bld20120858_Olson-1.pdf
City of Edmonds
TH
121 5 AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 FAX(425) 771-0221
Website: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
Plan Review Corrections
Plan Check : Date:
# BLD20120858 November 20, 2012
th
Project Name/Address:
Olson SFR 15500 75 Pl SW
Contact Person/Address/Fax:
James Thomas jthomas@arch-design.net
Reviewer: JoAnne ZulaufDivision:Engineering
During review of the subject submittal, it was found that the following information, corrections, or
clarifications would need to be addressed. All Handouts and Standard Details referred to in these
comments can be accessed at our website: www.edmondswa.gov by clicking Government / Public Works
(under Departments) / Permits and Development/ Engineering General|Standards.
Please Note: Building Handouts do not include updated Engineering Division Requirements. Refer to
Engineering Handouts for all Engineering Requirements.
These plans were reviewed using the Nelson Geotechnical report, City of Edmonds handouts and
standard details, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) and specifically the requirements
for construction in the Earth Subsidence Landslide Hazard Area (ESLHA) code section ECDC
19.10.030. This information was available at the time the submitted plans were designed. The plans
do not reflect a comprehensive review of this information. The following Engineering Division review
is relatively detailed but due to the number of issues, there is no doubt that I have missed something
during this review. Please carefully review all the above documents to verify compliance prior to
submitting revised plans.
General Comments:
1. Review and approval of Civil Sheets by Nelson Geotechnical Associates for compliance with
the geotechnical report is required prior to resubmission. (see comments to NGA - separate
document)
th
2. Please correct all sheets site address to 15500 75 Place W.
3. Guardrail runs right along the edge of the asphalt. The plans show a separation of up to 10ft
between the two. This appears to come from the survey. Please correct plans to reflect
actual conditions.
4. Show the soldier pile wall that is to be constructed and the existing wall on all the plans except
the grading plan. The grading plan should only show the existing wall.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012
Sheet SP1.0 Site Plan:
1. Impervious calculations under Drainage Data are incorrect. See comment under Drainage
Plan. Please remove from plan and add the correct Impervious Surface Calculation box to
plan.
2. Not sure what the hatch line is along the edge of the asphalt road refers to, please label.
3. Remove area of disturbance from this plan. Shown on grading plan.
4. Please revise plan to reflect changes made to civils.
5. Label all landscape walls.
Sheet C1/C2-Grading/TESC Plan:
1. Area of disturbance does not include all the areas where trees are shown to be removed.
Please referenceTree Removal plan (landscape plans).
2. Show trees to be retained within disturbance area. Call out tree protection measure and add
detail to Sheet C2.
3. Under the notes DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL STANDARD FOR EROSION AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (ESC) please remove notes #7, #12, #15, and #16 as they do
not pertain to this project and revise the following notes to reflect the specifics of this project
and the geotechnical report requirements #6c and #9.
4. Show on the plan the location of the slide reference in the geotech report. Show measures
required to stabilize.
5. Under VEGETATIVE COVER AFTER CLEARING AND GRADING, please remove the present
language and replace with All disturbed areas shall be compost amended per DOE
Stormwater Manual detail T3.15.
6. IT please define in TESC legend. Please see the geotechnical report about where this can
be placed. Move or remove on plans. Water cannot be directed down slope and no additional
earth disturbance shall be added to create a tesc measure. Add dewatering plan that is
consistent with the geotech report within the area of disturbance.
7. Under CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE, note #5; please confirm with geotech that silt fence is
the appropriate tesc measure. I have included a comment for the geotech regarding this item.
8. Also, remove #14 and replace with Compost amend per DOE Stormwater Manual detail
T3.15 and landscape per Landscaping Plan Sheets L1 and L2.
9. Revise note #15. Remove improvements after replace with measures once. Remove City
Development Inspector replace with Geotech of Record and Engineering Division Inspector.
10. Remove stockpile from site. See geotech report requirement.
11. Review ENGINEERING NOTES. Revise to reflect this project and fill in blanks. Also revise
note #3 by removing on the slope with equivalent species replace with per approved
Landscape plan.
12. Add note where appropriate Compaction of soils shall not commence during wet weather
conditions. Geotech approval of conditions required prior to start of all compaction.
13. Under CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR EROSION CONTROL/SILTATION CONTROL
please revise #5 per geotech report. No storage on site. Note #6, remove contractor and
replace with geotech of record. Also add after monitor the words within 12 24 hours
depending on the severity of the storm event,. Remove note #7
14. Under GRADING QUANTITIES Add the foundation volume to the grading calculations and
remove note #3. Show on plans all proposed elevations including the foundation. Bottom of
footing elevation is required.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012
th
15. Please revise site address on all sheets to 15500 75 Place W.
16. Pipe slope drain detail is not consistent with the geotech report.
17. Remove HANDLING OF SILT LADEN WATER section. Notes are not consistent with the
geotech report.
nd
18. Under GENERAL NOTES note #6, 2 sentence after must be add the words inspected
and. After construction is complete and remove remaining sentence and replace with the
geotech of record approves removal. Remove #10. Note #14 add and per geotechnical
nd
report requirements. Note #17 Remove 2 sentence. Note #18 Replace with Disturbed
soild shall be compost amended or temporarily stabilized per geotech report
recommendations. Remove #19. Note #19, after responsible to replace remaining
sentence with contact the engineering division for approval of change prior to construction of
the contested item. A revised plan may be required for City review. Note #22, change to
reference this project.
19. Remove PERMANENT COVER BMP (HYDROSEEDING GENERAL NOTES) or change to
reflect landscaping plan and geotech recommendations.
20. The catch basin detail does not show a overflow bypass. Please replace with City of Edmonds
detail or WSDOT detail.
Sheet C3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan:
A step by step review of this sheet has not been performed. Please review for consistency with the
NGA report, all City of Edmonds standards, the ESLHA development code, and the stormwater
classification of this site. Comments on sheet C1/C2 should provide a pretty good idea of the types
of changes that should be made.
Please revise and resubmit.
Sheet C4 Drainage Plan:
Per the ESLHA code, ECDC 19.10.030(F)(1) the drainage system shall designed by a
1.
licensed enginee. The City of Edmonds standard handout providing simplified sizing is not
adequate substitution an engineered system. A full report shall be submitted which will include
among other information, calculations that show the design does indeed limit the peak rate of
runoff to the predeveloped condition two-year, 24-hour design storm, while maintaining the
predeveloped condition peak runoff rate for the 10-year, 24-hour and 100-year, 24-hour
storms. Please remove all simplified sizing information from the plan.
The runoff from the road can not be connected to the infall of the detention system. The run
2.
off must by pass the system and connect after the outfall structure.
Roof drains, driveway and porch runoff shall be connected to infall catch basin of drainage
3.
system.
Concrete strip drain is shown on site plan. If that is intended, please shown and clearly label
4.
on the drainage plan.
Inlet #1 is proposed in the same location as a proposed tree. Please relocate either.
5.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012
Under DRAINAGE DATA proposed impervious surface does not reflect plan. Please review
6.
all information in this section and revise if necessary.
ENGINEERS GRADING SPECIFICATIONS should be on grading plan sheet. Please move
7.
to appropriate sheet and review for consistency with City codes, geotech report, etc.
Footing drain connection locations and pipe to a point after the outfall structure are not shown
8.
on the plan.
It is unclear how the runoff from the driveway and the concrete patio will be captured and
9.
connected to the drainage system. Please show and clearly label all catch basins, cleanouts
and other collection points. Please review the surface and subsurface drainage section of the
NGA report.
The connection of Inl #2 to a the downspouts is not clear due to the proposed grade lines.
10.
Please lighten so the drainage information on this sheet is clearly discernable.
Show retaining wall and drainage connection.
11.
All structures, pipe, etc. must include all identifying information i.e. pipe should have called out
12.
material, length and size.
Please label all existing structures as existing.
13.
Add note to plan All drainage material installed within the BNSF right of way shall be
14.
inspected and approved by BNSF prior to permit final approval.
Remove Rooftop Detention Structure detail. References simplified sizing construction.
15.
STORM DRAINAGE NOTES, please review for compliance with geotech report and Edmonds
16.
code. Remove and revise notes as appropriate.
Retaining Wall:
1. The NGA report needs some clarification regarding the location of the wall. The plans then
will need to reflect the correct location.
2. Once that is determined then full structural design is required. This design shall include all the
requirements noted in the Soldier Pile wall section of the geotech report. It will also include
specific length and the grades of the top of wall and bottom of wall above existing grade.
3. The wall repair is required by NGA as a necessity of development of the lot. The City has no
plan to replace the wall at this time.
4. Since the wall will be located in the right of way, the City will take on the responsibility of
maintenance once the wall is complete. The Engineering division will send out the wall
structural design for peer review once it is received with the submittal of the revised civils
accurately showing the wall location.
5. Wall design shall include drainage to connect to outfall of drainage system.
Sewer Pump Report:
The Sewage Pump Report does not meet all the criteria required. Please review the Engineering
Handout E62 for more information.
The Sewer Pump review was performed by Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer.
The following documents were reviewed: Sewerage Pump Station Predesign Report For George
Olson SFR dated April 27, 2011 and Civil Plans Submitted 8/23/12.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012
Sewer Pump Report cont.
Utility Civil Plan:
1. Fittings along the force main, such as bends, will not be allowed. Please revise to remove
bends and/or fittings.
2. There is no existing sewer force main between the park and the existing sewer manhole
southeast of the property.
3. Must be welded, no option for equal. Please revise call out.
4. Tracer wire is required on the force main, note on plans.
5. Pump station shall be installed no closer than 5 feet from any structure, rockery, etc. The
pump station appears to be less than 5 feet from the end of the wood board retention wall.
Please revise location of the manhole and call out distance from nearest structure.
6. No potentially large shrubs or trees shall be placed along the force main alignment. The
landscape plan shows trees being planted all along the force main and a tree being planted in
the location that the manhole is shown. Please revise plans
7. Requires a hose bib within 15 ft.
8. A 4 cleanout is required on the gravity sewer line between the building and the grinder pump.
Please show side sewer and vent pipe from house to pump, call out material, length and size
of pipe, and show location of clean out.
9. Pump control panel shall be located in direct line of sight from the pump station. Please show
how this requirement will be met.
10. The force main is shown as ending at the property line and then about 8 to the east there is
an arcing line connecting to the east of an existing clean out. It is unclear what the intended
plan is to connect to the public sewer system. Please clarify on plans and add invert
elevations, pipe length, material and size.
11. Review sewer profile on plan sheet.
Pump Calculations mixed specs and equipment; if using the Zoehler 840, please provide
information for that specific pump.
1. Page 5, last paragraph indicates that the pump selection is for a Zoehller 842. The
specification provided is for a Zoehller 840. Pump curves and tables provided are for 841/842
systems. Please revise to show information for one pump only. Review all calculations to
provide consistent information for the system chosen.
2. In the minor losses calculations, 1 ½ pipe is used. The specs for 840 use 1 ¼. Please
recalculate.
3. Head loss calculations are not correct with use of either size of pipe. Please revisit and revise.
4. Storage is measured using entire manhole volume. Please review specs, handout and revise
calculations with the actual storage area. Please revise all calculations that use Storage as a
variable.
5. Elevations for pump, page 4 section E do not match the elevations provided on civil plan.
Please revise to be consistent.
6. Plans included in the report (i.e.foundation plan) are not consistent with submitted plans.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012
Sheet C5 Utility Plan:
1. Water service is not addressed on this plan. Show line from connection at meter to
connection at house. 10ft sep required from sewer line. Label meter as new or existing and
call out size. Call out water service line material, length and size.
2. Show side sewer, clean out at house, clean out at property line, etc.
3. Provide rim and invert elevations as well as pipe material, length and size.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 11/28/2012