charlie's comments

Our comments are as follows:

1. Slope stabilization: With the wall layout, the only viable approach to support the steep slopes would appear to be by suspending cellular confinement webs or high-strength geogrid from the top of the slopes. Since the pitched areas are transected by walls, this will mean that attachments will be required along at least 5 different wall segments and also at the structural bean on the far west of the project. These attachments could take the form of stainless steel anchors that are either cast into the walls or installed by drilling into the finished walls. In our opinion, the spacing between anchors should not be more than 18”. Once the thickness of the soil layers in planted zones 3, 4, and 5 are established, Roofscapes, Inc. can compute the static pull-out forces for the anchors. The height of the anchors above the slab will depend on the final design for the landscape. Moment forces associated with these anchors will have to be taken into account for the design of the walls.

This sounds like a good approach. Please provide drawings and specification that we can send to our structural engineer for review. //The first step is to determine the profile for the planted areas. This will establish the elevations for the bottom of the soil profiles.

2. Border edging: In transitions between decomposed granite and planted areas (associated with planted zones 1 and 10, some sort of structural edge will be needed to stabilize the decomposed granite walkways. While this could be custom fabricated stainless steel, we believe it would be considerably cheaper to cast curbs at these locations (green lines on the layout).

The planted zones you refer to are defined by planter walls, so those should not be an issue. // the planted areas that are inboard of the walls and adjacent to the walkways do not currently show walls or curbs (areas 1 and 10 on my attached diagram). However, your point does apply to defining zones 11,12, and 4 (in some areas) from the walkways. We were thinking if the material can be kept below grade so that it is a not visable, would a plastic fence be more cost affective.// If the edges will be invisible (below grade), either a plastic or aluminum edge can be used. These must be installed in conjunction with a reinforcing mesh to provide horizontal stability. Also, we assume that the decomposed granite walkways will be installed over a high strength sheet drain. The edge detail must promote flow under the edge and into the sheet drain. This is one of the details that we will prepare. Note: These edges could also be cast-in-place concrete.

3. Walkway transition: We would like to receive a definitive cross-section showing the transition between the decomposed walkway the planted zone 10. We believe that the most practical solution for this transition will be to install the decomposed granite (and curb) over a high-strength sheet drain. This will allow percolated rainfall and excess irrigation water to flow underneath the walkways. Effective uniform drainage of the planted zones is essential. Alternatively --- the walkways could be constructed as barriers to flow. In this case an efficient subsurface drainage network will be required to collect underflow and convey it to an area drain located within zone 10.

See detail attached. We have a drain board specified for the entire roof (1" ) and up the planter walls (3/8"). // As stated above, we presume that a 3/8” thick strength sheet drain will be installed UNDER the walkways. The transition of flow at walls will be tricky and will probably have to be handled in various ways. One solution at walls will be to install a 1” sheet drain UNDER segments of the walls before they are poured/shot. This is a simple, effective, and tested. However, as we have discussed, at some locations rectangular inserts may be placed through the walls, creating high-efficiency ‘scuppers.’ Transitioning runoff to the subsurface scuppers will take some design planning. Roofscapes, Inc. has agreed to develop proposals for these various drainage conditions. Note: We see no reason to place sheet drains up the face of walls.

4. Barriers to flow: Many of the walls, unless modified, will provide barriers to water drainage. There are two possibilities: a) install these walls over high-strength sheet drains that will allow free flow of water under the length of these walls, or b) provide substantial scupper openings at all low points. We recommend building rectangular scuppers into the walls, each several inches high and a foot, or more, in length. We can work with the design team to determine how best to design and position scuppers.

Refer to detail attached (from #3). We had planned on providing weep holes at the bottoms of walls to allow drainage of water. // See comments above—we recommend large rectangular scuppers or, alternatively, casting the walls on top of sheet drain. Please provide a drawing showing the size and locations of weep holes so that we can submit these to our structural engineer. Please note that the engineer has already given us a max penetration through beams (of which we have a few we will need to drain through) of 2" diameter. // beams are a special case, since these must be cast in the initial pour and they are structural. You mentioned that circular penetrations are not as effective as rectangular. Please confirm your preference. // We definitely want rectangular openings. If a 2” clearance is dictated by the engineers, then we would suggest a series of 2”x8” or 2”x6” sleeves be placed through the beams before the pour (we suggest Certainteed Form-A-Drain for this purpose). Can you confirm this with your engineers? Also, we need to think about installing 2” diameter pipe sleeves through the beams (and walls) for electrical and irrigation lines. A preliminary layout for plumbing stub-ups, irrigation supply lines, and electrical conduit should be prepared before the slab and beams are cast.

5. Flow patterns: Based on Drawing A2.1e and P-2, it appears like the rows of drains located on the north and south perimeters of the building as well as the row immediately south of the ramp will serve only the narrow planters in these areas. In particular it appears like the southern row cannot be effective in capturing runoff from the adjacent and up-gradient planted areas and walkways. Is there a plan to connect the areas north of the high parapet wall with these drains? We can be of assistance in suggesting some solutions.

I believe the row of perf pipe on the north is no longer necessary and is an artifact from an older design. The intention of the southern row, at the perimeter of the building, was to help carry water in that narrow planter towards the west. Please advise if you believe this to be true. I am not sure that the row south of the pedestrian ramp helps either; please advise. //Where will the roof drains and channel drains be located. Is this flexible? The drainage plan will be based delivering water efficiently to the roof drains. Who is in the lead on this?

6. Waterproofing flashings: We understand that most, or all, of the walls will be constructed using shot-crete. Will this concrete be hydrophobic? We are concerned that if this concrete can absorb water, it will become necessary to flash the walls at least 6 inches above the soil layer. This will have aesthetic and cost implications. There are many possible solutions for flashing the walls. We would be happy to discuss these with the team.

Our shotcrete walls are all 5000 psi concrete. Given that and the attached waterproofing detail, the flashing is a secondary measure. Will we have plantings that can cover the flashing if it is 6" above the soil? Can this be reduced at all? Please advise. // I do not have sufficient information to conclude how the waterproofing flashing should be installed. If the waterproofing contractor will certify the deck as watertight, even at re-bar dowels, then wall flashings would appear to be completely unnecessary. What sort of guaranty is the waterproofing installer providing? The nightmare scenario, if there is one, would appear to be moisture absorbed into the shotcrete walls, migrating to the rebar dowels, rusting the dowels and compromising the waterproof slab. I have no idea what design precautions have been made to mitigate against this possibility. We know of other jobs (Sika Sarnafl) where walls cast on top of waterproofing required no wall flashings. If there is any uncertainty about this, then I recommend that the flashing be extended up the wall and 6 inches higher than the top of soil.

7. Irrigation: Unless 2” diameter sleeves are installed across and under the various walls, curbs, and walkways, stub-ups for irrigation will be needed in every planted zone. Also, the irrigation valves and controls can be either centralized inside the building (e.g., in a closet or utility space) or they can be placed on the roof. The downside of placing them on the roof will be that each irrigation zone will require its own valve chamber (typically 8”-12” high, 15” wide and 24” long. These will be visible.

2" diameter sleeves are being provided under the planter walls and walkways. Irrigation valves and controls will not be inside the building but in the planter areas. How many zones do you calculate we will need? My understanding is that these boxes will be flush with grade- lets work together to be strategic about where these are placed so that they are not in highly visible locations. // The boxes can go anywhere. The number of zones will depend on the planting plan, and the desire (if any) for flexibility in changing the plantings in the future.