0808_001.pdfOCE
OConnell Civil Engineering — 1508 Hoyt Avenue, Everett, WA 98201
Phone: 206-747-3494 email: ojerry26@yahoo.com
4. c3 piping clearance conflicts: no dependable as -built data was found for the existing underground
improvements, their location can only be assumed and potential conflicts field verified during
construction. The following note has been added on 0 where appropriate to alert the contractor:
`twisting utility locations in this area are very approximate. Contractor shall
determine as -built data prior to construction and shall `fit -in -field' as needed Design
revisions may be required '
5. 0 driveway runoff control: on 0 the detention tank has been moved under the new driveway and
more of the existing driveway (580sf) has been replaced: berms at cb's #4, 45, #6 have been added to
direct water into the cb grates. In addition, curbing has been added to portions of the new driveway to
better direct runoff.
6. c3 footing/wall drain (solid or perforated): a legend has been added on c3 to clarify solid or perforated
drains; the cad line types have been revised to correspond to the legend. (the previous line type was
chosen not to designate solid or perforated, but to help distinguish the drains from other improvements)
7. c4 detention tank bedding detail: a pipe bedding detail has been added and the detention system detail
has been revised on c4. A note has been added for contractor to obtain detention tank shop drawings from
the manufacturer prior to construction. The wall/flg drains shown were not intended to be buoyancy
drains for the tank. if tank drains are required it will be at the recommendation of the soils engineer once
the actual subsurface conditions are known during construction.
Planning division: Amber Groll, planner
Comment #4b — walls in setbacks:
The following were added to sheet c3:
-wall height callout
-note about 3' height limitation
(note: the remaining comments to be addressed by others)
Jerry OConnell, P.E. OCE engineering
1403-Itr-replyl -bldg
DATE
TO:
12/18/2018
Rod Wickham
Rid design("a)hotmail.com
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
PLANNING DMSION
425.771.0220
FROM: Amber Groll, Planner
amber groll(iyednumdswa.gov
RE: Plan Check BLD2018-r><r
1 4 176"' St, Edmonds
New SFR
On behalf of the Planning Division, I have reviewed the above building permit application. During
review of the subject submittal, it was found that the following information, corrections, or clarifications
need to be addressed. Please respond to the following items, so that I can complete my review:
Height:
a. Pursuant to ECDC 21.4.030.B, the average height level is determined by averaging elevations of
the downward projections of the four corners of the smallest rectangle which will enclose all of
the building including projections such as bay windows, and upper levels decks and balconies.
Chimneys and eaves projecting no more than 30 inches from the exterior wall of the building and
uncovered decks may be excluded. Please 'show,the=height:rectangle•to include alhof-the-above,
and who the average _gradmum height allowed, and'proposed heights on at least one=,
elevation view. See also�kt►ndout B41 (attached).
b. The property is located within the RS-12 (Single Family Residential, 12,000 square feet
minimum lot size). The height maximum in this zone is 25'. Because the height is shown within
12 inches of the maximum height permitted for the zone, a final letter of height confirmation
fro;jucensecl surveyor shall be provided upon completion of the structure.
Critical Area,'
r y e _
this parcel of land has not et had a c c aT a detemnmation, ne is required before
p anntri can complete its review of the proposal. The critical area otiee on title recorded under
AFN 201710200194 qualifies for this parcel so a new notice on title is not required.
�D3Geotechnical Report:
a. Please submit a geotechnical report that addresses the proposed development. A geotechnical
report consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.80.050 and addressing the criteria in ECDC
23.80.060 and 23.80.070 must be submitted.
Setbacks
a. The front setback on the site plan is labeled at 23'-0" but measures to 29'-6". Please clarify and