bld20140613_Bell St Fourplex-2.docx
City of Edmonds
TH
121 5 AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0220 FAX(425) 771-0221
Website: www.edmondswa.gov
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
Plan Review Corrections
Plan Check : Date:
# BLD20140613 November 12, 2014
Project Name/Address:
622 Bell St – Phoenix United Multi Family 622 Bell St.
Contact Person/Address/Fax:
Randy Munson Randy.Munson@comcast.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 choosing Permit Assistance:
GENERAL
1.
Thank you for providing a cost estimate, it is now under review.
2.Done.
3.Done.
4.Not done. Please add. Please add note to cover sheet stating “A separate right-of-way construction permit
is required for all work within the city right-of-way. A ROW permit application with contractor’s signature
shall be provided to the city.
5.
Done.
SITE PLAN and LANDSCAPE PLAN
6.
Please revise site plan and landscape plan to reflect all revisions made in response to these comments.
STORM DRAINAGE
7.Unable to confirm impervious calculations, plan scale is off by approx.. 2 ft. Please resubmit a accurately
scaled plan. Proposed Impervious surface calculations do not appear to include eves, the dumpster pad or
the walking paver area. The walking paver areas are considered impervious. Permeable pavers are a means
of mitigation of the walkway area. (Please contact Stormwater Engineer Jerry Shuster for further
information). Rough calculations from the scaled plan indicate that the total proposed impervious area is
closer to 5600 sf. Please recalculate and revise plans.
8.Not provided. Please provide a stormwater site classification worksheet for this project. The worksheet can
be found in the Handout E72
(http://www.edmondswa.gov/images/COE/Services/Permits_and_Development/Forms_and_Handouts/E72-
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 7/2/2017 PAGE ___ OF __
15
SWM_Erosion_Control-03.05.12.pdf). Based on the amount of new impervious surface proposed, it
appears it will classify as a Category 2 Small Site Project. Please verify.
9.Stormwater Engineer is reviewing-separate comments will follow. Please provide a stormwater report
including the requirements of Chapter 5 of the Edmonds Stormwater
CodeSupplement, (http://www.edmondswa.gov/images/COE/Government/Departments/Public_Works/Sto
rmwater_Utility/pdf/EdmondsStormwaterSupplementFinal20100428.pdf).
10.Stormwater Engineer is reviewing-separate comments will follow. Please provide an engineer designed
stormwater system. Simplified Sizing Tools are not an option for Category 2 Small Sites.
SHEET 1 OF 2: EROSION CONTROL (AND GRADING) PLAN
11.Done.
12.Not done. Please show tesc for catch basins in alley. Provide standard detail on plan sheet.
13.Done.
14.Done.
15.Done.
SHEET 2 OF 2: STORMWATER DRAINAGE (AND UTILITY) PLAN
Please do not change the note numbers on the plans. It makes the review process very difficult. If you
are not using a number anymore, please just put N/A or leave it blank. Add new numbers for anything
you are adding to the plan. Thank you!
16.Please revise Construction Notes as follows:
1-Done.
2-States 85 ft of 30” pipe, plan shows 45. Change as necessary for new design
3-It is not clear how this would be effective. The slopes are considerable and adding more sloping mid
driveway to try to drain everything to a catch basin in the center would be difficult to actually construct
while keeping the driveway slope under the maximum allowable 20% (with approved waiver) and/or may
cause cars to scrap the front or back of their cars on the pavement. Please revise or provide a detail (plan
and elevation) showing all the sloping and how this will be accomplished. It may be easier to put a 12” cb
in each of the driveways towards the building then the sloping to capture the run off will be less drastic. Or
perhaps a wider trench drain? A 4” trench drain is not sufficient to capture runoff from a slope of 14 -20%.
Please consider another means of capturing the run off.
4-Mis-typed. Please change to Type 2. Add note stating “If difference between rim and invert exceeds 5 ft,
a type 2 manhole will be required.”
5-Remove detail E5.3 Control Structure from this note. See comment #21 below. Revise note if necessary.
Clarify what material will be used from the control structure to the curbline.
6-Not done. Detail E5.3 can be added here. Revise as necessary for new design. Reference Flow Control
detail E5.4
7-Revise if necessary for new design.
8-Catch basin cannot be connected to the center of the detention pipe. Please route to detention catch basin
via new line or by connecting to the tightline. Revise if necessary for new design.
9-10 ok
11-FYI-if fire department requires sprinkling, 1-inch meters are required. Add size of water meters to be
installed.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 7/2/2017 PAGE ___ OF __
25
12-Multi-family driveway approaches can be a maximum of 24’to 30’ of the frontage. Plans show 32’.
Please revise.
13-Not done. A landscape strip is required between the driveways and at the west and east ends of the
property . Add “and landscape strip”
14-Done.
15-Not done. See handout E#37-revise note as needed
16-Done.
17-Done.
18-ok. Please revise note to state “concrete” pipe. (found using the “i” (information) icon on the gis map
available to you on our website). Inserta Tee connections are allowed but the ops division prefers a Romac
Saddle. Please revise to use the saddle unless there is a specific reason you do not think it is appropriate.
19-ok
20-Done.
21-There is no water line show to the east of the structure but there is a # 21. Please revise plan.
22-ok
Added Notes in 10/9/14 submittal:
23-This note does not replace the requirement of providing inverts for the connection at the lateral. Please
interpolate approximate invert using the information available. (standard 3ft depth, 2% slope, the invert
stated on the plan for the existing m/h, use the gis map on our website for manhole and pipe details using the
“i” (information) option and selecting structures on the map).
24- The current configuration of the sewer and water does not meet separation requirements. Sleeving
cannot be installed as described in the E#71 handout. Please revise.
***Not done. Also please remove details that do not apply to this project. Add all Standard Details to the
plans that are referenced in the above notes and in the drawings.
17.Done.
18.Not Done. Please review the Handout for requirements and revise plans. Please call out concrete slab
surface for trash enclosure. Add note that drop pins and pavement sleeves are required for gates in the
closed position and the open position.
19.Done.
20.Received Waiver Request, in review. Driveways off the alley exceed the maximum allowed 14% slope per
Edmonds Community Development Code 18.80.060 D 1. Please review code section for criteria necessary
to possibly obtain a waiver for up to 20% slope.
21.Done.
22.See response to note #3. 4” trench drains are not adequate for runoff collection from slopes of 16% and
19%. Please revise to show another method.
23.Details added. Rim elevation on plan and Finished Grade elevation on Detail Sheet 5 do not match. Inverts
not added to detail. Please remove the Control Catch Basin Detail and replace with COE standard details
E5.3 and E5.4. An autocad version is available of both details so project specific elevations etc may be
added.
24.Done. But since in this submittal the pavers are not being counted as pervious, the City has no requirements
regarding how they are constructed and installed. Please add to the Permeable Pavement detail the
requirement that the base course of aggregate shall have a minimum of 3” of storage and reference Handout
E#72B all requirements.
25.Call out rim and invert elevations for the existing CB on Bell St located northwest of the property.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 7/2/2017 PAGE ___ OF __
35
26.Not Done. Note #5 states DIP in the right of way for the storm crossing. Please verify that the pipe will be
getting less than 2ft of cover. If there will be 2ft or more of cover then DIP is not required. Revise note if
needed.
27.Not Done.Please add catch basin in gutter line on south side of street.
28.See Comment #26 regarding material. Note material and length of pipe from control structure to south
catch basin.
29.Not Done. Footing drains are required for this project. Please show how they will connect to the
stormwater outfall or make a connection to some other structure.
30.Not Done. For 6” Clean out at property line “Metal Cap” is not sufficient. Also please consider how
difficult it will be in the future to repair a sewer line that is under a dumpster pad. Note 12” cast iron
lamphole cover with ½” hexbolts required.
31.Done.
32.Not Done. Call out inverts at lateral connection to Sewer Main at at cleanouts to verify 2% slope is
achieved.
33.See comment on Note # 24. Water line crosses the sewer line and where parallel there is less than 10ft
separation. Please review Water Service Line Handout for separation and sleeving requirements. Please
revise drawings.
SHEET X OF X: FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS
34.Not helpful. The frontage plan should not show underground piping or include call outs for the utilities that
are underground. It should show meters and cbs as final structures. There should be a call out for the 2 ft
sawcut. It should show the location of the required street trees. Call out width of sidewalk etc. It should
provide more information about the frontage improvements. Please add plan showing the frontage
improvements.
35.Not Applicable.
36.See # 34. Frontage shall include a 3’ landscape strip adjacent to curb and 5’ sidewalk.
37.Not Done. Show and note all information on the frontage plan. Two Street Trees are required for this
project and shall be placed as follows:
a.The existing street tree at the northeast corner of the property needs to be removed.
b.Measured from the northwest corner of the property, tree shall be placed at 15’ (between driveways)
and 35’(east of east driveway) measured on center.
c.A 3’ x 3’ tree grate is required. I have attached an example of a 4’ x 4’ tree grate to use as reference.
d.Street tree species shall be a Capital or Chanticleer Pear, to be determined by Park Department.
The following comments are provided by Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Engineer:
Subject: BLD20140613 -622 Bell St
Drainage Report
The second paragraph of page 1 says the project will have 3,990 square feet for the building footprint and the driveway plus
5,320
1,330 square feet of pavers. This total (not in the report) is square feet of impervious surface area. The third paragraph
5,2405,340
of page 1 says there will be square feet of impervious area. Sheet 1 of the plans say there will be square feet of
6,578
impervious area. The modeling has 0.151 acres of impervious area of square feet of impervious area. Re-calculate the
impervious surface area and make the number consistent between documents.
Minimum Requirement # 6 – Runoff treatment – Include the amount of pollution generating impervious surface planned for
the project.
Minimum Requirement # 7 – This section should say that this Category 2 Small Site project is located in Creek base (Shell
Creek) and is subject to the peak flow control standards of 0.07 cfs/ acre, 0.14 cfs/acre, and 0.33 cfs acre for the 2-yr, 10-yr,
and 100-yr recurrence events. Based on X,XXX square feet of proposed impervious area (fill in the amount based on the first
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 7/2/2017 PAGE ___ OF __
45
comment), the allowable peak discharge rates for the 2-yr, 10-yr, and 100-yr are x cfs, y cfs, and z cfs (calculate x, y and z by
multiplying the total impervious area in acres by the peak flow control standards). Re-model and re-design the detention
system as needed.
No text was found in the report that addresses Small Site Minimum Requirements #8, #9, #10, and #11. These requirements
shall be included.
Plans
Sheet 3:
Note 2 – CMP detention pipe is not per standard. Acceptable material for detention pipe are as follows:
Metal:
ACSP – Aluminized Corrugated Steel Pipe (Type 2 meets AASTO designations M274 and M36)
ASRP - Aluminum Spiral Ribbed Pipe (16 gauge or better)
CAP –Corrugated Aluminum Pipe (16 gauge or better)
DIP – Ductile Iron Pipe (Class 50 or better)
Concrete:
PCP – Plain Concrete pipe
RCP – Reinforced Concrete Pipe
Plastic:
PVCP – Polyvinyl Chloride Pipe (SDR 35 or better)
CPEP – Corrugated Polyethylene Pipe (smooth interior wall, or N-12® pipe)
RPP- Ribbed Polyvinylchloride Pipe
Pavers will have runoff during large storm events. Show how runoff from the paves enters the detention
system
Add a note that all pervious area will have compost amended soils per City handout E72C.
The new storm line from the detetion system to proposed CB#1 crossed a water line. Show the crossing in
profile to ensure no conflicts.
Sheet 5:
The two figures selected from the City policy on permeable pavement are for reference only and should not
be used as standard detail. Since these pavers are being counted as impervious and the detention system is
being sized to accept runoff of from them, no standard detail is necessary other than to indicate to the
contractor how they should be constructed.
Jerry Shuster, P.E.
Stormwater Engineering Program Manager
Jerry.Shuster@edmondswa.gov
425-771-0220 x1323
Please resubmit 3 copies of the revised plans/documents to a Development Services Coordinator. Please
contact me at 425-771-0220 if you have specific questions regarding these plan corrections.
DATE FAXED/E-MAILED 7/2/2017 PAGE ___ OF __
55