bld20120661-Swedish_Medical_Ctr-E2.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE:October 16, 2012
TO:Brad Hinthorne
Brad.hinthorne@perkinswill.com
FROM:Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
RE:Application#:bld20120661
Project:Swedish Medical Center
Project Address: 21704 Highway 99
During review of the above noted application, it was found that the following information,
corrections, or clarifications are needed. Please redline plans or submit three (3) sets of revised
plans/documents with a written response to each of the items below to Linda Thornquist.
City of Edmonds handouts, standard details and development code can be referenced on the City
website.
Review 1 –September 11, 2012
Review 2 –October 16, 2012
GENERAL
10/16/12 –Cost estimate was provided and is currently under review.
1.
9/11/12 -Please provide an itemized engineers cost estimate, including units and unit prices, for
both on-site and off-site (right-of-way) improvements, including traffic control.The City
recommends use of the King County Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet.
A bond is required to be placed for all right-of-way improvements. Theamount of the bond
o
will be based on 120% of the City approved estimate for all right-of-way improvements.
The City will inform you of the appropriate bond amount after review of the cost estimate.
Bond forms can be obtained from Marie Harrison, Permit Coordinator –425-771-0220 or
Harrison@ci.edmonds.wa.us
Inspection fees for this project will be calculated at 2.2% of the 120% City approved
o
estimate for all improvements. As inspection fees were paid under the previous permit and
some but not all of the improvements were installed, it will be necessary for you to clearly
outline this with your submittal so it can be determined what additional inspection fees are
due.
ok
2.
bld20120661-Swedish_Medical_Ctr-E2.docPage 1of 6
10/16/12–Traffic control plan is acceptable, but quality ofplan is poor and it is difficult to
3.
read taper lengths, spacing, etc. Please revise accordingly. Please also add End Road
Work signage.
9/11/12 comment -Submit a traffic control plan for utility connections on Hwy 99.
10/16/12 –Vault structural review will be a deferred submittal.
4.
9/11/12 comment -I did not find storm detention vault structural calcs in the submittal. Were
they submitted? If not, please submit for review and approval. The vault may be sent out for
peer review.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT
October 16, 2012 comments -Review of the Drainage Report dated September 2012 and associated
drawings was completed by Stormwater Engineer Jerry Shuster. If you have specific questions
regarding these comments please contact Jerry directly by phone at 425-771-0220 or by email at
jerry.shuster@edmondswa.gov
9/11/12 comments were based on review of the Drainage Report dated August 2012.
GENERAL
ok
1.
ok
2.
Page 4 –Runoff Treatment
October 16, 2012 –Comment was partially addressed. The proposed two facility
1.
treatment train is only acceptable if the proposed media filter has the ability to remove
dissolved metals, as described in Table 3.2, Volume V pages 3-8 of the 2005 Ecology
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Please provide information
that shows the chosen media filter can effectively remove dissolved metals.
9/11/12 comment -The discussion of runoff treatment should follow the procedure in Appendix
I, Section 4.6, of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit.The
discussion should include an evaluation for need for oil control and enhanced treatment.Also,
add a sentence that states that since the water quality treatment facility is downstream of the
detention vault, it was designed to the full 2-year release rate from the detention facility.
October 16, 2012 –Comment was mostly addressed. Remove the last sentence that begins
2.
with “A proposed 90-foot long biofiltration swale …” near the top of page 5. It is not
needed.
9/11/12 comment -The existing detention vault behind the proposed building was installed in
1999. The approved drawings for that vault show 150 lineal feet of bioswale (1.5 ft wide @
3.5%) along the north property line at the east end of the site.This bioswale is the approved
water quality element forthis detention system.The current set of drawings does not show this
bioswale and it unclear from the drawings where the discharge from this 1999 vault day lights.
The design must include this original bioswale or an approved equivalent alternate meansof
treating the discharge from the 1999 vault.
Page 5 –Flow Control
ok
1.
Page 2of 6
Appendix D –“Raingarden & Vault Model –Mitigated Scenario –Raingarden
October 16, 2012 –Comment not addressed. The model still has a 24-inch diameter riser.
1.
According to Olympic Foundry, the SM60BH grate has an open area of 162.1 square
inches. This is equivalent to a round riser pipe 14.4” in diameter, not 24” in diameter.
9/11/12 comment -The outlet structure is modeled as a “Riser Outlet Structure.”The model is
looking atthe diameter of a round standpipe at a given elevation.The outlet is a 20x24 inch
catch basin with a rectangular beehive grate.Provide the open area of the beehive grate and
make it an equivalent to the area of round standpipe.For example, if the beehive has 2 square
feet of open area, this is equivalent to a round standpipe 19.2 inches in diameter.Re-run the
model with the revised parameters.
ok
2.
ok
3.
Appendix E –Pond Calculations
ok
1.
October 16, 2012 comments:
1.The Rain Garden drawn on Sheet C-421 is triangular with one side of the bottom area
approximately 17 ft long and another side approximate 26 feet long. If this area is a right
2
triangle it would have a bottom area of 221 ft. Translating this area to square rain garden for
the model would result in a length and width of about 14.9 ft. The model uses a length and
width of 17.2 feet. Please explain.
2.Figure D-1 indicates that there is 0.15 acres of pervious (landscape) that is tributary to the rain
garden. The modeling has 0.135 acres of “C, Lawn, Flat.” Please reconcile.
3.The outlet structure for the Rain Garden has a value of 1 ft for the parameter “Riser height above
swale surface.” This is the distance from the top of the amended soil to the top of the riser. The
top of the amended soil is shown as elevation 349.0 on Detail 2, Sheet C-420. The rim of the
outlet grate is shown at elevation 349.5 on Sheet C-421. Based on the drawings, this parameter
should be modeled as 0.5 ft. Also, double check the “Swale Bottom Elevation” parameter for
accuracy.
4.Sheet C-410–Ponds 1 and 2 are modeled as having square bottoms of 11.7 ft and 22.2 ft,
respectively. On the sheet they are shown to be triangular in shape with the “long” sides at those
dimensions. The side slope parameters used in the model do match what is on the drawing.
Demonstrate that the model input parameters for the ponds are representative of the volume
shown on the drawings.
Also, on this sheet and Sheet C-450 move the vault outlet control structure so it is under the
access manhole. This change is to facilitate maintenance inspections of the outlet control
structure.
5.Sheet 441 –Details 1 & 3 and modeling for these structures –The diameter of the riser pipes are
not specified but should be. For Pond 1, the modeling uses the following parameters for the
outlet structure: rectangular notched riser with a notch height of 0.5 ft and notch width of 0.0417
ft. The bottom orifice is specified at 0.5 inches. The detail does not show a notched riser and the
size of the orifice is not specified. For Pond 2, the modeling shows a flat riser, (no notch) and 3
orifices. The detail shows a rectangular notched riser and one bottom orifice at 0.5 inches.
Please reconcile.
6.Sheet C-451, Detail C -There are measurement callouts of “2.0” and “2.8” on thisdetail that are
difficult to understand. Please revise.
Page 3of 6
SHEET C-110–GENERAL NOTES
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
SHEET C-200–DEMOLITION & TESC PLAN
ok
1.
ok
2.
3.
ok
SHEET C-231–TESC DETAILS
ok
1.
SHEET C-300–PAVING & HORIZONTAL CONTROL PLAN
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
ok
4.
ok
5.
ok
6.
ok
7.
ok
8.
ok
9.
10.10/16/12 -Callout has been added, but the incorrect City detail has been referenced forthe
sidewalk. Please revise callout and detail on sheet C-331 to reference E2.13 not E2.1.3.
9/11/12 comment -Callout requirement to replace curb/gutter and sidewalk improvements along
Hwy 99 frontage consistent with WSDOT standards for curb/gutter and City standard detail
E2.13 for sidewalk.Incorporate standard details into plan set.
SHEET C-330–PAVING DETAILS
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
ok
4.
ok
5.
ok
6.
ok
7.
10/16/12 –Response letter states rain garden label was added, but I was not able to locate
8.
the label in the plan set. Please revise sheets C-400 and C-410 to include this information.
9/11/12 comment -Label the rain garden and reference detail provided on sheet C-410.
9.
ok
10/16/12 –Comment addressed, but note says Stadia site instead of Radia. Please revise.
10.
9/11/12 comment -Please indicate where stormwater runoff from the SE corner of the south
parking will flow to. It appears as though a small section will be directed onto the Radia site.
Page 4of 6
SHEET C-410(now sheet C-421) –RAIN GARDEN PLAN
ok
1.
ok
2.
SHEET C-420–GRADINGSECTIONS
ok
1.
ok
2.
SHEET C-430–STORM DRAIN PROFILES
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
4.
ok
SHEET C-440–STORM DRAIN DETAILS
ok
1.
2.
ok
SHEET C-441–STORM DRAIN DETAILS
ok
1.
SHEET C-450–DETENTION VAULT DETAILS
ok
1.
2.
ok
SHEET C-451–DETENTION VAULT DETAILS
ok
1.
SHEETC-500–UTILITY PLAN
ok
1.
10/16/12 –Comment addressed and detail included on plan sheet C-523, but not
2.
referenced on this plan sheet. Please revise.
9/11/12 comment -Revise plans to show both the domestic and fireline taps off the watermain
in Highway 99. Reference and include in plan set City standard detail E7.18.1.
10/16/12 –Comment addressed and detail included on plan sheet C-522.Please add
3.
referenceto sheet C-522 under construction notes.Under Construction notes please also
revise to say s/w and curb instead of surb.
9/11/12 comment -Trench in Highway 99 shall be restored to City standards –please reference
and incorporate into plan set standard detail E4.2.
ok
4.
ok
5.
6.
ok
10/16/12 –Comment mostly addressed.Please revise 8”x 8”DI tee to FLxFLxFL.
7.
9/11/12 comment -The water main on Hwy 99 is 8” DIP. Please revise callout of fittings at the
valve cluster connection on Highway 99 to the following:
a.(1) 8”x8”DI tee (FLxFLxFL)
b.(2) 8” MJ Couplers
c.(3) 8” Gate Valve (MJxFL)
ok
8.
ok
9.
ok
10.
Page 5of 6
ok
11.
10/16/12 –Reference to detail has been added, but reference should be changed to C-524.
12.
9/11/12comment -For the sanitary sewer system reference details provided on sheet C-522.
ok
13.
ok
14.
10/16/12 –Easement 40 appears to cross entire property frontage. Please confirm that the
15.
proposed DCDA, meter, etc. are not in conflict with any electrical distribution facilities
that may exist within this easement.
9/11/12 comment -An existing easement legend has been provided, but it is unclear where each
of these easements exist on the property. Please identify pertinent easements on the plan set.
10/16/12 –Add reference to and include in plan set City standard detail E7.1 for Fire
16.
Hydrant Assembly.
SHEET C-520–UTILITY DETAILS
10/16/12 –It has been brought to my attention that Detail 1 (E7.6.1) does not reflect the
1.
current city standard detail. Please replace with the detail found on the City website
havingrevision date of 10/04/11.
SHEET C-522–UTILITY DETAILS
10/16/12 –Detail 1does not reflectthe current city standard detail. Please replace with
1.
detail found on the City website having revision date of 10/04/11. Please also revise detail
callout to reference City detail E4.2 instead of E6.2
.
10/16/12 –Revise Detail 2 callout reference to E7.11 instead of E6.2.
2.
SHEET C-523–UTILITY DETAILS
10/16/12 –Revise Detail 1 callout reference to E7.18.1 instead of E17.8.1.
1.
Please contact me at 425-771-0220 or by e-mail at jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.govif you have
specific questions regarding these plan corrections.
Page 6of 6