HomeMy WebLinkAboutEngineering Dept. Approval1
Conn, Angelina V
From:Jordan, Alex
Sent:Monday, June 13, 2016 2:18 PM
To:'Beiermann, Gene'; Conn, Angelina V
Cc:Buzz Weisiger; Mark Naylor; Taylor, Andy; lovell@trgpsc.com
Subject:RE: Regions Bank at the Bridges
Attachments:02010.01114.PH_II.CE.C401.GP-C401.pdf; ONE WAY SIGNAGE 06.08.16.jpg;
02010.01114.PH_II.CE.C201.SP-C201.pdf
Gene,
Everything looks good. We will need revised plan sheets for The Shoppes at the Bridges for our files.
Sincerely,
Alex Jordan
Plan Review Coordinator
City of Carmel Engineering Department
(317) 571‐2305
ajordan@carmel.in.gov
From: Beiermann, Gene [mailto:GBeiermann@structurepoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 7:52 AM
To: Jordan, Alex; Conn, Angelina V
Cc: Buzz Weisiger; Mark Naylor; Taylor, Andy; lovell@trgpsc.com
Subject: RE: Regions Bank at the Bridges
Alex,
I’ve left a voicemail responding to your e ‐mail, please see also our responses below in red. We’d like to help
Regions/Roberts Group clear up any remaining items, let us know if there is anything we can do to keep this moving
forward.
1. The MLAG/MFPG provided on sheet C400 of the Shoppes plans appears to be incorrect. We would like for these
to be set 1’ above the local 100‐year flooding which is shown to be 853.23. Therefore, the MLAG and MFPG
should be set at a minimum of 854.23.
The finish floor elevation was set in order to allow for grading within ADA standards down to the adjacent
grades on the south end of the site. The FPG was worked backward assuming a typical 0.50’ difference between
FFE and lowest adjacent grade As has been discussed, the modeled flow in the unlikely event of all inlets being
clogged will not encroach on the finished floor. Please let us know if you would like to see anything else with
this.
2. The Shoppes at the Bridges plans I referenced in the previous comment letter were the plans approved and
signed by the City engineer. It appears that there were two revisions after the date of our approval. However,
we were not notified or supplied any revised sheets. Please have the developer for the Shoppes submit the most
recent revisions so we can make sure there are no issues and that we have the most up to date amendments on
file.
Noted. Full construction documents will be supplied to Carmel engineering when confirmation is reached that
all items on this e ‐mail are resolved.
3. Our concerns with revised drive aisle to North of Regions site are below:
a) Width of drive aisle varies north of proposed Region’s site.
This has been revised on our construction documents as shown on the attached site plan to show a
consistent width for the drive.
b) Do Not Enter and One Way Signage needs to be added along this drive.
2
One Way Do Not Enter signage can be shown as requested. I have attached a quick exhibit showing two
potential locations (both would be on the Regions plans). Let us know if there’s any additional or
different locations your office has in mind.
c) Open Space altered from Open Space plan to north of Regions, Shoppes building.
I believe Regions plans didn’t have the most current site base overlaid, per the plans issued last
month. The green space north of Regions will be constructed from our civil documents. We will share
our current sitebase with Regions as well.
Thanks,
Gene A. Beiermann, PE
Project Engineer ‐ Civil Department
7260 Shadeland Station, Indianapolis, IN 46256
T 317.547.5580 E Gbeiermann@structurepoint.com
W www.structurepoint.com
C 847.770.2534
From: Buzz Weisiger [mailto:cwcbuzz@gershmanpartners.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 2:47 PM
To: Beiermann, Gene <GBeiermann@structurepoint.com>
Subject: FW: Regions Bank at the Bridges
Gene,
Can you respond on these comments please.
Buzz
From: Jordan, Alex [mailto:ajordan@carmel.in.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 2:44 PM
To: 'naylor@trgpsc.com' <naylor@trgpsc.com>; 'lovell@trgpsc.com' <lovell@trgpsc.com>
Cc: Buzz Weisiger <cwcbuzz@gershmanpartners.com>; Taylor, Andy <ATaylor@structurepoint.com>; Keesling, Rachel M
<rkeesling@carmel.in.gov>; Conn, Angelina V <Aconn@carmel.in.gov>; Thomas, John G <jthomas@carmel.in.gov>;
Kashman, Jeremy M <jkashman@carmel.in.gov>
Subject: Regions Bank at the Bridges
Good afternoon,
We have reviewed the latest submittal for this project and have the following comments:
1. The MLAG/MFPG provided on sheet C400 of the Shoppes plans appears to be incorrect. We would like for these
to be set 1’ above the local 100‐year flooding which is shown to be 853.23. Therefore, the MLAG and MFPG
should be set at a minimum of 854.23.
2. The Shoppes at the Bridges plans I referenced in the previous comment letter were the plans approved and
signed by the City engineer. It appears that there were two revisions after the date of our approval. However,
we were not notified or supplied any revised sheets. Please have the developer for the Shoppes submit the most
recent revisions so we can make sure there are no issues and that we have the most up to date amendments on
file.
3. Our concerns with revised drive aisle to North of Regions site are below:
a) Width of drive aisle varies north of proposed Region’s site.
b) Do Not Enter and One Way Signage needs to be added along this drive.
c) Open Space altered from Open Space plan to north of Regions, Shoppes building.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
PLOT DATE: 5/17/2016 4:42 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:2.5849 EDIT DATE: 5/17/2016:4:37:01 PM EDITED BY: GBEIERMANN DRAWING FILE: P:\2010\01114\D. Drawings\Civil\Plan Set\PHASE II\02010.01114.PH_II.CE.C201.SP.dwg
72
6
0
S
h
a
d
e
l
a
n
d
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
|
I
n
d
i
a
n
a
p
o
l
i
s
,
I
n
d
i
a
n
a
4
6
2
5
6
TE
L
3
1
7
.
5
4
7
.
5
5
8
0
|
F
A
X
3
1
7
.
5
4
3
.
0
2
7
0
ww
w
.
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
p
o
i
n
t
.
c
o
m
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
CE
R
T
I
F
I
E
D
B
Y
IS
S
U
A
N
C
E
I
N
D
E
X
DA
T
E
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
P
H
A
S
E
:
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
NO
.
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
08
/
2
2
/
2
0
1
4
PH
A
S
E
I
I
20
1
0
.
0
1
1
1
4
SH
O
P
P
E
S
A
T
TH
E
B
R
I
D
G
E
S
11
6
t
h
S
T
R
E
E
T
&
SP
R
I
N
G
M
I
L
L
R
O
A
D
CA
R
M
E
L
,
I
N
4
6
0
3
2
GE
R
S
H
M
A
N
PA
R
T
N
E
R
S
60
0
E
.
9
6
t
h
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
u
i
t
e
1
5
0
IN
D
I
A
N
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
I
N
D
I
A
N
A
4
6
2
4
0
-
PLOT DATE: 5/17/2016 4:41 PMPLOT SCALE: 1:2.5849 EDIT DATE: 5/17/2016:4:22:32 PM EDITED BY: GBEIERMANN DRAWING FILE: P:\2010\01114\D. Drawings\Civil\Plan Set\PHASE II\02010.01114.PH_II.CE.C401.GP.dwg
72
6
0
S
h
a
d
e
l
a
n
d
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
|
I
n
d
i
a
n
a
p
o
l
i
s
,
I
n
d
i
a
n
a
4
6
2
5
6
TE
L
3
1
7
.
5
4
7
.
5
5
8
0
|
F
A
X
3
1
7
.
5
4
3
.
0
2
7
0
ww
w
.
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
p
o
i
n
t
.
c
o
m
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
CE
R
T
I
F
I
E
D
B
Y
IS
S
U
A
N
C
E
I
N
D
E
X
DA
T
E
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
P
H
A
S
E
:
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
NO
.
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
DA
T
E
08
/
2
2
/
2
0
1
4
PH
A
S
E
I
I
20
1
0
.
0
1
1
1
4
SH
O
P
P
E
S
A
T
TH
E
B
R
I
D
G
E
S
11
6
t
h
S
T
R
E
E
T
&
SP
R
I
N
G
M
I
L
L
R
O
A
D
CA
R
M
E
L
,
I
N
4
6
0
3
2
GE
R
S
H
M
A
N
PA
R
T
N
E
R
S
60
0
E
.
9
6
t
h
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
u
i
t
e
1
5
0
IN
D
I
A
N
A
P
O
L
I
S
,
I
N
D
I
A
N
A
4
6
2
4
0
-