Correspondence c' 5 0 5 W , S JO/ j oir ioL i ;ZooL/ - co 74'
•
9755 SW Barnes Road, Suite 300
t Portland, Oregon 97225
PACIFIC 503.626.0455
Fax 503.526.0115
AN ^BCO CO.+PM.
February 24, 2003
Gary Lampella
City of Tigard Building Official
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re: Washington Square Mall Expansion - Request for Modification of Code
Dear Gary:
Per our conversation today I am requesting a modification of the Uniform Plumbing Code per Section 301.2
Alternate Materials and Methods. Specifically we are requesting that an existing 36" reinforced concrete
(RCP) storm sewer pipe be allowed to remain in place under the proposed South Parking Structure. In
addition, we are requesting that an 8" PVC 3034 sanitary sewer pipe be allowed to remain in place under the
same parking structure (see sheet S 1.OA attached).
The existing 36" RCP was video tapped by Pacific Int -R -Tek on December 8 2003 to review the
condition of the existing pipe. The pipe is 31 feet deep at the manhole at the SW corner of Sears and almost
32 feet deep at the manhole at the SW corner of the parking area. The video tape record of the pipe indicated
a clean pipe with no visible infiltration or joint separation.
The existing 8" PVC pipe was video tapped by Pacific Int -R -Tek on December 2" 2003. The pipe is nearly
19 feet deep at the manhole at the SW corner of Nordstrom's and 24 feet deep at the manhole at the SE
corner of Nordstrom's. The video tape record of the pipe indicated a relatively clean pipe with minimal
internal deposits and only one service for Nordstrom near the downstream manhole.
The South Parking Structure is to be founded on piles with concrete pile caps that have been designed to
miss the existing 8" PVC and 36" RCP pipes. Since the foundation will not be founded over the pipes,
direct structural stress will not be exerted. The structures use is for vehicular parking only and is open to the
air on all sides and therefore does not pose a gas threat to the non - habitable structure. Both pipes are in good
condition and do not need replacement at this time. Both pipes are also extremely deep and would be
problematic to replace given their depth. •
It is my opinion that public safety is not compromised, nor is the interests of Macerich Co. jeopardized by
the requested modification of Code. Per UPC code section 3.01 -2.2 Compliance, I believe that the existing
pipes to remain "comply with the intent of this Code and the material offered is for the purpose intended, at
least equivalent of that prescribed in this Code, in quality, strength, effectiveness, durability, and safety..." •
Given that the pipes are under a non - habitable parking structure open to the air on all sides, I believe that this
test has been met. I have included the video tape record of these pipes for your review (please return the tape
whpacific.com planners surveyors engineers landscape architects
• a
•
• Gary Lampella •
February 24, 2004
Page 2
with your response). This is not a unique situation within Washington County, we were able to maintain an
existing 8" PVC sanitary sewer under a parking structure at the Peterkort Medical Office development in
order to facilitate construction and maintain existing services.
It is our intent to have a second video tape record made at the completion of the pile work to assure that no
damage has been caused during the auger cast pile installation. This way, we can assure that the pipes will
continue to function prior to completion of the foundation work. We would appreciate a timely response to
our request so that our permits may be processed and construction started as soon as possible. If you have •
any questions or need additional information, please don't hesitate to contact me at (503) 372 -3601.
Sincerely,
W &H PACIFIC, INC.
B yL.ByA0'
Project Manager
Cc: Skip Kuhn, Rick Beason, Greg Hathaway, Todd Ferking
End
' f
1-\Projeds\Macaich Cunyzviy30773 Wash Sq Expansion\OffrelWorc 307 73 -hr- ode modificationdoc
E t
• f
k i
. 1
whpacific.com planners surveyors engineers landscape architects
7 12oV'- o rr v 9? • •' ' ' r "+ 9755 SW Barnes Road, Suite 300
• Portland OR 97225
1 ° 503.626.0455
PACIFIC Fax 503.526.0775
MEMORANDUM
Q GE1�
TO: City of Tigard n
AR 2004
g 1��IN
FROM: Monte Higbee, P.E. M F jtGA 4
DATE: 3/03/04 Cut-0 0 OtV1S10N
CC: File
FILE #: WHP 30773 — Washington Square Expansion
RE: Response to Plumbing review comments from the City of Tigard
This memo is in response to comments from John Williams dated 2/23/04.
Response:
1. A detail of the oil -water interceptor with a storage tank has been added. See attached.
The upper deck garage storm drainage piping has been run to the ground level. Four (4)
catch basins with solid covers have been added in the ground level. The storm piping will
run into the catch basins before they leave out to the site storm sewer.
2. The storm drainage calculations are attached. Some of the pipes have been upsized based
on the City requirements of the 2 "/hr rainfall. Refer to revised sheets P 1.1 A & P 1.0B -U.
3. All piping underneath the new construction will conform to the code requirements. Refer
to the new general note on revised sheet P 1.0B -U. Refer to Response items 9 & 10
below for the two exceptions.
4. Due to the structural limitations, the overflow drainage piping is designed to run
underneath the new mall expansion and will be terminated (day lighted) in the future
parking garage. Based on a phone conversation between Mike Sheehan & Issa Qandeel
on 02/27/04 @ 8:30 am, Mike approved that once the overflow lines (from the different
overflow drains) are connected together into one main, the main line does not need to be
sized to handle blockage from all the overflow drains together. Therefore the combined
overflow drain mains are downsized a little.
5. See attached detail 5/C4.3
6. See attached sheet C4.0 for the water service backflow assembly. The irrigation system is
a design build service and therefore a separate permit will be required prior to irrigation
installation (the backflow device is probably already in place).
7. See attached sheet C4.0. Revised sheet MP0.1 reflects the deletion of the reduced
pressure backflow preventing assembly (RPBA) from the mechanical scope. The civil
drawings indicate the water meter and RPBA per City installation requirements.
I.\Projects\Macerich Company\30773 Wash Sq Expansion \Ofce \ Word \tigard comments(plumbing) 022704 doc - I -
Memorandum - continued
Page 2
8. See attached Backfill & Drainage Detail. Please attach this detail to the approved set of
plans. Structural sheet S 1.0A, call out 31/S3.0 shows that the foundation drain should be
placed around the basement section of the parking structure. The Geotechnical Engineer
did not think it was necessary to place foundation drains around the rest of the structure.
9. A request for Modification of Code was sent to Gary Lampella on 2/27/04.
10. A request for Modification of Code was sent to Gary Lampella on 2/27/04.
•
•
2
• F ✓u ►•-, 5 ,-1 t...) i 1 1) •
C 4-3 J l= T e a .id` •
Tv rSSA
STATE OF OREGON
Interpretive Ruling No. 98 -1
ELEVATOR SUMP PUMP INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
QUESTION: What is the proper method of installation for elevator sump pumps meeting the
requirements of the 1996 Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code?
Asked by: Brad Roast, Building Official, City of Beaverton
BACKGROUND: The Oregon Elevator Specialty Code (OESC) changed effective January 1,
1998, and now references the Oregon State Plumbing Specialty Code (OSPSC) for elevator sump
pump installation standards. Although the OSPSC addresses pumped drainage systems, it does
not specifically have a section or reference for elevator sump pumps. A request for an
interpretive ruling was made by Brad Roast, the Building Official of the City of Beaverton,
requesting clarification of which Plumbing Code provisions apply to these installations.
DISCUSSION: Authority. ORS 455.060 authorizes the Division to issue binding interpretive
rulings on the building codes and on acceptability of materials, design or method of construction.
Advice received from the Attorney General in OP #5208, October 1, 1981.
The elevator code requires elevator pits to be dry. Where an accumulation of water occurs, a
permanent means shall be provided to remove it. This can be accomplished by installation of a
gravity drain to daylight, indirect waste or a sump pump.
In hydraulic elevator pits there is negligible potential for oil leakage, due to oil leakage collection
and maintenance requirements of the elevator code. Therefore, oil /water separators are not
required.
Chapter 8 of the OSPSC is applicable to elevator sump pwnp installations. Dual pumps arc not
required. When practical, elevator pits shall be drained by gravity. Sump pump discharge pipes
shall connect through indirect waste connections to the building drain or sanitary sewer. Indirect
waste receptors for elevator sump pump connections shall be protected from trap seal loss by an
approved automatic means meeting OSPSC Section 1007.0 Sizing of elevator sumps and pump
discharge piping shall be based upon the anticipated gallon per minute (GPM) flow of the pump
installed and the manufacturer's installation standards.
FINDINGS: The 1996 OSPSC addresses pumped drainage systems with respect to two types
of systems: sewage ejectors and storm/ground water applications. Elevator sumps are intended
to remove water from the pit and shall be installed under the provisions of Chapter 8 of the
OSPSC. Elevator sump pump systems are expected to operate infrequently and should be
controlled by an automatic switch. The OESC does not allow elevator sump pumps to be
directly connected to the plumbing drainage system. Discharge piping must be routed outside of
the elevator hoistway and exit the pit as soon as structurally feasible. The discharge piping shall
1
•
requesting clarification of which Plumbing Code provisions apply.to these installations.
•
i
DISCUSSION: Authority. ORS 455.060 authorizes the Division to issue binding interpretive
rulings on the building codes and on acceptability of materials, design or method of construction.
Advice received from the Attorney General in OP #5208, October 1, 1981.
The elevator code requires elevator pits to be thy. Where an accumulation of water occurs, a
permanent means shall be provided to remove it. This can be accomplished by installation of a
gravity drain to daylight, indirect waste or a sump pump.
In hydraulic elevator pits there is negligible potential for oil leakage, due to oil leakage collection
and maintenance requirements of the elevator code. Therefore, oil /water separators are not
required.
Chapter 8 of the OSPSC is applicable to elevator sump pump installations. Dual pumps are not
required. When practical, elevator pits shall be drained by gravity. Sump pump discharge pipes
shall connect through indirect waste connections to the building drain or sanitary sewer. Indirect
waste receptors for elevator sump pump connections shall be protected from trap seal loss by an
approved automatic means meeting OSPSC Section 1007.0. Sizing of elevator sumps and pump
discharge piping shall be based upon the anticipated gallon per minute (GPM) flow of the pump
• installed and the manufacturer's installation standards.
FINDINGS: The 1996 OSPSC addresses pumped drainage systems with respect to two types
of systems: sewage ejectors and storm/ground water applications. Elevator sumps are intended
to remove water from the pit and shall be installed under the provisions of Chapter 8 of the
OSPSC. Elevator sump pump systems are expected to operate infrequently and should be
controlled by an automatic switch. The OESC does not allow elevator sump pumps to be
directly connected to the plumbing drainage system. Discharge piping must be routed outside of
the elevator hoistway and exit the pit as soon as structurally feasible. The discharge piping shall
1
•
MO ,L
,LUIS 'SDd
8T,T0 .L IDVSn
t£ : ST S0 /£0 a111I1 ',LS
QI NOILDINNOD
6t 09T9t 90ZT 'III NOI.LDINNOD
£6L0 ON XN /X,T.
• MO NOISSINSNV2LL
*5*5*5:5*55$$$$$$***5*
*** ,UIOda2I XI 5*5
* * *55g$s, **** * * *5** **
T0012 !ail DOH Q21VDI I, d0 AZID T89£6Z9£0S Xdd S£ : ST I2id 60 /SO /£0
F trq TO 1,1, -/ W k I S tL•- --
• C; -k 0e Ti g a..d x .
` l v SS A.,
not be located in elevator machine rooms or machinery spaces. Gravity drains may be used
where adequate grade is available.
Although hydraulic elevators may contain oil piping systems, the likelihood of oil leakage is
negligible and oil/water separators are not required under the provisions of the OSPSC.
CONCLUSION: The State Plumbing Board accepts the above findings for elevator drains and
sump pumps designed and installed within the applicable provisions of this ruling and the
Oregon State Plumbing Specialty Code and recommends adoption of this ruling:
Arthur G. Atchison, Chairman Date
State Plumbing Board
The recommendations and findings of the Board are accepted and the Interpretation is adopted
effective immediately.
•
it62. 7b.g
osep A. Brewer III, Administrator Date
Build g Codes Division
2