pln20120021-Ritter-Civil-E2new.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE:July 13,2017
TO:Joseph Smeby, Omega Engineering
joe@omega-eng.com
FROM:Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.gov
Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
Jen.machuga@edmondwa.gov
RE:Subdivision File #: PLN20120021
Project: Ritter 3-lot short plat
Project Address: 8364 Olympic View Drive
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 and on Wednesdays from8:30am-noon.
City of Edmonds handouts, standard details and development code can be referenced on the City
website.
Comments 1 –February 7, 2017
Comments 2 –July 13, 2017
On March 16, 2017 (after issuance of the February 7, 2017 plan review comments) an email
was sent from the City to the applicant indicating approval of an option to defer construction
of all required improvements to the future development of Lot A. With that came several
conditions that have not been submitted or acknowledged with the recent resubmittal. Please
address the following:
Should you decide to move forward with deferring the improvements the following will be required:
1)(Not addressed)A letter to the City clearly explaining why you are requesting to defer installation
of all the improvements for the subject property.
2)(Addressed) A complete set of civil construction plans, including all elements that need to be
constructed as conditions of short plat approval.This would include design of the retaining wallas
construction of the access road could not occur without a retaining wall.
3)(Not addressed) Acknowledgement/Agreement by the applicant that a condition will be placed on
the face of the short plat recording documents stating that all required improvements shall be
installed as a condition of building permit approval for Lot A.A performance bond will need to be
posted for all required improvements prior to the issuance of said building permit.A building permit
for Lot B shall not be issued until all required improvements have been constructed.
4)(Not addressed –please acknowledge) A similar statement shall also be recorded as a separate
document against each of the properties –Lot A and Lot B.
GENERAL
1.July 13, 2017 –Thank you for submitting a cost estimate. A complete review of the cost
estimate has not yet been completed and I will follow-up with you on any required
changes. In addition, as noted above, a performance bond will not be required with the
civil construction phase of the project and will instead be required prior to issuance of a
building permit for Lot A. The submitted estimate will be kept on file until that time.
2/7/2017 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. Posting a bond for stormwater systems applies to
subdivisions that involve 7,000 square feet or more of land disturbing activity and as well as
on projects in a critical area or buffer including ESLHA. 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.July 13, 2017 –letter from geotech not submitted. Response letter indicates said letter will
be provided once the revised plans have been reviewed and no significant changes are
necessary.
2/7/2017 comment -After making all corrections requested in this letter, please provide the
entire civil plan set as well as the native vegetation plan to a qualified geotechnical engineer and
have them write a letter addressing the compliance of the civil plans and native vegetation plan
with all applicable critical areas requirements of ECDC Chapters 23.40 and 23.80.
6.ok
7.ok
8.ok
9.July 13, 2017 –Response letter states the slope waiver letter has been included with the
resubmittal package; however, I was not able to locate the letter. Please resubmit.
2/7/2017 comment -The proposed driveway slope of 19.1% exceeds the allowable driveway
slope per Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 18.80.060.It may bepossible to
obtain a driveway slope waiver up to 20% if authorization is given by the Public Works Director
Page 2of 5
consistent with ECDC 18.80.060.D. A letter addressing the conditions of approval found within
ECDC 18.80.060.D shall be submitted to the City for review and approval should you determine
you are unable to meet the 14% through design considerations. Please note, the decision of the
Public Works Director shall be noticed as a Type II decision which will require noticing.
SHEET 1 –COVER SHEET
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
5.ok
SHEET 2 -SWPPP
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
5.ok
6.ok
SHEET 3–SWPPP DETAILS
1.ok
SHEET 4–TREE RETENTION/VEGETATION PROTECTION PLAN
7/13/2017 –Omega Engineering, Inc. response letter indicates correction to this plan sheet
wereprepared by Wetland Resources. For future re-submittal, please submit a response
letter from Wetland Resources addressing each of the plan review comments.
1.ok
2.ok
3.7/13/2017 –Trees are only approved for removal as impacted by proposed short plat
improvements. The plan currently indicates removal of several trees not impacted by
short plat improvements. Please revise as necessary.
2/7/2017 comment -Clearly showtrees that are to be protected and trees that are to be
removed.
a.Where trees are to be maintained barrier fencing shall be placed at the drip line of the
tree in order to protect the root system.
4.7/13/2017 –Location of orange barrier fencing shall beupdated consistent with comment
#3 above.
2/7/2017 comment -Orange barrier fence shall be provided instead of orange flagging to
indicate clearing limits and ensure protection of areas that are not to be disturbed.
5.7/13/2017 comments below -
2/7/2017 comment -Condition #3.a.2 of the preliminary short plat approval states the following:
“The applicant must submit a plan that shows how the project complies with the 30% native
vegetation requirement of ECDC 23.90.040.C. For further direction, see section II.F of this
report.”
Sheet 4 of your submittal references a vegetation management plan prepared by Wetland
Resources dated November 2, 2011. The previous civil submittal, however, included a
vegetation management plan as Sheet C1.1 that incorporated much of the provisions of the
Wetland Resources plan, but did include some changes from Wetland Resources’ initial plan.
Page 3of 5
For example, the Wetland Resources plan set aside the native vegetation area as an NGPA,
which typically refers to an area that is formally established with the recording of a subdivision
or other easement documentation. Since it is not required that this area be formally established
as an NGPA, the applicant had removed all references to an NGPA. Additionally, the Wetland
Resources plan had included provisions for permanent fencing and signage of the native
vegetation area, which had been eliminated in the plan provided as civil Sheet C1.1.
Since various versions of the vegetation management plan have been submitted over theyears, it
is important that the current civil submittal include the applicant’s current proposal for the
vegetation management plan. Therefore, please provide a vegetation management plan
consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. This plan may be provided as a sheet
within the civil documents or as a separate document, but must include the following at a
minimum:
a.ok
b.ok
c.ok
d.ok
e.ok
f.ok
g.ok
h.July 13, 2017 –Please provide more clarification. Work within Lot C (at a
minimum) needs to be done with thecivil construction improvements. Work on
the other lots could be deferred to the time of future building permits. Provide
a cost estimate for all work to be done at this time. A performance bond will be
required for these improvements.
2/7/2017 comment-Describe when the work within the native vegetation area is
proposed to be conducted. What, if any, work will need to be conducted at the same
time as the civil improvements? What, if any, work is proposed to be conducted
during future construction onthe new lots?
i.July 13, 2017 –As the vegetation management plan addresses all phases of the
project, please revise the erosion control plan to clearly indicate protection of
trees that are to remain on the site.
2/7/2017 comment -Condition #2 of the preliminary short plat approval states the
following: “Any tree cutting on the site must be consistent with the requirements of
ECDC 18.45 and the 30% native vegetation requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. A
tree cutting plan shall be submitted and approved with the civil plans for removal of
trees impacted by the subdivision improvements. Any tree cutting proposed on the
site that is not a hazardous situation and/or not necessary as part of the subdivision
improvements shall be reviewed at the time of building permit application review or
through the appropriate land use permit application and review. All trees that are to
be retained during the development process must be protected according to the
performance standards found in ECDC 18.45.050.H. If during construction it is
realized that certain trees that were planned to be retained will be damaged due to
the construction activities, replacement at a one-to-one ratio will be required per
ECDC 18.45.050.F.”
All proposed tree cutting must be indicated on the civil plans and must be consistent
with the above condition. Additionally, the plans must indicate the location(s) of all
tree protection measures, such as tree protection fencing consistent with the
requirements of ECDC 18.45.050.H.
Page 4of 5
6.ok
SHEET 5–GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
1.ok
2.ok
3.July 13, 2017–Retaining wall calculations have been provided and approved by the
Building Division. However, the design and details of thewall shall be added to theplans
for reference and construction.
2/7/2017 comment –Please clarify which (if any) retainingwalls are proposed at this time. Noe
that retainingwalls shall not exceed three feet in height over original grade where located within
minimum required setback areas.
4.ok
5.ok
6.ok
7.ok
8.ok
9.ok
10.ok
11.7/13/2017 –Response letter states this note has been moved to Sheet 7. While the note does
appear on Sheet 7 it still remains on this sheet as well. Please revise.
2/7/2017 comment -This plan sheet includes a note about the existing sewer service. Move this
note to Sheet 7. In addition, please clarify intent for sewer connection as the plan shows a new
connection in Olympic View Drive, but this note indicates use of an existing line.
SHEET 6 –DRIVEWAY PROFILE & STORM DETAILS
1.7/13/2017 –please label profile.
2/7/2017 comment -Label profile view as Storm and Driveway Profile and revise profile as
follows:
a.ok
b.ok
c.ok
d.ok
e.ok
2.ok
SHEET 7 –UTILITY PLAN & DETAILS
1.ok
2.ok
3.ok
4.ok
5.ok
6.ok
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REVIEW
7/13/2017 –No further comments.
Page 5of 5