Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to City of Carmel 6-4-2013 LetterMr. Gary R. Duncan, Jr., P.E. December 12, 2013 Page 1 December 12, 2013 Mr. Gary R. Duncan, Jr., P.E. Department of Engineering 1 Civic Square Carmel, IN 46032 Re: Health and Wellness Suites of Carmel – TAC Review Project No. 201300569 Dear Mr. Duncan: American Structurepoint, Inc., has revised the design, construction plans and drainage report for the Health and Wellness Suites of Carmel project per the review comments listed in the June 4, 2013 letter. Each comment listed from the review letter contains a response addressing each issue. Below are the original comments with the response in italics. 1. Per your April 25, 2013 email to Amanda Foley, the construction of a 10-foot path across this property’s frontage on Pennsylvania Street and the dedication of right-of- way for a total of a 65-foot ½ right-of-way will satisfy all requirements of the City of Carmel Thoroughfare Plan as it relates to the Engineering Department. Please contact the Planning Department regarding street trees and buffer plantings required by the Thoroughfare Plan. The required street trees and buffer plantings will be shown on the landscape plans and submitted to planning. 2. Please omit the following from the plan set and the Title Sheet: Sheet L100, Overall Planting Plan; Sheet L103, Planting Details; Sheet E102, Site Lighting Plan; Sheet A100a, Overall First Floor Plan; and Sheet A100b, Overall Second Floor Plan, Perspective Views 1, Persepective Views 2, Overall Elevations – North/South, Overall Elevations – East/West and Overall Elevations – Monument Sign and Enclosures. The Department of Engineering does not have approval authority over landscape plans, site lighting plans, or architectural plans. Sheets have been omitted from the revised plan set. 3. Will this development be platted?? No, it was discussed with the Planning Department that any easements will be done by legal descriptions. Mr. Gary R. Duncan, Jr., P.E. December 12, 2013 Page 2 4. Please add adjacent landowners to the plans. Adjacent landowners are shown on the revised Site Plan, sheet C.200. 5. Are any offsite easements proposed? A 30 foot offsite drainage easement is proposed for the pond outlet pipe. See sheet C.409 for location of offsite easement. 6. Will existing 10-foot landscape easement along Pennsylvania be vacated with this project? This should be vacated since it will be within the proposed right-of-way. 7. Please clearly mark and label the construction limits on all plan sheets. Construction limits are shown on revised Demolition, Site, Utility and Grading Plans. (Sheets C.102, C.200, C.300 and C.400 – C.401). 8. Please provide the following statement in the plans, “UTILITY RELOCATIONS REQUIRED BY THE PROJECT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER. UTILITY LINE RELOCATIONS REQUIRED FOR ROAD PROJECTS THAT RESULT IN A CONFLICT WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER TO RESOLVE WITH THE UTILITY. EXISTING POLE LINES REQUIRE TO BE RELOCATED SHALL BE RELOCATED TO WITHIN ONE FOOT OF PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE”. Note has been added to the revised Utility Plan, sheet C.300, (General Utility Notes 17, 18 and 19) Mr. Gary R. Duncan, Jr., P.E. December 12, 2013 Page 3 9. Is the detention volume for the fully developed Thoroughfare Plan right-of-way for Pennsylvania provided onsite? Fully developed Pennsylvania Street right-of-way is used for the detention calculations. Please refer to the drainage calculations in the revised Drainage Report. 10. All areas outside the parking lot shall be directed to the detention facility. Additional storm sewer has been added and grading revisions made to collect all onsite runoff and direct it to the detention facility. 11. Please ensure the outlet to the receiving stream is properly stabilized. Outlet to the receiving swale is stabilized with riprap outlet protection and can be seen on the Erosion Control Plan, sheet C.501. 12. The storm sewer outlet pipe shall be located within a 30-foot drainage easement. Proposed storm sewer outlet pipe is within a 30-foot drainage easement. 13. The MFPG and MLAG shall be the same elevation. These elevations shall be based on: a. 1-foot above the maximum water surface elevation on-site, during a 100-year rain event, assuming all storm inlets are plugged. b. 2-feet above the 100-year elevation of the detention facility and 2-feet above the emergency spillway. MFPG and MLAG meet these requirements. Detailed modeling of the overflow ponding during a 100-year rain event, assuming all storm inlets are plugged is included in the Drainage Report. 14. Please provide the flood route through the site to the detention facility. The flood route shall be based on a 100-year rain event, assuming all inlets plugged. Emergency Overflow Routing Plan provided in the revised plan set on sheet C.412. Mr. Gary R. Duncan, Jr., P.E. December 12, 2013 Page 4 15. Please provide the flood route from the detention facility to the receiving system. Flood route from the detention facility to the receiving system is shown on sheet C.413. 16. Please provide the storm structure numbers on the storm profiles on C.403. Storm structure numbers are provided on the Storm Sewer Plan & Profile sheets C.404 – C.410. If you have any questions or need clarification on any of these comments, please feel free to contact me at our office (317) 547-5580. Very truly yours, American Structurepoint, Inc. Ross L. Nixon, PE, LEED AP Project Manager RLN: