The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCorrespondencePage 2 of 3 Email: ccotter@cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M Univers7 >>> "Melissa Thomas" <mtho- :: ugessnc-engineering.com> 6/29/2010 11:08 AM >>> Carol, Please find attached the letter r: I ding in-- Sanitary Sewer Bore across WD Fitch. Thanks - Melissa Petty Thomas, F. =. LEED Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP 979-680-8840 x 113 From: Carol Cotter [n ilto:Cc , _ r:g cstx.gcv] Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 . 7 AM To: Kyle Zapalac; Melissa Thorn Cc: Alan Gibbs; Israel Koite; St( -cn A. Ma'donado Subject: Fwd: Re: CS ISD Tra-; o!tation Revised Final CD"s for City Approval Melissa/Kyle, I have not received a response i you regarding my previous email. Please be aware that the contractor cannot proceed without the pipe deflection beirr; .r'dressecand ultimately certified under engineering seal that the deflection is within tolerances. Thanks, Carol Carol L. Cotter, P.E. Senior Assistant City Engineer Public Works Department PO Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 Office: (979) 764-3570 Fax:(979) 764-3496 Email: ccotter@cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M Univers, >>> Carol Cotter 6/21/2010 11 AM >>> Melissa - The sanitary sewer bore did not as well as planned, being about 2 feet off horizontally. Contractor is wanting to relocate the downstream manhole. (This is r :'.ably an option if the new manhole is installed and the old one demolished.) That being said, there is deflection in the casinc You rill need to determine the deflection and certify that it is within allowable tolerances. Thanks, Carol Carol L. Cotter, P.E. Senior Assistant City Engineer Public Works Department PO Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 Office: (979) 764-3570 Fax: (979) 764-3496 file://C:\Documents and Setti - cootterlocal Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C29E4BFCity of College Stati... 6/29/2010 Page 3 of 3 Email: ccotter@cstx.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M Univere e >>> "Melissa Thomas" <mthor ,; =tigessnerengineering.com> 5/3/2010 11:04 AM >>> Carol, The revised Transportation she are on their way to your office for the city approval seal. We sent 9 sets total, 4 for your use, 1 for our office and 4 for Pepper =:son to have onsite for their use. Please let me know when they sealed with the City approval stamp so we can get those distributed appropriately. They are continuing work on the sanitary er line roving towards WD Fitch tomorrow. Thank you again for your help =.ttentior cn this matter, Melissa Petty Thomas, PE LEED®Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP - F"�-" 2501 Ashford Drive, Suite 102 College Station, TX 77840 P: 979-680-8840 x 113 F: 979-680-8841 mthomas@gessnerengineerinc ^m State of Texas HUB Certified www.gessnereng ineering. com file://CAI)oeuments and Setti, ,- ccotter' ,ocal Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C29E4BFCity of College Stati... 6/29/2010 Page 1 of 1 Carol Cotter - Re: Detention Pond Bottom Slopes Prom: Carol Cotter To: Kyle Zapalac Date: 11/13/2009 9:05 AM Subject: Re: Detention Pond Bottom Slopes Kyle - The lesser slopes could become a maintenance issue, but if the School District is okay with it, so are we. Carol >>> "Kyle Zapalac" <kzapalac@gessnerengineering.com> 11/12/2009 4:11 PM >>> Carol, Please see the attached documents showing slopes in the revised detention pond designs to meet your comments for the College Station ISD Transportation Center. The slopes shown are the bottom of the pond towards the pilot channels. All pilot channels have a 0.5% slope toward the outlet. Please let us know if this design will be acceptable. Thank you, Kyle Zapalac, M.E., E.I.T. Gessner Engineering, LLP 2501 Ashford Drive, Suite 102 College Station, TX 77840 P:979-680-8840 F: 979-680-8841 file://C:\Documents and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4AFD2166City... 11/13/2009 Page I of 3 Carol Cotter - RE: Re: CS Transx>rtation Revised Final CD"s for City Approval From: "Melissa Thomas" F-ithomasDigessnerengineering.com> To: "Carol Cotter" <C,_ acr@cst�.gov> Date: 6/29/2010 12:19 P Subject: RE: Re: CS ISD 'l r ;_�sportation Revised Final CD"s for City Approval CC: "Alan Gibbs" <ALI , s@cstx.gov>, "Israel Koite" <Ikoite@cstx.gov> With the deflections allowed an, =sated in the letter, the PVC SS pipe can have 12" deflection per 20' section of pipe, which would give 3' deflection over 6C ,'✓e only 'rave 2'5" deflection, so we are still acceptable on the PVC pipe. The schedule 80 steel encasement pipe allows fc S''I, deflec;',on, which would give 3' allowable deflection over the 60' of pipe. Again, we have 2'5" in the field, so we are still a ,otable. Melissa Petty Thomas, F LEED Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP 979-680-8840 x 113 From: Carol Cotter [mailto:Ccc cstx.ge,,I Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 35 AM To: Melissa Thomas Cc: Alan Gibbs; Israel Koite Subject: RE: Re: CS ISD Trans _ —ation Revised Final CD's for City Approval Melissa, Our inspector tamped the steel r- ng and %,.sually detected that the deflection occurs later in the pipe. Carol >>> "Melissa Thomas" <mthor @gessnerengineering.com> 6/29/2010 11:22 AM >>> Carol, I spoke with the drilling company ,esterday afternoon and what the letter states is what he said occurred during drilling, that it was a gradual deflection. Melissa Petty Thomas, P LEED Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP 979-680-8840 x 113 From: Carol Cotter [mailto:Cce -1�cstx.gov] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 '0 AM To: Melissa Thomas Cc: Alan Gibbs; Israel Koite Subject: RE: Re: CS ISD Trans; r: ation Revised Final CD's for City Approval Melissa, It is my understanding that the last 60 feet. Please confirm ac. Carol Carol L. Cotter, P.E. Senior Assistant City Engineer Public Works Department PO Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 Office: (979) 764-3570 Fax:(979) 764-3496 ection is not gradual along the entire 180' length of the pipe, but actually occurs within the ield cor i.itions and address. file://C:\Documents and Sett: -cotter i ocal Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4C29E4BFCity of College Stati... 6/29/2010 Page 1 of 3 Carol Cotter - RE: CSISD Transportation Center Sanitary Sewer Re -alignment From: Carol Cotter To: Melissa Thomas Date: 4/9/2010 3:36 PM Subject: RE: CSISD Transportation Center Sanitary Sewer Re -alignment CC: Danielle Charbonnet; Israel Koite Melissa - The CIP Project Manager for Fitch was Danielle Charbonnet (764-3690). The inspector was Israel Koite. I have emailed them to see what information they might have. Did you coordinate with the Fitch widening plans in the design of this crossing? Carol >>> "Melissa Thomas" <mthomas@gessnerengineering.com> 4/9/2010 2:03 PM >>> Carol, Do you have any information on the Seminole gas line from the William D. Fitch construction? I will try to contact them and see if I can find out anything as I have no idea how deep or what size it is... Melissa Petty Thomas, P.E. LEED Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP 979-680-8840 x 113 From: Carol Cotter [mailto:Ccotter@cstx.gov] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 1:57 PM To: Melissa Thomas Cc: Israel Koite Subject: RE: CSISD Transportation Center Sanitary Sewer Re -alignment Melissa- 1. Noted 2. Okay, as long as you are confident that there won't be a bust in the elevations. 3. I now see the drop manhole note on the Utility Layout Sheet. I was looking at the profile sheet. It is not called out in the profile nor reflected in the "Flowline In" elevations. As long as contractor installs a drop connection it should be fine. 4. What about the Seminole gas line? S. Noted Carol >>> "Melissa Thomas" <mthomas@gessnerengineering.com> 4/9/2010 12:12 PM >>> Carol, I have a few questions on the comments 1. 1 will clarify the portion of sewer line is public and which is private and add notes about the cocs logo on private manholes. 2. We do not have the topographic information for Fitch as it was not surveyed for this project. We did not have this information shown on the previously approved profiles either. We can add the Fitch cross section if you have construction plans you can send me? 3. We have a drop manhole called out at this station- do we need to call this out differently than we have it? 4. 1 have a call in to Kimberly Winn to find out about the depth of the gas line. This might be an issue as no matter what we are going to have to cross it at some point to tie in to the line. We are pretty much tied down to the elevation of our sanitary sewer based on the line we are tying into. I could flatten it down a bit to get it down to the minimum 0.4%, but it file://C:\Documents and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBF497CCity of College Stat... 10/6/2010 Page 2 of 3 Will only gain us a few tenths at the manhole and will not make much difference at the crossing. 5. We will shift the bore pit location to just on the other side of the existing sidewalk and extend the boring encasement to that point as well. This size of a bore pit is what the contractor said they needed. Thank you, Melissa Petty Thomas, P.E. LEED Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP 979-680-8840 x 113 From: Carol Cotter [mailto:Ccotter@cstx.gov] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:20 AM To: Melissa Thomas; Mike Campbell; Ruben DeLaO Cc: Israel Koite; Jeff Haeber; Stephen A. Maldonado Subject: Re: CSISD Transportation Center Sanitary Sewer Re -alignment Mclissa- I have the following comments for you to address; 1) Clearly indicate that the only public portion of sewer line is from the existing manhole to the manhole at Sta 2+30.92, and the remaining sewer is private. Also, private manhole lids should not have COCS logo. 2) Why is the existing grade for the sewer crossing Fitch not shown in profile? 3) TCEQ requires drop connections for flowlines entering manholes greater than 2 feet above invert. Ste 9+71.77. 4) Confirm that the vertical separation between the high pressure gas line and the sewer is acceptable to the gas company. I though separation had to be a minimum of 18" plus half diameter of pipe. Does not appear that you have this separation. 5) I don't think you can bore Fitch as shown unless you are boring the entire length for 16" encasement. As shown you will be left with a very large void area along the length of pipe not showing encasement. Is there not room for bore pit nearer to the road? Typically the bore pit and receiving pits are located right next to the ends of the encasement. Carol L. Cotter, P.E. Senior Assistant City Engineer Public Works Department PO Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 Office: (979) 764-3570 Fax: (979) 764-3496 Email: ccotter@csbc.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University >>> "Melissa Thomas"<mthomas@gessnerengineering.com> 4/8/2010 2:42 PM >>> All, We submitted copies of the revised Sanitary sewer profile and Utility Plan to the city with the re -alignment of the sanitary sewer line as discussed. Melissa Petty Thomas, PE LEED®Accredited Professional Gessner Engineering, LLP - F7451 2501 Ashford Drive, Suite 102 College Station, TX 77840 P: 979-680-8840 x 113 F: 979-680-8841 file://CADocuments and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBF497CCity of College Stat... 10/6/2010 Page 3 of 3 mthorrasia)gessnerengineering com State of Texas HUB Certified www.gessnerengineering com file://C:\Documents and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4BBF497CCity of College Stat... 10/6/2010 Page 1 of 3 Carol Cotter - RE: New CS High School and Transportation Center - Flood Study From: "Morgan Lund" <mlund@gessnerengineering.pom> To: <Ccotter@cstx.go Subject: RE: Neew CSC, Scho and Transport ti Centex- Flood Study Carol, Please take a look at our planned flood study scope below. Please let us know if you have anything else we need to add or if some of this information is unnecessary. Feel free to call me if you have any questions. General Site info / background A. To include all off the Spring Creek and Lick Creek Watershed upstream of subject site, approximately 5;,:000-acres A. Drainage areas broken down into approximately 50 acre sizes Drainage basin area descriptions with: A. Areas B. Existing Usage C. Method of Stormwater Conveyance 1. Roughness 2. Slope 3. Channel or culvert cross sections D. Design Values 1. Assumed Usage Coefficient 2. Hydraulic Length 3. Time of Concentration III. Hydrographs from each drainage area A. flat sgu a Unit Hydrographs or FEMA flows B. For each design storm 1. 2 year 2. 25 year 3. 100 year IV. Study Points A. Confluence at Spring Creek and Lick Creek B. Confluence at Alum Creek and Lick Creek C. Subject Site V. Final Analysis data to inclu s-hi tv") A. 100 year flood lain evao subject went B. Timi or peak w reti prior to and from our site w/o detention C. Ti ng for peak flo s in creak and from our site w/ de` tention n — at roadway? VI 1. Conclusions — detention at the subject site is/is not detrimental to the flood plain in this area. file:HC:\Documents and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4AA66A4ACity ... 9/9/2009 Page 2 of 3 Thanks, Morgan S. Lund, E.I.T. Gessner Engineering, LLP - College Station voice: 979.680.8840 x 105 From: Kyle Zapalac Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 3:50 PM To: Morgan Lund; Thomas Gessner Subject: FW: New CS High School and Transportation Center - Flood Study Kyle Zapalac, E.I.T. Gessner Engineering, LLP From: Carol Cotter [mailto:Ccotter@cstx.gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 2:07 PM To: Kyle Zapalac Cc: Alan Gibbs Subject: Re: New CS High School and Transportation Center - Flood Study Kyle - I have researched the flood studies we have on Lick Creek and Spring Creek for the CSISD Transportation Center. Based on what I can determine for the Rock Prairie/WD Fitch location, there was a CLOMR approved in 1995 which realigned a section of Lick Creek around the landfill. The followup LOMR expired during review, so was not approved. This adds to the difficulty of the evaluation of whether or not detention is necessary for this site since the effective models do not reflect existing conditions. Since your project is adjacent to the Primary System it may be demonstrated that detention is not beneficial to the system with an engineering timing analysis. The analysis should include; 1. All upstream development broken into basins of size similar to the development being studied, 2. If FEMA Q's are not available, all basins should be analyzed in a similar fashion using an SCS balanced triangular hydrograph or other approved methods, 3. Study points should include confluences Spring Creek @ Lick Creek and Alum Creek @ Lick Creek, and 4. Site flows should be routed to study points in the analysis. Note, this is specialized H&H analysis, not a standard drainage report. I am still researching the flood studies on the high school property. Please forward this email to Morgan. She had requested the information previously, and I don't have her email address. Call if you have any questions. Carol Carol L. Cotter, P.E. Senior Assistant City Engineer Public Works Department PO Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 Office: (979) 764-3570 Fax: (979) 764-3496 Email: ccotter@csb(.gov City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University >>> "Kyle Zapalac" <kzapalac@gessnerengineering.com> 8/4/2009 2:19 PM >>> Carol, file://CADocuments and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4AA66A4ACity ... 9/9/2009 Page 3 of 3 I believe at one of the College Station ISD High School and Transportation Center meetings there was a discussion of flood studies which had been done at both site locations. If flood studies are available could you please send them to me for us to use in our drainage design? Thanks for your help, please let me know if you have any questions. Kyle Zapalac, EIT Gessner Engineering, LLP 2501 Ashford Drive, Suite 102 College Station, TX 77840 P:979-680-8840 F: 979-680-8841 College Station- Home of Texas A&M University College Station- Home of Texas A&M University file://C:\Documents and Settings\ccotter\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4AA66A4ACity ... 9/9/2009