Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />Thank you, <br />Cindy <br />From: Brian Doolan <BDoolan@everettwa.gov> <br />Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:36 AM <br />To: Erik Emerson <EEmerson @everettwa.gov>; Cindy Cullen <CCullen@everettwa.gov> <br />Subject: RE: 2202 100th Street S.W.(PW2004-012) <br />As long as there is a hold harmless and that the never has any obligation to touch or go near the private property then I <br />am ok with it. Thanks <br />From: Erik Emerson <EEmerson@everettwa.gov> <br />Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:25 AM <br />To: Cindy Cullen <CCulien @everettwa.gov>; Brian Doolan <BDoolan@everettwa.gov> <br />Subject: RE: 2202 100th Street S.W.(PW2004-012) <br />We'll also require a hold harmless agreement. Cindy, if I missed putting that in there I had intended to. It should have <br />been in the SEPA as well. <br />Brian, the swap is for the frontage improvements on 100t". The alternative would be a detention facility in 100t" which <br />could potentially interfere with the imminent widening plans (not to mention adding more to your maintenance load.) <br />Erik <br />From: Cindy Cullen <CCullen@everettwa.gov> <br />Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:18 AM <br />To: Brian Doolan <BDoolan@everettwa.gov> <br />Cc: Erik Emerson <EEmerson@everettwa.gov> <br />Subject: FW: 2202 100th Street S.W.(PW2004-012) <br />Hi Brian — <br />Erik and I are reviewing this project, and Benyam said that you marked on the drawings that the street drainage <br />shouldn't be connected to the site. <br />The applicant is trying to do a flow control trade due to site constraints. They are proposing to control/treat some offsite <br />drainage (Basin D below) instead of a northern strip of their property (Basin B). The discharge is to a wetland. Would this <br />be okay with you, or is there something that I'm not aware of? <br />(We are going to make a comment that the trade-off areas need to be equivalent.) <br />G <br />D <br />