My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Black Oak Ridge II HYDROSTUDY
>
Hydro Studies
>
Black Oak Ridge II
>
Black Oak Ridge II HYDROSTUDY
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2014 1:24:31 PM
Creation date
8/22/2014 2:48:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
HD-HydroStudies
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Loudoun County, Virginia <br />www.loudoun.gov <br />Department of Building and Development <br />1 Harrison Street, S.E., P. O. Box 7000, Mailstop #60A, Leesburg, VA 20177 -7000 <br />(703) 777 -0220 <br />FAX Numbers: Permits (703) 771 -5522 - Engineering (703) 737 -8993 <br />Zoning & Administration (703) 771 -5215 <br />Bob Cohen, PG September 2, 2014 <br />Principal Hydrogeologist <br />Tetra Tech <br />45610 Woodland Rd., Suite 400 <br />Sterling, VA 20166 <br />Re: Review of the Black Oak Ridge II Subdivision Hydrogeologic Study <br />Dear Mr. Cohen, <br />Thank you for your recent submittal of the detailed Hydrogeologic Study for the Black Oak <br />Ridge II Subdivision. Staff has completed the review of the Hydrogeologic Study and has <br />determined that the report is complete with respect to Facilities Standards Manual (FSM) <br />Chapter 6.2 requirements. Prior to full approval of the report, please address the following: <br />1) The original pumping plan proposal called for retesting of the existing Well #6 <br />(Lot #2). You noted however, that the well was in use, and therefore could not be <br />retested, and another lot was substituted. If Well #6 is to be used for a new <br />construction, then it will need to be successfully tested. Staff did not count Well <br />#6 toward the 30% testing requirement, but since the well was included in the <br />report, staff does not want to lead your client, or the eventual inhabitants of Lot <br />#2 (with Well #6) into the false belief that Well #6 has been successfully tested. <br />Please add a brief note to Section 4 of your report that Well #6 has not been <br />successfully tested, and that a constant drawdown test as described in Chapter <br />1040 of the Codified Ordinances will be required. <br />Sincere , <br />Dennis H. Cumbie, CPG <br />Hydrogeologist <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.