PLN20130004_Sycks_ENG2.pdfof EDo CITY OF EDMONDS
CIVIL PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
Y ENGINEERING DIVISION
�St 1g90 (425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE: September 11, 2013
TO: Matthew Merritt — LDC Inc.
Mmerrittgldc corp. com
FROM: Jennifer Lambert, Engineering Technician
RE: Subdivision File #: PLN20130004
Project: Pineview Place — 3-Lot Short Plat
Project Address: 1020 2nd Ave S
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 an Engineering Technician.
City of Edmonds handouts and standard details can be referenced on the City website under Permit
Assistance.
lst Review — 7/26/13
2nd Review — 9/11/13
GENERAL
1. 9/11/13 — Comment was addressed and will be reviewed separately. Comments to follow.
7/26/13 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
short plats 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 short plat
improvement bond forms from the City.
If you intend to post a bond in order to record the short plat, the bond amount will be based
on the entire scope of the project.
Inspection fees for this project will be calculated at 2.2% of the 120% City approved
estimate for all improvements.
2. OK
3. OK
4. OK
5. OK
6. OK
7. OK
8. 9/11/13 — Comment was partially added. Please add note to sheets 6, and 7.
7/26/13 Comment - On all plan sheets where easements are shown, please label the easements
as private.
Sheet 1 of 9 — Cover Sheet
1. OK
SHEET 2 OF 9 — Existing Conditions
1. OK
SHEET 3 OF 9 — TESC Plan
2. OK
3. OK
4. OK
5. OK
6. OK
Sheet 4 of 9 — TESC Notes and Details
1. OK
Sheet 5 of 9 — Horizontal Control Plan
No Comments
Sheet 6 of 9 — Grading Plan
1. OK
2. OK
Sheet 7 of 9 — Roadway and Utilities
1. OK
Page 2 of 4
2. 9/11/13 — Comment was addressed. Need to verify with the City's Stormwater Engineer
that he is OK with the revised chart. I will follow up next week.
7/26/13 Comment - Impervious Areas chart: Provide a breakdown showing the square footage
of the road and each single family residence (showing house and driveway separate). This
information will also need to be shown on the face of the recording documents.
3. OK
4. OK
5. OK
6. OK
7. OK
8. OK
9. OK
10. OK
11. 9/11/13 — Manning "n" value for design of grass -line swales is too low (0.030). Oregon
Dept. of Transportation recommends 0.05 for flow depths of up to 0.7 feet and grass 2 to 6
inches. To be conservative, we must assume the swales won't be mowed to less than 2
inches. Confirm the swales are sized properly sized using this "n" value or re -size as
needed. Also, rock check -dams must be in the swales where the slope exceeds 4 % to
prevent washout.
7/26/13 Comment - Please note that the pre -sizing tables in the City's handouts are not designed
for 100% infiltration; they are sized to meet the flow control standard of 0.7 cfs/acre-
impervious, 0.25 cfs/acre-impervious, and 0.45 cfs/acre-impervious for the 2-year, 10-year, and
100-year recurrence events, respectively. The design needs to demonstrate that the overflow
system of the pipes and open channels can handle these flows without causing problems to
nearby properties. This includes the open channel at the northwest property boundary that
appears to be flowing into the neighbor's garage.
a. Please provide documentation that shows the proposed stormwater plan has addressed
the stormwater flows for both onsite and offsite.
b. Or the developer can design the infiltration trenches for 100% infiltration.
12. OK
13. OK
14. OK
15. OK
16. OK
17. OK
18. OK
19. OK
20. OK
21. OK
22. OK
23. OK
24. OK
25. OK
26. OK
Page 3 of 4
27. OK
28. OK
29. 9/11/13 — Comment was addressed; however, it appears that the power and water for lot 3
share the same trench. Please revise as needed.
7/26/13 Comment - Please show the location of the dry utilities so that a minimum of
3'separation between the utilities can be verified.
Additional Comments 9/11/13
30. Replace CB 3 at the end of Tract 999 with an adequately sized trench drain across the full
width of the pace surface. This is to help keep the home dry during intense storms (berms
are not standard practice).
Sheet 8 of 9 — Notes and Details
9. OK
10. OK
11. OK
12. OK
13. OK
Sheet 9 of 9 — Notes and Details
No Comments
Please contact me at 425-771-0220 or by e-mail at jennifer.lambertgedmondswa.gov if you have
specific questions regarding these plan corrections.
Page 4 of 4