bld201100692-76_Ave_W-21605-Swedish-E2.doc
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
DATE: 10/25/11
TO: Brad Hinthorne
Brad.hinthorne@perkinswill.com
FROM: Jennifer Lambert, Engineering Technician
Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Program Manager
RE: Application #: bld20110692
Project: Swedish Medical Center – Puget Sound Cancer Center
th
Project Address: 21605 – 76 Ave W
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 Linda Thornquist. City of Edmonds handouts, standard
details and development code can be referenced on the City website.
st
1 Review – 9/21/11
nd
2 Review – 10/25/11
GENERAL
10/25/11 – Comment not addressed.
1.
9/21/11 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 traffic control. The City
recommends use of the King County Site Improvement Bond Quantity Worksheet.
Inspection fees for this project will be calculated at 2.2% of the 120% City approved estimate for
o
all improvements.
10/25/11 – Comment not addressed.
2.
9/21/11 Comment - Please submit a traffic control plan for review and approval.
OK
3.
OK
4.
OK
5.
Traffic Impact Analysis
1.OK
bld201100692-76_Ave_W-21605-Swedish-E2 Page 1 of 7
Sheet C-110 – General Notes:
General Notes:
1.OK
Water Service Notes:
2.OK
Sheet C-200 – Building Demolition & TESC Plan
1.OK
2.OK
3.OK
Sheet C-210 – Parking Demolition & TESC Plan
1.OK
2.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Please remove ‘TESC Removal’ and replace with
‘…prior to the operation of the stormwater system’.
9/21/11 Comment - Please add a note that the temporary sediment pond will be cleaned prior the
operation of the stormwater system.
3.OK
4.10/25/11 – Comment was addressed. However is the word ‘pending’ intended to be used or was
it suppose to be ‘ponding’?
9/21/11 Comment - It appears that there may be an error in the note referring to the catch basin with
the permanent control. Please revise plans accordingly.
Sheet C-232 – TESC Details
1.OK
Sheet C-300 – Building Paving & Horizontal Control Plan
1.OK
2.OK
Sheet C-310 – Parking Paving & Horizontal Control Plan
1.OK
2.OK
3.OK
4.OK
Page 2 of 7
5.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Please note what the 14’ double gate is intended
to allow access to. If the gate is intended to allow for access to the pond, please show a path
from the gate to the gravel access.
9/21/11 Comment - Per the Landscape Plan there is a gate located at the southeast corner of the
parking area. What will the surface from the gate access to the gravel access be?
Sheet C-330 – Paving Details.
1.10/25/11 – Comment was not addressed.
9/21/11 Comment - Please note that engineering will not be inspecting curb ramps installed within
private property. Please confirm with the building department if they require inspections and adjust
notes accordingly.
2.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Please add a note to the detail that the wheel stop
will be 2’ from end of stall.
9/21/11 Comment - Please add a detail for the wheel stops and reference on plan sheets accordingly.
Sheet C-400 & 410 – Building Grading Plan
1.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Grading amounts were provided, but no
calculations. Please provide the calculations.
9/21/11 Comment - Please show the grading calculations.
2.OK
3.OK
Sheet C-401 – Building Grading Blow-Ups
1.OK
Sheet C-420 – Grading Sections
1.OK
Sheet C-500 – Building Utility Plan
10/25/11 – Comment not addressed. Please review the title report for any easements. If there
1.
are not easements, then easements will need to be provided to the city for all city utilities prior
to final project approval.
9/21/11 Comment - Please show all private and public easements.
10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. The total regulated area impervious area should
2.
be the sum of the replaced and new. Areas mitigated by low impact development means that the
water does not enter the city storm system. Since the rain garden is piped to the pond which is
Page 3 of 7
then released to the city storm system the rain garden is not considered LID. Therefore #7 in
the chart should be 0. Please revise the chart accordingly.
9/21/11 Comment - Please revise the impervious surface chart to include all areas of impervious
surfaces that were constructed after 1977 as new. When you deduct the area that is being mitigated by
an existing stormwater management system from the total regulated impervious area, your amount of
regulated area not yet mitigated should equal 51,718 sqft. Please make sure to separate the 51,718 sqft
into LID and conventional stormwater systems as directed in the impervious surface chart.
OK
3.
OK
4.
OK
5.
OK
6.
OK
7.
OK
8.
10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Please note if the water easement is proposed or
9.
existing.
9/21/11 Comment - Please show that the water meters are located within the easement. If there is not
an easement, an easement will need to be provided to the City prior to final project approval.
OK
10.
OK
11.
OK
12.
OK
13.
New Comment
Please show new 2” service as copper.
14.
Sheet C-510 – Parking Utility Plan
1.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. The reference is incorrect or detail was not
provided (6).
9/21/11 Comment - Please reference the detail and sheet for SDCB-700 (control structure).
Sheet C-521 – Utility Profiles
1.OK
2.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Plans callout Type I – 48” Manhole. Plans should
either indicate Type II Manhole or Type I Catch Basin. Please revise plans accordingly.
9/21/11 Comment - Please revise notes to show that SDMH 2 is used instead of SDMH 1.
Sheet C-530 – Utility Details
1.10/25/11 – Comment not addressed. Detail 2 is showing a Type I sewer manhole which is not
used. If you intend to use a Type II storm manhole, please add the detail to the plans.
Page 4 of 7
9/21/11 Comment - Type I Manhole Detail does not appear to be used in the plan set. Please revise
plans accordingly.
2.10/25/11 – Comment not addressed.
9/21/11 Comment - Detail 1 is not referenced on sheet C-500 & 510. Please revise plans accordingly
***As changes are made, please make sure that the appropriate details are referenced throughout
the entire set of plans. ***
Sheet C-531 – Utility Details
1.OK
2.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. Cross section of the media filter on C-510
indicates that you would be looking north; however, the detail indicates you are looking south.
Please revise plans accordingly.
9/21/11 Comment - The view point of the media filter drain detail is not as shown on C-310. Please
also include the distance to parking/bumper blocks.
Sheet L-101 – Landscape Plan
1.OK
Sheet L-103 – Plant Legend & Details
1.OK
Sheet L-201 – Irrigation Plan
1.OK
Sheet A-1.0 – Site Plan
1.10/25/11 – Comment not addressed. Please review the title report for any easements. If there
are not easements, then easements will need to be provided to the city for all city utilities prior
to final project approval.
9/21/11 Comment - Please show all private and public easements.
2.OK.
Traffic Control / Truck Route – Plan submitted by Dan Beason w/Skanska
1.10/25/11- Comment not addressed.
9/21/11 Comment - Please provide a site specific Traffic Control Plan showing the following items.
a.All southbound lanes of highway 99.
b.Bus stops
Page 5 of 7
c.Neighboring driveways
d.Dimensions (for signs, driveway and bus stop locations, etc.)
e.Appropriate signage and lane closure for the removal and replacement of the curb/gutter
Review comments by Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Engineering Program Manager: Please contact
Jerry directly with any questions you may have related to the storm drainage report. Jerry can be
reached by email at shuster@ci.edmonds.wa.us or by phone at 425.771.0220.
For this permit I reviewed the following:
Swedish/Edmonds Hospital, Puget Sound Cancer Center, Drainage Report, dated August 2011,
KPFF Consulting Engineers.
Civil Plan sheets C-410, C-500, C-510, and sheets with referenced details.
Drainage Report
1.10/25/11 – Comment was partially addressed. The first part of the comment has been
satisfactorily addressed. It is unclear what area is considered the “bypass area”; it should be
delineated in Figure 3. It should also be noted if bypass area contains any pollution generating
impervious surface. If so it would need to be accounted for in the site’s treatment systems.
9/21/11 Comment - Section 2, page 2. This section should include a description the current drainage
system served by all parts of the site that are going to be redeveloped by the proposed project. A
drawing should show what areas are tributary to the existing vault. A second figure (under Section 3)
should show all areas of the proposed projects that are tributary to the various stormwater features
(rain garden, media filter, sand filter, and detention pond) and the bypass area. This information should
feed into the table on Sheet C-500 that has a tally of the various types of impervious surface areas.
2.10/25/11 – Comment was not addressed satisfactorily. The CSWPPP appears to be written to
the 2005 CSWGP. It needed to be written to the 2011 permit.
9/21/11 Comment - Section 3, page 3, Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.
a)The site classifies as a Large Site Project. Large site projects are required to have an
assessment of the erosion potential of the site. Please fill out the enclosed form and include it
the report as an appendix.
b)On page 3 of the report, discuss the results of the erosion potential scoring.
c)The Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the project that will be submitted
to the Dept. of Ecology should be included in the submittals to the City of Edmonds. Be sure
to send the Notice of Intent and write the plan to the most recent Ecology Construction
General Stormwater Permit (CSWGP), effective 1/1/2011. More information can be found at
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/construction/permit.html.
3.OK
Page 6 of 7
4.OK
5.OK
6.10/25/11 – Comment was not addressed satisfactorily. The maintenance standards for the media
filter have not been included.
9/21/11 Comment - Appendix G. These standards appear to be from the 2009 King County Surface
Water Management Manual. Please include all the appropriate standards from the 2005 Ecology
Stormwater Manual and the Washington DOT manual for the media filter.
7.OK
Note: additional comments may be generated by the reviewer based on the changes to the design
necessitated by these comments.
Page 7 of 7