The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWPO201700053 Review Comments WPO VSMP 2017-11-07 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 VSMP Permit plan review Project title: Albemarle County Sidewalks Project file number: WPO201700053 Plan preparer: John Hash, Timmons Group [john.hash@timmons.com] Owner or rep.: Jack Kelsey, Albemarle County [Jkelsey@albemarle.org] Plan received date: Rev 1 – 14th June 2017 Rev 2 – 2nd Sept. 2017 Rev 3 – 2nd Nov 2017 Date of comments: Rev 1 – 25th July 2017 Rev 2 – 17th Oct. 2017 Rev 3 – 7th Nov 2017 Reviewers: Rev 1 – Bobby Jocz Rev 2 – Bobby Jocz Rev 3 – Bobby Jocz County Code section 17-410 and Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:34 requires the VSMP authority to act on any VSMP permit by issuing a project approval or denial. This project is Approvable conditional purchase of nutrient credits. A. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) a) Rio Road Sections 1 & 2 a. No comments b) Rockfish Gap Turnpike a. [Calculations Packet] Project narrative missing. Rev 2 – Addressed. c) Avon Street Extended a. No comments d) General a. Provide date and source of topographic data. Elevations must be field verified within the past year. Rev 2 – Addressed. b. Provide proposed contour elevations. Rev 2 – VDOT revenue sharing projects dictated in manner which does not necessitate this type of detail. Comment rescinded. c. Ensure all symbols/line work are included in key, or ensure all symbols/line work are explicitly labeled. Rev 2 – Addressed. d. Provide engineering details for SWM structures. This should include DI-structures, curb and gutter structures, ramps, etc. Rev 2 – Addressed. e. Show proposed elevations on road section profile views, or indicate that the elevations are Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 4 unchanged. Rev 2 – Addressed. B. Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP) 1. No objection. C. Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) VSMP Regulation 9VAC25-870-108 requires the VSMP authority to approve or disapprove a SWMP. This plan is Approvable conditional purchase of nutrient credits. a) Rio Road Sections 1 & 2 a. [LD 204] DI type and throat length are inconsistent between calculations packet and plans. Please correct. Rev 2 – Addressed. b. [LD 229] Pipe invert elevations are inconsistent between calculations packet and plan for Rio Road Section 1. Lower end invert for 3-1 to 3-2 is a foot off causing subsequent sections to also represent incorrect values. Please correct. Rev 2 – Addressed. c. Show HGL elevations on pipe profiles. Rev 2 – As noted, HGL elevations presented in calculations packet are sufficient. Comment rescinded. b) Rockfish Gap Turnpike a. Typical section for STA 10+00 to 14+15 identifies proposed path surface material as “Asphalt Concrete” please clarify. Rev 2 – Addressed. b. Specify ramp type at the north end of the asphalt path adjacent to Cory Farm Road. Rev 2 – Addressed. Connection is asphalt to asphalt with detectable warning strip. c. Provide additional detail regarding transition between CG and conveyance channel at STA 14+15. Rev 2 – Addressed. d. [LD 204 and LD 229] Drainage areas presented for structure 5A-2 in DA map (sheet 2I(3)) and in calculations booklet are inconsistent. Map specifies drainage area of 0.13 acres, where calculations booklet specifies DA as 0.03 acres. Please correct. Rev 2 – Partially Addressed. See below: e. [Sheet 2I(3)] DA and analysis for inlet 5-A3 not presented. Please evaluate. Rev 2 – Acknowledged. f. [Sheet 7A] Show pipe details for pipe section between structures 5A-1 to 5A-2 on SWM profile. Rev 2 – Addressed. c) Avon Street Extended a. [LD 204] Provide structure number and type in stormwater inlet computations table. Rev 2 – Addressed. b. [Sheet 7B & 7C] Manhole access must be provided at a minimum of every 300 feet for pipes 12-48” in diameter. In addition, pipes should maintain a minimum of 0.5% slope. Rev 2 – Addressed. d) General a. The 0.40, 0.30, and 0.95 lbs of nutrient credits for the Rio road, Rockfish Gap, and Avon Extended sidewalk projects will need to be purchased prior to VSMP approval. Rev 2 – Acknowledged. Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 4 Additional Rev 2 Comments 1. For structure 5A-2 the DA is corrected, but now the C value in the LD-204 table is inconsistent with what is presented on sheet 2I(3). Rev 3 - Addressed 2. DA and C values are inconsistent between calculations packet and plan sheet [Sheet 2I(5)] for structure 6D-2. Please correct. Rev 3 – Addressed 3. No DA or C value is presented for structure 6D-3 on the plan sheet [Sheet 2I(5)]. Rev 3 - Addressed 4. No data is presented in the Calc packet LD 204 table for structure EX 2-6E. Rev 3 – Addressed 5. Label is missing for structure EX 2-6E on sheet 2I(5). Rev 3 – Addressed 6. Structure ID number inconsistent for structure EX 1-6E between label and DA callout. Label numbers structure as EX 6-E1. Please correct Rev 3 – Addressed. D. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) Virginia Code §62.1-44.15:55 requires the VESCP authority to approve or disapprove an ESCP. This plan is approved. The erosion control plan content requirements can be found in County Code section 17-402. a) Rio Road Sections 1 & 2 a. Ensure all construction activities are included in LOD. It appears some areas within roadway, specifically installation of new stormsewer structures, are not included as part of LOD. Rev 2 – Addressed. b. Ensure silt fencing is placed 5-7 feet from the tow of slope per ESC Handbook Spec 3.05. It appears fencing is indicated to be placed overtop of areas where site grading is to occur. Please correct or clarify. Rev 2 – Due to nature of project, exemption granted for silt fence-slope separation distance. b) Rockfish Gap Turnpike a. Provide silt fence behind proposed grading from STA 18+50 to the beginning of the drainage channel. Rev 2 – Area of concern appears to drain to existing SWM facility. There is no need for silt fence in this area. Comment rescinded. c) Avon Street Extended a. Generally Acceptable, no comment. Additional Rev 2 Comments b. LOD should encompass storm structures 5 to 5-2 as defined on sheet 5 indicated to be included in temporary construction Easement. Rev 3 – Addressed Engineering Review Comments Page 4 of 4 Engineering plan review staff are available from 2-4 PM on Thursdays, should you require a meeting to discuss this review. Process; County staff will need to enter project information in a DEQ database for state application processing. DEQ will review the application information based on local VSMP authority approval. At this time, the DEQ portion of the application fees will need to be paid directly to the state. For fastest processing, this is done electronically with the emails provided on the application. DEQ should notify applicants with instructions on how to pay fees. When DEQ approves the application, they will issue a permit coverage letter. This should be copied to the county. After DEQ coverage is issued, via the coverage letter, the County can hold a pre-construction conference. Applicants will need to complete the request for a pre-construction conference form, and pay the remainder of the application fee. The form identifies the contractor and responsible land disturber, and the fee remaining to be paid. This will be checked by county staff, and upon approval, a pre-construction conference will be scheduled with the County inspector. At the pre-construction conference, should everything proceed satisfactorily, a joint VSMP and grading permit will be issued by the County so that work may begin. Bobby Jocz, EIT Civil Engineer I (434) 296-5832 ext: 3283 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 www.Albemarle.org