Engineering & Storm Comments 2.pdfOF EDV0 CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
6'st 1 g90 (425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE: August 16, 2019
TO: Rob Michel
rwmichel@nwlink.com
FROM: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.gov
RE: Application #: bld20160026
Project: Paradise Heights
Project Address: 546 Paradise Lane
During review of the above noted application, it was found that the following information,
corrections, or clarifications are needed. Please submit revised plans/documents with a written
response to each of the items below to a permit coordinator.
Resubmittals can be made at the Development Services Department on the 2nd floor 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.
Comments 1 — May 7, 2019
Comments 2 — August 16, 2019
GENF,RAL
1. 8/16/2019 — Thank you for providing the cost estimate. A final review of the estimate will
be completed after the next submittal, when plans are closer to being finalized. Please
note, the water meters and gas line can be removed from the cost estimate. The utility pole
relocation, however, should be added.
5/7/20109 comment - Provide an itemized engineers cost estimate for both on -site and off -site
(right-of-way) improvements, including traffic control and all utility installations. Use the King
County Bond Quantity Worksheet (available on the county website) and utilize "write-in"
sections where appropriate.
a. The amount of the bond will be based on 120% of the City approved estimate for the off -
site improvements.
b. A 3.3% inspection fee is calculated for the project based on 100% of the City approved
estimate for the entire project improvements.
2. August 16, 2019 — Acknowledged by applicant. A ROW permit application will be
provided to the city prior to issuance.
5/7/2019 comment - Please add a note to plans stating "A separate right-of-way construction
permit is required for all work within the city right-of-way." Please note, a ROW permit
application with contractor's signature shall be provided to the city prior to issuance of civil
construction plans.
3. August 16, 2019 — Response comment letter states a written response will be provided in
the next submittal.
5/7/2019 comment - Please provide a written response from the geotech that the current civil
plans and drainage report are consistent with the geotech report.
4. August 16, 2019 — Response comment letter states an approved set of plans will be
submitted to the City for inclusion in the civil plan set.
5/7/2019 comment - Provide a copy of the water plan for the project. Ultimately, a copy of the
plan signed as approved by Olympic View Water and Sewer District will need to be submitted
to the City for inclusion in the civil construction plan set.
5. ok
6. ok
7. ok
8. ok
9. ok
Sheet 1 of 6 — SITE PLAN
1. ok
2. August 16, 2019 — Refer to Sheet 6 for comments.
5/7/2019 comment - Provide a cross section for Paradise Lane within the plan set and reference
on this plan sheet. Include the following:
a. Existing pavement (label width)
b. Pavement widening (lane width of 11-ft to be measured from center of pavement)
c. Road cross slope (existing and proposed)
d. New sidewalk, curb and gutter
e. Slope of finished grade from back of sidewalk to property line
3. August 16, 2019 — Per a field meeting with Rob Michel and the property owner, it was
discussed that it might be more consistent to install a 5-ft wide sidewalk. A letter was to be
submitted to the City (addressed to the City Engineer) providing rationale for why a
waiver in the required sidewalk width should be considered/approved. Alternatively, the
sidewalk can remain as shown, at 7-ft in width.
5/7/2019 comment - City code allows for a 7 ft-10 ft wide sidewalk in multi -family zones. At
this location, the sidewalk can be constructed at 7-ft in width.
4. ok
5. August 16, 2019 - Refer to Sheet 6 for comments.
5/7/2019 comment - Provide a cross section of both drive aisles in between the buildings, within
the plan set and reference on this plan sheet. Include the following:
a. Face of buildings and any proposed building projections (balcony's, roof overhang, etc.)
b. Pavement width
c. Cross slope
6. ok
7. ok
8. ok
9. August 16, 2019 — The proposed mailbox location has been shown and the comment letter
states approval from the Post Office will be obtained. Please add a note to the plans
stating such or provide documentation stating their approval of the location.
Page 2 of 5
5/7/2019 comment - Will mailboxes be located on site? If so, please add note. If lock box will
be located within the ROW, please revise plans to show location (as approved by the Post
Office).
10. ok
11. ok
12. ok
13. August 16, 2019 — In a field meeting with Rob Michel and the property owner, the City
gave direction that the approximate west half of Paradise Lane (as it sits adjacent to the
subject property frontage), will be reconstructed as a new road section. Removal of the
concrete road with new asphalt road section and a blended taper into the adjoining
Paradise Lane would occur. The east end of the replacement area was to occur at a joint
and was decided in the field. Please confer with Rob Michel on how to address this on the
plans. This is the approach that will be taken instead of the potential south half removal
and replacement noted in the comment below. Please revise the plan accordingly.
5/7/2019 comment - Paradise Lane appears to be a concrete road along the entire property
frontage and is in a definite state of disrepair. At a minimum, when panels are disturbed, the
entire panel shall be removed. In addition, areas that have extensive cracking and/or vertical
separation may also necessitate full panel replacement. It is likely that the entire south half of
Paradise Lane will need to be removed and replaced with asphalt per City road standards.
Please add a note to the plans that identifies these concerns along with a general statement that
the full extent of restoration of Paradise Lane will be determined in the field by the Engineering
Inspector.
14. ok
15. ok
16. ok
17. August 16, 2019 — Road design and frontage improvement callouts have been incorporated
into this plan sheet. Please revise sheet title to reflect this.
Sheet 2 of 6 — ROAD & DRAINAGE PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. August 16, 2019 — Comment was addressed, but response letter states the detail was moved
to Sheet 8. If the detail is to remain on Sheet 8, then the reference on this plan sheet will
need to be revised to indicate such.
5/7/2019 comment - Provide reference to the Stormfilter Cartridge detail found on Sheet 6.
4. ok
5. ok
6. August 16, 2019 — Thank you providing a breakdown of surfaces. Please revise the note
that states "pervious to trench #2" to state "impervious". The area reflected is a portion of
the driveway.
5/7/2019 comment - Include Hard Surface Area chart on the plans. Provide a breakdown for
hard surfaces and roof tops and the type of stormwater management system being installed to
manage each.
7. August 16, 2019 — The road and frontage improvement design details have been included
in Sheet 1. Please revise this sheet title.
Page 3 of 5
Sheet 3 of 6 — SEWER
1. August 16, 2019 — Response letter states approval by WSDOT will be obtained.
5/7/2019 comment - The sanitary sewer line for the project has a proposed connection in SR-
104. This section of SR-104 falls within WSDOT's Limited Access area and will require
review and approval by WSDOT. Please find below a contact at WSDOT to at least make
initial contact with:
Alex Compton, PE, LEED AP
WSDOT Northwest Region
Utilities Accommodation & Project Delivery Engineer
206.440.4129
comptoa(c�r�,wsdot.wa. og_v
M-Th 6:30am — 3:30pm
F 6:45am— 1:15pm
2. ok
3. ok
Sheet 4 of 6 — GRADING
August 16, 2019 — Response letter states the wall design will be forthcoming upon further
review, and will be provided prior to seeking approval from the city.
5/7/2019 comment - Plan states "Retaining wall design completed by others". Please reference
other documents that address the wall design.
Sheet 5 of 6 — TESC
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
Sheet 6 of 6 — NOTES & DETAILS
1. ok
2. ok
3. August 16, 2019 — Revise detail as noted below and consistent with other plan review
comments provided in this letter.
5/7/2019 comment from Sheet 1 - Provide a cross section for Paradise Lane within the plan set
and reference on this plan sheet. Include the following:
a. ok
b. 8/16/2019 — Please confirm that the center of pavement is also the center of ROW.
The 11-ft travel lane should be measured from center of pavement.
5/7/2019 - Pavement widening (lane width of 11-ft to be measured from center of
pavement)
c. ok
d. ok
e. ok
4. August 16, 2019 -
5/7/2019 comment from Sheet 1 - Provide a cross section of both drive aisles in between the
buildings, within the plan set and reference on this plan sheet. Include the following:
a. Face of buildings and any proposed building projections (balcony's, roof overhang, etc.)
Page 4 of 5
b. Pavement width
c. 8/16/2019 — The cross sections provided indicate cross slopes of up to 6%. A typical
public or private street design would be limited to 2%, which is even more critical
where a valley for drainage is being provided. Please revise accordingly.
5/7/2019 - Cross slope
Sheet 1— Traffic Control Plan (Paradise Lane
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
ok
4.
ok
5.
ok
Sheet 2 — Traffic Control Plan (Edmonds Way)
August 16, 2019 — Comment not responded to. Please acknowledge.
5/7/2019 comment - Traffic control plan for Edmonds Way will need to be sent to WSDOT for
review and approval as the sewer connection falls within WSDOT's Limited Access Area.
STORMWATER ENGINEER REVIEW
Refer to attached plan review comments by City Stormwater Engineer, Zachary Richardson.
Please contact Zack directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at
zachary.richardson(aedmondswa.Eov with any specific questions you may have regarding his
comments.
Page 5 of 5
°V EIM
STO RM WATE R REVIEW COMMENTS
To:
Date:
Project Name:
City of Edmonds
Engineering Division
Applicant
July 22, 2019
Paradise Heights
Permit Number: BLD20190026
Address: 546 Paradise Lane
Review Type: Building (SFR)
Submittal Date: 6/27/2019
Reviewer: Zack Richardson, PE
City of Edmonds, Stormwater Engineer
Recommendation: I recommend that BLD20190026 be withheld until the comments
below are adequately addressed.
Review Comments:
1. Nothing further
2. General: It does not appear that the frontage improvements have been
considered for any mitigation or addressed in the drainage report; update as
needed to address mitigation for the frontage improvements.
Update: Not addressed; reviewer suspects an outdated WWHM report may have
been attached as the run date listed is 2/18/2019, which pre -dates the previous
review comments.
a. If any portion of the frontage will bypass the infiltration facilities:
ii. Include the frontage improvement in the by-pass basin of the
WWHM model
Update: Frontage improvements not modelled or included in bypass basin;
Additionally, it is not clear how MR #6 is applied to the frontage; update as
needed.
b. It is unclear how MR #5 has been applied to the frontage improvements;
updated and address.
Update: Response states infeasibility added, but text was not found in MR
#5 to address infeasibility. While infiltration must be address first, it
appears the frontage area is too large to be exempt from detention
Page 1 of 2
requirements per Edmonds Amended List #2 and is likely not eligible to be
infeasible from detention.
3. Nothing further
4. Nothing further
5. Nothing further
6. Nothing further
7. Nothing further
8. Nothing further
9. Nothing further
10. Nothing further
11. Nothing further
12. Nothing further
13. Nothing further
14. Nothing further
15. Nothing further
16. Sheet 6: On the filter detail, circle or identity the cartridge type (size & flow rate)
proposed and identify the proposed media type.
Update: Details provided for CB #7 & #8, but what happened to the filter for
Asphalt/Road #3? Show, callout, and provide details for water quality mitigation
associated with the west drive isle (asphalt/road #3); or explain/justify omission in
report text.
17. Sheet 2: Provide `top of riser' elevations for all overflow tees (match top of rock
minimum).
18. Sheet 2: It appears that the rim for CB #6 is lower than the top of rock for the
trench and would overflow at this location without achieving full mitigation as
currently shown; updated grading and elevations as needed to maintain a
minimum 6" freeboard above the maximum water surface of the infiltration trench
(ie. top of rock) at all CBs.
19. Sheet 2: Dimensions shown for trench 2 and used in the corresponding model do
not match; update model and plans for consistency.
Page 2 of 2