Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-31-22_EMAIL CORRESPONDANCE1 Randy Visser From:Mikaela Schultz <mschultz@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent:Monday, October 31, 2022 4:45 PM To:'Ryan J. Hudock' Cc:Randy Visser; Adam Oliver Subject:RE: Evergreen Shops SP Question - 22222 Attachments:Untitled attachment 00133.txt; Untitled attachment 00136.htm Good afternoon Ryan, Please see my prelim responses in blue below, keep in mind these need to be uploaded to pdox as a response for archiving purposes. If you wish, you can just upload this email in the next revision cycle as response.  Ref #8: We just provided the projected sewer demands (and assumed water was the same) in the report since it was believed that this is needed for keeping track of downstream sewer and lit station capacity. There is only one water service for this building and no fire services. Do we still need to address the anticipated water demand? If so, I’m having trouble finding the section of the DSS that specifies water demand, only sewer demand rates are listed. Let us know what you’d like to see. –It’s in there, just certify/stamp/sign the water waste water report, and that will be fine. (Ref#7 directs this too)  Ref #9: The recent civil set show curbing around the whole interior parking and drive aisle area. Can you please confirm whether this has been addressed already or is still outstanding? Also, the SW design report with a stamp date of 9/8/22 has been updated accordingly. It’s looks like this comment is from our old SW design report, which was from August 2022. The curb is there, I will be able to resolve this one.  Ref #21: Would adding additional info to the northern swale (such as spot elevations, flowline slope, etc) be acceptable to address this? This comment is bringing up too many unrelated points and doesn’t really make sense. Also, I’m not sure why the stormwater manager, Adam, is commenting on the civil grading plan. He reviews the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), which will follow site plan as part of building permit. The whole area generally slopes downhill to the north similar to most of Bozeman (LiDAR contours depicted on the City GIS as well) so this site plan addresses run-on from the south and run-off to north. Let us know what you think here. -This comment is from Storm I have cc’d Adam Oliver for his input. Feel free to call if you have any additional questions for me, City of Bozeman MT Mikaela Schultz, EI | Transportation and Engineering (406) 582-2388 From: Randy Visser <randy@visserarchitects.net> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2022 3:07 PM To: 'Ryan J. Hudock' <Ryan.J.Hudock@imegcorp.com>; Mikaela Schultz <mschultz@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Evergreen Shops SP Question - 22222 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I need to keep this moving? Where are we at with this? Thanks, 2 randy visser visser architects, P.C. 163 quiet water way manhattan, mt 59741 ph. (406) 282-9922 From: Ryan J. Hudock <Ryan.J.Hudock@imegcorp.com> Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2022 3:38 PM To: Mikaela Schultz <mschultz@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: Randy Visser <randy@visserarchitects.net> Subject: Evergreen Shops SP Question - 22222 Hi Mikaela, We’re working on addressing comments on this project and I was hoping to clarify a few things so that our resubmittal meets expectations. The architect send us a screenshot of the engineering-related comments that apply to IMEG (see attached). Below are my specific questions:  Ref #8: We just provided the projected sewer demands (and assumed water was the same) in the report since it was believed that this is needed for keeping track of downstream sewer and lit station capacity. There is only one water service for this building and no fire services. Do we still need to address the anticipated water demand? If so, I’m having trouble finding the section of the DSS that specifies water demand, only sewer demand rates are listed. Let us know what you’d like to see.  Ref #9: The recent civil set show curbing around the whole interior parking and drive aisle area. Can you please confirm whether this has been addressed already or is still outstanding? Also, the SW design report with a stamp date of 9/8/22 has been updated accordingly. It’s looks like this comment is from our old SW design report, which was from August 2022.  Ref #21: Would adding additional info to the northern swale (such as spot elevations, flowline slope, etc) be acceptable to address this? This comment is bringing up too many unrelated points and doesn’t really make sense. Also, I’m not sure why the stormwater manager, Adam, is commenting on the civil grading plan. He reviews the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), which will follow site plan as part of building permit. The whole area generally slopes downhill to the north similar to most of Bozeman (LiDAR contours depicted on the City GIS as well) so this site plan addresses run-on from the south and run-off to north. Let us know what you think here. Sorry for all the questions. I just want to make sure this next submittal is 100%. Thanks for taking the time to review this! Ryan Hudock, P.E. Civil Project Engineer To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.C&H | IMEG Corp. C&H | now IMEG 1091 Stoneridge Drive | Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-1115 Ryan.J.Hudock@imegcorp.com (Please note my new email address) website | vCard | map | regional news Learn more about our transition to IMEG Corp. 3 This email may contain confidential and/or private information. If you received this email in error please delete and notify sender.