bld20120455-Chase_Bank and bld20120925-Walgreens-E3.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
(425) 771-0220
City Website: www.edmondswa.gov
DATE:February 12, 2013
TO:Norm Scheg –norms@aaieng.com
Craig Harris –craigh@aaieng.com
FROM:Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
RE:Application#:bld20120455
Project:Chase Bank –New Bank
Project Address: 9801 Edmonds Way
Application #: bld20120925
Project: Walgreens
Project Address: 9797 Edmonds Way
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 Marie Harrison.
City of Edmonds handouts, standard details and development code can be referenced on the City
website.
st
1Review –August 13, 2012
nd
2Review –December 6, 2012
rd
3Review –February 12, 2013
GENERAL
February 12, 2013 –Response comments state the values have been updated, but I am not
1.
able to find a copy of the estimate within the submittal packet. Please submit for review.
12/6/2012 -Thank you for providing a cost estimate. The estimate will be reviewed in more
detail once the civils plans are closer to their final form. In an initial review of the document
the following corrections/information was noted:
a.Sidewalk thickness shall be 5 ½” thick (currently shown as 4” in estimate)
b.Sawcut for work within City ROW shall be included in estimate
8/13/2012 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.
A bond is required to be placed for all right-of-way improvements. The amount of the bond
o
will be based on 120% of the City approved estimate for all right-of-way improvements.
bld20120455-Chase_Bank and bld20120925-Walgreens-E3.docx
Page 1of 7
The City will inform you of the appropriate bond amount after review of the cost estimate.
Bond forms can be obtained from Marie Harrison, Permit Coordinator –425-771-0220 or
Harrison@ci.edmonds.wa.us
Inspection fees for this project will be calculated at 2.2% of the 120% City approved
o
estimate for all improvements.
February 12, 2013–Plan not yet submitted.
2.
12/6/2012–Response letter states TCP and haul route plan will be provided by contractor once
selected for project.
8/13/2012 comment -Please submit a traffic control and haul route plan for review and
approval.
ok
3.
February 12, 2013 –Frontage Improvement Plan provided –see sheet C-101.
4.
February 12, 2013 –Frontage Improvement Plan provided –see sheet C-101.
5.
February 12, 2013 –Refer to Sheet C-100 below.
6.
12/6/2012 -Response letter states “refer to architectural plans”, however Sheet C-100 does
provide some of the requested information. Please revise C-100 to also include signage that is
to be replaced in the ROW as well as any directional signage that will be installed on private
property. If striping information isprovided on the architecturals then please provide a
reference on Sheet C-100 to the specific architectural plan sheet.
8/13/2012 -Please provide a striping plan that dimensions parking stalls and drive aisle widths
and provides details for directional arrows and signage.
February 12, 2013 –Easement documents have not yetbeensubmitted.Please also see
7.
comments under Storm Drainage Report regarding storm system easement areas. With
the recording of the new storm easement, the existing stormeasement will need to be
relinquished. This can occur within the same easement document.In addition, please
keep in mind that a public pedestrian access easement will also be necessary for that
portion of the sidewalk that extends onto private property.
12/6/2012-Response commentstates “Legal documents will be provided by the Surveyor for
approval and recording once the extent and locations of the required easements have been
finalized”.
8/13/2012 comments -Please be aware that any easements proposed as beinggranted to the City
of Edmonds will need to go through a City Council process of approval prior to building permit
issuance. Once easement areas have been determined please provide legal document exhibits
for each. The City will assist with the easementform at point.
February 12, 2013 –Response comments acknowledge this comment.
8.
12/6/2012 –Please note that any easements to be provided to the City will need to be taken
before City Council in two separate processes (committee and full council) prior toissuance of
the building permits. This typically is a 2-3 week process. Please keep this in mind as you
proceed forward with your project.
February 12, 2013 –Please further describe the intent of the retainingwall that has been
9.
revised to partially extend onto the neighboring parcel to the east.I have heard
discussions about opening up traffic flows between the two parcels, but I’m not sure if this
is accurate. Please elaborate on this further so it can be determined if any additional
review of thislayout is necessary. The Planning and Building Divisions will or likely
already have provided comments on this as well.
February 12, 2013 –for the final plan set, please remove revision clouds. Clouding is
10.
critical when the revision pertains to an issued permit, but in the design phase it adds
confusion to the plan set.
Page 2of 7
STORM DRAINAG E REPORT
The following comments are provided from Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Engineer. Please
contact Jerry directly at 425-771-0220 or by email at jerry.shuster@edmondswa.govwith any
specific questions you may have regarding these comments.
February 12, 2013 –
1.There are outstanding issues related to the routing of the runoff from the residential
development to the north of the site to ensure the connection is properly constructed.
a.The conveyance capacity spreadsheet in Appendix B states that the contributing area
is 0.803 acres.A figure justifying this area needs to be included.
b.Sheet C-001 shows the removal ofthe existing 12 in diameter culvert yet Sheet C-
110 says “Intercept existing 12” storm line.” Clarify how the new pipe will connect
to the existing system.New infrastructure connecting to this system shall be in an
easement given to the City since it carries exclusively City runoff from the road to
the north.
c.The new pipe conveyingthe runoff from theresidential development to the north
must include:
i.Pipe penetration detail, if it is going through the proposed wall.
ii.Pipe anchoring details
iii.Proper connections to the existing system at catch basin or other junction.
iv.Hydraulic analyses to ensure no surge of manholes at the bottom of very
steep pipe run.
d.There is an existing 15-ft wide easement through this area.Please show it on the
drawings and adjust the easement as necessary for the new pipe to be installed.
2.The sizing calculations for the proposed CDS2015 unit could not be could not be located in the
drainage plan.The CDS should be sized to the 15 min flow rate from WWHM3 for an on-line
BMP using the post development (unmitigated ) flow rate from 1.48 acres of “parking,
moderate.”According the Department ofEcology, the CDS2015 can handle up to 0.7 cfs for
this water quality flow rate
(http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stormwater/newtech/use_designations/CONTECH_CDS_
GULD_071808.pdf).
3.Sheet C-110 shows the layout of the stormwater infiltration chambers.Only three of the rows
have inlet pipes.Please indicate how the flow will be dispersed to the other rows of chambers.
Also, the call out for the chambers indicates 27 chambers (there are 70) the dimensions called
out do not match what is in the drawing.
The modeling for the stormwater chambers assumes 24 inches of rock under the plastic
chambers.The storm chamber detail in Sheet C-541 only show 6 inches of rock under the
chambers. Ensure that the plans match the modeling.
Sheet C1.0andC-000–GENERAL NOTES
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
ok
4.
Page 3of 7
Sheet C1.1andC-001–EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEMOLITION PLAN
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
ok
4.
Sheet C-100–SITE PLAN
ok
1.
February 12, 2012 –Thank you for revising this plan sheet to include striping and signage
2.
references. Please revise as follows:
A detail for detectable warning truncated dome application is provided on sheet
a.
520. Please reference this sheet in detectable warning surface notes. For
information, the City does not requirethe installation of truncated domes in the
instances shownthroughout this project.
<32 12 19>: This note is referenced for stop bars, which states “yellow paint
b.
striping (typical). Black outline on concrete pavement”. Please revise to show stop
bars being white. In addition, surface is asphalt so black outline is not applicable.
Crosswalks throughout reference note <03 12 19>, however a note with this
c.
numbering has not been provided. If this is a typo and is intended to read <32 12
19>, then comment “a” above applies in this situation as well.In addition, if note
<32 12 19> applies then City standard detail E3.2 for crosswalks shall be
referenced.
<32 12 16>: Add reference to detail provided on sheet 510.
d.
Sheet C-101–FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTPLAN
February 12, 2013 –Copy of plans approved by WSDOT not yet received.
12/6/2012 comment -The Citywas recently informed by WSDOT that they would like to see
improvement plans that involved removal and replacement of curb sections. Please submit the
frontage improvement plan to WSDOT for review and approval or deferral back to the City.
February 12, 2013 –Thank you for revising the driveway approaches. Please refer to
1.
sheet C-512 for the driveway entrance detail instead of C-511 as shown with the center
driveway approach.
12/6/2012 -Please revise driveway approaches to be consistent with WSDOT driveway
approach detail provided on Sheet C-512. Concrete sidewalk will carry through approach and
sidewalk will be at a constant grade, therefore the curb ramp details do not apply.
ok
2.
February 12, 2013 –Please revise cross sections A-A and B-B to includedimensions for
3.
planter strips and proposed sidewalk.
February 12, 2013 –Cross section A-A does not reflect the same section for A-A as shown
4.
in plan view. Please revise accordingly.
Page 4of 7
Sheet C3.0 andC-110–UTILITY PLAN
1.See sheet C3.1 andC-111 belowfor original comments 1-5.
February 12, 2013 –Thank you for revising sheet callout. Please revise to reference detail
6.
4 instead of detail 1.
12/6/2012 -Rain gardens are shown on Sheet C-110 and reference is made to details on sheet
C-121, however, rain garden details are not provided on C-121.It appears as though the detail
is provided on C-540.Please reviseplans accordingly.
8/13/12 comment -Several rain garden notes reference C4.0 for details, but not all rain gardens
will have the drywell component. Please revise accordingly.
ok
7.
This comment is no longer applicable.
8.
ok
9.
This comment is no longer applicablewith the building permits, it will be handled in any
10.
subsequent subdivision process.
February 12, 2013 –Response comments state “Ongoing conversations are in progress
11.
with the adjacent property owner regarding the scope of work to be performed on
adjacent parcel and associated easements”.
12/6/2012 -Response letter states “the retaining wall drain has been moved to our property”.
The plans do, however, show a portion of the drainage system on the neighboring parcel.
Please revise accordingly. In addition, please comment on whether or not a construction
easement will be required. Will any construction activities such as grading, shoring or
placement of forms encroach on the neighboring parcel?
8/13/12 comment -The retaining wall drain line appears to be shown on the parcel to the east.
Will an easement be obtained from this property or is the drain line on the subject property?
Will a construction easement from the property to the east be necessary?
February 12, 2013 –Thank you for revising the storm system. Please refer to comments
12.
above provided by Jerry Shuster.
12/6/2012 –Please revise the storm bypass system as requested.
8/13/12comment -Storm bypass system shall be installed with straight runs between catch
basins. Where bends are needed a catch basin shall be provided. At a minimum, please provide
one additional CB (at the approx. midpoint) in the storm bypass system.
ok
13.
ok
14.
ok
15.
ok
16.
ok
17.
February 12, 2013 –General Note #11 states “Utilities within five feetof a building shall be
18.
constructed of materials approved for interior use as described in the current edition of
the UPC”. Please revise to state two feet.
Sheet C3.1 andC111 –WATER UTILITY PLAN
February 12, 2013 –Response letter states “to be addressed at a later date”.
1.
12/6/2012–Thank you for providing a separate plan sheet. Please submit a copy of the
approved plan sheet from OVWSD once approval has been received.
8/13/12comment-The subject development falls within the Olympic View Water and Sewer
District for the water utility system. Please provide a separate plan sheet for the water utility
Page 5of 7
system with an approval block for OVWSD. Approval by the District will be required prior to
issuance of the subject building permit.
February 12, 2013 –Response letter states “to be addressed at a later date”.
2.
12/6/2012 -Response letter states “per discussions with Lynne Danielson of OVWD, the
locations of the water system components are “OK”. Any revisions to the locations will be
provided during their review of the plans”. Please note, the City does not want private utility
systems to be located within the ROW especially when there is room to locate the facilities
entirely on private property. Discussions on this will continue should location within the City
right-of-way become the only viable option.
8/13/12 comment -A portion of the proposed water system is shown to be located within the
City right-of-way. Please move to private property.
February 12, 2013 –Response letter states “to be addressed at a later date”.
3.
12/6/2012 -Response letter states “DCDV under OVWSD jurisdiction”. Please refer to
comment #2 above. The water utility system itself may fall under OVWSD jurisdiction, but
approval to locate facilities within the right-of-way falls with the City.
8/13/12 comment -The DCDA is shown to be located within the City sidewalk. Please include
details of the access hatches on the water utility plan sheet.
February 12, 2013 –Response letter states “to be addressed at a later date”.
4.
12/6/2012 -Response letter states “see response to item 2 above”. Please also review City
responsesto items 2 & 3 above.
8/13/12 comment -Please work with OVWSD to locate as many of the water system
components outside the sidewalk area (or near the building) as is possible.
ok
5.
Sheet C2.0 andC-120–GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN
February 12, 2013 –Plans reference details provided on Sheet C-121, however this sheet
1.
has not been included within the plan set. Please include.
12/6/2012 -Thank you for relocating the silt fence on private property. The application of the
silt fence is incomplete, however, and does not fully address the needs of the site. Silt fence,
straw wattles, etc. will need to be installed on the downstream side of the limits of soil
disturbance. Please revise plans accordingly.
8/13/12 comment -Silt fence shall be installed on private property. Existing sidewalk shall
remain open for as long as possible. Please revise plans.
February 12, 2013 –Rock entrance was added back into plan set. Please show the rock
2.
entrance to fall within the limits of the private property. Area within ROW shall remain
asphalt and be temporarily patched with cold mix when disturbance is necessary and until
final restoration is complete.
12/6/2012–Rock entrance was removed. A note was added stating “vehicle parking area to be
rocked”. Please revise not to also state “when asphalt area is removed”. Add note that states
“leave existing asphalt sections in place until it becomes absolutely necessary to remove”.
8/13/12 –comment –Rock construction entrance shall also fall within limits of private property.
Add note to leave existing asphalt approach in place until it becomes absolutely necessary to
remove.
ok
3.
ok
4.
Page 6of 7
Sheet C510–CIVIL ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS
February 12, 2013 –Response comment indicates the sheet name satisfies Walgreens
1.
requirements and it is requested that it remain as shown. The sheet name can remain as
shown, but it is not consistent with other plan sheets provided. Other detail sheets
specifically have “details” in the title. The change would make sense for clarity, but is not
critical for permit compliance.
12/6/2012 -Revise sheet title to reflect construction details.
February 12, 2013 –Response comment requests the numbering remain as is. The City is
2.
not requesting the numbering to change and it can remain as shown. A cross reference to
which sheet the detail is provided on is certainly beneficial when construction plan sets
become this large. This falls true for any detail provided in the plan set. This is a request
for clarity, but the change is not critical for permit compliance.
12/6/2012 -Revise so that details state which plan sheet they appear on within the civil plans.
February 12, 2013 –Detail 1: Yellow paint is acceptable for directional arrows, however
3.
stop bars shall be white. Please revise accordingly.
February 12, 2013 –Detail 8: Please add notes that clarify stop signs shall be red,
4.
consistent with MUTCD regulatory signage standards.
Sheet C4.0 andC-511 and C-512–CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
ok
1.
ok
2.
ok
3.
February 12, 2013 –Detectable warning truncated domes are not required at the driveway
4.
approaches. Please remove the associated WSDOT standard detail from the plan set.
Sheet C4.3 andC-542–CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
ok
1.
Sheet C-540–PRIVATE UTILITY DETAILS
ok
1.
Please contact me at 425-771-0220 or by e-mail at jeanie.mcconnell@edmondswa.govif you
have specific questions regarding these plan corrections.
Page 7of 7