bld20150490-Sherwood Elem-Paving-Parking-E2.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE:
June 16, 2015
TO:
Thaddeus Egging
thaddeus.egging@kpff.com
FROM:
Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.gov
Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Program Manager
Bertrand Hauss, City Traffic Engineer
RE:
Application #: bld20150490
Project: Sherwood Elementary
th
Project Address: 22901 –106Ave W
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 a permit coordinator.
nd
Resubmittals can be made at the Development Services Department on the 2floor of City Hall.
Permit Center hours are M, T, Th & F from 8am-4:30pm, closed on Wednesdays.
City of Edmonds handouts, standard details and development code can be referenced on the City
website.
Comments 1 –May 19, 2015
Comments 2 –June 16, 2015
GENERAL
June 16, 2015 –Thank you for providing a cost estimate. Please note, inspection fees will
1.
be calculated using this estimate, however, a recent determination has been made that a
performance bond will not be required from a public entity such as the school district.
May 19, 2015 comment -Please provide an itemized engineers cost estimate, including units
and unit prices,for both on-site and off-site (right-of-way) improvements, including all utilities
and traffic control. Please use the King County Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet
and utilize the “write-in” sections where appropriate.
A bond is required to be placed for all erosion control measures, right-of-way and
stormwater management improvements. The amount of the bond will be based on 120% of
the City approved estimate. The City will inform you of the appropriate bond amount after
review of the cost estimate. Please obtain the appropriate subdivision improvement bond
forms from the City.
If you intend to post a bond in order to record the subdivisionand ahead of constructing
required improvements, the bond amount will be based on the entire scope of the project.
Inspection fees for this project will be calculated at 3.3% of the 120% City approved
estimate for all improvements.
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
5.ok
June 16, 2015 –Response letter acknowledges requirement.
6.
May 19, 2015 comment -Please note, a raingarden covenantwill be required for this project.
The covenant will need to be recorded at Snohomish County prior to final construction approval
for project (not prior to building permit issuance). The City has a template covenant and will
forward this soon.
Sheet G0.02–GENERAL NOTES
1.ok
Sheet C0.01 –MASTER SITE PLAN
1.ok
Sheet C1.02 –TESC DETAILS
1.ok
Sheet C3.01 –GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
June 16, 2015 –Drainage report states 29,185sf (0.67 acres). Plans state 29,815sf (0.67
5.
acres). It appears numbers were transposed. Plans should state 29,185sf. Iwill redline
the plansaccordingly unless you prefer to submit a new plan sheet.
May 19, 2015 comment -Provide an impervious surface area chart consistent with City handout
E72.
6.ok
Sheet C3.02 –GRADING AND DRAINAGE DETAILS
1.ok
2.ok
Sheet C3.03 –GRADING AND DRAINAGE ENLARGEMENTS AND DETAILS
1.Typical Rain Garden Section:
a.ok
June 16, 2015
b.–Kpffresponded as follows(item 13 in their response memo):
“Per discussion on May 15,2015, mineral aggrgate type 26 (3/4” washed sandy gravel) is
now included in the rain garden profile, in place of the geotextile fabric between the
infiltration basin and the biorention soil.”
Page 2of 4
This layer is not shown in the Typical Rain Garden section, on sheet C3.03 but
should be.
May 19, 2015 comment -A geotextile should not be placed under bioretention soil (See
LID guidance); they tend to clog. A solution used by Seattle is Seattle mineral aggregate
type26 between the bioretention soil and the gravel.It is a ¾” washed sandy
gravel.See pages 9-11 and 9-14 in https://www.ecobuilding.org/olympia/flyers-
forms/903SR51110Revised.pdf
Also, geotextile on the bottom of an infiltration trench tends to clog (top and sides OK).
Sheet C4.01 –PAVING AND UTILITY PLAN
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
July 16, 2015 –The turning movements included on plan sheet C0.02show that a van
5.
would barely make the turns and/or would likely be on the curb against parked carsto do
so.Please confirm the owner is acceptant of the proposed design. If so, the City will also
accept the design asthe movements will be on private propertyand therefore any damage
to infrastructure would occur on private property.
May19, 2015 comment -If the 15-foot center aisle is intended for traffic, please show turning
movements can be achieved with proposed curb radii at each end of the aisle.
6.ok
7.ok
8.ok
9.ok
10.ok
11.ok
12.ok
Sheet C4.02 –PAVING DETAILS
1.ok
2.Detail 8 –Ramp Paving Enlargement:
a.ok
b.ok
June 16, 2015 -A landing needs to be provided at the curb ramp across the drive
c.
aisle from R7. Indicate ramp section on the plans.
Sheet C5.01 –STRIPING AND SIGNAGE PLAN
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
5.ok
6.ok
7.ok
8.ok
9.ok
Page 3of 4
10.ok
Sheet C6.01 –HORIZONTAL CONTROL TABLES
June 16, 2015 –Curb ramp R2, R3 and R5 do not reference the plan sheets in which they
1.
are located. Please revise.
May 19, 2015 comment -Revise curb ramp table to note which plan sheet details are provided
on.
Sheet C7.01 –CITY OF EDMONDS DETAILS
June 16, 2015 –Reference to ramps R4 and R6 have been removed from the plan set.
1.
Please revise as needed. Please note, Detail 5 on C4.02 still references these ramps.
May 19, 2015 comment -Detail 6 –City standard detail E2.16 is not the appropriate detail for
the curb ramps R2, R3, R5 and R6. City standard detail E2.17 (or WSDOT equivalent) could be
used for ramps R2, R3, and R6. Ramp R5 could also be constructed utilizing detail E2.17, but a
modifieddetail is requested addressing construction of this ramp as a 4-foot minimum width
landing area will need to be provided at the top of the ramp connecting all three
sidewalk/walkway sections together.
2.ok
Sheet C7.02 –CITY OF EDMONDS DETAILS
1.ok
Sheet L1.01 –LANDSCAPE PLAN
1.ok
2.ok
3.June 16, 2015-The landscape plan (sheet L1.01) specifies “Northwest Bioswale Mix.”
Rain gardens are not bioswales.Bioswalesare used to convey flows and give some
treatment.The grasses specified are not appropriate for rain gardens.Rain garden
(bioretention) plants need to be selected for the 3 zones found in these BMPs.See section
6.1.2 and Appendix 1 of the 2012 “Low Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual
for Puget Sound” for choosing the correct plants.
4.June 16, 2015-All disturbed converted and disturbed pervious areas within the project
area must have soils amended per Ecology BMP T5.13, Post-Construction Soil Quality and
Depth.
STORMWATER REPORT
The following comments areprovided from JerryShuster, Stormwater Engineer. These are
the same comments that were provided via email on May 6, 2015. Please contact Jerry
directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at jerry.shuster@edmondswa.govwith any specific
questions you may have regarding these comments.
Drainage Report, dated April 2015
ok
Page 4of 4