The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEngineering Dept comments 8-1-20131 Conn, Angelina V From:Greg Snelling [gsnelling@snellingeng.com] Sent:Thursday, August 22, 2013 9:45 AM To:Foley, Amanda J Cc:Duncan, Gary R; Barnes, David R; Thomas, John G; Conn, Angelina V; Boone, Rachel M.; 'Greg R. Hoyes'; 'Greg Ilko' Subject:RE: City of Carmel Docket No. 11100013 SU Saint Mary and Saint Mark Coptic Orthodox Church Attachments:Letter to AFoley - variance for direct discharge.pdf; Cost Estimate to comply with Thoroughfare Plan.pdf; Kendall Wood Plat.pdf; Letter to AFoley - BPWS.pdf Amanda, please see the attached files that should address comments 1 through 4. Once I hear back from John, I will submit the variance request letter for #5. Can you let me know what the upgraded pipe would be from double wall smooth interior (i.e. Hancor HI‐Q or ADS N12) which is what we are proposing for the perforated pipe? Thank you. Greg Snelling, PE, LEED AP Snelling Engineering, LLC 13295 Illinois Street, Suite 142 Carmel, IN 46032 317.663.3206 (office) 317.697.0180 (mobile) From: Foley, Amanda J [mailto:afoley@carmel.in.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:15 PM To: 'Greg Snelling' Cc: Duncan, Gary R; Barnes, David R; Thomas, John G; Conn, Angelina V; Boone, Rachel M.; Greg R. Hoyes (Greg.Hoyes@hamiltoncounty.in.gov); Greg Ilko (gilko@crossroadengineers.com) Subject: RE: City of Carmel Docket No. 11100013 SU Saint Mary and Saint Mark Coptic Orthodox Church Greg, Reviewing this project, it appears that most of my previous comments have not been addressed: 1. Comment 1 of a letter dated March 25, 2013 and Comment 1 of a letter dated May 22, 2013. Section 2.09 of Chapter 2, Article 1 of Chapter 10 of the Carmel City Code requires that all projects and Improvements or authorizations under the jurisdiction of the zoning ordinance that adjoin, include, are served by or affect existing streets bearing a designation on the Thoroughfare Plan shall conform to the requirements of the Thoroughfare Plan in regards to (1) the dedication of public Rights‐of ‐way; (2) design and construction of the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage of the project; (3) Setback; and (4) any other affected development standards. Section 2.09 further states that the petitioner may elect to provide a monetary commitment equal to the value to otherwise design and construct the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage. The value of the commitment shall be equal to the difference in the value to otherwise design and construct the improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage, minus the cost to design and construct those improvements indicated by the Thoroughfare Plan across the roadway frontage that will be installed by the petitioner. The values established above shall be approved by the department of Engineering. Section 2.09 further states that conformance with the Thoroughfare Plan as outlined above shall be in addition to any improvements deemed necessary by: (1) Chapter 5, Sections 5.03.05 and 5.05.02(3); (2) Statements per Chapter 24, Section 24.02(B)(5)(e); and (3) Other applicable standards. Our office will contact you to discuss this comment further. Please submit a cost 2 estimate for the commitment to the Non‐reverting Thoroughfare Fund, per your 5/22/13 phone conversation with Amanda Foley. The Department repeats this comment. 2. Comment 11 of a letter dated March 1, 2013 and Comment 6 of a letter dated March 25, 2013 and Comment 2 of a letter dated May 22, 2013. Board of Public Works and Safety approval is required for the two curb cuts. The Department repeats this comment. Please proceed with submitting the curb cut requests for the curb cuts shown on the construction plans. The Department repeats this comment. After searching thoroughly, I cannot find any indication that this request has been submitted to our office. 3. Comment 16 of a letter dated March 1, 2013 and Comment 8 of a letter dated March 25, 2013 and Comment 3 of a letter dated May 22, 2013. The northeast corner of the site cannot direct discharge to the right‐of‐way without being treated and detained. A variance is required for any direct stormwater discharges. At a minimum, the driveway runoff needs to be detained on ‐site. However, the Department will support a variance for the grassed areas to direct discharge to the right‐of‐way with no detention. It still appears that the north drive is direct discharging from the site through the existing yard inlet in the Shelborne Road right‐of‐way. Please verify this driveway is directed to the onsite storm sewer system and detention facility. Thank you for the grading changes. As previously stated, the Department will support a variance for the direct stormwater discharge from the grassed areas. However, I cannot find any evidence that a variance request letter has been submitted to our office. 4. Comment 17 of a letter dated March 1, 2013 and Comment 9 of a letter dated March 25, 2013 and Comment 4 of a letter dated May 22, 2013. Please label any offsite easements. Is an offsite easement required for the storm sewer outlet in Kendall Wood Subdivision? Does the storm sewer cross through a Tree Preservation Easement in Kendall Wood? Per City Code, no improvements are allowed within a Tree Preservation Easement. Since Kendall Wood has not been platted yet, it would be best to contact Kendall Wood’s engineer and have him accommodate a break in the TPE on their site and provide a 30‐foot drainage easement for the Church’s storm sewer connection. Please also contact Daren Mindham for his approval of any changes to Kendall Wood’s TPE. Please send Stoeppelwerth a CAD file of the drainage easement for them to incorporate into the Kendall Wood final plat. Please provide me a status update regarding this item and the discussions with Kendall Wood. The Department needs a copy of the easement agreement or an indication from that development that the drainage easement will be platted with their final plat. 5. Comment 23 of a letter dated March 1, 2013 and Comment 11 of a letter dated March 25, 2013 and previous Comment 5 of a letter dated May 22, 2013. 2.5 feet of minimum cover is required along the storm sewers. We will support a variance for the minimum pipe cover; however, a condition of the variance will be to upgrade to a higher class of pipe. Please submit a letter of request for the variance as such. Please verify with John Thomas that perforated pipe is necessary and required in this area (between structures 4‐7). The Department repeats this comment. Please verify with John Thomas that the perforated pipe is necessary in this area, and please submitted a variance request. I cannot find any evidence that a variance request has been submitted for this item. Please provide an update on the above outstanding items. Thanks, Amanda From: Greg Snelling [mailto:gsnelling@snellingeng.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 11:31 AM To: Foley, Amanda J Subject: FW: City of Carmel Docket No. 11100013 SU Saint Mary and Saint Mark Coptic Orthodox Church Amanda, can you let me know what outstanding issues there are from your office for this project. I believe they will be doing the sanitary sewer extension soon, but there might be some additional fundraising necessary to start the building. I just want to be ready when they ask. Thank you.