURCE: Precision Mapping Streets DATUM: NAD 83
AFFECTED MAP PANEL
TYPE: FIRM* NO.: 51003CO269D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005 FIRM-Flood Insurance Rate Map
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO288D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
FLOODING SOURCE AND REACH DESCRIPTION
Moores Creek—from approximately 3,700 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road to just downstream of the confluence of Biscuit Run
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Flooding Source Proposed Project Location of Proposed Project
Moores Creek Bridge Modification The existing bridge at Bent Creek Road will be widened 20 feet in the
downstream direction
Fill Placement Along the right overbank facing downstream from a point approximately
2,470 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road to a point approximately 130 feet
downstream of the confluence of Biscuit Run
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS TO FLOOD HAZARD DATA
Flooding Source Effective Flooding Proposed Flooding Increases Decreases
Moores Creek Zone AE Zone AE Yes Yes
Floodway Floodway Yes Yes
BFEs' BFEs Yes Yes
Zone X(shaded) Zone X(shaded) Yes Yes
*BFEs-Base(1-percent-annual-chance)Flood Elevations
COMMENT
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency's(FEMA's)comment regarding a request for a CLOMR for the project described above.
This document is not a final determination;it only provides our comment on the proposed project in relation to the flood hazard information shown on the effective
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)map. We reviewed the submitted data and the data used to prepare the effective flood hazard information for your
community and determined that the proposed project meets the minimum floodplain management criteria of the NFIP. Your community is responsible for approving
all floodplain development and for ensuring that all permits required by Federal or State/Commonwealth law have been received. State/Commonwealth,county,
and community officials,based on their knowledge of local conditions and in the interest of safety,may set higher standards for construction in the Special Flood
Hazard Area(SFHA),the area subject to inundation by the base flood). If the State/Commonwealth,county,or community has adopted more restrictive or
comprehensive floodplain management criteria,these criteria take precedence over the minimum NFIP criteria.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 2 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
o�yART,yt�,
;yam
Federal Emergency Management Agency
°-s. ` - 4`, Washington, D.C. 20472
t't c°
' /IND0,
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
OTHER COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY THIS CONDITIONAL REQUEST
CID Number: 510033 Name: The Independent City of Charlottesville, Virginia
AFFECTED MAP PANELS
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO269D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO288D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 3 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 o Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
4,yARTAf
; 40 u Federal Emergency Management Agency
° - Washington, D.C. 20472
AND sti�
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION
To determine the changes in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed project,we compared the hydraulic modeling reflecting the proposed
project(referred to as the proposed conditions model)to the hydraulic modeling used to prepare the Flood Insurance Study(FIS)(referred to as the
effective model). If the effective model does not provide enough detail to evaluate the effects of the proposed project,an existing conditions model must
be developed to provide this detail. This existing conditions model is then compared to the effective model and the proposed conditions model to
differentiate the increases or decreases in flood hazards caused by more detailed modeling from the increases or decreases in flood hazards that will be
caused by the proposed project.
The table below shows the changes in the BFEs:
BFE Comparison Table
Flooding Source: Moores Creek BFE Change(feet) Location of maximum change
Existing vs. Maximum increase 0.7 Approximately 520 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Effective Maximum decrease 1.2 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Proposed vs. Maximum increase 0.5 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Existing Maximum decrease 0.1 Approximately 260 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Proposed vs. Maximum increase 0.7 Approximately 520 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Effective Maximum decrease 0.7 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Increases due to the proposed project that exceed those permitted under Paragraphs(c)(10)or(d)(3)of Section 60.3 of the NFIP regulations must adhere
to Section 65.12 of the NFIP regulations. With this request,your community has complied with all requirements of Paragraph 65.12(a)of the NFIP
regulations. Compliance with Paragraph 65.12(b)also is necessary before FEMA can issue a Letter of Map Revision when a community proposes to
permit encroachments into the effective floodplain/regulatory floodway that will cause BFE increases in excess of those permitted under Paragraph
60.3(d)(3).
NFIP regulations Subparagraph 60.3(b)(7)requires communities to ensure that the flood-carrying capacity within the altered or relocated portion of any
watercourse is maintained. This provision is incorporated into your community's existing floodplain management ordinances;therefore,responsibility
for maintenance of the altered or relocated watercourse,including any related appurtenances such as bridges,culverts,and other drainage structures,
rests with your community. We may request that your community submit a description and schedule of maintenance activities necessary to ensure this
requirement.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
----,
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 4 of1Issue Date: June 20,2014. ;Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
tipARTiyr6,
U� Federal Emergency Management Agency
i:ky° Washington, D.C. 20472
ANDS
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
DATA REQUIRED FOR FOLLOW-UP LOMR
Upon completion of the project,your community must submit the data listed below and request that we make a final determination on
revising the effective FIRM,and FIS report. If the project is built as proposed and the data below are received,a revision to the FIRM,
and FIS report would be warranted.
•Detailed application and certification forms must be used for requesting final revisions to the maps. Therefore,when the map revision
request for the area covered by this letter is submitted,Form I,entitled"Overview and Concurrence Form,"must be included. A copy of
this form may be accessed at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/dl_mt-2.shtm.
•The detailed application and certification forms listed below may be required if as-built conditions differ from the proposed plans. If
required, please submit new forms,which may be accessed at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/dl_mt-2.shtm,or annotated copies
of the previously submitted forms showing the revised information.
Form 2,entitled"Riverine Hydrology and Hydraulics Form." Hydraulic analyses for as-built conditions of the base flood,the 10-
percent, 2-percent,and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floods,and the regulatory floodway, must be submitted with Form 2.
Form 3,entitled"Riverine Structures Form."
•A certified topographic work map showing the revised and effective base and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain and floodway
boundaries.Please ensure that the revised information ties-in with the current effective information at the downstream and upstream ends
of the revised reach and any tributaries.
•An annotated copy of the FIRM,at the scale of the effective FIRM, that shows the revised base and 0.2-percent-annual-chance
floodplain and floodway boundary delineations shown on the submitted work map and how they tie-in to the base and 0.2-percent-annual-
chance floodplain and floodway boundary delineations shown on the current effective FIRM at the downstream and upstream ends of the
revised reach,as well as any tributaries.
•As-built plans,certified by a registered Professional Engineer,of all proposed project elements.
•A copy of the public notice distributed by your community stating its intent to revise the regulatory floodway,or a signed statement by
your community that it has notified all affected property owners and affected adjacent jurisdictions.
•Documentation of the individual legal notices sent to property owners who will be affected by any widening or shifting of the base
floodplain and/or any BFE increases BFE establishment along Moores Creek.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
—_ ;,�
�_� ,
c
• Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 5 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 1,,,,,, NadiCase No.: 13-03-1957R COOMR-APP
yART 4,
T
'�u Federal Emergency Management Agency
° `' Washington, D.C. 20472
-" IND StiG°
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
DATA REQUIRED FOR FOLLOW-UP LOMR(continued)
•FEMA's fee schedule for reviewing and processing requests for conditional and final modifications to published flood information and
maps may be accessed at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/frm_fees.shtm. The fee at the time of the map revision submittal must be
received before we can begin processing the request. Payment of this fee can be made through a check or money order, made payable in
U.S. funds to the National Flood Insurance Program,or by credit card(Visa or MasterCard only). Please forward the payment,along with
the revision application,to the following address:
LOMC Clearinghouse
Attention: LOMR Manager
847 South Pickett Street
Alexandria,Virginia 22304-4605
After receiving appropriate documentation to show that the project has been completed,FEMA will initiate a revision to the FIRM,and
FIS report. Because the flood hazard information(i.e.,base flood elevations,base flood depths, SFHAs,zone designations,and/or
regulatory floodways)will change as a result of the project,a 90-day appeal period will be initiated for the revision,during which
community officials and interested persons may appeal the revised flood hazard information based on scientific or technical data.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 %%se, Case No.: 13-03-1957R CIF=
,vokaTtij�;.
1$,y u(Atiro ', Federal Emergency Management Agency
. -' Washington, D.C. 20472
*N,AND S@
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY REMINDERS
We have designated a Consultation Coordination Officer(CCO)to assist your community. The CCO will be the primary liaison between
your community and FEMA. For information regarding your CCO,please contact:
Mr.Eugene K. Gruber
Director,Mitigation Division
Federal Emergency Management Agency,Region III
One Independence Mall, Sixth Floor
615 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia,PA 19106 4404
(215)931 5512
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
-(--- --7=1,--,--,----------
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
R
O�eA A1�,
.1� wrr +rrr�
�. , ° Federal Emergency Management Agency
o Washington, D.C. 20472
VIAND St-
June 20, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL IN REPLY REFER TO:
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Case No.: 13-03-1957R
The Honorable Satyendra Singh Huja Community Name: City of Charlottesville, VA
Mayor,City of Charlottesville Community No.: 510033
PO Box 911,City Hall
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mayor Huja:
We are providing our comments with the enclosed Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR)on a proposed
project within your community that, if constructed as proposed, could revise the effective Flood Insurance Study
report, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Flood Boundary and Floodway Map for your community.
If you have any questions regarding the floodplain management regulations for your community,the National Flood
Insurance Program(NFIP) in general, or technical questions regarding this CLOMR, please contact the Director,
Mitigation Division of the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)Regional Office in Philadelphia, PA, at
(215)931-5512, or the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (1-877-FEMA MAP).
Additional information about the NFIP is available on our Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Sincerely,
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
List of Enclosures:
Conditional Letter of Map Revision Comment Document
cc:
The Honorable Thomas Foley
Albemarle County Executive
Mr. Anthony Edwards
City of Charlottesville Engineer
Mr. Glenn Brooks
Albemarle County Engineer
Mr. Daniel R. Hines, P.E.
Bohler Engineering
Page 1 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
PART '.
o�` Federal Emergency Management Agency
•° " Washington, D.C. 20472
t gND
0,7-.
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT
COMMUNITY INFORMATION PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION BASIS OF CONDITIONAL REQUEST
BRIDGE FLOODWAY
City of Charlottesville FILL HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
Virginia NEW TOPOGRAPHIC DATA
COMMUNITY (Independent City)
COMMUNITY NO.: 510033
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE: 38.012,-78.501
IDENTIFIER 5th Street Station SOURCE: Precision Mapping Streets DATUM: NAD 83
AFFECTED MAP PANEL
TYPE: FIRM* NO.: 51003CO269D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
*FIRM-Flood Insurance Rate Map
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO288D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
FLOODING SOURCE AND REACH DESCRIPTION
Moores Creek—from approximately 3,700 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road to just downstream of the confluence of Biscuit Run
PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Flooding Source Proposed Project Location of Proposed Project
Moores Creek Bridge Modification The existing bridge at Bent Creek Road will be widened 20 feet in the
downstream direction
Fill Placement Immediately downstream of the proposed bridge widening at Bent Creek
Road
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS TO FLOOD HAZARD DATA
Flooding Source Effective Flooding Proposed Flooding Increases Decreases
Moores Creek Zone AE Zone AE Yes Yes
Floodway Floodway Yes Yes
BFEs* BFEs Yes Yes
Zone X(shaded) Zone X(shaded) Yes Yes
*BFEs-Base(1-percent-annual-chance)Flood Elevations
COMMENT
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency's(FEMA's)comment regarding a request for a CLOMR for the project described above.
This document is not a final determination;it only provides our comment on the proposed project in relation to the flood hazard information shown on the effective
National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP)map. We reviewed the submitted data and the data used to prepare the effective flood hazard information for your
community and determined that the proposed project meets the minimum floodplain management criteria of the NFIP. Your community is responsible for approving
all floodplain development and for ensuring that all permits required by Federal or State/Commonwealth law have been received. State/Commonwealth,county,
and community officials,based on their knowledge of local conditions and in the interest of safety, may set higher standards for construction in the Special Flood
Hazard Area(SFHA),the area subject to inundation by the base flood). If the State/Commonwealth,county,or community has adopted more restrictive or
comprehensive floodplain management criteria,these criteria take precedence over the minimum NFIP criteria.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
,Page 2 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 v.r+ Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
t4ARTtif�
O/""\i,.
11.?19, 96 Federal Emergency Management Agency
:°�4, ` 'V,.. Washington, D.C. 20472
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
OTHER COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY THIS CONDITIONAL REQUEST
CID Number: 510006 Name: Albemarle County, Virginia
AFFECTED MAP PANELS
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO269D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
TYPE: FIRM NO.: 51003CO288D DATE: FEBRUARY 4,2005
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 3 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014" ',maltase No.: 13-03-1957R CLOM14. 1-APP
�v.OtiyART,yr
_or Federal Emergency Management Agency
94- Washington, D.C. 20472
<4'4'9ND SEe
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION
To determine the changes in flood hazards that will be caused by the proposed project,we compared the hydraulic modeling reflecting the proposed
project(referred to as the proposed conditions model)to the hydraulic modeling used to prepare the Flood Insurance Study(FIS)(referred to as the
effective model). If the effective model does not provide enough detail to evaluate the effects of the proposed project,an existing conditions model must
be developed to provide this detail. This existing conditions model is then compared to the effective model and the proposed conditions model to
differentiate the increases or decreases in flood hazards caused by more detailed modeling from the increases or decreases in flood hazards that will be
caused by the proposed project.
The table below shows the changes in the BFEs:
BFE Comparison Table
Flooding Source: Moores Creek BFE Change(feet) Location of maximum change
Existing vs. Maximum increase 0.7 Approximately 520 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Effective Maximum decrease 1.2 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Proposed vs. Maximum increase 0.5 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Existing Maximum decrease 0.1 Approximately 260 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Proposed vs. Maximum increase 0.7 Approximately 520 feet upstream of Bent Creek Road
Effective Maximum decrease 0.7 Approximately 80 feet downstream of Bent Creek Road
Increases due to the proposed project that exceed those permitted under Paragraphs(c)(10)or(d)(3)of Section 60.3 of the NFIP regulations must adhere
to Section 65.12 of the NFIP regulations. With this request,your community has complied with all requirements of Paragraph 65.12(a)of the NFIP
regulations. Compliance with Paragraph 65.12(b)also is necessary before FEMA can issue a Letter of Map Revision when a community proposes to
permit encroachments into the effective floodplain/regulatory floodway that will cause BFE increases in excess of those permitted under Paragraph
60.3(d)(3).
NFIP regulations Subparagraph 60.3(b)(7)requires communities to ensure that the flood-carrying capacity within the altered or relocated portion of any
watercourse is maintained. This provision is incorporated into your community's existing floodplain management ordinances;therefore,responsibility
for maintenance of the altered or relocated watercourse,including any related appurtenances such as bridges,culverts,and other drainage structures,
rests with your community. We may request that your community submit a description and schedule of maintenance activities necessary to ensure this
requirement.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
Page 4 of 6 Issue Date: June 20,2014 „,,o(Case No.: 13-03-1957R CLOMR-APP
j U Federal Emergency Management Agency
\c:.,., �. Washington, D.C. 20472
4ND Sti
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
DATA REQUIRED FOR FOLLOW-UP LOMR
Upon completion of the project,your community must submit the data listed below and request that we make a final determination on
revising the effective FIRM,and FIS report. If the project is built as proposed and the data below are received,a revision to the FIRM,
and FIS report would be warranted.
•Detailed application and certification forms must be used for requesting final revisions to the maps. Therefore,when the map revision
request for the area covered by this letter is submitted,Form 1,entitled"Overview and Concurrence Form,"must be included. A copy of
this form may be accessed at http ://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/dl_mt-2.shtm.
•The detailed application and certification forms listed below may be required if as-built conditions differ from the proposed plans. If
required,please submit new forms,which may be accessed at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/dl_mt-2.shtm,or annotated copies of
the previously submitted forms showing the revised information.
Form 2,entitled"Riverine Hydrology and Hydraulics Form." Hydraulic analyses for as-built conditions of the base flood,the 10-
percent,2-percent,and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floods,and the regulatory floodway,must be submitted with Form 2.
Form 3,entitled"Riverine Structures Form."
•A certified topographic work map showing the revised and effective base and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain and floodway
boundaries.Please ensure that the revised information ties-in with the current effective information at the downstream and upstream ends
of the revised reach and any tributaries.
•An annotated copy of the FIRM,at the scale of the effective FIRM,that shows the revised base and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain
and floodway boundary delineations shown on the submitted work map and how they tie into the base and 0.2-percent-annual-chance
floodplain and floodway boundary delineations shown on the current effective FIRM at the downstream and upstream ends of the revised
reach,as well as any tributaries.
•As-built plans,certified by a registered Professional Engineer,of all proposed project elements.
•A copy of the public notice distributed by your community stating its intent to revise the regulatory floodway,or a signed statement by
your community that it has notified all affected property owners and affected adjacent jurisdictions.
•Documentation of the individual legal notices sent to property owners who will be affected by any widening or shifting of the base
floodplain and/or any BFE increases BFE establishment along Moores Creek.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
-° 4. .r:- -..,-,',.-.1:4..,-:.„-: _
' <
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
,Page 5 of 6 'Issue Date: June 20,2014 -NsigoolCase No.: 13-03-1957R I CLOMR-APP
R
J ii
o Federal Emergency Management gement Agency
�.
` `',4 Washington, D.C. 20472
O6
'r'4ND S'G ,.
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
DATA REQUIRED FOR FOLLOW-UP LOMR(continued)
•FEMA's fee schedule for reviewing and processing requests for conditional and final modifications to published flood information and
maps may be accessed at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/frm_fees.shtm. The fee at the time of the map revision submittal must be
received before we can begin processing the request. Payment of this fee can be made through a check or money order, made payable in
U.S. funds to the National Flood Insurance Program, or by credit card(Visa or MasterCard only). Please forward the payment,along with
the revision application,to the following address:
LOMC Clearinghouse
Attention: LOMR Manager
847 South Pickett Street
Alexandria,Virginia 22304-4605
After receiving appropriate documentation to show that the project has been completed,FEMA will initiate a revision to the FIRM,and
FIS report. Because the flood hazard information(i.e.,base flood elevations,base flood depths, SFHAs,zone designations, and/or
regulatory floodways)will change as a result of the project, a 90-day appeal period will be initiated for the revision,during which
community officials and interested persons may appeal the revised flood hazard information based on scientific or technical data.
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information exchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104
�6 of 6 Ilssue Date: June 20,2014 °fir Vii Case No.: 13-03-1957R I CLOMR-APP
w
• ' ° Federal Emergency Management Agency`' J4`, Washington, D.C. 20472
'',.-4 ND St--",-
CONDITIONAL LETTER OF MAP REVISION
COMMENT DOCUMENT (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY INFORMATION (CONTINUED)
COMMUNITY REMINDERS
We have designated a Consultation Coordination Officer(CCO)to assist your community. The CCO will be the primary liaison between
your community and FEMA. For information regarding your CCO,please contact:
Mr.Eugene K. Gruber
Director,Mitigation Division
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region III
One Independence Mall,Sixth Floor
615 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia,PA 19106 4404
(215)931 5512
This comment is based on the flood data presently available. If you have any questions about this document,please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange(FMIX)toll
free at 1-877-336-2627(1-877-FEMA MAP)or by letter addressed to the LOMC Clearinghouse,847 South Pickett Street,Alexandria,VA 22304-4605. Additional Information
about the NFIP is available on the FEMA Web site at http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip.
--
Luis Rodriguez,P.E.,Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
13-03-1957R 104