bld20170501-eng20170122-Magic Toyota-Demo-SWMVault-E1.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE:
May 1, 2017
TO:
David Estes, Strotkamp Architects
dhestes_aia@frontier.com
FROM:
Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.gov
RE:
Application #: bld20170501 (demo) and eng20170122 (stormwater vault)
Project: Magic Toyota
Project Address: 21300 Highway 99
During review of the above noted application, it was found that the following information,
corrections, or clarifications are needed. Reviews by other divisions, such as Planning, Building, or
Fire may result in additional comments. 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 and on Wednesdays from 8:30am-noon.
City of Edmonds handouts, standard details and development code can be referenced on the City
website.
GENERAL
This project is being reviewed in several different phases.Comments provided under this
plan review are specific to the demo permit and stormwater permit, which includes review of
the stormwater detention vault to be used as a sediment/storage tank during demolition.
1.Structural review of the vault has been completed by David Evans and Associates through a
Peer Review process. Comments are provided as an attachment to these plan review comments.
Communication/correspondence related to these comments should be directed to the City.
2.Special inspections willbe required for the construction of the vault. Aspecial inspection and
testing agreement form will follow these plan corrections.
3.The existing features shown within the plan set are difficult to see (very light print). Please
resubmit plans,ensuring this informationis legible.
4.Include a City Engineering Division approval block on all plan sheets. Refer to sample on City
website.
Sheet D-1.0–TESC AND DEMOLITION PLAN PHASE 1
1.Include construction sequence. Refer to sample on City website.
2.Provide civil plan sheet index.
3.Provide Utility Purveyor information.
4.Is the construction fence shown on the plan set a silt fence or chain link fence?
a.If it is a chain link fence, please show access gates with gate swing onto private
property.
b.Please include a silt fence along the downstream boundaries of the property as
appropriate.
5.Show job shack location, if any.
6.Demolition Key Note #1 indicates removal of existing pavements to construct vault, but this
note is also referenced where the construction entrance is to be placed. Please clarify. See also
Sheet D-2.2 Note #2.
7.Plans indicatedemolition of a portion of the sanitary sewer line. While it is difficult to see the
extent of the existing sewer, it is assumed there are no other connections on thisline from the
private property prior to connection to the City main. If this is accurate, please show cut and
cap of the sewer at the property line.
8.Clearly show the domestic water service to the existing structure (to be demolished). The
domestic service shall be cut and capped at the meter. If the meter is not going to be reused
with the new development then it shall be noted that the service shall be cut and capped at the
main line. Work within the ROW, however, should be deferred to full development of the site.
9.A note on the plans states “Shut water valve prior to demolition.” Clearly indicate what this
portion of the system provides water to. Fire line/systems serving the parking structure shall
remain active at all times.
10.A hose spigot with AVB or yard hydrant shall be identified on the plan set to remain active
through the course of construction.
11.How will access to upper level of parking structure be maintained during construction? Will a
chain link fence be provided to allow safe clearance, etc. from open trenches. Will shoring be
provided around vault excavation to prevent too much over-excavation?
Sheet D-2.0–OVERALL TESC AND DEMOLITION PLAN PHASE 2
1.Label Phase II limits of disturbance
2.General Erosion Control Note #16 –The City does not issue permits for rockeries. Please revise
to state retaining wall.
3.General Demolition Note #2 states “contractor to protect existing features which are to remain.
Clearly indicate which features are to remain.
4.General Demolition Note #3 –Water and sewer utility systems to be abandoned shall be cut and
capped at the property line. Please revise note to include this requirement.
Sheet D-2.1–TESC AND DEMOLITION PLAN PHASE 2
1.A haul road has been shown throughout the site. What surface material is proposed for the haul
road?
2.Demolition Key:
Note #1: Please clarify what “associated appurtenances” refers to.
3.Plans state “remove existing catch basin and plug existing pipe” in two locations along Hwy 99.
When the existing improvements are more legibleon the plan set I’m sure it will be clear, but
please confirm that the CB to be removed is part of the storm system on private property.
Page 2of 4
4.Please confirm water utility connections and meter location for the existing structure at the NE
corner of the property. Water service shall be cut and capped at the property line.
5.Will utility poles within City ROW be removed/relocated during the demolition phase of the
project? If so, a separate ROW construction permit will be required at this time. Please follow
thisLINK to the application form if needed.
Sheet D-2.1–TESC AND DEMOLITION PLAN PHASE 2
1.Demolition Key Note #2 indicates removal of existing sidewalk, concrete, and asphalt
th
pavements. This note is referenced at the entrance to the site off 212St SW. Sidewalk within
City ROW shall be maintained for as long as possible throughout the project. Preserving a
th
section of asphalt at the entrance off 212would also be preferred to prevent quarry rock from
kicking out into the ROW. Please revise as appropriate.
STORMWATER REPORT
The following comments are provided from Robert Edwards,Stormwater Engineer. Please
contact Robertdirectly at 425-771-0220 or by email atRobert.edwards@edmondswa.govwith
any specific questions you may have regarding these comments.
Background
This is classified as a Large Project because it involves 1 or more acres of land disturbing activity.
Large Project are subject to Small Site Minimum Requirements 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.
This project is to provide the demo of the site and construction of the permanent stormwater vault.
This review is for these aspects only. A separate review is preparedforthe commercial building
submittal.
Minimum Requirement #1 –Preparation of Stormwater Site Plan
Comments:
1.Sheet C-2.1: The 110 LF 12” CPEP near the northeast corner of the site is specified at
6.87% slope. Based on the inverts, the slope calculates to 5.82%.
2.Sheet C-2.2: The 20 LF 12” CPEP near the west property line is specified at 0.50%. Both
upstream and downstream inverts are 366.82, meaning the pipe is laid flat.
3.Sheet C-2.2: Near the C-2.1 match line, overlapping leader notes are unreadable.
4.Sheet C-2.4, Control Structure Detail: The notch width is specified as 0.10’. The WWHM
modeling specified 0.01’. Please resolve the discrepancy.
5.Sheet C-2.4, Control Structure Detail: Specify the shear gate and associated pipe diameter.
6.Sheet C-2.4, Control Structure Detail: The main discharge orifice is missing. The WWHM
modeling specified 0.66”. Specify if the orifice is to be constructed at this phase or later.
Constructability may be an issue. One possible solution is to provide the orifice at this phase
and provide a plug that will be removed when the detention vault is commissioned.
Minimum Requirement #2 –Construction Stormwater Pollution Plan
Comments:
1.Sheet D-1.0: BMP conflict, remove silt fence from construction entrance.
2.Sheet D-1.0: Provide inlet protection for the existing CB immediately adjacent to the
construction entrance.
3.Sheet D-1.0: Specify Baker tank minimum size requirement.
4.Sheet D-1.0: Add Baker tank discharge/disposal requirements.
Page 3of 4
5.Sheet D-2.0: BMP conflict, remove silt fence from construction entrance.
6.Sheet D-2.2: BMP conflict, remove silt fence from construction entrance.
7.Sheet D-2.2: The proposed vault will discharge to the existing stormwater system. Although
the #57 stone berm will trap sands and gravels, turbid water may enter the storm drain
system. Specify how turbid runoff will be held. Will the outlet of the vault be blocked?
8.Sheet D-2.3: Provide detail for inlet protection.
9.SWPPP Section 3.1.4: Specify minimum Baker tank size and discharge requirements and/or
disposal method(s).
10.SWPPP Section 4.2.1: Although the requirements are specified for events of 250 NTU and
greater, the more likely scenario is turbidity values between 26 and 249 NTU. Please
provide the response requirements for this case.
Minimum Requirement #3 –Source Control of Pollution
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #4 –Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #5 –Onsite Stormwater Management
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement # 6 –Runoff Treatment
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #7 –Flow Control
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #8 –Wetland Protection
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #9 –Operation and Maintenance
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement # 10–Offsite Analysis and Mitigation
Comments: None
Minimum Requirement #11 –Financial Liability
Comments: None
Page 4of 4