Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CITY OF EVERETT <br />Permit Services <br /> <br />The comments below were generated from this project’s City of Everett Stormwater Reviewers. All questions shall be routed through this project’s Public Works <br />Reviewer with City of Everett Permit Services. <br /> # Document Sht/Pg Reviewer’s Comment Designer’s Response Initials <br /> Review Comments from DEPARTMENT NAME: __Surface Water Management____________ , REVIEWER NAME: __Cindy Cullen______________________ <br />1 Memorandum - Does the existing ditch in front of the property serve as an <br />overflow for the stream to the west? The storm drain conveying <br />the stream is 18”, so I assume that is why the frontage pipe was <br />required to be 18”. However, I was not the original reviewer. <br />If the existing ditch and proposed storm drain does not act as <br />overflow conveyance, provide supporting information in your <br />memo to address this. Alternatively, provide calculations to <br />demonstrate that the 12” pipe can support its drainage area plus <br />overflow from the stream. <br />I have outdated plans, but I am seeing a storm drain crossing <br />rd <br />103 that we do not have on City mapping. Does your basin area <br />include that storm drain? Or does that pipe discharge to the <br />stream and not to the project’s frontage conveyance? <br />2 Memorandum - If evaluating a larger area to address #1, refer to our guidance in <br />DCSS 4-3.1(1) and Table 4-3.1(1)-1 for intensity rainfall <br />coefficients. Also refer to DCSS Table 4-3.1 Summary of <br />Stormwater Analysis Standards. The City can provide a rainfall <br />record for use with dynamic modeling. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />