Date |
Text |
2010-02-03 15:23:47 | ENGINEERING REVIEWER: |
| DEAN S. LAUDERMILK, PROJECT COORDINATOR |
| PHONE: 561-494-1083, FAX: 561-494-1116 |
| EMAIL: [email protected] |
| 1ST REVIEW, FAILED. |
| |
| GENERAL COMMENTS: |
| 1. CITY ENGINEERING APPROVED MATERIALS LIST (AML) NEEDS |
| TO BE USED WHENEVER MATERIALS USED ARE LISTED IN THE |
| MANUAL. SUCH ITEMS INCLUDE THE 12" LINE AND THE 4" LINE |
| AND WALL SLEEVES. THE AML CAN BE FOUND AT |
| HTTP://WWW.WPB.ORG/ENGINEERING/ENG_FORMS.PHP , IT IS |
| THE SEVENTH FORM LISTED. |
| |
| SHEET 5: |
| 1. PIPE PENETRATIONS ARE TO HAVE WALL SLEEVES USED. |
| 1-A. THE NEW 12" LINE GOING THRU THE NEW RECEIVING TANK |
| AND INTO THE WETWELL WILL NEED TO USE THE SLEEVES. |
| 1-B. SO WILL THE 4" DRAIN LINE. |
| 1-C. THE TWO DUMP LINES (4 AND 3" INTO THE NEW |
| RECEIVING TANK WILL NEED WALL SLEEVES ALSO. |
| 1-D. THE 12" LINE AND THE 4" LINE PENETRATION WILL NEED |
| TO HAVE HOLES CORED INTO THE WETWELL. THE HOLES WILL |
| NEED TO BE 4" (MINIMUM) LARGER THAN THE OUTSIDE OF THE |
| SLEEVES USED. THE SIZE OF THE HOLES LISTED WILL NOT |
| WORK. |
| 2. "PROPOSED CURB DRAIN" IS SHOWN AT THE RIGHT SIDE OF |
| THE PLAN: |
| 2-A. IT APPEARS TWO ARE SHOWN, BUT WHERE ARE THE PIPES |
| THAT DRAIN FROM THEM? THERE ARE NO DETAILS FOR THE CURB |
| DRAINS, DO YOU MEAN TO BUILD A CURB WITH FLUMES THRU |
| THE CURBS? THIS IS TOTALLY UNCLEAR. SEE 2-B |
| 2-B. CROSS SECTION ON SHEET 5, B/S7 SHOWS THE CONCRETE |
| SLAB, EAST OF THE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY IS TO BE THE SAME |
| ELEVATION AS THE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY, WHY NOT RAISE UP |
| THE EAST SLAB SO IT IS LEVEL WITH THE TOP OF THE CURB, |
| THEN NO FLUMES WOULD BE NEEDED AND THE SLAB EAST OF THE |
| CURBS WILL DRAIN ACROSS THE CURBS. |
| 3. THE NOTE "SLOPE PROPOSED CONCRETE PAD AND REPAIRED |
| ASPHALT PAVEMENT TOWARDS PROPOSED ROADWAY DRAIN. THERE |
| IS NO APPARENT ASHPHALT, EXCEPT TO THE EAST OF THE |
| CONSTRUCTION. WHERE THE ARROW IS POINTING IS ALL NEW |
| CONCRETE. CALL OUT WHERE ANY NEW ASPHALT IS TO BE |
| INSTALLED. |
| 4. A HOSE BIB IS SHOWN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE NEW |
| RECEIVING TANK, I WOULD SUGGEST ANOTHER BE INSTALLED |
| WHERE THE LINE IS TIED BACK IN NEAR THE WETWELL. ALSO, |
| THE HOSE BIB(S) WILL BE SIGNED "NON-POTABLE WATER" |
| SINCE IT IS ON THE PROCESS WATER LINE, CORRECT? |
| 5. 2 - 3" 90 DEGREE BENDS ARE SHOWN ON THE RELOCATED |
| PROCESS WATER LINE. ON SHEET 6 THE ELBOWS SHOWN ARE 45 |
| DEGREE BENDS. WHICH IS IT? IF THE ELBOWS ON SHEET 6 ARE |
| THE EXISITNG, WHERE ARE THE NEW 90 DEGREE BENDS AND |
| THREE WOULD NEED TO BE USED, NOT TWO AS SHOWN. |
| |
| SHEET 6: |
| 1. THE ROUTING OF THE NEW 3" WATER LINE IS NOT SHOWN, |
| HOW WILL THE LINE BE OFFSET DOWN WITH 1 - 90 DEGREE |
| BEND AND THEN EAST WITH 1 - 90 DEGREE BEND TO THE EAST, |
| AND NOT HAVE IT CONFLICT WITH THE 12" AND 4" DRAIN |
| LINES? |
| |
| SHEET 7: |
| 1. THE SECONDARY POUR IN THE BOTTOM OF THE TANK SHOULD |
| END AT THE SAME ELEVATION AS THE INVERT OF THE 12" LINE |
| LEAVING THE TANK, NOT AS SHOWN. ALSO, SEE COMMENT 1-A |
| FOR SHEET 5 THE SLEEVE WILL SET THE INVERT OF THE 12" |
| HIGHER. |
| 2. A PREFORMED WATER STOP AND KEY WAY IS PROPOSED WHERE |
| THE 12" LINE EXITS THE TANK, THIS WILL NOT WORK, THE |
| KEYWAY WILL NEED TO BE ABOVE THE WATER STOP. EITHER |
| LOWER THE BOTTOM SLAB, OR RAISE THE 12" PIPE. |
| 3. A 1/4" THICK ALUMIUM DIMOND PLATE IS TO BE USED TO |
| COVER THE TANK. WILL THIS BE SAFE ENOUGH FOR A PERSON |
| TO WALK ON? |
| |
| SHEET 8: |
| 1. A WALL SLEEVE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE WALL |
| PENETRATION. THE HOLE FOR THE 8" PIPE WILL NEED TO BE |
| LARGE THAN WHAT IS CALLED OUT (12"). |
| |
| ADDITIONAL NOTES: |
| PLUMBING REVIEW K. STEVENS FAILED PLAN DUE TO THE |
| DUMPSTER PAD IS NOT ROOFED AND THE CATCH BASIN DRAINS |
| INTO THE SEPTAGE WETWELL. I EXPLAINED THAT WE CAN NOT |
| ALLOW THE FLUIDS TO DRAIN INTO A STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM, |
| BUT THAT THEY NEED TO GO BACK INTO THE TREATMENT CYCLE, |
| INCLUDING ANY RAIN WATER COLLECTED. HE SHOULD BE |
| CHANGING THIS COMMENT, BUT, YOU MAY WANT TO CONTACT HIM |
| DIRECTLY. |
| |
| |