| Date |
Text |
| 2022-02-14 12:02:12 | THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM THE REVIEW OF THE |
| | 11-23-2021 SUBMITTAL: |
| | |
| | 1. PGD PLAN CALLS FOR THE PLUGGING OF THE SW INVERT OF |
| | THE STORM MH AT THE INTERSECTION OF 10TH STREET AND |
| | RAILROAD AVE. THE DEMOLITION PLAN CALLS FOR THE STORM |
| | PIPE CONNECTED TO THE SW INVERT TO REMAIN. IF THE |
| | INVERT IS BEING PLUGGED, THE PIPE SHOULD BE REMOVED AS |
| | WELL AS THE CURB INLET CONNECTED AT THE OTHER END OF |
| | THE PIPE. THE EXISTING INLET WILL BE LOCATED IN THE |
| | PROPOSED 8 FT WIDE SIDEWALK. IF THE STORM PIPE REMAINS, |
| | SHOW IT ON THE SANITARY SEWER PROFILE. |
| | |
| | 2. WHERE RAISED CURB OR CURB AND GUTTER IS PROPOSED, |
| | CONFIRM THE BACK OF SIDEWALK WILL BE HIGHER THAN THE |
| | TOP OF CURB FOR POSITIVE DRAINAGE OF THE SIDEWALK. |
| | |
| | 3. PIPE CONFLICT INFORMATION SHOULD INCLUDE THE PIPE |
| | THICKNESS WHEN CALCULATION TOP OF PIPE OR BOTTOM OF |
| | PIPE ELEVATIONS. THE CLEARANCE DISTANCE SHOULD BE FROM |
| | OUTSIDE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE OF PIPE. |
| | |
| | 4. THE STORM PIPE BETWEEN S-101 AND S-102 IS AT AN |
| | ADVERSE SLOPE AND MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE 6-INCH |
| | WATER MAIN TO THE FIRE HYDRANT. CALLOUT CONFLICT |
| | INFORMATION ON THE WATER AND SEWER PLANS. |
| | |
| | 5. THE 12-INCH WATER MAIN IS CROSSING UNDER THE |
| | EXISTING 15-INCH RCP STORM PIPE FROM STRUCTURE S-101. |
| | MAKE SURE THERE IS ADEQUATE VERTICAL CLEARANCE PER |
| | PBCHD. |
| | |
| | 6. STRUCTURE S-102 MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH SANITARY |
| | SEWER LATERAL. IS THE LATERAL BEING REPLACED OR |
| | REMOVED? |
| | |
| | 7. NO PROPOSED DRAINAGE SHOWN ON N. RAILROAD AVE |
| | BETWEEN 7TH ST AND 8TH ST. SECTIONS G AND H SHOW |
| | PROPOSED 18? RCP STORM. ADVISE HOW THE NEW GUTTERS WILL |
| | DRAIN INTO THE EXISTING INLETS AT 7TH ST. |
| | |
| | 8. LABEL RIGHT OF WAY LIMITS ON THE PGD SECTIONS. |
| | |
| | 9. SHOW MILL AND RESURFACING LIMITS ON ALL STREETS AND |
| | ALLEYS. |
| | |
| | 10. SOME PROPOSED DRAINAGE STRUCTURES ARE SHOWN WITHIN |
| | CROSSWALKS. |
| | |
| | 11. SHOULD CROSSWALK ON N. RAILROAD AVE AT AT 7TH |
| | STREET BE CLOSER TO THE INTERSECTION? |
| | |
| | 12. ALL RIGHT OF WAY LINES FOR STREETS AND ALLEYS |
| | SHOULD BE SHOWN AND LABELED. |
| | |
| | 13. LIGHT POLES APPEAR TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH |
| | UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. |
| | |
| | 14. EXPLAIN HOW GUTTERS WILL FLOW AROUND UBER/LIFT |
| | DROPOFF/PICKUP AREAS. |
| | |
| | 15. CONFIRM SLOPE DIRECTION FOR AREAS OUTSIDE OF RIGHT |
| | OF WAY FOR SECTIONS F1, F2, AND F3. |
| | |
| | 16. DOES THE ON-SITE EXFILTRATION TRENCH DETAIL ON |
| | SHEET C5.1 APPLY TO THE EXFILTRATION TRENCHES ON N. |
| | RAILROAD AVE.? CONFIRM THE ELEVATIONS LISTED ON THE |
| | DETAIL. SHOW WHERE THE SILVA CELLS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED |
| | (HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL OFFSETS) WHEN ADJACENT TO AN |
| | EXFILTRATION TRENCH (SEE HARDSCAPE PLANS FOR SILVA CELL |
| | DETAIL). |
| | |
| | 17. NOTE 2 ON FDOT STANDARD PLAN 711-011 (SHEET 10 OF |
| | 13) DISCUSSES MAKING THE CROSSWALK STRIPING PARALLEL TO |
| | THE LANE LINES WHEN THE SPECIAL EMPHASIS CROSSWALK IS |
| | NOT PERPENDICULAR TO THE LANE LINES. THIS COMMENT |
| | APPLIES TO THE CROSSWALKS CROSSING THE SIDE STREETS. |
| | |
| | TRACY WARD, PE |
| | SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER |
| | ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT |
| | 561-494-1120 (O) |
| | 561-351-0510 (M) |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| |
Print |
