6.4. & 6.5. SR 02-19-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Scott Hadicker January 21,2002 Page Three · The emergency overflow and high water elevations need to be included on the plan to vedfy the elevation of the buildings. · At the southeast comer of the plat, there are two areas where storm sewer pipe extends out into the rear lot areas to pick up Iow points. We question whether or not these storm sewer extensions are necessary. Closer examination of the natural topography in these areas should take place to verify whether or not storm sewer ,is necessary to pick up these isolated drainage areas. · There is grading shown on the exception to the plat all along the frontage of Street C. Permission from the owner of the exception will be necessary before the grading plan can be approved. · A temporary cul-de-sac meeting the City dimensions will need to be constructed at the south end of Street C. If the Developer is unable to get an easement from the Brown property to construct a temporary cul-de-sac, one of the lots in this location may become unbuildable to facilitate the cul-de-sac construction. · When the grading plan is resubmitted with the above changes and/or corrections, it should be submitted at a 50 scale. PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN · The dead-end watermain proposed in Street D and Street E needs to be looped together to eliminate the dead-ends and to facilitate a higher fire flow in these areas. Sanitary sewer and water services should be shown at the appropriate locations for serving future lots to be developed in the exception. Also, an extension of the mainline water and sewer, if appropriate, needs to be shown into the exception. We are reviewing the ERMU's water model to determine an appropriate routing and sizing for a trunk watermain through this development. We will provide this information as soon as it is available. This development will be provided a trunk credit for any trunk sized watermain required above 8-inch. STORM DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS · A review of the storm drainage calculations submitted indicates that the calculations are for Trott Brook Farms South and Trott Brook Crossing. When the two plats are looked at for storm drainage purposes together, the drainage calculations are acceptable. Essentially, the drainage calculations are requiring Trott Brook Crossing to retain more of its drainage so that Trott Brook Farms South can discharge at a slightly higher rate than proposed. At some point, the Developers of Trott Brook Crossing will need to submit in wdting that they are agreeable to restricting the discharge from their site to a lower level so that Trott Brook Farms South can discharge at a higher rate. Ltr 1-21-02 Harticker.rev Howard R, Green Company CONSULTING ENGINEERS