HomeMy WebLinkAboutFile Documents.33 MINING STOCK PKWY.0093-2020-BRES (6)Column1 Column2 Column3 Column4 Column5 Column6 Column7 Column8 Column9
Burlingame Phase III - COA Permit Comment Response 2 - Engineering - 03-17-2021
* The following matrix are the Engineering COA Permit Comments 2 per the Permit drawings dated 12-11-2020. The comments are organized per department review and contain the original comment information along with design team
response and the design team member responsible for the response.
Engineering Comments - PJM Reviewer - 359 Design
File Page Parties Notes Design Team Member Design Team Response Date Complete
E-P2.1 90.Civil Phase 3 Easement
Coordination.20210212.pdf
[1] C5.01-UTIL 1 Civil Water easement width shall be 25' for lines
12" and smaller to comply with COA Water
Department standards. Revise the easement
exhibit to reflect this. Note these easements
must be finalized prior to CO.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: The easement has been widened
to 25-ft. Supplemental easement exhibits &
descriptions will be updated accordingly
E-P2.2 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 23 Civil The geotech report from Kumar calls out at
least 2' between the water service lines and
the building footers needs to be provided.
Building 10 profile appears to be right at 2', if
this is not achievable in the field, inform the
COA and a change order may be required.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: A min. of 2-ft clearance is provided
for Bldg 10's water service. A dimension has been
added to the profile to provide further clarificiations
E-P2.3 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 24 Civil 2' separation from the service line to the
building footer is not maintained on building
15 per the requirements of the Kumar geotech
report. Increasing the depth will violate the
bury depth requirements of the Distribution
Standards. Propose solutions for this conflict,
to be discussed with COA Engineering and
Water.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: A min. of 2-ft clearance is provided
for Bldg 15's water service. A dimension has been
added to the profile to provide further clarificiations
E-P2.4 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 24 Civil The geotech report from Kumar calls out at
least 2' between the water service lines and
the building footers needs to be provided.
Building 14B profile appears to be right at 2', if
this is not achievable in the field, inform the
COA and a change order may be required.
HP-Kumar Geotech SE Response: A min. of 2-ft clearance is provided
for Bldg 14B's water service. A dimension has
been added to the profile to provide further
clarificiations
E-P2.5 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 24 Civil 2' separation from the service line to the
building footer is not maintained on building
13A per the Kumar geotech report.
Increasing the depth will violate the bury depth
requirements of the Distribution Standards.
Propose solutions for this conflict, to be
discussed with COA Engineering and Water.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: A min. of 2-ft clearance is provided
for Bldg 13A's water service. A dimension has
been added to the profile to provide further
clarificiations
E-P2.6 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 24 Civil The geotech report from Kumar calls out at
least 2' between the water service lines and
the building footers needs to be provided.
Building 14F profile appears to be right at 2', if
this is not achievable in the field, inform the
COA and a change order may be required
.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: A min. of 2-ft clearance is provided
for Bldg 14F's water service. A dimension has
been added to the profile to provide further
clarificiations.
E-P2.7 90.Civil Plans.20201211.pdf 44 Civil Update Detail E for the 4" service line floor
penetration detail to include the
recommendations of the geotech report
prepared by Kumar (ie 2' vertical separation).
Bedding and backfill specs shall still comply
with COA Water Distribution Standards.
Sopris Engineering SE Response: The recommendations provided
within Kumar's letter dated Feb. 19, 2021 have
been added as notes to this detail. In addition,
further discussions with the Water Dept. took
place on
3-17-2021 to discuss the use of Class 6
aggregate base course for bedding material in
lieu of 3/4" screened rock. The water dept.
determined that this was acceptable and therefore
the notes and details have been amended
accordingly.
03/19/2021