Magic Toyota - Engineering Comments 2.pdfof EIIAf CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
Y
ENGINEERING DIVISION
FSf. , gqo (425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE: August 21, 2017
TO: David Estes, Strotkamp Architects
dhestes—aia@frontier.com
FROM: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.gov
RE: Application 4: bld20161684 & bld20170493
Project: Magic Toyota — civil site and utility improvements
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.
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.
Review 1 — June 8, 2017
Review 2 — August 21, 2017
GENERAL
1. August 21, 2017 — As the project permitting has been applied for in phases, the cost
estimate will need to account for this. A cost estimate was submitted for the demolition
and storm vault permits and inspection fees were paid for this phase of work. Please
confirm that the cost estimate provided is for work to be performed in addition to the
work outlined in the previous cost estimate. Specifically, please confirm TESC Supervisor
hours. Please revise the cost estimate as follows:
a. Include any storm system revisions that were not included in the first estimate.
b. Include water system improvements.
c. Include sewer system improvements.
d. Include traffic control and right-of-way improvements
e. The building pad subgrade compaction and site proof roll does not need to be
included in the cost estimate.
6/8/2017 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. The amount of the bond will be based on 120% of the City
approved estimate for the off -site improvements.
f. A 3.3% inspection fee is calculated for the project based on 120% of the City approved
estimate for the entire project improvements.
2. ok
3. ok
4. August 21, 2017 — Thank you for submitting a traffic control plan. It is currently being
reviewed by the City's transportation engineer and any comments will follow.
6/8/2017 comment - Provide a traffic control plan addressing the following:
a. Traffic control for separate phases of work along 212th St SW and Highway 99.
b. Show bus stop location. Will a temporary stop be necessary? Add notes as appropriate
to coordinate with CT prior to work start.
Sheet CV-1 COVER SHEET
1. ok
2. ok
Sheet CV-2 — CITY STANDARD NOTES
1. ok
2. ok
Sheets D-1.0-D2.3 — TESC AND DEMOLITION PLAN PHASE I
1. ok
2. ok
August 21, 2017 —
a. At present, a construction entrance on Hwy 99 is being utilized. This is the
preferred entrance for the contractor and my understanding is they intend to use
this until it no longer is feasible to do so. Please revise plans to show this
construction entrance in addition to the entrance on 212th if there is still intent to
use this construction entrance.
b. Also with regards to access, the owner and contractor had discussed temporarily
shifting access to the existing parking garage to the south to avoid the detention
vault excavation. The plans do not reflect this. Please confirm if this is desired and
revise plans as needed to show what is being proposed to provide this access.
c. D-2.0: The power poles are shown to be relocated under the previous demo permit,
however, all work within the right-of-way is to occur with this permit and
associated ROW permit. Please revise plans to indicate this work will be done with
the subject permit.
d. D-2.1: Revise note along 212th and Hwy 99 street frontages that indicates removal
of an existing driveway and replacement with new sidewalk, landscaping, and
display parking to just read replacement with new sidewalk. Alternatively, the
note could be revised to clarify which elements will be constructed within private
property and which elements will be located within the ROW.
6/8/2017 comment - Show demolition elements specific to this phase of the project including
removal of existing driveway approaches, removal of utility poles, etc.
Page 2 of 4
4. ok
5. ok
Sheet C-1.1 — SITE PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
_5. ok
6. ok
Sheet C-1.2 — SITE PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
5. August 21, 2017 — The note has been revised, but it states the 5-foot wide sidewalk is to be
replaced with a 4-foot sidewalk. This is not accurate. The existing improvements are to be
removed and a 7-foot wide sidewalk is to be constructed with tree grates to be installed at
approximately 40-feet on center. Please revise note and update plan to reflect proper
spacing of tree grates.
6/8/2017 comment - Revise Section C-C to clearly note the requirement for the existing
sidewalk to be removed and replaced with a 7-foot wide sidewalk, with tree grates to be
installed as indicated. It shall also be noted that existing failing, damaged, and/or non -compliant
curb and gutter shall be removed and replaced as required by City Engineering inspector.
Sheet C-1.5 — SITE DETAILS
1. ok
Sheet C-2.0-C2.4 — GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN & STORM VAULT
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
5. August 21, 2017 — The legend includes a line type as well as symbol for detention vault and
vault access riser respectively. Both have an asterisk after, but I was not able to find a
separate note for these features. Please explain the asterisk. In addition, the vault access
riser symbol is shown as a solid black circle in the legend but an open circle in plan view.
Please revise accordingly.
Sheet C-3.0 — UTILITY OVERALL PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
Sheet C-3.1 — UTILITY PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
Page 3 of 4
3. ok
4. ok
_5. ok
6. ok
7. August 21, 2017 — Please add note to plans that existing sanitary sewer lateral (from
property line to main) to be TV'd by City Public Works Dept. to determine if it's
acceptable to reuse. If not acceptable, a new lateral will need to be installed from main to
property line.
6/8/2017 comment - Sewer connection to existing sewer main is indicated on the plans. Pease
note the existing pipe size and material and indicate how connection will be made to this line.
Will a wye be cut in or is the existing pipe larger, allowing for a core drill?
8. ok
Sheet C-3.2 — UTILITY PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
_5. ok
6. ok
Sheet C-3.3 — SANITARY SEWER DETAILS
1. ok
Sheet A-1.0 — SITE PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
Sheet A-2.4 — ROOF PLAN
1. ok
Sheet L-1.0 — LANDSCAPE PLAN
1. ok
2. ok
3. ok
4. ok
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
Ok — no further comments.
STORMWATER REPORT
Ok — no further comments.
Page 4 of 4