V3 RESUBMISSION Response to Township Engineers Review 1 Dated November 3 2022

5 18. The site plan drawings must be revised to include profiles of the following storm sewer lines: a. Basin #1B to Structure — (61). b. Structure — (62) to Structure — (60). PETRY RESPONSE: The profile from Basin #1B to MH #8-1 has been added to the plans (See Sheet SP-11). It should be noted that Structures 60, 61, and 62 are existing structures that are to remain. The plans have been revised to clarify this. 19. Sheet SP-4 shows that Basin #1B will have 2-80 ft lengths and 2-40 ft lengths of 48" HDPE pipe (total 240 ft). However, the Pond No. 3 — Basin #1B Pond Report in the Stormwater Management Report shows 5-60 ft lengths of 48" pipe (total 300 ft). This discrepancy must be resolved. PETRY RESPONSE: Basin #1B has been revised to call out for 5-60 ft lengths of 48” HDPE pipe, totaling 300 ft (See Sheet SP-4). 20. Sheet SP-4 shows that the 48" HDPE pipes in Basin #1B will have an invert elevation of 404.00 whereas the Pond No. 3 — Basin #1B Pond Report shows that the invert elevation will be 409. This discrepancy must be resolved. PETRY RESPONSE: The Pond Report has been revised to show the correct invert elevation of 404.00. 21. Sheet SP-4 shows that perforated HDPE pipe is proposed in Basin #1A and Basin #1B. We note that 25-29.4h stipulates that whenever a stormwater management design includes one or more BMPs that will infiltrate stormwater into subsoil, the design engineer shall assess the hydraulic impact on the groundwater table and design the site so as to avoid hydraulic impacts. PETRY RESPONSE: The site plan has been revised show that the pipes are not perforated, as the systems are detention basins and are not designed for infiltration. (See Sheet SP-4).