HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to CrossRoad, HallDavd J Stoeppelwerth
PIVSidellt, CEO
Profess lonat engirmodr
Prr,,de$sdmat Land Surveyor
Curtis C.. Huff
Vice Presdlerd„ COO
.,',dcdcd%sional Lard StliNiyor
STOEPPELWERT1-1 & ASSOC:IA:1ES INC.
. ,...5119,010IMMAMMINVOMMIMIIMMIMOMIt
RN, Stooppelwerth
F"buodef
Pitofc'd...dogdid Emylrieer
Professlorml Land 1 New') r
79.65 East 10601 Street
Fishers, Indiana
/1603,6-2505
317.819.5935
Fax:: 317„8,19.,5942
ww&Stoepttelweti.h..c.:o
(,..:ONSUEFING ENGINEERS LAND SURVEYORS
September 5, 2012
Re: 'Vii age ofWestCtay, Section 10010-C
CrossRoad Engineers P.C.
,
3417 Sherman Drive
Beech Grove, Indiana 46107
M VVam Hall
Attention: r,
Dear Mr. Hall:
Enclosed please find a set of Construction Plans and a Drainage Report
which were revised in accordance with your comment letter dated July 30, 2012.
Those comments were addressed as follows:
1. A copy of the legal boundary survey for this site prepared by Gripe
Consulting is included with this submittal.
2. A Secondary Plat for this project is included with this submittal. This site
has slightly changed from the Primary Plat; however, I have included a
reduced copy of that as well.
3. Existing Conditions
f. All existing utilities and infrastructure are now shown and labeled
appropriately.
j. There were no existing cornerstones located by the topographical
survey to be protected,
m. All existing utilities are shown and labeled accordingly,
4. A subdivision covenants will be provided by the developer once available
5. The Site Development Plan have been revised to show all required
information, We are still trying to complete the Drainage Summary by
adding the Volume of Detention Required and Provided however are
looking to discuss this further with your office. Once completed we will
send electronic pdf files of Sheets C200 and C201 to your attention.
6. The Weighted CN's have been separated by soil types in the excel
worksheet.
Cross Road Engineers, P.C.
September 5, 2012
Page 2
7. The existing conditions calculations with associated curve numbers and
times-of-concentration have been added to the report.
8. Ail detention calculations are provided per Section 102.03.i.o
9. The existing storm sewer at the southwest corner of our project was
specifically designed as an 18" (per request by HCSO) to accept our sites
proposed outlet. We have shown that this 18 R.C.P. is sufficient to
handle our outlet flow.
10. The hydrologic soil groups have been adjusted to the next less infiltrating
capacity category from the existing conditions.
11. The allowable 100 year release rate has been adjusted to 0.24 cfs,
12. We have revised the plans to show the full build out of Lake #2 instead of
temporary condition, The report reflects this correctly.
13. Due to the site layout constraints and the detention area required we
were not able to provide the minimum separation from the road right-of-
way. Therefore, we will propose a barrier of some type in the future
sections along the roadways adjacent to the ponds.
14. Additional Node Reports have been provided to show / compare the 4''
orifice and the 6.5" (Lake 1) and 6' (Lake 2) results,
15. We have provided calculations in the drainage report to account for the
accumulation of sediment. We have illustrated this on the lake cross
sections on the Site Development Plans.
16. We are currently seeking a variance for this existing right-of-way
drainage.
17. Pipe velocities have been adjusted to meet the 2.5 ft/sec mrnimurn.
18. We have provided a minimum 2.5 of cover over all storm sewers under
pavement.
19, AR storm runs have been evised to have a minimum of 0.1 foot drop
through the manholes.
20. Pipe tables in the Construction Plans match the information provided in
the Drainage Report.
21. Invert elevations have been added to the profile for Pipe 415-414,
22. Storm profiles in the Construction Plans match the information provided in
the Pipe Input, Output and Output 11 Reports,
23. The acreage and runoff coefficient for Basin 413 has been corrected.
Cross Road Engineers, P.C.
September 5, 2012
Page 3
24. The local intensity values do match that of the City of Carmel rainfall data.
25. The acreages for Direct 1 and Direct 2 have been removed from the
allowable release rate calculations.
26. Normal Pool areas are listed within the ICPR report — Input Report.
27. Top of bank elevations for Lake #1 and #2 have been revised on the
typical pond details.
28. The drainage easement for Lake #2 has been revised to encompass the
full build out of the pond.
29. The offsite infor ation within the ICPR Report for Lake #1 has been
added to the Proposed Conditions Basin Map. We were provided the
release rates for Pond #6 (offsite Lake #1) but did not have the Tc and
CN for Pond #6. A basin was created in ICPR which was adjusted to
release the cfs for Pond #6 we were provided. Lake #2 is not receiving
any offsite drainage.
30. The Drop Structure 433 Detail and Drainage Report information have
been corrected,
31. The Drop Structure 402 Detail and Drainage Report information have
been corrected.
32. Notes have been revised to reference the correct sheet numbers for the
standard drawings denoted.
If you have any questions or com ments regarding these revisions please feel
free to give me a call at (317) 570-4841.
Very truly yours,
STOEPPELWERTH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Brett A. Huf
Cc: Matt Lohmeyer
Angie Conn
BA Wrneb
.SA55960PUL-S \Blue ..j3ook \Agency_Corresporidence‘R.esponseCtossR.oadlingiocerstiall09-04-1.2.doe