The URL can be used to link to this page

34546 STREET FILE ON MICA VIEW ESTATES p ValleY ° 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.688.0239 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0295 ♦ hr@spokanevalley.org Memorandum Date: June 23, 2009 To: File ~ \l O From: Carrie Ac6sta; Deputy City Clerk Re: Moldy documents: PF-01-05 Mica View Estates C of E; Pierce Rd Impr. 4-25-44 & 5-25-44 10/10/05 Due to a water pipe breaking in City Hall's basement sometime last year, we are now _ discovering that several files contain documents with mold on them. The State Archivist Office confirmed with our City Clerk that we should make copies of, then destroy all moldy documents and make a not in the file; that is the purpose of this memorandum. The documents within this file are merely copies of documents which had mold and are now clean and can be handled without concern of contamination. In addition, the documents were moved from a 6-tab file to a 4-tab file, so some have been combined. The following lists the tabs and documents specified as contained within which were copied, then destroyed: • Tab #1: Pink Engineer's Worksheet, Findings & Conditions, Staff Report, Engineer's Conditions, Design Deviation, Other Agency's Conditions, Environmental & MDNS Rpts, Application Documents • Tab #2: Correspondence, Fee Receipts • Tab #3: Pre-Submittal, Road & Drainage Review, Design Information, Meeting Notes, Pre-Construction Information, Inspection Reports, Certification Data • Tab #4: Traffic Study, Concurrency • Tab #5: Bonds, Quantity Estimates, Bond Inspection Sheet (No documents contained within this tab) • Tab #6: Plat Checklist, Plat Language/Misc. Plat Info, Drainage Language, Sight Distance, Homeowner's Agreements, Maintenance Agreements, Easements (No documents contained within this tab) ENGlNEER'S REVIEW SHEET Active Project Status ~ As Built Plans Received PIaLs File SF 01-05 Road Plans Approved New Road Standards Mylar Companion Fiies: Related Files: Date Time Building Dept: Hearing: Technical Review: Large Lot: ~ Pteliminary Review: Type: B{dg. Sq. Feet: Date Received: April 26, 2005 No_ Lots:1 Project Name: MicaView Estates I Site Address: Pierce Rd. Imp. Pierce Rd_ & Pierce Ln Conditions Mailed: Range-Township-Section:1 V ~ Flood Zone: No PARCEL(S) (firsf 20) Water Source: Sewer Source: Spokane County School District: Central Valley Fire Distnct: FD #9 Phone Distnci: Qwest Applicants ~ Owner Engineer ~ Name: Name: Name: Business: Business: Buslness: Address: Address: Addresa: Clty, State. Zlp: Clty, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Phone: Phone: Phone: Business: Celi: Cell: FAX: FAX: FAX: email: email: email: ~ Englnoer Btlfing ~ Surveyor Qtfier , Name: Name: Name: Business: Business: 8usiness: Address: Address: Address: City, St,ste, Zip: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Phone: Phone: Phone: cgu: ceu: cen: FAX: FAX: FAX: email: email: email: Signed Name: 6uilding Phone: Contact: Sandr2J RBSkeil Contact: Planning Phone: 688-0045 Contact; Inlti Eng Need Tecfmically Complete Eng Need Drainage Plans Eng Need Traffic Analysis Eng Need Other Design Devtatlon Dates (in-Out) In Out ~ In f Out ~ In ~ Out ~ BOND ACTIVITY Svnd Original Dat4 Amount ~ Released ~ Reduced ~ Balance ~ Other Notes Hearing Date Decision App Den Cond Appld CC Appld To CC Decision App Den Cond Appld Court ~ Appld to Court Decision App Den Cond Appld ~ l111t. ~ ~ ' ~S - o ~ ~ .m-~-•~,~~ ~~t~.-c.~ 0~- 'a - 7 .°1 C'C" QrUse next page for Project Notes-w / ° ENGINEER'S REViEW S'HEET NOTL%;p - - - - i~fllt._.,~..y... .,r..=..y.,.~,i :r~ i' =n - . - - - _ - , . , _ - - ~ k- . _ _ ' ' _ _ , _a ~ ~1 . . ~ _ _ ~..r.~ _d..' . . . • ~ ' ~ 1_~i.` ~ 1~ - _ _ - ' ' . . . . . . ' ~ _~.o.,. i.~.ee1x~.~_ ~M. • _ . .r , - ~ i.. " _ _ ' _ _ _ _ _ _ ' . _ " ~ • i - . t_ .i! ' , i~ _ - , ~ - , . - " ~~,',rF~,• t~i E. ~ _ - - - - - . 1_- - - - . ~ . ~ - - - _ - _ ~ • ~ ~ R r,",.Yi~, z~=~ `I - _ , . - - _ - - ~ . . - ° =w ,..,:i-__ • ~ ' _ , . . . - - - ' ` - _ • a` ~ ~ . ` a:•~.i~a t` t " E'~ . . - - _ ' • ' ~ ~ sa~:~ s~t"~-~"" y',~•~~ ' ' f r~-~ • • - . _ • ' _ 1 ~ _ , _ _ . . . . _ _ ~ . _ . _ . ~ _ . . . . . . - _ . _ . , . . ' ~ ~ ~ ~f • . . _ ~ _ 1~ _ ' F . I ' " _ " i . - - • f _ _ . . , ~_.~.r_]4~ ~1 ~ _ _ _ _ _ . " _ _ _.1 _ . - t:....i. `~vA'-- _ • r ' - _ _ _ -~x~ -•__S.1L~.ic~t.ar, ~ -f . ~a6.] • ~ r ' _ ' • ' _ _ . _ _ - ~ - ~ - - _ - ' - :=..y:c~~ _~1~^_ t . a - - - - - ___u.~_ _ - • ~ ~ . ' , ; ! s ~ - - • - - y ° -,.~:,x.;:-=;~~ ~ , . - - - • • - „ - . ~ . - ' • ' - - _ - - _ T - ' - ' ' ♦r...e .'c-_ '4.~V.. . ~ ' , , . ~ _ _ " ` . . " • "'~4•'~ ~~t•A . ~ . i . _ _ - • - ~ _ _ ` . . I` ~ 1' -,A~:. C ' . • = y_ _ _ I' ;c^~- M' ~ . _ ' _ "~l _ • r . . t.' ' ~i~L.ru:~ . ~ ~ " _ _ _ _ , _ _ `T' -'-z-~-t'~ ` ~ _ . _ ' _ _ ~ " .c...._. ".__i.c.W~~ -'...s ...f.'1 ` , . , . _ . . . :i7 . " _ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ' . _ _ _ ~L_ . '.'1''t~,i~l~ -_lr i~Ji~ '~e'!1 ~ ' Y I ' ' . . . _ ~.f i~~. r..._ _.~.xd...:~'^.iisi~•1w~4'y~l~:~_~ ^ " " _ 4c_»u._._ .~~~Y.YS~.~:'Y~...P.{~S'.I. ..Y ♦ _ . , " . _y. ._i_.~_~ . _~.71t4...v__.~.~~.r...... +~•~r~}''tr•~.1.ad Y: ' - ~ " . _ -~a f_ ~41~i.~k~~ .N.~'Qv _•',.r ~ y' ~.~_.hv,s~l.~_2-~_ n, i t••... ~ ~Y~" 77L^Y~ , , 1 1_ - . - ` , ~ . ~,,-i-~' ~~r~~-'~ ~ M" . : ~w...'~ ~ 1•.i ..~..._:i ~ 1._. _ _ _ _ ' ' _ ~ ~ " _ • ~ i ~ . . . _ _ -euC.~' l~~F _'4.-si - • - ~ - - ~ - - ~ ~ - - l~e-"~,~ - ~ - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~~~-c~'i 'f'.~y r._~r7 . ~ ~ - ~ - , - -w _ ' ~ . ■ i , ~ . - . . _ . _ i~ a--•: ' ~ z ~ . mi - "~.Y~'t-i~ 4~`W",. ..+.~z...._z~. - ' . . • _ J _ . _ . " _ ` ' '~.,~r~,.~~7 ' - - - . _ _ - _ _ _ ~y,' ' • . ~a~1~Jia3..r- _ _ - . ` - - ' - - ~ ' ~ _ ~ ' _ _ '~~,aa:.~i+s~ ~Fc ~s..-`_ "~"•~~x `.'~~e~Y''_ ..a.'c~ . h t , "k~~ r~ 1! ~J~~'./. 4'~q~~~~• ! L` ' . - ' _ _ _ I ' ' ~..LL_..` _ . 1/ ~ . ~ _ y L.S.~..:`r_.]:~:•~" ~]:~S~ra~.YOit'M r. • + ~ ~ - . _ ~ ' , ~ . l~ . ' ' 4~ `Y~ l-.~t y, .L ~•q.yt`' y¢T.,'~a.~;~ '7! ~ ~Rr. ~ . , • i~~~_ ~ a c ENGINEER,S REVIEW SHEET NOTES Init. ~ t~ ~ - ~l(~1 -r~% ti r 7~ r 14e ! /V" C/ ee ,i''Vi - -f/~_ ~ t ~ 1'' i) " ~ ,;~m.r~'t~'.~` -•.w / ~7 ~ ~ r m N m 0m 05/12/2005 06: 29 5094587516 SE~ PAGE 01 acl m ` ~ . ~ ■ ■ N) Scott's Excavateng of Spol~ane tTOS PO Box 87'9028 ~ . - !lancouver, VVA. 95687-1028 EXCA11A1r1NG SPOfCARE, INCA Phone: (509)458-7548 4NhPre pSchecluldng Meets Serviae Fax: (509)458-7616 Fax Company: City of Spokane Valley . To: Kathy Cummings From: Kim Long , Fax: 921-1008 Da4e: 4/5/2005 , Phone: 688-0175 Pages: 3 (including cover sheet) Re: Mica View'C of E cc: , Perrnits . Urgent For Review x _ Please RepIX M Please BBd N iVo action needed ~ . Kathy, ' Here are the permits, my only question is do I need to have an "obstruction" permit fon-n for the work to be , done at the Ponderosa end of the project? If so, fax or e rreail it to me, if fact, if you can, e mail all of the Qermit forms that }/ou wouid have for us, my address is kiml@scottsexcavatinginc,com , Thanx, Kim Kim Long Phone: 458-7548 Cell: 370-0085 Fax to: 921-1008 I Project Number: 05001575 In. ~ A,pplic3tlJri -'~)ate: 05/13/2005 Page 1 of 2 THIS IS NOT A PEI2MIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit Proiect Information: Permit Use: ROAD OBSTRUCTION TO INSTALL WATER Contact: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING MAIN TO COUNTY SUBDIVISION Address: 10403 W WESTBOW RD C- S- Z: SPOKANE, WA 99224 Setbacks: Front Left: R.ight: Rear: Phone: (509) 458-7548 Group Name: Site Infornzation: Project Name: ROW . - - - - . _ . _ _ _ - . . . - _ ~ . . - . _ . . . _ _ . - Plat Key: Name: RANGE District: ENG Parcel Number: 44042.9999 Block: Lot: SiteAddress: 0 E PONDEROSA DR Owner: Name: UNKNOWN Address: UNKNOWN Location:: CSV UNKNOWN . Zoning: UNKN Unknown Water District: Hold: ❑ Area: 0 Sq Ft Width: 0 Depth: 0 Right Of Way (ft): 0 Nbr of Bldcrs: 0 Nbr of DweUings: 0 Review Informatioft: Review Plan Review Released By: Perniits: Rigli r of wUy Contractor: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING Finn: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING Address: 10403 W WESTBOW Phone: (509) 458-7548 SPOKANE, WA 99224 Ttem Descrintion Units Unit Desc Fee Amount CONST IN ROW - UTILITIES 1 NUNIBER OF $16.00 ROW INSPECTION 1 NUMBER OF $25.00 Permit Total Fees: $41.00 Operator: K C Printed By: K C Print Date: 05/13/2005 1 ~ Project Number: 05001575 In. - Application --ate: 05/13/2005 Page 2 of 2 r i THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit 1Votes: - - SP-1129-97 -BUII.,DING PERMITS ARE REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED BY STORMWATER - SEE MEMO IN PLAT FILE'JAS Pavmejtt Summarv: Pennit Tvpe Fee Amount Invoice Amount Amount Paid Amount Owina Right of Way $41.00 $41.00 $0.00 $41.00 $41.00 $41.00 $0.00 $41.00 DisclairneY: Submittal of this application certifies the owoer (or person(s) authorized by the owner) has both examined and finds the information contained within to. be true and correct, and agrees that all provisions of laws and/or regulations governing this type of work will be complied with. Subsequent issuance of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the code or of any other state or local laws or ordinances. Signature: Operator: K C Printed By: K C Pri.nt Date: 05/13/2005 05/12/2005 06:29 5094537615 SES FAGE 02 MAY 11 2005 10:11 FR , TO ,4,,, .16 P.02/02 - ' , Gall'l4 hoiim'before i,.nsptctionrequired Phone 509.688-0195 Pax 509.688-0037 ~ Vs ;0AW* S ~~PAR-rnnENr oF. PUBI,iC WEaRKS te permtt # An#icipoted start da ' RpW CUNSTR cT1oN pERMIT Loca ~ • ~ tian af ropert~• p y ki (A ddre~sfParcvl €f. lf evoZlable) -jG I b A►PP]ic$n! Nae(m FaX 1 . Addres5 (cLt03 w. W4-'7ad Phnne . ~ ' Contractor's Name Address l.v. ~A)-Celcrc.Jl~ v P~an~ 75"Yj Contractar's Reg.# ~D7TU Explres pRfJ.1ECT DESCRIPTION (Provide sit,a skatch or pfan es nece"ary tor clarity) 11 Sewer ConnecUon D Driveway F~ Curb & Gutter ~ Qas Installatlon/Repair ~ Ca6le/CanduitlPo(e ~ Sidevvalk RepalrlCQnstruotivn • Water Iristallation/Repair Qther Q Pavement Cut Dirnensions Bond/fnsurance certfiaation must be on fl1e with the Cit , Bond # FC~}t~ IDITiONS: j -4!vt -Tc~'1 'f L.)f e. , j ~ . , Permlttee Pg'at-uure Approved . Date ~ • 1 hereby euthorize the City ofl'pokane Valley to charge the fee for lhis permit to my eredit card. Carcl 9 Expiration Date Name of Holder Sianature Fees pAid$ Date Init . (Application) (InspLction) In addition to the permit appllcadoji fee of $16.00 (utility) c,r $25.00 (conStnacUon), inspectian on each parmit will be bllled to ttis parmtttee at s rete of $80.00 per flour wtth a$25,00 (1 f2 hour) min9mum. PQrmitteo signature c+onstitutes an agreernent to these terms and provisipn$. Worfc completed aatlafactorily (5ignad) Data ~ , Perplt aot vaUd utxtg One-Call No ttf"ication Ticket# en.tered her~__EL~,% R' PEIiMTI' M[18T B~ KEFTUN SITE ' ! Ac* TOTAL PAGE. 02 Pro'ect Number: 05001585 In, ate: 05/16/2005 Page 1 of 2 ~ ~~p~ ~lication - . . THIS_ IS NOT A PERMIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit Proiect Information: . . . . . . . _ . . . . Pennit Use: EXTENSION OF PIERCE ROAD FOR NEW Contact: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING SPOKANE COUNTY PLAT Address: 10403 W WESTBOW RD C- S- Z: SPOKANE, WA 99224 Setbacks: Front Left: Right: Rear: Phone: (509) 458-7548 Group Name: Site Informatiott: Project Name: ROW J`___"~ ....y~ ~~~........~.......~~~.L~~.. . - . _ ~ ~ Plat Key: Name: RANGE District: ENG ~ Parcel Number: 44043.9999 Block: Lot: SiteAddress: 5700 S PIERCE RD Owner: Name: UNKNOWN Address: UNKNOWN Location:: CSV UNKNOWN Zoning: UNKN Unknown Water District: Hold: ❑ ' Area: 0 Sq Ft Width: 0 Depth: 0 Right Of Way (ft): 0~ Nbr of Bldgs: 0 Nbr of Dwellings: 0 Review Information: . . . . . : . . . . . . . . - - _ . - , . - . - Review Plan Review Released By: Pernuts: - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . - Righr of way Contractor: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING Firm: SCOTT'S EXCAVATING Address: 10403 W WESTBOW Phone: (509) 458-7548 SPOKANE, WA 99224 Item Descrintion Units Unit Desc Fee A.mount ROW INSPECTION 1 NUMBER OF $25.00 RO W- ROAD OB STRUCTION 1 NUIVIBER OF $16.00 Permit Tota! Fees: $41.00 Operator: K C Printed By: K_C Print Date: 05/16/2005 Project Number: 0500I585 ~i" ~~pplication ~ite: 05/16/2005 Page 2 of 2 TFIISrIS NOT A PERMIT Penalties will be assessed for commencing work without a permit Notes: . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . - ~ - Pavme►2t Sumfnary: , . . : _ . . . . - - - Permit TNme Fee Amount Invoice Amount Amount Paid Amount Owina Right of Way $41.00 S41.00 $0.00 $41.00 $41.00 S41.00 $0.00 $41.00 Disclaimep: Submittal of this application certifies the owner (or person(s) authorized by the owner) has both examined and finds the information contained within to be true and correct, and agrees that all provisions of laws and/or regulations governing this type of work will be complied with. Subseyuent issuance of a permit shall not be construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of the code or of any other state or local laws or ordinances. Signature: Operator: K C Printed By: K_C Print Date: 05/16/2005 05I12I2065 06:29 509452r615 SES PA-GE 03 MAY 11 2005 10:11 FR. TO 4 16 P.02/02 ~ . Call 24 hours before i.nspcctioa requircd Phpne 509.688-0195 Fsx 509,688-0037 si4~~~1,R.~~~ ' ;0*V' Amey pEPARTnnENT 4F. PUBLlc WoRKS , Attticipated start date :~f l lQ 05 - Pormit # >c/f ,~/z ~ J . ROW CQNSTRUCTION PERM IT ' 0 LoCation of ro ert~• e~f 'e~ . f qq~ • 9( ~ . p p y , (Addre s, rcel if~ j evai(able) _ APPIiGant Name, ~XCq ~ 1-.~X1 Fax (o , . Address 1~03 W. w~-~ ~ . Phone 75zy~ r Gdntractor's Narne S~~ &,SCZ v< 7'inC., x/tC Address PhQne 45Y , CQntcactor's Reg.# LC071,1~S l (o (o (3 c~ - - ExPires 60r 3D( OWS PROaECT DE3CRlPTIOId (Provide site sketch or plan as necessary tor clarity) ri Sewer Connection 11 Dr(veway ~ Curb & Gutter ❑ Gas lnstallatianlReAair ~ Cable/ConduiUPo(e ~ Sldewa{k RepairJConstructivn ~ Water Iristallation/Repafr E] Ufhet , ❑ Pavernent Gut Oimens9ons Bond/fnsurance cartifiaailon must be on file wtth the Ci , Borid # F SPECIAL CONDRIOHS: • Pacmlttea natur Approved . , Date . 1 hereby au#horize the City of pokane Valley to charge the fee for this permit to my credit card. C9rd,# p Expiration Date , - Name of Holder S4nature Fees paid$ • Date InIt (Appiloatlon) (In$pecvon) In addition to the permit appllcailon fee of $16.00 (utility) or $25.00 (construction), inspectlon on each permPt wi(l be billed to the permtttee et a rate af $60.00 per hour wifh a $25.04 (112 hour) minimum, Permittee signature consUtutes an agreement to thasa terms and provisions. Waric cQmpleted satlsfactorily (Signad) Date i Permit not valid untfl Oue-Csll Notificatian Ticket # entered here PERMIT MTTb"r B~ KEIPT ON SITE ' TOTAL PAGE.02 Page 1 of 2 , . , Merrijean Gadd From: Bruce Howard [bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 5:05 PM To: Sandra Raskell . Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Lots . O.K. Thanks anyway. I hope we will have an approval soon and it won't matter. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help with the process. Bruce From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 2:16 PM To: Bruce Howard Cc: Tom Schoftens Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Lots That is up to the County for the property located in the County. The City will not issue a right-of-way permit until there is plan approval. -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 1:34 PM To: Sandra Raskell Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Lots . . Thank you Sandra. Can we start construction at our own risk? Todd had indicated there were only minor comments from you, and the County and fire department have already given their blessing to go to Mylar. It is crunch time for all of us, and this would really help to start the grading and getting ready to pave before it gets too late. Any help would be great. Thanks again, Bruce From: Sandra Raskell [maitto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] . Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:54 AM To: Bruce Howard Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Lots They are in the list to be reviewed. As you know Septernber/October are busy months for development. We are working hard to expedite all projects. I will let you know as soon as I have completed the review. Thanks, Sandra -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:19 AM 10/7/2005 Page 2 of 2 To: Sandra Raskell Subject: Mica View C of E Lots Good morning Sandra, Can you please give me a status of the C of E final plans? I was hoping to get this paved this year, and it is quickly becoming crunch time to get that done. I also have an upset neighbor that want to get his yard cleaned up and build a shop, but not until the road construction is done and he knows where things are going to set. Any info would be helpful at this point. Thanks, ` Bruce A. Howard _ Construction Manager Landworks Development, Inc. . 10/7/2005 Page 1 of 1 i 1 Merrijean Gadd From: Sandra Raskell Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 4:10 PM To: 'Todd Whipple' Cc: 'Bruce Howard'; Zarecor, Matt Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Todd, • I have not yet reviewed your changes to the plans. I will let you know as soon as I can if you can go to Mylar or if other items are needed. Thanks, Sandra -----Original Message----- From: Todd Whipple [mailto:trwatwce@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 2:33 PM To: Sandra Raskell Cc: 'Bruce Howard' Subject: Mica View C of E Sandra, Hi, Tim Schwab at Spokane County has given us permission to go to mylar on the County portion of this project. If after your review you feel that we are okay to we would like to get the mylars distributed and for signature as soon as possible. Your consideration on this issue is greatly appreciated. Todd R. Whipple, P.E. . Whipple Consulting Engineers 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Ph: 893-2617 Fx: 926-0227 CI: 995-2939 email: TRWatWCE@msn.com 10/7/2005 Mica View Certificate of Exe; -~t~-on Page 1 of 1 Merrijean Gadd From: Sandra Raskeil Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 3:39 PM To: 'Iris, Wendy' Subject: RE: Mica View Certificate of Exemption A copy of your comments will be sufficient. Since the area is small, the City will review the plans. Thanks! Sandra -----Original Message----- From: Iris, Wendy [mailto:WIris@spokanecounty.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 10:01 AM . To: Sandra Raskell Subject: Mica View Certificate of Exemption Sandra- Have you decided what you would like to do for review of the Mica View - Certificate of Exemption. The project extends Pierce Road (public road) then turns into a private road. Todd Whipple has indicated that he dropped off a set of plans to you...did he?? My comment letter will be ready to send out later today (I will forward my comment letter to you for your review). My comments may address some of your concems but please just let me know how you want to proceed. Thanks Wendy B. Iris, PE P/an Review Engineer Spokane County 477-7441 5/5/2005 w Page 1 of 2 D ~ , f t l I r , • • . Merrijean Gadd ' From: Sandra Raskell Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:46 AM r, To: 'Bruce Howard' ' Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Lots ~ Bruce, I talked with the properly owner yesterday morning. I explained to him he needed to discuss the issues with Todd Whipple and with you further that this is really a private matter. I also explained he would need to review the easement language to determine the requirements of the easement. The only item the City would'review is a design change proposed by Todd or a licensed Engineer. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Sandra -----Original Message----- . ~ ,•pvFrom: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 8:23 AM To: Sandra Raskell ' Subject: Mica View C of E Lots . Sandra, I received a phone call from a resident that lives on the east side of Pierce road at the end of the cul-de-sac. He is concerned about the design of the `208' ponds and his 1•. ~ current circular driveway that will be cut off. He has plans to build a shop near this location and is upset due to the fact that he can no longer get access to the proposed site without the circular driveway. - He would like to meet and go o v e r t h e r eq u i r e m e n t s o f t h e p o n d s. I d o n o t k n o w w h a t t o tell him as the ponds are designed to treat storm water runoff within the City, and also within the Pierce Road easement. Can you please schedule a time late in the afternoon to discuss this with us? I was hoping for Wednesday or Thursday of this week. I told him my hands were tied to install the ponds per the plan unless the City was . willing to let us not do it. I think it would be best if he hears it straight from you. Thank you for your help on this. I am sorry for involving you, but I do not know how to resolve this without your help. - Please let rne know as soon as you can on you schedule. I can be reached at 951- 4004. Thank you. . Bruce A. Howard Construction Manager . ~ 10/26/2005 page2of2 Landworks Development, lnc. . . '1 ~ 'y . . . ,nlnt,11nn5 . . ` Page 1 of 2 ~ ~ - Merrijean Gadd From: Sandra Raskell Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:18 AM To: 'Bruce Howard' ' Subject: RE: Mica View C of E What we will be looking is to make sure if there are any major deficiencies. Your client may be required to come back and fix some of the curbing/sidewalk. I will let you know. Thanks! ~ -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:10 AM To: Sandra Raskell Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Sandra, Just a heads up, I saw a lot of broken sidewalk and curb out there at Meadowview Ranch Estates. With . the project being so old, this is why I was concerned with going back to a contractor for warranty work. It is not very likely that someone will want to step up to the plate and pay for something that old. In fact I do not even know who the contractors are that originally did the work. Thanks again for all your help. ' . .e Bruce - - . - . . . . , . From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] . ; Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:06 AM To: Bruce Howard Subject: RE: Mica View C of E I talked with Todd last night and he is supposed to be responding to me this morning with clarifying 1 and 2. Hopefully today we will have everything done. . For Meadowview Ranch Estates, John and I will visit the area and make sure everything looks ok. I will let you know if we need anything else. Hopefully we will make it this week. . Thanks, Sandra . -----Original Message------ ' From: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:00 AM To: Sandra Raskell Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Sandra, Thank you for your review comments. I know you are very busy right now at the end of the • construction season. We appreciate you help and patience in these matters. . Bruce A. Howard . 10/7/2005 r Page 2 of 2 ~ Construction Manager Landworks Development, Inc. From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM To: Todd Whipple; Royal Myhre , Cc: Bruce Howard; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt Subject: Mica View C of E Todd, I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: 1. On sheet 8B Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. . 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not • indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. Please address. : 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the hydrograph information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75) from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. • . Please address items 2 and 3 before proceeding to Mylar.. Once these items are addressed and item 1 is changed on the plans, the City may sign the Mylars for construction and release the right-of-way permit. ~ . t Please let me know if you have any questions. -Thanks, , Sandra Raskefl, P.E. , , . Development Engineer City of Spokane Valley . • ~ 11707 East Sprague Avenue ~ Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 10/7/2005 (JL WCE Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc 13218 E. Sprague Avenue ~ . Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 TRANSMITTAL COMPANY: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATE: ^ Octcber 5, 2005 DELIVERY TYPE: Hand ATTENTION: Sandra Raskel) FROM: Stacey Jenkin . PROJECT No.: 04-19 REGARDING: Mica View C of E TRANSMITTAL OF: Street and Drainage ' - - r X AS REQUESTED FOR REVIEW RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: ' NO.OF EA SET ~ DESCRIPTtON 'ITEMS 1 X Paper Street and Drainage 1 X My(ar Street and Drainage . NOTES/ COMMENTS: Sandra, . Here are the copies of Street and Drainage for Mica View C of E. Sincerely, Cu'` ~ _ . . "r.~' Stacey Je in CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIP(ENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED PRIVATE AND CONFlDENTIAL. IF YOU RECEIVE THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES AS ALLOWED BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SENDER NOTED ABOVE. THANK YOU. . AWCE September 30, 2005 W.O. No. 04-19 Spokane County Department of Public Works - Transportation 1026 W. Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 Zo,95 Attn: Tim Schwab, P.E. and Matt Zarecor, P.E. D Development Services Engineers o - ~ Re: Mica View - Certificates of Exemption Pierce Lane Private Road and Storm Drainage Plan - Submittal No. 5- Final Mytar Submittal Dear Tim and Matt, . Enclosed are one set of mylars for the construction of the private road and drainage plans for the above referenced project. Also enclosed with this submittal is a final _revised Drainage Report. j •Below are responses to comments received from Spokane County in Tim's transmittal . :-~of September 19, 2005. The City of Spokane Valley responded with three minor . comments which are not detailed here and of which have been completed to their satisfaction as they have signed their sheets of the enclosed mylars. Response to Spokane County Comments on 4th Submittal County comments are bold and paraphrased with responses in normal text. ' PLANS I. Previous comment was in#ended to have frash racks put on pipes 18- inch and larger , This revision has been completed 2. Stations for Ponds A1 and A2 are mislabeled , This has been revised , WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS • CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 13218 E SPRAGUE AVENUE • SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 • PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 . Sokane County - Engir.. 59 Submittal September 30, 2005 Page 2 DRAINAGE REPORT 3. Submittal No. 3 and No. 4 have conflicting information and calculations, the 6/14/04 vs 7125/05 have somewhat different resuits. The summary information should agree with the latest date. This has been added and the appropriate sheet attached for reference. 4. Add narrative for Pond L Narrative added 5. Add post developed discharge rate to Table 1A . ,..-This has been added ..j 6. Redo the calculations for pond A1 and A2, pond size from the calculations is twice that shown on the ptans. Use the correct bottom elevation from the plans, also the area in the calcs for ponds D and E is oversate base on the plans and needs to be recalculated ' . Revisions have been made as necessary, it should be noted that the calculations were essentially correct, but Basin A, different from the other basins actually evaluated A1 and A2 combined. For the final submittal, this as corrected and separated into A1 and -A2. ' 7. The rates out of the ponds as shown in the narrative table have some values greater than the pre-developed flows, values for discharge rates from the 7/26/05 are generally lower, the note at the bottom should not be used. Revisions have been made as necessary, we response to no. 6 above. 8. Ponds A1 A and A2A in the report note that they have under drains :These have been removed from the report 9. Provide a complete final drainage report with all items revised as noted and full size basin maps. This has been provided. ' Srkane County - Engin. ~I 5t Submittai September 30, 2005 Page 3 MISCELLANEOUS 10. Provide bianket easement for natural drainage ways ;The sponsor has indicated that each drainage way is clearly delineated and this will be covered in the CC&R's 11. The drainage facilities lay outside the 70-foot private road easement, new easements shall be required. Please provide the following: a. Plat certificate, deed, deed of trust or conveying instrument b. List of signers c. Legal descriptions, exhibit of the easement area titled "Exhibit A", etc.. d. Easement area drawing exhibit, titled "Exhibit B" , e. Blanket Easement for the project drainage areas A copy of the legal has been included and the remaining documents are being prepared . at this time and will be delivered as soon as possible. . 12. Provide a fire district approval letter The fire district has signed the mylars instead of providing a letter. , , . 13. Provide a maintenance Manual and sinking fund calculations 41 p _ r This is attached for reference 14. Provide a draft copy of the CC&R's along with the HOA - UBI # This has been requested from the owner and will be provided upon receipt After your review please sign the mylars and contact us as we need to retum a set of the rnylars to the City as well as a paper copy, plus we would like to make a copy of the mylars for our offices. should you have any questions related to this submiital please do not hesitate to call at 893-2617 or when your comments are ready for pick up so that , this process can move along smoothly to approvallacceptance. Since ly, Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Enclosures - Plans and attachments as noted Cc: File September 30, 2005 W.O. No. 04-19 Spokane County Department of Pubiic VlJorks - Transportation 1026 W. Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 Attn: Tim Schwab, P.E. and Matt Zarecor, P.E. Development Services Engineers . . Re: Mica View - Certificates of Exemption aPierce Lane Private Road and Storm Drainage Plan Submiffal No. 5- Final Mylar Submittal °Dear Tim and Matt, ' Enclosed are one set of mylars for the construction of the private road and drainage . plans for the above referenced project. Also enclosed with this submittal is a final revised Drainage Report. , . • A • ' . f 2 Below are responses to comments received from Spokane County in Tim's transmittal 1.of September 19, 2005. The City of Spokane Valley responded with three minor comments which are not detailed here and of which have been completed to their satisfaction as they have signed their sheets of the enclosed mylars. Response to Spokane County Comments on 4th Submittal County comments are bold and paraphrased with responses in normal text. PLANS 1. Previous comment was intended to have trash racks put on pipes 'i 8- . inch and larger This revision has been completed 2. Stations for Ponds A1 and A,2 are mislabeled This has been revised ' . F ~ ~''r 'e'~.. r``~. i'~7 x.~... ` r-'~.•~'_ ``ST ` C' i: S\P ROAUS r D;VIcEIOI` t_;i= Tl-IIE Pi3ELIC WCIz,!,:s LEPAt=:n~9I_w! . ~ _ _ 3 .y <<~ • t • s c,.t 5. r i i~"^•~ • September 19, 2005 j V. ~ C C r. y rt Pt r . L r C. ~tJU_ Mr. Todd Whipple, P.E. ~ • Whipple Consulting Engineers . , 13218 East Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99216 ,r - Subject: CE 91-05 Mica View - Certificate of Exemption Road and Drainage Plan Submittal #4 Mr. Whipple, We have reviewed your submittal of the road and drainage design documents we received on September 16, . 2005 for the Mica View C. of E. project. Before the Certificate of Exemption can be accepted, the private road proposed to serve fihe lots must meet the current design standards. Mylars may be submitted provided the following items are addressed adequately for acceptance of the plans: PLANS 1. Previous comment asked to provide a trash rack for all culverts greater than 18". It should have said equal to or greater than 18"-. Add notes for the 18" culverts on sheet 12 as was done for the - 24" pipes. 2. The Pond Location Tables for Ponds A1 and A2 have stations and values which do not agree with the plan view detail. DR.AINAGE REPORT 3. The drainage report (submittal 3& revised nanative of submittal #4) has conflicting infonnation and calculations. Some of the drainage calculations have a 6/14/05 date and some have a 7I26/05 calculation date. These have somewhat different results. The final drainage report should have a consistent set of calculations. The summary information should agree with the latest calculations. 4. In the drainage renort narrative, include summary information for the basin downstream of Basin J & K, the cul-de-sac area. . 5. Add to Table 1 A the post-developed discharge rate from the ponds to show that the post developed rate is less than the pre-developed rtmoff rate. 6. Redo the drainage calculafiions for pond size shown in the plans for ponds A1 & A2. Pond size in calculations is over twice that shown in the plans. Use the correct bottom elevation from the plans. Also the area in the drainage calculations for Ponds D& E is overstated based on the plans and needs to be recalculated. 7. The rates out of the ponds as shown in the narrative table have some values greater than pre- developed flows. Values for discharge rates from the later calculation set (dated 7/26/05) are . generally lower. The note at the bottom should not be used. Use.correct values or revise pond sizes. 26 b4 6roa~i~a ra~~ Ave. ~.e _~~c-ti':a~t~ titi ~;y-j lY 7 Z ~ rr,~.~~V\ 377_i'ct;t 1 E,. ^ `~t'+~i Z-!t)::'' m T(iL): i^t}Z1) `~'1 E1.3 10 ~ '~7~-l 6SF~ (2:1 i'1C`C~r1 4.T: -71r8 .~A _i:is•l:t. __,X: (.7~}` ~ 8• The drainage report states that a 2' x 3' gravel gallery will be in.stalled under the pond bottom with a grate 6" above the pond bottom to help discharge some storm water to the underlying soils for Basins AlA and .A2A on page 18 of 26. The plans do not show these facilities. Either revise the drainage report or add these to the plans. 9. Provide a complete fnal Drainage Report including all items as listed in the Appendix and are mentioned in the report such as full sized basin maps and photos. MISCELLANEOUS You have uldicated that these will be submitted at a later date, but are mentioned for reference. . 10. Provide a btanket drainage easement for the natural drainage areas. 11. The dra.inage facilities that lie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easement (Auditor's Document Number 5194998) are required to be placed within easements. The easements shall meet the requirements of the Stormwater Guidelines. Please provide the : , . following documentation so we can prepare the easements: " a. Plat certificate: Deed, Deed of Trust; or Conveying Instrument (recorded copy); b. List of signatory names; c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Include a title "Exhibit A", it shall be stamped by a licensed Surveyor, all margins shall be 1" or gxeater, 8 point minimum font size, and the text shall be reproducible; and, d. Easement area exhibit: Include a title "Exhibit B" and meet the requirements of the legal description exhibit. 12. Provide fire district's approval with their signature on the cover sheet of the plans. 13. Provide a maintenance manual and sinlcing fund calculations. 14. Provide a draft copy of the CC&R.s along with the Homeowner's Association UBY#. If you have any questions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, Matt Zarecor, P.E. Development Services Engineer/Marager ° Tim Schwab, P.E. 'Plan Review Engineer cc: Bryan Walker, Owner File ' • I I Mica View C of E Lots _ STORm DRAINAGE P4NDS AN D _ FACILITIES i OPERATION & MAINTENANCE. MANUAL , and SINKING FUND EVALUATION DOCUMENT WCE W.O. No. 04-19 September 2005 • ' S. . , . _ , 1 . By . Whipple Consulting Engineers (WCE) 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 MICA VIEW C OF E LOTS STORM DRAINAGE PONDS AND FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENAfVCE MANUAL 1.00 PURPOSE This pian is intended to provide general operations and maintenance guideiines for the . drainage ponds and other drainage facilities located in the Mica View C of E Lots development project. As noted, all facilities discussed are located outside of the City of ~ Spokane Valley and Spokane County road rights-of-way. Implementation of these guidelines will ensure that the drainage facilities installed will function as designed, and continue to store, treat and discharge stormwater at the rates intended. -'c- - 2.00 INTRODUCTION . Generally, the drainage system is intended, through a series of processes, to treat and discharge the increase in water runoff generated on-site. This water is created by the , construction of the impervious surfaces such as buildings, paved parking areas, streets, driveways and sidewalks. Generally, the resulting stormwater is routed via gutter, catch basin, curb inlet, pipe or swale to a stormwater pond or series of ponds. These onsite ponds then store, treat and discharge the excess stormwater at specified rates by either - allowing the water to evaporate, infiltrate though the pond bottom and during extreme storm events through the drywells and/or catch basins installed within these facilities. The drainage facilities in this development are comprised of several elements: A. Convevance For this development conveyance is comprised of the following elements: e Catch Basins • Pipes • GUttG'1'S * Curb Inlets * Grassy Swales B. Storac,e . For this development storage is comprised of the following elements: 0 Pond A1A and A2A on site with a volume of 78 cubic feet (cf) (each) 0 Pond A1 and A2 on site with a volume of 395 cf (each) 0 Pond B and C on site with a volume of 390 cf (each) • Pond D and E on site with a volume of 513 cf (each) m Pond F and G on si#e with a volume of 263 cf (each) , o Pond H and I on site with a volume of 610 cf (each) o Pond J on site with a volume of 375 cf (each) 0 Pond L on site with a volume of 300 cf Whipp/e Consulting Engineers Page 2 Mica View C of E Lots Drainage Facilities O&M Manual . iVnIiCA VIEW C OF E LOTS STORM DRAINAGE PONDS AND FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL C. Treatment and Discharqe For this development treatment is comprised of the following elements: * Ponds A1A and A2A - infiftration and/or evaporation and then overfiow . ~ discharge to Pierce Road * Ponds A1 and A2 - infiltration and overfiow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. . o Ponds B and C- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ~t yi~:~-•J!r\ ways within the project. . * Ponds D and E- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. o Ponds F and G- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. o Ponds H and I- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. * Pond J and K- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. a Pond L- infiltration and overflow discharge to natural drainage ways within the project. As shown, it there may be several drainage solutions or there may be only one - drainage solution for this development. It is therefore of the utmost importance to : provide adequate operations and maintenance activities to ensure that the conveyance . elements remain silt or dirt free, as free flowing silt or dirt will affect the ability for the gutters, swales or pipes to adequately pass or discharge stormwater and may lead to the ponding of water within the gutters, swales or pipes prior to entering the ponds. Should these facilities fill up or becorne clogged, the only remedy would be to remove the silt and debris. Therefore, periodic maintenance is a must. A full set of engineering drawings will be available for review at City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Public Works. 3.00 GEWERAL OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS, The drainage facilities for the iViica Vievu C of E Lots are generally very simple, functional, and have low maintenance requirements. A periodic visual inspection of the facilities will usually identify any required maintenance. Most maintenance will consist . of keeping the catch basins, curb inlets, grassy swales and ponds free of deleterious debris and sediment. However, a specific inspection schedule should be followed to ensure proper and safe operating conditions. See Section_ 4.0 for recommended maintenance schedules. Whipple Consulting Engineers Page 3 Mica View C of E Lots Drainage Facilrties O&M Manual . MICA VIEVi/ C OF E LOTS STORM DRAINAGE PONDS AND FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL 3.10 Convevance Facilities includinq Catch Basins, Pives, Gutters, Curb Inlets and Grassv Swales . . Within this development, the street gutters and/or swales function as -storm pipes directing stormwater to the pond locations. Concrete curb inlets, if a design feature may capture the gutter flow and transfer this flow to the pond locations via grassy swales. The pipe system works similar to the gutter and/or swales system for conveyance except the water is initially captured in a catch, basin or grate inlets and then transferred via storm drainage pipes directly to the ponds via the outlet structure and splash pads located in each pond. 3.20 Storaqe Facilities includinq Drainaqe Ponds As designed this project intends to collect the rainfall or snow melt runoff from the roadways, sidewalks, driveways and other facilities. It is intended that the rainfall or snow melt water will go into the various ponds via curb inlets, grassy swales, catch basins and storm drainage piping. _ For this development, there are FIFTEEN ponds for storage and discharge which require maintenance. A sketch of their locations is provided in Exhibit `Aattached to this document. - 3.30 Treatment Facilities includinq Drvwells and Pond Bottoms As described earlier, the general operationaf procedures for the storm drainage system designed for this development uses both pond bottoms and drywells as drainage discharge options. Therefore, it will be important to keep the pond bottoms watered during the summer months but not over watered or saturated. They should remain dry enough to support the weight of a standard riding lawnmower without sinking into the grass and creating ruts while at the same time promoting a thick stand of "green" or healthy grass. The reason for this is that it is the grass, thatch and root structure that provide the brunt of the treatment processes prior do discharging to the underlying soils and ultimately to groundwater. As designed, the pond bottoms should always remain at least 6-inches below the top of the drywells or six inches below the invert or bottom of ` discharge pipes. This will ensure that for most of the rainfall and snow rnelt runoff events that occur within the Spokane area that little if any stormwater will discharge via the drywell andall discharge will occur either Whipple Consulring Engineers Page 4 Mica View C of E Lots. Drainage Facilifies O&M Manual MICA VIEW C OF E LOTS STORM DRAINAGE PONDS AND FACILITIES OPERATION & NiAiNTENANCE MANUAL through evaporation, plant uptake, or infiltration to the underlying soils. The drywells and or discharge pipes are in place in case of a higher than normal storm event to ensure that there will be no resulting property damage from a rainfall or snow melt event where runoff is considerably higher than normal. Generally and for practical purposes, a storm event ' of 30-years or less will not create enough runoff to discharge to the drywell and/or discharge pipe, unless the pond bottoms are frozen. You should not be surprised if you hear of a 50-year event that no water went . into the drywell because each pond has the ability to discharge water via infiltration at different rates. Therefore, it is extremely important that pond bottom health and periodic maintenance of the pond bottom grass is achieved. 3.40 Winter Or)erations During the winter, snow removal operations, as much as possible require that snow should be plowed directly into one of the site ponds or roadside swales. This will allow for freeze / thaw and other snow melt runoff scenarios to occur without creating large ice patches within the project site. 4.00 MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND SCHEDULES Below is a maintenance description for each of the drainage system elements contained within the Mica View C of E Lots development, including the conveyance, storage, treatment and discharge. All drainage facilities located outside of City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County road rights-of-way and within tracts are -expected to be maintained , by the development management or land owner. Maintenance activities for this development are expected to always be maintained by the ownership or management of. the noted property and shall run with the land in the event of sale or transfer of ownership. . General . Proper maintenance procedures are a necessity for the continued functioning of the drainage facilities. Improper maintenance, or lack of attentive maintenance measures, may result in substantial on-site and downstream impacts. It is strongly recommended that the developer and or Home Owners Association (HOA) designate an individual, who will be responsible for making sure the maintenance measures are implemented. Generally, maintenance personnel are to conduct a visual inspection of the drainage Whipple Consulting.Engineers Page 5 . Mica View C of E Lofs Drainage Facilities O&M Manual - MIcA ViEW C oF E LoTs STORiVI DRAINAGE PONDS AND FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL facilities immediately following a substantial rainfall or snowmelt event. This could be that it rained noticeably hard for a short period (30 minutes or more) or that it rained steadily for a long period (6 hours or more) or if a significant rainfall and then snow melt event, associated with a"Chinook" melt were to occur in January, February or March when the ground has a high likelihood to be frozen. For long duration storms, greater than 24 hours, maintenance personnel are encouraged to inspect the drainage facilities during the storm event to identify any developing problems and correct them before they become major problems. 4.10 Storm Events General Inspection Responsibilities 1. Inspect all catch basin, gutters, curb inlets, swales, ponds or other appurtenances, making sure that they are clear of debris and obstructions. 2. Inspect the pond banks/sides/berms, making sure there are no breaches or breaks in the sides of the pond. Immediately repair any breaches or breaks, with a sandy loess soil, compacted in place and follow up after the storm event with more substantial maintenance activities. 3. Inspect the pond bottoms and be sure that they are free of trash or other . debris that would preclude the infiltration of stormwater. Additionally, the drywell, discharge pipes, conveyance pipes and catch basins within the ponds should be checked to be sure that they are free of debris and remain free draining. These above noted storm event related visual inspections (no. 1, 2, and 3) are in addition to the maintenance schedules noted for each item, which follow: 4.20 Convevance Inspection of the following items should be performed once in the spring and once in the fall as noted: e Catch Basins/Manholes - should be visually inspected by either looking through or removing the grate to insure that no build up of sediment or - other deleterious material is blocking the opening to the pipe. If encountered the extra sediment and deleterious material should be removed. • Pipes - pipe ends should be inspected for breakage, crushing or other ' damage which could impede storm water flows. • Gutters - should be evaluated for settling, cracking, spalling or other damage that would impede the flow of storm water or other runoff from Whipple Consulfing Engineers Page 6 Mica View C of E Lots Drainage Facilities O&M Manual DRAINAGE PORiDS Sc OTHER DRAINAGE FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL reaching the curb inlets and pond bottoms. m Curb Inlets - should be evaluated for sediment or grass encroachment at the inlet/curb interface. This matedal should be removed and the inlet should be free and clear of sediment, weeds, grass or other deleterious material to ensure free flow into the grassy swales and ponds. • Grassv Swales - should be evaluated for mowing damage, under watering, over watering and the presence of extra sediment. In the event that any of these elements are found, remediation back to a green healthy stand of mowed grass should be performed. Extra sediment should always be removed from the swale. , 4.30 Storaae Inspections of the following elements should be made once in the spring, once in the summer and once in the fall. However, pond bottoms should be inspected monthly to be sure that no unusual sediment, debris, trash or other deleterious materials have gathered in the pond bottom, if observed or discovered this material should be removed immediately. Additionally, it is required that a good stand of green, mowed grass be maintained within each of the noted ponds throughout the growing season and that they be irrigated from May through September of each year. During the irrigation and normal growing season it is imperative that the pond bottoms not be over watered and become saturated to the point that they will not support a normal sized riding lawn mower. Over ~ saturation of the pond bottoms generally will result in several things, first the wet area not being mowed and/or second the wet area being mowed and rutted with mud coming to the surface, thereby affecting pond operations. In the event that pond bottom saturation occurs, it must be immediately remedied. In the event that earlier saturation has caused damage to the pond bottoms, the damaged area must be removed and replaced with sod of similar characteristics of the - existing pond bottom. This applies to all of the ponds and grassy swales within this development. 4.40 Treatment and Discharqe Inspection of the following elements should occur twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall. These elements should be inspected to insure that the grates, conveyance pipes, discharge pipes, manholes or catch basins are not plugged or full of deleterious materials, which should be removed. „Whipple Consulting Engineers Page 7 Mica View C of E Lots Drainage Facilities O&M Manual DRAINAGE PONDS & QTHER DRAINAGE FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINTENANCE MANUAL 5.00 Recommended Set-Aside Funds for tUlaintenance & Future Replacement Costs There will be annual costs which will be required to maintain the drainage facilities. Similarly, there will be replacement costs and major renovation costs of all drainage facilities which will occur in the future. These replacement costs are the responsibility of the current project owner(s) or successors in interest. Future replacement and major renovation costs have been converted to annual costs, in the form of recommended set- aside funds. The estimated annual maintenance costs and recommended annual set-aside costs are listed in Table S.OOA. It is recommended the project owner or management set-aside these amount of funds annually, to ensure that adequate maintenance and replacement measures of the drainage facilities will be implemented. Table 5.00 Annual Cost Summary - , . . . - . - . - - - Annual . Annual Set Aside Funds-for Drainage Facility Future Replacement or'Major . Maintenance Costs Renovation Underdrain - Pipes $ 8,500.00 $ 850.00 Conveyance - Swales $ 6,500.00 $ 2,800.00 Treatment and Discharge $2,500.00 $ 3,475.00 Sub-total Annual Costs = $17,500.00 $7,125.00 Note: (1) Any renovation costs for ponds are included in the annual maintenance costs. . (2) Life expectancy of Conveyance and Treatment facilities is 30-years @ 2.5% Table S.OOA - Cost Per LotlUnit Evaluation Anticipated Total Cost Per Year ~$17,500 +$7,125 =$24,625 Number of LotslUnits I 14 Units Anticipated Cost Per Year Per LotslUnits $24,625/14 = 1,760.00 per year Or $146.67 per month Whipple Gonsulting Engineers Page 8 Mica View C of E tots Drainage Facilifies O&M Manual , Page 1 of 1 Todd Whipple From: Pat Moore [moore.assoc@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 5:59 PM To: Todd Whipple Subject: Drainage Easements - MICA VIEW Todd, Please find attached the drainage easements I have prepared based on the drawing the Royal sent to me. As we discussed I described a 110' wide easement, the centerline of which is the centerline of the private road, to cover most of the drainage structures and piping. I also added five additional easements to cover the piping that extends past the 110' wide easement. I have also attached an update of my ctrl.dwg that has the drainage easements as I calculated them. It might be a good idea to have Michele look at them to make sure I had the most current drawing to work from or didn't make a mistake. It is really getting hard to type with my "trigger" finger flinching all the time Pat 9/30/2005 September 29, 2005 Legal Description Drainage Easement No.l A 110.00 foot wide storm drainage easement located in a portion of the Northwest Quarter ofthe Southwest Quarter of Section 4 and a portion of the East Half of Section 5, all in Township 24 North, Range 44 East, W.M. in the County of Spokane, State of Washington, the centerline of which is more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 4; thence NO1°03'08"W along the east line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; a distance of 809.54 to its intersection with the south boundary of Short Plat No. 1128- 97 as recorded in Book 15 of Short Plats, Page 83, records of Spokane County, being also the Southeast corner of Tract "B" of said short plat; thence N88°38'S7"W along said south boundary, a distance of 244.96 to the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the northwest the radius of which bears N84°04'58"W a distance of 400.00 feet and the TRIJE POINT OF BEGINNIlNG of this centerline description; thence southerly along said curve through a central angle of 00°24'21 an arc distance of 2.83 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point "A"; thence conti.nue southerly along said curve a central angle of 48°39' 14 an arc distance of 339.67 feet ; thence S57°OS'29"W a distance of 41.58 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point "B"; thence continue S57°OS'29"W a distance of 13.28 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point • "C"; thence continue S57°OS'29"W a distance of 121.91 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the northwest and having a rad.ius of 500.00 feet; thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of 14°00'S7" an arc distance of 122.31 feet; thence S71 °06'25"W a distance of 97.21 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the north and having a radius of 450.00 feet; thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of 39°33'44" an arc d.istance of 310.72 ' feet and subtended by a chord which bears N89°06'43"W a distance of 304.59 feet; thence N70°49'15"W a distance of 369.60 to the beguiniug of a curve concave to the northeast and havi.ng a radius of 2500.00 feet; thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of _ 06°33'28" an arc distance of 286.14 feet and subtended by a chord which bears N67°32'31"W a . distance of 285.98 feet to the beginning of a reverse curve concave to the southwest and having a radius of 500.00 feet; thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of 25°08'08" an arc distance of 219.35 feet and subtended by a chord which bears N76°49'S2"W a distance of 217.60 feet to the beginn.i.ng of a reverse curve concave to the northeast and having a radius of 400.00 feet; thence northwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 50038'49" an arc distance of 353.58 feet and subtended by a chord which bears N64004'31W a distance of 342.18 feet; thence N38°45'07"W a distance of 350.18 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the east and having a radius of 465.00 feet; thence northerly along said curve through a central angle of 60°48'20" an arc distance of 493.48 feet and subtended by a chord which bears N08°21'03"W a distance of 470.65 feet; thence N22°36'55"E a distance of 36.59 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point "D"' thence continue N22°36'55"E a distance of 118.71 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point "E"; thence continue N22°36'S5"E a d.istance of 32.26 feet to the terminus point of this centerline description, which bears N70°39'47"W a distauce of 1138.77 feet from the Northeast comer of Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 5; TOGETHER WITH a twenty foot (20') drainage easement the centerline of vvhich is described as follows: Begi.nning at the aforementioned Point "A"; thence S83°40'37"W a distance of 55.00 feet; thence S52°36'39"E a distance of 93.38 feet to the terminus of this centerline description.; ALSO TOGETHER WTI"H a fifteen foot (15') drainage easement the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the aforementioned Point "B"; thence N32°54'31"W a distance of 55.00 feet; thence N05°44'37"E a distance of 142.20 feet to the terminus of this centerline description; ALSO TOGETHER'WITH a fifteen foot (15') drainage easement the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the aforementioned Point "C"; thence S32°54'31"E a distance of 55.00 feet; thence S06018' 16"E a distance of 40.62 feet to the terminus of this centerline description; ALSO TOGE'THER WITH a fifteen foot (15') drainage easement the centerline of which is described as follows: Begi.nning at the aforementioned Point "D"; thence S67°23'OS"E a distance of 55.00 feet; thence S60°02'S8"E a distance of 48.49 feet to the terminus of this centerline description; ALSO TOGETHER WITH a fifteen foot (15') drainage easement the centerline of which is described as follows: Begi.nning at the aforementioned Point "E"; thence S67°23'OS"E a distance of 55.00 feet; thence S62°13'44"E a distan.ce of 53.80 feet to the termi.nus of this centerline description; WCE Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc 1 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valiey, WA 99216 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 TRANSMITTAL COMPANY: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATE: September 27, 2005 11707 E. SPRAGUE SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206 DELIVERY TYPE: Hand ATTENTION: Sandra Raskell FROM: Stacey Jenkin PROJECT No.: 04-19 REGARDING: Mica View Estates TRANSMITTAL OF: mylars ~ : -a AS REQUESTED X FOR REVIEW RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: NO. OF : ITEMS EA SET DESCRIPTION ; 2 X mylars NOTES/ COMMENTS: . Sandra, Enclosed are two copies of mylars for Mica View for your review. Please sign and call when they are ready to be picked up and we will take them to the county for final , signatures. Thank you, D Stacey Jenkin ~ D SL-P 2 7 2005 10 ~ C wo R KS CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIPIENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU RECEIVE THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES AS ALLOWED BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SENDER NOTED ABOVE. THANK YOU. ~ - - Page 1 of 2 Merrijean Gadd From: Bruce Howard [bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:10 AM To: Sandra Raskell Subject: RE: Mica View C of E Sandra, Just a heads up, I saw a lot of broken sidewalk and curb out there at Meadowview Ranch Estates. With the project being so old, this is why I was concerned with going back to a contractor for warranty work. It is not very likely that someone will want to step up to the plate and pay for something that old. In fact I do not even know who the contractors are that originally did the work. Thanks again for all your help. Bruce From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:06 AM , To: Bruce Howard Subject: RE: Mica View C of E I talked with Todd last night and he is supposed to be responding to me this morning with clarifying 1 and 2. Hopefully today we will have everything done. For Meadowview Ranch Estates, John and I will visit the area and make sure everything looks ok. I will let you know if we need anything else. Hopefully we will make it this week. Thanks, Sandra -----Original Message----- -From: Bruce Howard [mailto:bhoward@tb.com] , Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:00 AM To: Sandra Raskell , Subject: RE: Mica View C of E . Sandra, . , Thank you for your review comments. I know you are very busy right now at the end of the construction . season. We appreciate you help and patience in these matters. Bruce A. Howard . Construction Manager Landworks Development, Inc. ' From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM To: Todd Whipple; Royal Myhre Cc: Bruce Howard; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt Subject: Mica View C of E 10/7/2005 ~ , Page 2 of 2 Todd, I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: , 1. On sheet 8B Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. Please address. 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the . hydrograph information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75') . from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. Please address items 2 and 3 before proceeding to Mylar. Once these items are addressed and item 1 is " changed on the plans, the City may sign the Mylars for construction and release the right-of-way permit. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue . Spokane Valley, VVA 99206 . Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 ' . 10/7/2005 n Page 1 of 2 . . ` Merrijean Gadd _ From: Todd Whipple [trwatwce@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:57 AM To: Sandra Raskell; 'Royal Myhre' • Cc: 'Bruce Howard'; John Hohman; 'Zarecor, Matt' - ' Subject: RE: Mica View C of E _ Importance: High , Sandra, The following responses are per our discussion yesterday, we will be circulating the mylars today. Todd R. Whipple, P: E. . Whipple Consulting Engineers ; 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Ph: 893-2617 - Fx: 926-0227 CI: 995-2939 email: TRWatWCE@msn.com . . From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] ~ Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM • • To: Todd Whipple; Royal Myhre - Cc: Bruce Howard; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt . Subject: Mica View C of E Todd, . I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: 1. On sheet 8B Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. [Todd Whipple] This revision has been made 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding : perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. Please address. [Todd Whipple] Finally found the text that you were referencing, there are no gravel galleries in the ponds for Basins A1 A and A2A. . 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the hydrograph information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75') from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. [Todd Whipple] These pipes are in the County and outside of Basin A, Line 4 is in Basin B and has 5-feet of freeboard; Line 5 is in Basin C and has 4-feet of freeboard; Line 8 is in Basin D and has 5-feet of freeboard and Line 11 is in 10/7/2005 ~ P3ge 2 ❑f 2 Basin E and has 5-feet of freeboard Please address items 2and 3before proceeding ta Aliyfar. Once t,hese iterns are addressed and itern 1 is changed an the plansr the City may sign the Mylars for constructivn and release the right-of-vuay permit. Please let rrie know if you have any quesfions. Thanks, Sandra RasE6ellf P.E. Development Engineer City of Spakane 11aliey 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane 1lalley, VUA 99206 Phone: (509) 688-09 74 _ Fax; (509) 921-1008 _ 't • , I . M1.'. ? 4 io! ifLm Page 1 of 1 0 Merrijean Gadd From: Bruce Howard [bhoward@tb.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:00 AM To: Sandra Raskeli Subject: RE: Mica Vew C of E Sandra, Thank you for your review comments. I know you are very busy right now at the end of the construction season. We appreciate you help and patience in these matters. Bruce A. Howard Construction Manager Landwor4cs Development, Inc. From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM To: Todd Whipple; Royal Myhre Cc:.Bruce Howard; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt Subject: Mica View C of E Todd, I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: o - 1. On sheet 8B Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. Please address. 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the hydrograph . information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75') from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. Please address items 2 and 3 before proceeding to Mylar. Once these items are addressed and item 1 is changed on the plans, the City may sign the Mylars for construction and release the right-of-way permit. . Please let me know if you.have any questions. , Thanks, Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer . City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 ' Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 . . , j 10/7/2005 o Page 1 of 1 Merrijean Gadd From: Sandra Raskell Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM To: 'Todd Whipple'; 'Royal Myhre' Cc: 'Bruce Howard'; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt Subject: Mica Vew C of E Tracking: Recipient Read Todd Whipple' 'Royal Myhre' 'Bruce Howard' ]ohn Hohman Read: 9/26/2005 3:57 PM Zarecor, Matt Todd, I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: 1. On sheet 86 Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. . 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. 'Please address. 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the hydrograph information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75') from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. - Please address items 2 and 3 before proceeding to Mylar. Once these items are addressed and item 1 is • changed on the plans, the City may sign the Mylars for construction and release the right-of-way permit. Please let me know if you have any questions. - Thanks, Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer City of Spokane Valley . 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 10/7/2005 Page 1 of 1 KSandra Raskell From: Sandra Raskell Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 3:36 PM To: 'Todd Whipple'; 'Royal Myhre' . Cc: 'Bruce Howard'; John Hohman; Zarecor, Matt Subject: Mica View C of E . Todd, I reviewed you submittal for the Mica View C of E. The following items are still outstanding: 1. On sheet 8B Detail A is labeled as Detail B. Please update. 2. Your report still states there are gravel galleries for A1A and A2A. If you are proposing on adding perforated pipe instead, where does the pipe go? Also, that design is not indicated in the plan sheets. Further information may be required if you are proposing the perforated pipe. Please address. 3. For the freeboard issue, the submittal #3 Drainage Report (in the section located after the hydrograph information), Lines 4, 5, 8, and 11 don't meet the required depth of freeboard (0.75') from the water surface elevation to the elevation of the inlet. Please address. Please address items 2 and 3 before proceeding to Mylar. Once these items are addressed and item 1 is changed on the plans, the City may sign the Mylars for construction and release the right-of-way permit. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, 5andra Raskell, P.E. , , - Development Engineer • : City of Spokane Valley • 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 9/26/2005 . ~ . . ' Cl'fl_ Sp6ra....,01 a1,1, e y 11707 E S ra ue Ave Suit p g e 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhallCspokanevalley.org September 6, 2005 T odd Whipple, P.E. ~ L Whipple Consulting lneers br\t&- 13218 E. SPra venue r ~ Spokane ey, WA 99216 , - . Mica View C of E(SF-OI -OS) Street & Drainage Submittal #3 Comments Todd, On August 23, 2005 Public Works received your third submittal of the street and drainage plans. Please update the following items on your next submittal: Plan Sheets le'oo' On Sheet 5, please further deta.il the swale. This shall include the width, length, " and top of berm elevations. I suggest you add berms in the swale to slow the flow pr.X and allow further treatment. !K Please remove the approval stamp from plan submittals. This is reserved for the Ar FiNAL mylar only. Drainage Report ~ Your report indicates a required volume of each swale to be 49 c.f.; however on VPlease page 19 it states 40 c.f. Please update. submit drywell testing infonnation for the proposed Type A drywells located in the swales. The only soil testing information given near the proposed location is not acceptable for drywells. Frior to acceptance this information shall - be submitted, reviewed and accepted. .-11,0 3. Your report states galleries are to be used in the swales and ponds; however they are no indicated in the plans. Please update the plans or the drainage report. It appears there are numerous manholes/catch basins that do not have the reyuired 0.75 feet freeboard. Please revise to meet this requirement. x ~ Once this information is submitted, further review can occur. Other items may occur at the review of the next submittal. A.n entire drainage report is not required, only the items changed from the previous submittal. Please contact me at 688-0174 for any additional questions. Sincerely, Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer cc: Bryan Walker - Property Owner Matt Zarecor - Spokane County Engineering Divi sion Department of Public Works - Development Project File . t-. . 0.1 a PAN/Z9/2005 14 : 51. FAX 509477765~r S1'ORANC COUNTl' ENGINEERS - la001 ■ • . U ~ ■ _ ' ■ ■ ■ I~ ■ ° Fax Transxriittal . ~ r A s''°~`~(10UUY . . ~ . Ucvelopnielit Services Depvtment ~ ,JJ Division af Lngineeriiig and Roads ~ ~ (509) 477-3600 D Fax (509) 477-7655 nate: Sept je~~~ Q D , ~ . Tu: Sandra Raskell Fax No: 921-1008 Coinpany: City of Spolcane Valley cc: I+,ax No: r'rom: rI'im Schwab Numficr of Piqges: 3 incl. cover . Subjcct:, CE9105 - Mica View Certificate oFExemption . Sandra - Atiached is our comment letter for the Mica View Certi.ficate of Exemption, -4Ih subinittal. As xxientxoned in a previous coinmerlt letter, wc will be loolcing ior the City's approval for khe itelns north of Ponds A1 and A2 (inside City lim.its). . If you have any questions please give me a call. .Tzm Sch-miab J . . 1 . . •L cc: Proj ect File , . 09/19/2005 1.4 : 5]_ 1~A,' S09477765F SPOI{ANL COUNT~.'- ENGINEER.° [7j 002 + g !Ir?`t . ~ iir?H ' ' • , .~a ~~,:.•,;y~..,•:,;,~;;t~,l~~•~.,,,~.,i . , rt ~ 1 • ~ •;n'_` [A' J Jr (D I K Lk 1 Ni I F_ A ' r ~ P DNISION OF ENGWEERING AND ROADS A DNISION OP THE PUSLIC WORKS DEPARTM.SNT September 19, 2005 . Mr. Todd Whipple, 'P.E. " Whipple Cansulting Engirieers . 13218 East Sprague Ave. . Spokane Valley, W,A 99216 . , Subject:CE 91-05 Iqica View - Certifeate of ExemptAOn Road and Drainage Plan Submittal #a Mr. VJhipple, . . We have reviewed S►our submittal of the z-oad and draiiiage design documcnts we received on Seplember 16, 2005 for the Nfica View C. of E. pzojeet. Before the Certificate of Exemption can be accepted, the private road proposed to serve the lots must meet the current desigcl standax-ds. Mylars may bc submiCted providecl the following items are addressed adequately for acceptance o#'the pians: PLANS • 1. Previous conrunent asked to provide a trash rack for all culverts greater than 18". It should have said equal to or greater than 18". Add notes for the ] 8" culverts on sheet 12 as was done for tlie - 24" pipes. . , n 2. The Pond Location'I'ables fur Ponds Al and A2 have stations aiid values which do not agree tivith the'plan view detail. DRAIIVAGE REPOR.T . 3. The drainage report (sizbmittal #3 & revised iiarrative of submittal #4) has conflicting information and calctilations. Some of the drainage ealculations have a 6/14/05 date and some have a 7/26/05 calculation date. These have somewhat dzffexeni results. The final drainage report should have a consistent sEt of calculations. The summary inforxnation should agree with the 1Qtest ealculations. 4. In the drainage report nan'ative, include summary infonnation for the basin downstxeam of Basin r &c K, the cul-de-sac area. . 5. A.dd to Table IA the post-developed diseriarge rate fxom the ponds to show that the post developed - rate is less than the pre-developed runoff xate, . 6. Redo the drainage calculations far pond size showi-i in the plans for ponds A,] & A2. Pond size in calcLilations is over twice that shotivn in the plan.s. Us-V the correct bottam elevation from the plans. Also the area in the drainage calculations for Ponds D& E is overstated based on tihe plans and needs to be reca]culated. . 7. The zates out of the.ponds as shotivn ui the narrative table have some valucs greater than pxe- - developed flows. Values for discharge rates from the latEr calculation set (dated'7/26/05) are • generally lower. The note at the bottom should not be used: UsE *correct values or rcvise pond sizes. 1026 W. Droadway Ave. o Spokane, WA 99260-0170 Q(509) 477-3600 • FAX: (509) 477-7655 (2nd Ploor) 477-7478 (3rd Floor) ~ TDD: (509) 477-7133 ~ 09/19/2005 19:51 1lAX 509477765,r; SYOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERP Z003 . ~•;~'I~ ~F . . ; : •cn;ib' ' - 1~.~•• {}lTS /~~I . • , w,,'~•ie B. The. drainage report states that a 2' x 3' gravel gallery will be installEd under the pond bottom with a grate G" above the pond bottom to help discharge sorne storm water to the underlying soils ' for Basins A1A and.A2A, on page 18 of 26. The plans do not show these facilities. EiYher xevise the drainage report or add these to the plans. . 9. Provide a complete final brauiageReport including al] items as listed- i.u the Appendix and axe • znentioned-in the report such as fi.ill sized basin maps aud photos. MIS CELI,ANEOUS , You have indicated that these will be submitted at a later date, but are mentioned for ieference. 10. Provide a blanket drainage easeinent for the nahual drainage areas. . 11. The drainage facilities fihat lie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easemenfi (Auditor's Document Number 5194998) are required to be placed within easements. T'he , . easements shall meet the requirements of the Stonnwater Guidelines. Please provide the following documentation so we can prepare the easenlents: • a. Plat certificate; Deed, Deed of Trust, or Conveying Instrument (recorded copy); . b. List of signatory names; c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Include a title "Exhbit A", it sha11 be stamped by a licensed Surveyor, all margins'shall be 1" or greater, 8 point minimum font size, and the text shall be reproducible; and, d. Easement area exhibit: Include a title "Exhibit B" and meet the requirem,ents of the legal description exhibit. ' 12. Pxovide fire district's approval w7ith their signature on the cover sheet of the plans. 13. Provi.de a mauitcnance manual and sinldng fund calculations. . 14. Provide a draft copy of the CC&Rs alang with the Homeowner's Association UBI#. , If you have any qucstions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, Matt Zarecor, P.E. _ Development Services Engineer/Manager Tim Schwab, P.E. - Pl an Review Engineer cc: Bryan Walker, Ownex . File . - I • ~ , • ~ ~~~~►~~1~ p~ Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.92 1. 1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org September 6, 2005 Todd Wlupple, P.E. W}upple Consulti.ng Engineers . 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Re: Mica View C of E(SF-OI-OS) . Street & Drainage Subm.ittal #3 Comments Todd, On August 23, 2005 Public Works received your third submittal of the street and drai.nage plans. Please update the followi.ng items on your next submittal: ' Plan Sheets 1. On Sheet 5, please further detail the -swale. This shall include the width, length, , and top of berm elevations. I suggest you add berms in the swale to slow the flow . and allow further treatment. 2. Please remove the approval stamp from plan submittals. This is reserved for the . FINAL mylar only. ' , Drainage Report 1. Your report indicates a required volume of each swale to be 49 c.f.; however on page 19 it states 40 c.f. Please update. 2. Please submit drywell testing information for the proposed Type A drywells located in the swales. The only soil testing i.nformation given near the proposed location is not acceptable for drywells. Prior to acceptance this i.nformation shall be submitted, reviewed and accepted. 3. Your report states galleries are to be used i.n the swales and ponds; however they are no indicated in the plans. Please update the plans or the drainage report. 4. It appeazs there are numerous manholes/catch basins that do not have the required 0.75 feet freeboard. Please revise to meet this requirement. . . Once this information is submitted, further review can occur. Other items may occur at the review of the next submittal. An entire drainage report is not required, only the items changed from the previous submittal. Please contact me at 688-0174 for any additional questions. SinceAely, m~r~A26o Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer cc: Bryan Walker - Property Owner . Matt Zarecor - Spokane County Engi.neering Division . ~-ep- '.Len ohOWNWl~~rc~,' , ~ ~ks=D:evelopme ; 'doOMM/07/2005 13:31. FA1 509477765F SPOKANE COUNTY rNGINELI2f , Q001/003 w ■•0 . . ,~~n a m . - - ' - ■ ~~x T1°a11SmAttal . A 5p~'f Cov~,~rr .Develo ment Ser'vices Department misgineerilig and Raads N (509) 477-3600- Fax (509) 47.7-7655 ~ Date: August 31, 2005 'I,o: Todd Whipple, P.E. Fax No: 926-0227 . Coiiipa»y: WCE cc: 13ruce Howard Fax No: 924-9728 A+'rum: Tim Schwab . Numbcr of Pages: 3 incl, cowr Subject: CF91 OS - Mica View Ceztif cate of rxemption rA-Xw oN q '*5 ~t~ sAzvR& G.-rr OF SPVK-oqn/e- vAt44t-*r Attached is our comment letter for the Mica View Certificate of Exemption, 3"d submittal. If you want, we can lneet with you to discuss these coinments. If you have ariy questions please give me a call. Tirn Schwab , cc: Proj ect rile t ~ 09/07/2005 13:31 FAY 509477765r- SPOKANE COUNTY ENGYNEER° ~002/003 . v, - . . ' ~ . ~ . - • . ~ t~ ~ . S C) J< AA I,-.T ` C> I-T N -r -e- DNISION Or E1vGiNEERING AW RDADS A DIVISION OF 'fHE PUBLiC WORKS DEPARTMENr August 31, 2005 Mr. Toc3d Whipple, P.E. NVliipple Consulting Engineers 13218 East Sprague l1,ve. Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Subject: CE 91-05 Mica View - Certificate of Exemption Road and.Drainage Plan Submittal #3 Mr. Whipple, We have reviewed your submitial of the road and drainage desigii docutnents we zeceived on August 23, 2005 for the Mica View C..of E. project. Before the Certificate of Exemption can be accepted, the private road proposed to serve the lols must meet the current design standards. T'he following items need to be addxessed or resolved prior to acceptance of the plans: PZ,A.NIS 1, The pond botfioins as shown in the plans will not work with the constant 5:1 slope from edge of pavement to bottom of swale along with the grade of the road. Either show that the slopes vary or revise pond bottom area to show the flat area that can be const7-ucted. . 2. Provide a trash rack for all culverts greater than 18". Include a detail. 3. The plans show inadequatc voluine for 20$ treahnent for Basins J& K. 4. In the iypical scctYOn detail, show the cut-off ditch. . 5. We recommend that you record a*blanket drainage easement for the natural drainage areas. 6. On Sheet 3, the centerline station elevation listed is inconect. The edge of asphalt grades left and right at Sta. 61-h25 and Sta. 62+50 don't match the 2% slope from the centerline gi'ade. 7. 'Z'he Spokanc County acceptance bloclc should have preliminary on it or be put on a non-printing. layer until ready.for mylars to avoid potential confusion over acceptance of plans. DRA.INAGE REPORT.8. I'er requirements for detention basins on page 3-6 of the GSM, a 10 year storm design storm is to be evaluated as well as the 2 year and 50 year design storms. It appears most of tihe calculations have been performed. Include in your report nan•arive a summary table with the 2, 10 and 50 year design storms, pre-developed vs. post-developed from the pond for each basin so it is shown that for each of these design sfiorms in each of the basins, the rate in fhe post-developed conclition is less than or equa] to the rate in the pre-developed condition. 9. The predominant.soil type for this site is Type C soil. From Table 5 on page 6-8 of the GSM, the lowest value for Type C soil is 70 for fo-rest land with good ground cover. The Drainage Report claims a CN value for existing of 66. Also we believe your post-developed CN value is calculaYed incoi-rectly and is also low. However, the difference beriveen CN values is roughly similar and therefore we will accept you're the calculations using these CN values. In future submittals, consider CN values that more appropriately f t soil typES and land uses. 1026 W. Hroadway Ave. m Spokane, jJVA 99260-0170 Q(509) 477-3600 rAX: (509) 477-7655 (2nd Floor) 477-7478 (3rd rloor) o TDD: (509) 477-7133 ~ .09/07/2005 13 : 31 Ft1X 509977765!7 SYORANr COUN'1'1' Js"NGTNEER" - 1?1003/003 ' • • " - 10. Show how storm water at the enci of Pierce Lane north of Basins J& K is trcated and detained. Include drainage calculations and plan eclits. 11. In ftnal Drainage Repoi-t, include a11 items as listed in the Appendix and are mcntioned in the report such as full sized basin maps and photos. 12. The ponds sizes shown in the drainage report and the plans do not agree in size. Cheelc all ponc3s . to make sure the size of pond in the drainage report, the size claimed on the swale detail block and the actual size of the pond shown in the plans all agree. . 13. ror the road and impervious area north of Basins A1 and A.2, we-will accept the recoinmendations regarding lxeatznent and disposal from the City of Spolcane Valley. NIISCELLANEOUS You bave indicated that these will be submitted at a later date, Uut are mentioned for reference. 14. It appears tllat construction is proposed in these plans for the.conriection to Pierce Road that is • outside the existing 70' Road and Utility eascment area. Please provide a copy of the easements to allow this constniction or revise the plans to fit within existing easement. 15. The drainage facilities that lie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easement (Eluditor's Document IVumber 5194998) are required to be placed within easenlents. The easements shall meet the requirements of the StormwaYEZ Guidelines. Please provide the . followuzg documentation so wc can prepare tlze easements: a. Plat certificate: Deed, Deed of Trust, or Conveying Instrument (recorded copy); ' • b. List of signatory names; c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Tnclude a title "Exhibit A", it shall be stampecl by a liccnsed Surveyor, all margins shall be 1" or greater, 8 point miniinum font size, and the text shall be. reproduciUle; and, d. Easement area exlubit: Tnclude a title "Exhibil: B" and meet the requirements of the legal description exlZibit. 16. Provide a fire district approval letter. 17. Provide a maintenance manual and sinlcing fund calculations. 18. Provide a draft copy of the CC&Rs along «ith the Homeowner's Association IJBX#. Xf you have any questions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, , Matt Zarecor, P.E: Development Services Engineer/Manager . Tim Schwab, P.E. Plan Review Engineer . . cc: Biyan Walker, Owner File 1 i I . / WCE Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc A Civil and Transporfation Engineering Company 13218 E. Sprague Avenue ~~c ~T v P u JL:,~ li `e Spokane Valley, WA 99216 QUG 2 3 2005 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 . TRANSMITTAL COMPANY: ~ CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATE: August 23, 2005 11707 E. SPRAGUE AVENUE SuiTE 106 DELIVERY TYPE: Delivery SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206 ATTENTION: Sandra Raskell FROM: Todd R. Whipple, P.E. PROJECT No.: , 2004-19 RE: 1St Submittal PROJECT: Mica View C of E AS REQUESTED X FOR REVIEW RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: NO.OF EA SET DESCRIPTION ITEMS . 1 X Drainage Report w/ geotechnical information, etc... 1 X Bond prints for review and comment NOTES/ COMMENTS: Sandra, Enclosed is one set of street and storm drainage plans as well as one copy of the drainage report for "review by the City. Upon your review please forward any comments that you may have back to this office. As always should you have any questions or comments please feel free to call. D R c Since ly, f ~ ~ ~ _J 3 D .''j L ' ±'~~5 4:i~ ' r o Todd R. Whipple, P.E. ~c Cc: File CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIPIENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU . RECEIvE THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES AS ALLOWED BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SENDER NOTED ABOVE. THANK YOU. AWC . August 22, 2005 W.O. No. 0419 ec ~ ~ D~ ~ Spokane County , Departrnent of Public Works - Transportation a A"~ 232005 1026 W. Broadway UBLIC Spokane, WA 99260 ~ ~o j ~ A ttn: Tim Sc hwa b, P. E. a n d M a tt Z a r e c o r, P. E. Development Senrices Engineers Re: Mica View - Certificates of Exemption Pierce Lane Private Road and Storm Drainage Plan . Submittal No. 3 for Review Dear Matt, Enclosed are two sets of private road and drainage plans for review and approval. Also enclosed with this submittal are two copies of the REVISED drainage report combined with the geotechnical evaluabon, pavement evaluation and inspection agreement between the Project Sponsor and Allwest. 6elow are responses to comment received from Spokane County in Tim's transmittal of July 23, 2005. Prior to responding to each comment several issues need to be generally discussed as they relate to a majority of the comments received. 1. Pierce Lane, through the Short Plat, and based on the survey inforrnation that we have received from Pat Moore, the roadway easement is 50-feet and there are two 10-foot utility easements on either side of that for a total easement width of 70-feet. 2. Per a comment from the County, we have included cutoff swales to allow the upgradient pass through water to not mix with the site generated storm water. These are shown on Sheet 11. 3. All ponds.have been increased in size for the `208' type treatments with 6-inch retention area and revised outlet structures. Infiltration of the pond bottoms will be via under drains placed in the pond bottoms and connected to the outlet structure. Response to Spokane County Comments on 2nd Submittal County comments are italicized, bold and paraphrased with responses in normal text. WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS • CIVILAND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 13218 E SPRAGUE AVENUE • SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 • PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 . Spokane County - Engini s - 2"d Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 2 PLANS 1. Provide larger and more easily read Bearings for the roadway centerline These have been added . 2. Provide BCR, MCR and ECR station on the curb returns For this project the only curb returns that we now have are on the curb returns at both cul- de-sacs, and these have been added as well as stationing around the new/proposed cul-de- sac. 3. Provide a profile.forthe cul-de-sac. In speaking with Tim, we noted that Wendy had indicated that points with elevations were acceptable, which is why we presented what we did, also for the 2"d submittal we added a table to list slope between points, in checking with Tim, he indicated that the table would be fine. - 4. Specify dryland grasses for the bioswales and ditches . As with the previous submittal, the ditches are to be irrigated and mowed, we have tried to note this better 5. Sheet 6 has incorrect name in title block . This has been revised 6. Update curve data table on sheet 2 This has been checked and revised 7. The radius of the cul-de-sac should be 50-feet This has been revised by enlarging the gravel shoulder to 5-feet from the proposed 2-feet, which takes the sac to 50-feet. 8. Show existing and/or proposed utilities for the project This project only proposes public water service which is shown on the plan, sewer will be on site septic. 9. Show proposed finish grade contours for the proposed road. These have been significantly revised and reviewed for adequacy and consistency ' Spokane County - EnginL . s 2"a Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 3 10. The edge of asphalt was not updated for deletion of the thickened edge, piease revise. . These have been lowered 0.30 feet 11. The edge of asphalt was not revised from the deletion of the original cul- de-sac. This has been revised 12. Stopping construction stationing conflicts betvveen 64+00 and 63+25 This has been revised to 64+00 13. Pierce Lane/Road connection detail, notes do not match or are missing This has been revised. 14. Add pipe profiles, show invert elevations, existing and proposed ground, other utilities, etc. These have been added 15. Minimum pipe size is 10-inch for runs less than 44', or use 12-inch. All pipe has been revised to 12-inch except for the control pipes from the proposed ponds which are 6-inch. 16. Storm drainage tees are not allowed, add structures or modify discharge point. Structures and/or discharge locations have been revised. 17. Pond bottom and side slope along with offset distance conflicts. The corresponding detail has been revised as there was conflicting information 18. Provide trash racks for all pipe over 18-inches These have been added 19. For locations with rip rap, indicated material gradation and thickness on plans. Add a filter blanket per Section 4 of the GSM Addendum These have been checked and calculations added • Spokane County - Engin't. . s 2"a Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 4 20. Provide a sump in the ponds and rotate the weir 90-degrees, also the 3-inch depth may be excessive. Based upon the plan revisions and 208 storage, this comment does not apply 21. In the typical ditch and pond section, distances and slope conflicts, etc. The corresponding detail has been revised as there was conflicting information. 22. Construction outside the 70-foot road and utility easements, please provide copy of the easement to allow this construction to occur or revise plans. These have been requested from the project surveyor Pat Moore and will be provided when plan revisions have been accepted by the County. 23. The drainage facilities lay outside the 70-foot private road easement, new easements shall be required. Please provide the following: a. Plat certificate, deed, deed of trust or conveying instrument b. List of signers c. Legal descriptions, exhibit of the easement area titled "Exhibit A", etc.. d. Easement area drawing exhibit, titled "Exhibit B" • We have requested these from the project surveyor and they will be provided under separate cover. DRAINAGE REPORT 24. The drainage report states that the project is outside the ASA, this is incorrect, per the GSM the project is in the ASA and treatment is required - prior to discharge Treatment has been provided by the following raising the discharge pipe 6-inches off the pond bottom and allowing for discharge through the pond bottom via under drain pipes to the outlet struc#ures. 25. A 10 year design storm must be evaluated as well as the 2 and 50 This has been added as required. 26. Pass through basins will still reach the road, either provide cut off swales or include in pond calculations Cut off swales have been added to the plans. 27. CN Value of 78, how was this determined. , . • Spokane County - Engint . s . 2"d Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 5 The value of 78 was an average of the 30-feet of developed roadside swale of CN=68 and the asphalt section CN=98 by using the following equation ((2x68)+98))/3 = 78. 28. Showlprovide time of concentration calculations for the post-developed basins These have been included. 29. Revise the plans and calculations to show that the 2-year pre-developed is not exceeded by the 2-year post development fiow rates. Discharge rates have not been revised due to the requirement for 208 type treatment and . with the exception of very slow release rates through the pond bottoms to the infiltration pipes, little to no flow is expected from the 2-year storms. 30. Revise detention areas to match pond areas that can be built. We are confused by this comment, but in discussions with Tim, believe that this relates back to the 3:1 vs 5:1 and some dimensional problems with a detail and or section which has been revised. 31. Use rational formula to check ditch velocities These have been revised and re-calculated and remain within acceptabfe limits. 32. Show how storm water at the end of Pierce Lane at Pierce Road is treated and detained. Prior to submittal of this 2"d package, this issue was discussed with Sandra Raskell at the City of Spokane Valley and it was indicated that because of the existing easement and right of way conditions and some of the changes made by the adjacent land owners the last 100- feet of roadway could not be stored, however, it would be routed to the roadside ditches and discharged frorn the swales to Pierce Road with as much detention as could be provided. The design includes the design forthis comment. 33. Provide rip rap calculations These have been provided. MISCELLANEOUS 34. Provide a fire district approvat letter This will be provided upon acceptance of the drainage plans . . Spokane County - Engin; s 2"d Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 6 35. Provide an O&M Manuai and Sinking Fund calculations. These will be provided after initial review of this 3rd submittal 36. Provide a draft copy of the CC&R's along with the HOA - UBI # This has been requested and will be transmitted under separate cover. The following comments are from the Citv of Spokane Vallev, we have only responded to those comments that are generally not duplicate aomments from Spokane County or were comrnents based on the original 208 presentation. 9. Verify how runoff downstream of 62+50 will be treated and disposed, prior . to entering the City of Spokane Valley. As shown on the basin map and plans, this project proposes to intercept all storm drainage at about station 62+50 via Ponds A1 and A2 which discharge to the east. Below or northerly of 62+50, and currently within the City of Spokane Valley, the adjacent - homeowners have disturbed the soil and surrounding area of the private road easement to ' a point that drainage treatment and discharge are nearly impossible if not completely impossible to treat and dispose. We have spoken with Sandra Raskell at the City of : Spokane Valley and have indicated that we can cut off all upstream water south of 62+50 so that only that water downstream of that point will continue to run within the City and that our ability to treat and dispose is nearly impossible. Therefore, we have requested relief that the that area between 62+50 and 63+50 be allowed to run free as the existing slopes do now with no other upstream contributing basins being allowed to run to the cul-de-sac. Essentially the solution was to create a 40-foot by 1-foot flat swale (slope less than 2- percent) at the base of the hill to provide storage per the City of Spokane Valley technique of V=1133A, wherein, 40 cf of storage is required and 78 cf of storage is provided below the top back of curb along Pierce Road in the cul-de-sac 12. Specify a grassy cover for the roadside swale This has been added; the grassy swale will be irrigated and mowed. After your review should you have any questions related to this submittal please do not hesitate to call at 893-2617 or when your comments are ready for pick up so that this process can move along smoothly to approval/acceptance. Sincer y, ~ ~ - - Todd R. Whipple, P.E. • Spokane County - Engin~ s 2"d Submittal August 22, 2005 Page 7 Enclosures - Plans, Drainage Report, Geotech Report and Inspection Documentation Cc: File . • ; . ' _ S-P O K A N E C O U,N T-y DMSION OF ENGIIVEERING AND ROADS A DMSION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPA.WrMEN'r July 21, ZooS RECEIVED. Mr. Todd Whipple, P.E. JUL 2 2 2005 Whipple Consuiting Engineers IB ,Y: 13218 East Sprague Ave. --~.Spokane Vailey, WA .99216 , . . . .'Subject: ~CfE -99.-05 i1'l~ica'Vieiti -.Certificate~of;Exem., pfion . . Road and ~Drairiage ,Plan Submittal *2 . . Mr. Whipple, . . , . . We have.reviewed your submittal of the -road and drairiage design documents iive received_on.July - , . . 14, 20.05 for ~the Mica View C.* of E.. project. Before the- Cer#if cate of ~Exer'inption can be accepted,, . the f. private roatl proposed to serve the lots must meet fhe current design sfandards. Tie fotiowing itemsneed .to~~be ad~_ressed or resolved_pi~ior .to 'acceptance* of theplans;; - : . . PLANS . - . . , . . . , . . 1. Bearings for ttie roadway .centerline rieed #o _be sHown on -ttie plan viewat a size ~hat is ~readable. . - _ . . , . 2. Provitle BCR, MCR, and-:ECR~stations/elevations on-all curb retums. . . ~ 3. Provide a pi~of te ofthe :edge of asphalt for lhe cul-de=$ac -at the end, of t?ier,ce Lane. . .4. -Specify dryland grass mix. . . fo`r_biosw.aies and ditches. . . . . 5. - Shee66 'has :an incorrect name iri the .title, .block. _ . . , . . . 6. Curve data block on*sheet 2needs to be updated. 6a6e1 tfie furves for` ihe,cul-de=sac , - and curb 'retums. - ~ 7. The radius forl~e edge of: gravel .of the cul-de-sac .at the end of Pierce Lane .should be .~50' per.Standa~dPlan'A=10a'for p~ivate road cul=de=sacs., . . . . . . 8. Show existing andlor propo sed .utilitie's for the pr`oject. A water line,has-been installed in =the proposed 'r-oad. 9. Shbw proposed f nish grade contours for the proposed road. 10. The edge of asphalt profile.grades match the centerline profife gr'ades. With a 2% cross slope,' there should be ;a 0:30' _difference. 11. The edge of asphalt profiles show curb teturn elevations and. a`gap in the profles for a cul-de=sac 'that is rio longer a part ofttie -design. Revise the profile. 12. The profles for both centerline and edge of asphalt.show new construction matching 'into ex+sting at Sta. 64+00. The plan view and detail show a sawcut and match irito existing pavement at about Sta. 63+59. Reyise the profile and vertical curve at PVI Sta..63±25 to rriatch the plan view-and provide a smooth transition to ex'isting pavement at the cul-de=sac. . . , I 1026 W. Broadway Ave. o Spokane, WA 49260-0270 a(509) 477-3600 FAX: (549) 477-7655 (2nd Floor) 477-7478 (3rd Floor) o'I'DD: (509) 477-7133 f _ ~ _ ~ 13. In the detail for connection to existing Pierce Road on sheet 5, some construction notes don't match construction labels such as #11 &#12. Also in this detail, what is the Type 1 curb inlet for? Is this to allow storm water in the roadside ditch a way to flow out to the cul-de-sac? 14. Provide profiles for storm pipes and. culverts and verify that the minimum cover - requirements are met (Stormwater Guidelines page 4-3). Show invert elevations, how the culvert will match into existing ground and show utility crossings to verify there wifl be no conflicts. Include stationing and offsets to road centerline. 15. Minimum size of pipe allowed is 10" for pipe runs less than 44' or 12" otherwise. Revise pipe sizes. Check elevations of pipe at end of cul-de-sac for inconsistencies. _ 16. Storm drain "tees" into pipes without a drainage.structure are not allowed. Add a drainage structure or revise the connection location. 17. The pond bottoms as shown in the.plans will not w.ork with fhe 5:1 slope to bottom of swale along rivith te grade of the road. Revise porid bottom area fo show the a~rea that can be constructed. 18. Provide a trash rack for all culverts greater than 18. Include a detail, 19. For locations with rip rap, indicate material.gradation. and thickness on the plans. Add a filter blanket as 'needed per . Section 4 in tfie. addend'um. , 20. Provide a sump in the detention basins prior to..the outlet structure. i'he orifice will have - to be off-set horizontally from the "notch" weir so they wbn't conflict with. each other at some locations. The plans indicate, that the '"notch".weir .is to be 3" deep; :but the top: of - structure %is ;generally less than 3" . from -the "notch" iiveir elevation: Does the unotch" weir need 'to be 3" deep? If so, revise fop of structure elevations ~nd top -of ~beim elevations. How do you propose protecting the 1! and 2"orifices from ~silting::o~ plugging up? 21. In.the typical ditch and pond section detail on sheet 7, irevise.either the depth:fr"om the edge of road to bottom ~of pond, the ~horizontal distance;from.edge 'of stioulder to.bottom of pond, or the slope from the edge. of road 'to bofiom -of 'pond. 22. It appea"rs that construction is proposed in these plans for the conriection to Pietce Road . that ~is outside the existing '70' Road and Utility easement area: Please. provide a copy of - the easements to allow this construction or revise ~the plans to fit wittiin existing-basement. 23. The drainage .facilities that lie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easement . (Auditor's Document Nurriber 5194998) are required to be ,placed within easerrments. The easements shall meet the re.quirements of theStormwater Guidelines. -Please provide the following documentation so we can prepare the easements: a. Plat certificate: Deed, Deed of Trust, or Conveying Instrument (recorded copy); b. List of signatory names; c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Include a title "Exhibit A", it shall be stamped by a licensed Surveyor, all 'margins shall be 17 or greater, 8 point minimum font size, and the text shall be reproducible; and, d. Easement area exhibit: Include a title "Exhibft B" and meet the requirements of the legal description exhibit. DRAINAGE REPORT 24. The drainage -report states incorrectly that the project is outside the aquifer sensitive area (ASA). As shown in Figure 6 on page 6-9 of the GSM, all of sections 4 and 5 of Township 24 North, Range 44 East are in the ASA. The project is also within the f , o Spokane County Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). Treatment of the storm water will be required prior to discharge to the natural drainage basins. 25. Per requirements for detention basins on page 3-6 of the GSM, a 10 year storm design storm is to be evaluated as well as the 2 year and 50 year design storms. It appears most of the calculations have been performed. Include in your summary tables shawing that the 10 year design storm requirement is met. 26. The pass through basins have been shown on the basin map. From the contours shown, much of these areas will sheet flow-to a roadside ditch as opposed to a natural drainage swale. Report and/or pians need to either keep this area separate or account _ for this storm water in the detention ponds. 27. Show how you arrived at a CN value of 78 for the road section. If CN values that differ by more than 20 are used, separate ,hydrographs for the finio areas need to be generated and then added together to make a resultant hydrograph. . . , . 28. Show time of concentration calculations for the post-developed basins. 29. Revise calculations and plans to show that the 2 year -pre=deveioped flow is not exceeded by the 2 year post-developed flow: 30. Revise detention calculations to show pond areas that can be buiit inrith road grades arid slopes as shown in the plans 31. The SCS method is. alloviied to,.be used on basins areas less than 10.acres in size when . routing storm water thfough a detention pond to detetmine pond sizes. However for checking other items such as velocity of storm water in the ditch, the rational fo(mula . (Q=cra) must be used. 32. Sliow how storm water at the end of Pi&ce Lane is -treated and detained. . 33. Provide rip rap calculations. MISCELLANEOUS You have indicated that these wiH be submitted at a later date, but are mentioned for reference. 34. Provide a fire district approval letter. 35. Provide a maintenance manual and sinking furid calculations. 36. Pi ovide -a d`aft copy of ti`te CC&Rs a(ong with the -Horrieowner's Association UBI#. If you have any questions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, Matt Zarecor, P.E. Development Services ngineer/Manager . Tim Schwab, P.E. Plan Review Engineer - cc: Bryan Walker, Owner File . . j • ~ . • 1 1 : e CEIZED] C1T~~ 0 AUG 0 3 2005 Ulley B'Y: 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Va ey 6 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhallC spokanevalley.org July 29, 2005 Todd Whippte, P.E. . Whipple Consulting Fngineers _ 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Re: Mica View C of E(SF-01-05) Street & Drainage Submittal # Comments Todd, . On July 14, 2005 Public OVorks received yowr second subtnittal of the street and drainage plans. As we discussed on the phone, the Ciiy is concemed about your propflsed . overflow system into the public cul-de-sac. Flease update the following items on your next submittal: 1. Please include bypass calculations. for Ponds Al and A2. There is. concern of the steep gra.des and runoff not being caught inPonds A1 and A2. Along with:the . calcuiations, please -include all .poncl-calculations for A1 and A2. T'his will help in the review process. . . 2. Include calculations for the grassy swales -located north of Ponds A 1 and A2. These.calculations shall address any bypass from Ponds A1 and A2 to-the grassy . swales, sizing of -the swales, -and discussion of an overflow system. The swales sball drain within 72 hours. All post=developed flow po'tentially exiting the grassy swales shall not enter City boundaries. 3. Please update the plan"s to ind.icate conti.nuous curb on the Pierce Road cul-de-sac rather than the inlet design. 4. The inforrnation given in the drauZage report is not complete for a review of Ponds A1 and A2. Please include tlie fiollowing information for further review of the Ponds: conirol stnicture calculations,to ,include release rates, downstream channel calculations, emergency oveiflow weir infoiYnation (100 year event), etc. Please refer to the 1998 Stormwater Guidelines_for fiuther reyuirements not listed. 5. On sheet 5, the required iteins are missing for the proposed swale. Please update plans to meet the plan review requirements. Refer to the City's Plan Review Guide or the 1998 Stonmwater Guidelines for the appropriate plan requirements. 6. On sheet 7 please update the following infornaation: a Pipe information,- type, size, inlet elevations, slope. b. Pond details are difficult to review. Flease clearly define the ponds areas. i Once this information is submitted., further review can occur. Other items may occur at the review of the next subrnittal. Please contact me at 688-0174 for any additional questions. Sincerely, c ~ . Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer cc: Bryan Wa]ker - Property Owner Matt Zarecor - Spokane County Engineeri.ng Division Deparhnent of Public VtTorks - I}evelopment Project File i C1T1' UF ;o*Valley 11707 E 5Prague Ave Suite 106 ♦ SPokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhallCspokanevalley.org July 29, 2005 Todd Whipple, P.E. , Whipple Consulting ~ngineers 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Sgokane Valley, WA 99216 Re: Mica View C of E(SF-OI-OS) Street & Drainage Submittal # Comments Todd, . On July 14, 2005 Public Works received your second submitta.l of the street and drainage plans. As we discussed on the phone, the City is concerned about your proposed overflow system into the public cul-de-sac. Please update the followi.ng items on your next submittal: , ~ Please include bypass calculations for Ponds A 1 and A2. There is concern of the steep grades and runoff not being caught in Ponds A 1 and A2. Along with the calculations, please include all pond calculations for A1 and A2. T'his will help in the review process. ~ Include calculations for the grassy swales located north of Ponds A 1 and A2. These calculations shall address any bypass from Ponds A1 and A2 to the grassy swales, sizing of the swales, and discussion of an overflow system. The swales sha11 drain within 72 hours. All post-developed flow potentially exiting the grassy swales shall not enter City boundaries. -.41 Please update the plans to indicate continuous curb on the Pierce Road cul-de-sac rather than the inlet design. . The information given in the drai.nage report is not complete for a review of Ponds A 1 and A2. Please include the following information for further review of the Ponds: control structure calculations to include release rates, downstream channel calculations, emergency overflow weir information (100 yeaz event), etc. Please refer to the 1998 Stormwater Guidelines for further requirements not listed. On sheet 5, the required items are missing for the proposed swale. Please update plans to meet the plan review requirements. Refer to the City's Plan Review ✓ Guide or the 1998 Stormwater Guidelines for the appropriate plan requirements. _-,~On sheet 7 please update the following information: a. Pipe information - type, size, inlet elevations, slope. ✓ . b. Pond details are difficult to review. Please clearly define the ponds areas. ~ . . . Once this information is submitted, fiuther review can occur. Other items may occur at the review of the next submittal. Please contact me at 688-0174 for any additional questions. Sincerely, • Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer . cc: Bryan Walker - Property Owner Matt Zarecor - Spokane County Engineering Division . ~ I . t ' ~ °J Yr•~ , WCE ~F'` JUL 1 4 20'0'5 Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc BY= 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 . TRANSMITTAL COMPANY: ~CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATE: July 12, ZOOS 11707 E. SPRAGUE SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206 DELIVERY TYPE: Hand ATTENTION: Sandra Raskeil FROM: Stacey Jenkin PROJECT No.: 04-19 REGARDING: Mica View TRANSMITTAL OF: Drainage Report X AS REQUESTED FOR REVIEW RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: NO.OF EA SET DESCRIPTION ITEMS 1 X Drainage Report X d~ NOTES/ COMMENTS: Sandra, Here is the Drainage Report for Mica View. Sincerely, ~ • Stacey Jen in ~ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIPIENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU RECEIVE THIS TRANSMITfAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES AS ALLOWED BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SENDER NOTED ABOVE. THANK YOU. ~ ~ ~ , i I~~ \s~'1, ~ ` 41, ~t 4,,. .~l a . - ~ ~ ~ A . ~ Y ~ ` . _ ♦ ti`l Y~ 1~j • 1 q I, ~4' w k4 l ~r • ~ . . ~~L• ~ _ ~ ~ ~ •~'J y. ! `'.',t r~~ . ~ j • r4•~. :~3 `,'1'e t ' ' ~y,•~~ , ~ , v` +~~~r,~` ^e.~1t~;'•`,' ti ! • j ,t i t' . •y ? _ ; ; ~ : , t . , ~ ~ . `;aI►t ' , ; ~ ; , ~ , / ~ • , e i SS ti= , , ;~t ~ . P _ ; , ~ . , ~ r . •~~~I ' , ~ ~ ~ r~: " t• r•. u;;,, • ~ i~ ?,t~' ~ ~ ' . ' ~ •f ~ ~ f~ ` ' ''fj~'~-v i ' , ' ` • "~..r.~-,. ~ • - . ~ ~ t: 7' ~ ' ~M ~-±~tJ'~,~ " ~ i ~ ' ~ ~ t • . ~ 1~~ E i~ • ~ . . , ' ; : 4 ' At , + ~~f" ~~5'',.(~.' ' . ;i. lj• 4;~~~ty;~ ~ ~{t'"~•l~;' ~ ~ 1 + f,Z'`- ~ t~~'~ _~Y ~ ~t:~~~ ~ ~i •,r • _ ~ . ~ •t ~ ~id,-'; i _r j . iA ~ i , ryY. , .~~M~~~r~~'rri. r 1v!`_`~'►T.~ y • ~ tc .,..r,,.... jy4 4 l~~~F `1 S~~ ~y ~ f~{~ r y 4~ l• . ~.7 . ~ . .r~ [~r,~~f~.~ Y ~f7'j Jl- ~rt~''~• Lxr l/;~~.~~.,~(+~ ~_J~~~r1 . ~ ~ t • b.- -i-• ~M~_f«y~i.~ ~ 1 ~rj. ~t ~~1. ~ • s '~Sy ♦a,A- Tr~ • . ~ti t~,' 4, r~Ja~~. y.~ _ _ '~;~t• ~R ~~t`=t-+ ~ ' r' . }T~ i i f irt ~ ; • `6i. _r"~ . t ~4~.f►~~Ii) ~~~.4i , ~,,r - c r'~~ ~'4~. {Z~~~j • " ~a} . '1~'~.t"~,.a ia l\1 t ♦ . . ~ • ~ i L v,~+ t ' Pi""` ~y'~ t'r , ~rf SJ ~ +~e~ ~ tl~~~~' k ~ i~ ~ _ 't•~ t~. >3 r•- [ vv,i~C"~']y~ : ~~4'~•~,'r~`t~. - r 4 r ~~~•~.~,~'',.ffi (f` ~ =i ~~'y~ ~ f i ,~'';(~~t,'J/1 : .'~~{Y~~ri ~2li,. ~y ' ~ (~t'~~~:.~f~~•~'~!,!t•~ ~ .r ~J:.fi°, ~ : ~k : ~"yt ! ~t - . _ `1~►.4.j ~!•'i f~d;s`[+trj s.~~„~.~'~1 , j ' ~ ..~3~~ 4•• ! ti' ~I~ L~' ~li~~'~, . • ~i..ti ~!•a~ r ~'S~ t (~t ~ kr I i'.1~~~~1/~~.,1',, ~{•a~ti•s~:nt ~ ,~'r~1'i~: ti ~i !t •~t~ f,•. t.~,~ ;~~~R~,~'~~t•,•t~ `~,v ~ ~~sa ' . * ~ r ~ ~ :G • st , ~i 11~ . ; Y ~ ~+~~J . . 1 '4 • - ~ ~ ~~S ~ if " ; t1 . g' , ~ y ! l ~-r~• ~ ~ h r♦ c..BF- , I r S.Lx+'.~ , , . ~i~~~` 3,`~ . , 1 'H~ _LT 1 21 ir;i~ ' t#.~~i.t'~ i ~i :r`'#?~~`'~, ' - - • '11~. G ; _ . _ _ ~ ~ ~ ,Y f' } d~hi:•r7~ ~ e.7 ~ F a ~ ~ . , 0~l1 ~ s~ kll`'~' ~N~~ ~ ~ h ~ • ~ i ~ t P~ ~i, . w J~r• ~ ~p a ~ +i4 f,~' ~ y~~-2 , 5•,~~r~,~ ° ~}r i~,~ i~,+t' I r~~~'~~ ~0.. r+,~i~YIM^~~*~ ` ~ ~~•7~~.1~.~ i ~ ~ S ~7 .a ~ ,g~• . .~U1~~,~, wR.'~.F I~ 'r. r ~ ~;y • i ~,yrOld'l` 1 ~ (~o ~ ~ f ~ i 4 ~d,~;~/,'~ ~ ~ ON, ~it , + x~. , . , „ ~ . ~ , ~~yJ ~ty . r r _ ~~~1a .';~`"f 1+- .4~ y" • A `Y I ic!'l: ~ .t ; , . y a . . u~.~ . . . -•rT'tTF ~Pi..-_-, fo . . ~ i . , ~ , . . , ' . . ~ ~ I . . . . _ . , i . .j . . . ' . . . . ~ . " ~ ~ ~ . . ~ ' ~ ' , . . fi ~ 4 . 1 F y11 '1 f 1 f • r r_ i ~ I/e ~S , ; ~ , ► ~ i~, ~ ,.1+ }~x'~ ~ . , . . • ,.r k~ v 4 '~r ~r `I~' `1 `►~1 ti~ i '.w {a~ i ,0 ;'A I' ~ ` 1 ` ~ ,,y~,~ ~ r ( : ~ ` ~ ~ ~i ' ~ ~ • ' • • 4 4'r. 4,t r~~ ~~~U ty~ t 1 ~ ' ,,~•':~~lt ~ ~'~f A~ i~l ''r• 1 f ~'v. r f~ 1 r)S M~ _.!r' 3~~{h , W ~y~ ~T• r ~ • ~ ; f~ 7 ~ ~ i 1 ~ 4~ - t~ 1 1 f~~ e~., .w+: ~~~.a `',.,ll..- ,~~f~ , ' , •w , f7 n- r~, ~`M. , ,;,:•ra ~ • `,~t'~'►t .r.;~,'i, - ~,,,~r~ 1~ Y, 1 Y n • E1 ♦ 7 n ~4~~ ~ ~ } w. ' ` s !i ~..ti ~ ~i~ "~4 ~ • {~~1~~"~^. , ~ ~ f►.'v~•~ r ! 1 r ~i ~ y • r,'!r, ~ w ~ ~ . C Y • • .a ry~ . o- 'r r,~' n f r. . , L • 'Ir ~ 1 ~ .•~+R~, ~~i~'~f; ~,i w a4 +i , Q`~~ 4 r f ~ A: ~ i. . ~f . , 1 ` ~ . ` `i'T • 4•)~"'~"~ r ~ r.~: ~y~,.,,1, ~ ~ ~ d . tp{d~'h~! -r ,,..1r,'' • . -i•;t` L ~ ~:4 # ~r•t•~t ~ 3 . } . ~R - a,e'~~•'-~'-. 1 ~ , 1 ~ 1\ ~T`. ~ ~ 7~' t ~ ~ •k ~ ~io ,~1~i+ ~i ~~iy~ti~; z ~ `'Ji~~ t. ~ ~ ~ i 1 , r~~~~~~'~'i~;? _ .'V.' ~ ` ~y ~ • `-l'r" , ` • A~ ~•-f~ i~1w L ~ ~l ~ ~ I ,.MT' . • •1• • !r~ M, ~ " a - ' ~ • ~q , ti, ~j' . .rw~'i•,~~ . . .I 1 J I4n' ~ a . w ~ '..~"f"' ~ ~Y~ 7~ ~ ' , ~ x ' ~ ~ •t:. i"-t_ii ~ ~ • , . . • . ; • ""y . , . , , . . yJ. i,h ~ h+ f ~t ~ ~w_ ' ~rr ~ i fii-'y'~1.~.ii.+~:~ ~ . ! ~ i.• ~ ~ . h. , ~y I~rI.~~{ . ~ • , ~{A.. T ; ~ t'~t ~ ' ±Y ,~F~T~ i i " ^ ~1~ ~a~J ~.7~ ,t ~ ! r ~ • ~ , ~ . Y~A~" M""t,. ,'..I t~~ ~~ir~T (~f;.'~~;,=5~~a~~j~"fc7,~"~t~d'. f'l.~•6a_ f ~rf. ,.l I ~r z~, F~ r ~I f , ' ~l ~ ~t 1 ' ~ ~i t' ~ „ 7 ~ ~ ti•A~aj f ~ . ~ . i ' ~ i ~p 't t.1a1'~ r , . 'ot~~ t~'40 A. ~ + jf {1`J { ~~~9'S, ,~~~~oi,~~+"c'~rr.~'~ 1 , +ry..~ ~~y ~1,.. ~ r -'a1I+ "ti ~ f~ ~r ~ •L~ W~/~" ~i~" rt .r4~ {"l p. i ~ ,~l i~ +~X` Q_/~,.h• ~i,fiQ}j ~~y~ H Ik ' , t.t~`~ x~.,y7 q~„' 1• i/,r ~.l~I.t, llvaT ~,^~,~l ri't"~W~F .'f , ~ r ~ ~ . 1~ . u~i- ~ +ir. . , ',t~~A ~ ~r,~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i fl • ~ '~1 ~ , ~ ~ ~ r ` : y,~ Y , ' y ~I . ~ ~ . a , k . V~h + n~, • - y ;-.~r' „A` • . ~Y1'!'1 ` ~ r ! . •j . ~ , i} 4~ 'i ` y~ ~ , +~1 ~ ~e' ' t ; ~ ~~j'~~~~ ~ ~,1~: . ' ' ~ ~/~t K { ( *o = yy " -"r :A: '~~I!!~.~ ~'~.~1 ( . , I, (~~y?'~,i~~ir,+. ,D , ~ ~ . . , J.~' M~ . 7. . . . Q~'', ,.I .'(+tlr ~1~ . . ,'j' • .1 ~ I `f "`~tisllr~'~ Y +w~l. 1 •M ' , ~ ► ~ . i ` y I l ~ r:~ 4 y ~ ~ ~ Yk' . ~~r ~kj~ r5,~(~y+4.44 r ~T~'+~~~~~~~`~+.~ ~ yb•,hH~ , ; . ~ 1"~ ~ ~~~I~ , i { y }~.y ~ { . - ~ , 'f i ~ , . 'r . i r . ~ ~ A • ~'a ~ ' ,i• ' ; , ~ , ~ - : t ~ 4 ~ f~ , . ~ i~7~~~~i'~ il i~ , M + .1 ww H...~'~+~,- •I~!`^.~ . i A.` , . ' • . . ry`~~~~ rti.~ ,~:{1'^R~.'.~" . ' . . , t , " ~ . , ~ ~ ~''•t.; ' µ r~ i 4 ~ ~ ' , K ~ . . ' . . . ~ ~ r , J , ~ h ~ w • ~ ~ p ~ , J~' ~ , , ' w' ~,;1 - i ~a . ~~:jr~'"'.~• r,. ~ .1 ~ r.~' . . . . ~ a i. ' Nl 444(~l: ~1- 1 A . r+ ~M 6 ~ w - ' , !~'t i n • ' r 4 e ` w , `r" ry . ~ . . . .•`t 'v. ti~ ~ p~ . ' ~ r ~ , r - ~ ~ : . ' , ~ j,,. r .~'..-d s~ ,,ti ~ . "1 l~ ti ~ . . . ~ ~ ~ ' - , d~. • . ; . . 71 ~'hat' AR ~/+i`it~,,~` ~ . ~ •~e.:~1r'~. , ~ ' Y • . ~ \ ~ ~ ,,-r;',~~'1.• t , ~ ~i~"~ ~~1~1 ¢ . 4 ~r.A~ ~1~~".~~~~1'~~~,~ ~ ~ ' i i~'•. •r~J~f,~~1r1~''~,'~ ~'1l~/rl ~08 !r~~ r'~ .~Z ^ .,I r ~ ~ t,~~ ~1 ~~4 ~ ~ ~J ' Y1+; ~f, ~ f ~ ~ 1~ h ~ ~,V / • ' , ,j~'~ ~ ~i :~r , ~ ~r~y _ ; ~ Y,1, k~' M , ; ~ ~r ~ ~ • _ ~1 r~ ~ 'c, ~d ~ ; , , ( 'i~ l ~ ~ %~~'s 7~ r~ 1 ~ ~1 ~ ~y 's , f :~jF, t ~'r.r h ~ I ~ ~.H~ • ~...lJ~;"~ j'Y~ '`)0.,.~ ,y', ' - , y~ , '~ir'' 1~Y' ~ ' ~ ; . ~ M ~4,~ .~1•~ .y, ~ . ; , ~ a~ j ~i~LA. Y .~f~''4~►s~ ~r ' t. "ilv. q ~^'~i~ Pn - `r ~'t•,' ~ . . ~ oHe.}p~,.:.j'~~ * ~",1. a.'. r.. ~~w+ .i ..~~.1. , . 1J+~1 , . - ~r ;;~i ~t.:.~.~~~^'4 ~ .,lYl',.rcr `~w~~ ~`ir,L~ . w~~~~ _ ..1\ r,♦ • • . "'t~~~' ~ , , . . • ' y~ wI' . ~ . ~l~\ ~'y , r . ~6~~; . ' ,r._, y .I ~.T' ~,W ~.1~. , , - ~ • , h ' ♦~m. ~ y - . _ r . I'l .1Z.,,.~`'4 _ ~ •1~ ~'t ~1►~~~~~~ r . . ,,'t.. • ` , ~~1~~~ r+r ,A ♦ ~r~+'u+• ~•'iti Py, , r , . , T , •..~u ~v.', r. . - - I~ f a ' 1 V • . _ ' ' Y_ , 4,~~ ~ .~~~P:~ lr 1~.,1 aE . ~r ♦ ~ +y1 r ~ C~'S: ' 'r i.~S~ 1 ~M r ' ' +~~W.~h ;1.~ . U `~~1r~, '~•y. ~1 j'~'.~ • •'+'lew , . '~~ani . . . • • '"t. , . . ~ ~ , . . . 1 tniL F t3-~ ~ Y ' ~~.a .1~ • ~ ` 4' ' ~f 4'L:?i.:t~.4~" '~5., t'/•♦~ 4 ,..1 ~`!a'" , ~~f ~i ,~.~F ~ • 1 ~ 1~~ ` • 1'~ • `~it~,~~ '`,~`s ti~ ' , -~~~1 i~~S.,,~ `i, '.~1. ~e,t . . . `t~1,}•~ ~ ' r~~• - #.y . ` ,,,•~,J . ` ` ~e ~~s+ ~ ♦ ti`., `141 ~ ~'r k►h1. '~f 't p+=~~_ ~ . `t ` ~ ► ~ ~ , ~ i; ~ 1 ~ ~ A ~1~ e : ~ {J . ~R / ~.j ~.,t♦ ►}~`~~Ru°~ `;F ~ ~ ~ f - a~ ' ~ • ' a ~~`~t•.~5 1 ~ r~ f~~~ ( ;1 ~ ~~~~t'- r i~ ~ • ` .'M r- ~1"~ , f Ar U { ~ ~ ~x ~ . . + .4~~~K~+~';rr y . ' ~ ~►~r'Y~} ti t~' • ~ - r~ik~ ~ ~ ' 1 , 1'''~,, , , :~r~ : ~ , ~y € , - ~ ~i.,e~•~ ~ ~ " . ~ " •;"'~,}'1i',`~ ~'tt ~•,'~~~i~"'~~~'yt~,,;_;~. ~1rV L.L , k i , ~ 7,~T~ • t t ~ ~ y~, X ~ l J ~w .t,7~~ ~~~~1~1'~~..~~1t~1~, H~,~'. J:~II~+.;,.'e ~ , .r~ ~ t' ~x;~-f ` j•~t: •n',,•- (a1• ~ ~ . - , t ~i ,1~ ; ♦.at•r ~ t\ ~1:~_ .~'h ~ ~YJ/~ f ~ t ~~t S~ ~'{j ~'~l!~ ~a~ 1~ • l•h t,• ~ •.`t.. ' , ' ` 'i{f`'l4k t~~et~ ~~S~1;r~t~~:~. ~ ~~1\~•~ S` '',l. t ±it 1~`t .l \~~1 }Ip\ r~.~~~~ ~~'y . ~ f 4\1 ♦ ` ~ ~ .,'i ~~~1~' f, T ~ ' ~i ~e ,lt ~~~•~~.,i~ tiyt'1 ` ` - , ~i #~•y+r•• 1i,~ ~z~~ e~ ~ , ~ ~ ; '>t~~!' ~ ~ ah ' . t ~ +i c} , rt !~r t ~~,~1 , 1 ~p. ~ . + L, ~.'=~.iltrµi+~~'.~i~~' ~ ~,~i1`` ~ ~ , , f~,,~i'►r ` ~ - - I ~ i . . . ~ ~~•.i~ f', • ~c 1 ~ ~ '.i:ic•'A,.d. ~ _ n . . , ` ~ ~s•~~':~. ;1; y~~.~, ft~•. _ `~r-~ ` -4. ' 1 ~~'ti ~ ;-i,~. : ~ ~ '.~~is4:,. sz ' ti a. ' ' ~ , , , ~ ~ _ ` ~ - ' "t~`,~.-. .yr ~ ~e ~~.s;` .~y' ' . - 1 . J - - . , t a~ • • ~r*' ~ :~~r~ ~ . ~ . ~ - ~ t~~. r . ~ :i' 's l::?~.t~\: : ~ ''J. ~4. - t1 ,4'~1.•~4~ ~ 1 T,~ ti ~,i . 4 ~ ~ f ~ ~ I - i► ~1/, l r~' ° l t ~ a : ~ ~ -~i' ,~t ♦ K:~y ~ • Z^c ~c r - a~ ; :,,y' ~!.t~ j : - ti . . - • ~ ` - . _ _ . ~ . J ~ . ~o.. , . . Y ' ~i.M1.` . _ ~ ` ~t i . ~ f' ~ ` •s \'ty. LL_:!" ~s.~L,!~' ~ , . ay~~►'Y ~ . sst~- .~~.a~,Y~ . ,t ~ ~ l • . . ~ ~L.y ♦ : . :y♦ ~ ~ ~ . • ~ ~ C L_~i.'~ ~ iV~ ~ ' ~~'~~~.Z. ~1`~ - ~ s ' ' . : _ ~ ~ ~ . - _ ~...1 • ~ t. V _a3~.~ ~•~F 1• ~ " ` ~ 7~~~ 3 ~f _ _ . ' ' ~ ' " • ~1•~ ' ~ ~ ' '.~n' j _ . . _ - ~ _ • " ' ~ . - . , . - 1 j ~J.i>.~ . . . . . ; . ~ ~ ,ZI r : I - . ~ : ``M•;9~!~' - - ~ _ ' - _ - - - - - ~ -,i` ~ . ~ , . . 1 ~ v' - _ ~ • ~ ~ . _ ' . - ~ r .i`~•:'~,~i• , ~c . ~ ~~kr ~ , I • IrY . l j~ ~ I~~ ♦ h ~ . ~ t Y.-, I~ l'~ ~=T~ ~ ♦ i • . l Y I ! ~~~~.~..41 ~I . ~ } 1` 1• ~ • Ir `~y Y ~ :y~1 ~r'~ a.{ ~~i~ • . T w:~~ ~ . ; ( t- ~ ~~P~ 'J vii. s - j . _ S - . . ~,~•~'•w.s .C---i -1 ' t~~►i,~'•. ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ` El f ~ r ` _ -S ~ t,~, • ,;w~~ ~ . ' ~ . I i'V e • ~~i;~ - ~ ~ } ~ ~ ~ ~ , i. ` r }yy . ~l•.. . , ' ~ . ~ . ;~~jj ~t ~ r . °^y ✓ ~ ~ _ .4~- ~ ~ ~ . • 'I. . i .Y' ° - j fs~. . y`' _ ~I ~ ~ . ' ~ + ~ \ ~ - ' ~ i^~t:. .~~..►_~a,~ I`1..~.) t. y~~ - °,r •-'2_~- ~ l, . ~ 1~r~- . Sft•!.lj"'„ . ~l•{ kv_r~,. -Y ~ ~ - ` • ~ L.. r_ v ~ry4 J ' ' ' , - ~ - f '~•,~=~;,,i~ C i. f ~5~~~' ^y ~ r ' -.s{'~'. '••I + ~r~ "'w, . . ~ . . . L , i' ~ . . ♦ ~ ~t. ` ~ ' _ _ _ ' - . y~~ ~L~% i- ••~t~~ . ' ~ . ~l ~ p_ _ . . • + . .i ' ~ ' ' . ' . . ' . . - . _ _ ~ ' . ' _ - " • ' " ~('J • ~C ; . ' ~ _ • . J' . •_F _ ; . _ . . ~~~I', . . . V • - • - , _ , _ - -~a•~~lC'~'a.sr~ - • I ~ . - • . ~ ' . ~ ' • ~ - - _ ~ ~':_~"ei'~•- - ' . I ~ ~ : ~ ' " ' ~~,c,s , j, t ~ ~~~'fs~.~r R~~}•; ~*11~~i~~~~•, .,f, ~~~u. i ~t' t~•x ~ .til,~'n~~~~ • ~3~~r i,~ ~S!-• ' ~ i ~ _ Ja~"S Jd~ K41_,,,,,sn ; ; , . "~r~~ ~ . +~►M~kT~. . •.1 1 .•~1 f ~ • . ~in . - kAlIoO& . . . ~ . ~ . ~ AWC JUL 1 4 ?005 July 10, 2005 W.O. No. 0419 Spokane County Department of Public Works - Transportation 1026 W. Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 Attn: Matt Zarecor, P.E. and Wendy Iris, P.E. Development Senrices Engineer Re: Mica View - Certificates of Exemption Pierce Lane Private Road and Storm Drainage Pian Submittal No. 2 for Review Dear Matt and Wendy, Enclosed are two sets of private road and drainage plans for review and approval. Also enclosed with this submittal are two copies of the REVISED drainage report combined with the geotechnical evaluation, pavement evaluation and inspection agreement between the Project Sponsor and Allwest. Below are responses to comment received from Spokane County in Wendy's transmittal of May 4, 2005 as well as comments received from the City of Spokane on May 23, 2005. Prior to responding to each comment several issues need to be generally discussed as they relate to a majority of the comments received. 1. We have revised the plans to indicate that Pierce from the end of the existing cul-de- sac will now be a private roadway and as such the entire roadway wilt now be labeled Pierce Lane. 2. We have revised the entire concept of the storm drainage report from that of a project using 208 type swales and drywells to a project that utilizes detention and release rates. For this project the design release rates in all instances are the pre- developed 2 and 50-year storms. 3. We have evaluated 5 offsite, up gradient basins, 4 of which will require water to pass through the project site and under Pierce Lane. In these instances, all pass through pipes have been sized as 24-inch CMP at 2-percent. In other instances, these pipes are also used as discharge pipes for the ponds within the appropriate basins. Response to Spokane County Cornments on 1St Submittal WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS • CIVILAND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 13218 E SPRAGUE AVENUE • SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 • PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 . Spokane County- Engin, ~ 2"d Submittal July 10, 2005 Page 2 County comments are italicized, bold and paraphrased with responses in normal text. PLANS 1. Provide Bearings for the roadway centerline These have been added 2. Sidewalks are required on public roads 3. Maxirnum grade for public road is 8-percent Pierce Lane is now private and these requirements do not apply 4. 20-foot separation for nosing to public right of way At the present time the island has been omitted from the plans 5. Provide BCR, MCR and ECR stations and elevations at curb returns These have been added as applicable 6. The following are required for cul-de-sacs a. Station of the center of the sac b. Profile of the cul-de-sac wl 1-percent minimum grade These have been added. 7. Provide profiles for storm pipes, minimum cover etc... No profiles have been added at this time, but cover in all instances has been checked. 8. Ver'rfy call outs on Drainage Detail Sheets a. Elevations issues b. Wrong inlets c. Stationing, etc... These have been significantly revised and reviewed for adequacy and consistency 9. Specify dry land grasses for bio-swales No bio-swales are proposed at this time 10. Organic carbon testing for infiltration swales deeper than 6-inches The 208 concept for this project has been abandoned at this time. , Spokane County - Engir; : s 2 Submittal July 10, 2005 Page 3 11. Storage depth for swales with and without drywells The 208 concept with drywell discharge has been abandoned at this time. 12. Verify that the swale floor is greater than 6-inches below the gutter flow line. The type C curbs have been eliminated from this project and all swales are below edge of roadway. 13. Drywelt in Swales B and C may not drain as designed The 208 concept with drywell discharge has been abandoned at this time 14. For pond berms that are 4feet or higher use Figure 47 of the Stormwater guidelines. Add these details. These have been added and noted. 15. The drainage facilities lay outside the 70-foot private road easement, new easements shall be required. Please provide the following: a. Plat certificate, deed, deed of trust or conveying instrument b. List of signers c. Legal descriptions, exhibit of the easement area titled "Exhibit A", etc.. d. Easement area drawing exhibit, titled "Exhibit B" We have requested these from the project surveyor and they will be provided under separate cover. DRAINAGE REPORT 16. through 22 have been significantly revised and with the general exceptions of overall plan and drainage report coordination, generally all other comments do not appty. MISCELLANEOUS 23. Provide a fire district approval 8etter This is being requested 24. Provide an O&M Manual and Sinking Fund calculations. These will be provided after initial review of this 2"d submittal , Spokane County - Engir;: - .3 - 2"d Submittal July 10, 2005 Page 4 25. Provide a draft copy of the CC&R's along with the HOA - UBI # This has been requested and will be transmitted under separate cover. The following comments are from the Citv of Spokane Vallev, we have only responded to those comments that are generally not duplicate comments from Spokane County or were comments based on the original 208 presenfation. 9. Verify how runoff downstream of 62+50 will be treated and disposed, prior to entering the City of Spokane Valley. As shown on the basin map and plans, this project proposes to intercept all storm drainage at about station 62+50 via Ponds A1 and A2 which discharge to the east. Below or northerly of 62+50, and currently within the City of Spokane Valley, the adjacent homeowners have disturbed the soil and surrounding area of the private road easement to a point that drainage treatment and discharge are nearly impossible 'rf not completely impossible to treat and dispose. We have spoken with Sandra Raskell at the City of Spokane Valley and have indicated that we can cut off all upstream water south of 62+50 so that only that water downstream of that point will continue to run within the City and that our ability to treat and dispose is nearly impossible. Therefore, we have requested relief that the that area between 62+50 and 63+50 be allowed to run free as the existing slopes do now with no other upstream contributing basins being allowed to run to the cul-de-sac. This would cut off approximately 300 to 400 feet of upstream topography from flowing to the north. 12. Specify a grassy cover for the roadside swale . This has been added After your review should you have any questions related to this submittal please do not hesitate to call at 893-2617 or when your comments are ready for pick up so that this process can move along smoothly to approval/acceptance. Sincer 1y, ~ Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Enclosures - Plans, Drainage Report, Geotech Report and Irispection Documentation ~ ~ ~ k 05/16/,2005 09:15 NAX 5094777655 0~ ~y ' ~FC~TVFD : MAY ~ 6 ZAp5 Faz Transmittal P~':. ~-.----..y..., ~ ~ DevelopZnent Services Department Division of Engmeering and Roads ' (509} 477-3600 Fax (509) 477-7655 Date: May 16, 2005 To: Todd Whipple, P.E. Fax No: 926-0227 Company: WCE . cc: Fa.z No: From: Wendy Iris Natnber of Pages: 4 Subject: CE9105 Mica View Certificate of Exempfiion . Attar hed is our camment letter for the Ati.ca View Certificate of Exemptian. I noticed that I did not send out an officialletter. You had only reccived a draft, my apologies. If you have any questions please give me a call. -TYendy Iri.s 477-7441 cc: Project File VS/lfi/,'lUUS Vy:25 irAa bUy4777tib5 kbYUftAivz wuivtt r.t~~ttvr,r,ic~ qyvv~ . , . ~ . ~ i S P O K A N E C O LJ N T Y DMSION OF ENGIIVEERiNG AND ROADS A DMSION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS D$PAmmBff May 4. 2005 Mr. Todd Whippte, P.E. Whippte Cdnsulting Engineering Company 13218 East Sprague Ave. Spokane Valiey, WA 99216 Subject CE 91-05 Mica Vew-Certificate of Exemption Road and Drainage Ptan Subm'ittai #1 . Mr. Whippie, We have rediewed your Aprii 15, 2005 submittai of the road and drainage design documents for the above noted tand action. Before'the Certificate of Exemption can be acxepied, the private road propossd to serve the lots must meet the current design standards. The follawing items need to be addressed or resolved prior to acxeptance of the plans: . PLANS 1. ProVtde bearmgs for the roadway centetiine. 2. Sidewalks are required an the public road section. 3. The maximum grade on pubfic roads is 8%. 4. Verify that the nase of the private roadway median istand is no closer than 20' to the public roadway curti (ine. 5. Rrovide 6CR, MCR, and ECR statians/efevations on ail curb returns. 6. The foliawing items are re.quired for cui-de-sacs: a. The stafion of the center of cLti-de-sac; and, b. Tiie profile of the cul-de-sac curb. Verify that the grades are 1% minimum. 7. Provide profdes for storm pipes and verify that the minimurn oover tequirements are met (Stormwater Guideiines page 4-3). 8. Verify ca1F-outs on Drainage Qetails sheet; it appears there are several inconsistencies indud'mg but not iimited to the folZowing items: . a. Elevation busts; b. Wrong cxsrb inlet call-outs; and, c_ lnconsistent stationing. , 9. Specify dryiand grasses for biosyrates and ditches. 10. Organic carbon testing is only required fior water quality -depths ttiat exceed 6" (measured from fop of sad to drywell). t# does not appear that all of the swalesldetention ponds wgl require organic carfion testing. 11. Verify that the total storage depth is s'I' for swales with drywells and S° for swales without drywells. 1026 W. Bmadway Ave- • Spokane, WA 99260-0170 •(509) 477-3600 FAX: (509) 477-7655 (2nd Floor) 477-7478 (3rd Flmr) • TDD: (509) da7-7133 . .v rca.a uvaY ~ r r vuu .7i'VifmVz WUiVY'Y IS'iVli11V ~~.I,''K, vzj UUJ 12. Verify that the swale floor is >6" betow the gutter flowtine at curb inlets tivithout drywell and/or >12° with drywefl. 13. It appears that the drywelis to be installed in Swales B and C may encounter a limiting layer " within 4' from the bottom of dryweU. Test pits excavated in the vicinity of these SwaIes refused at 5%'. Please verify and provide justification that 4 feet of minimum ciearance to any limiting layer is provided. ~ ; 14. For pond berm heights that exceed 4 feet in height the design is to include a keyway, clay or geotextile liner and is buiit in accordance with Figure 47 of the Stormwater Guidelines. Please provide these derails on the plan sheets. : : 15. The drainage faalities that !ie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easement (Auditor's Document Number 5194998) are required to be placsd within easements. The : easements shatl meet the requifiements of the Stonnwater Guidelines. Please provide the ~ following documentation so we can pnepare the easements: . ; a. Plat certificate: Deed, Deed of Trust, or Canveying tnstrument (recor:ded copy); ' b. Ust of signatory narnes; • : c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Include a titie °Exhibit A7, it sha11 be stamped by a lioensed Surveyor, all margins shaU be 1p or greater, 8 poirrt minimum font size, and the text shall be reproducible; and, , d. Easemen# area exhibifi Include a trtie "Exhibit B° and meet the requirements of the Iegal * description exhbit : ; DRAIRIAGE RERORT 16. Thete a ars to be several discre ' ppe pancies between the dratnage report and the construcfion , ptans. Either oorrect the drainage report to caoTrelate with the construcfion plans or visa versa. Foilowing is a tist of items that were inoonsistent: ~ a. The elevations, areas, volumes etc. in the Pond Summary Table of the drainage report are not consistent with what is detailed in the plans; b. The bowstring calculations indicate drywells in swales tfiat don't have drywefls or are utilizing oufflow rafes for double-depth drywells where single-depth are calted out in tfie plans; c. There are curb inlet and chedc dam calcutat+ons in the drainage report for several curb inlets that are not shawn in the plans; and, ~ d. The drainage report narrative stahes "Each narrow swale overflows through a grassy weir irrto a d"rbch that channels the flouv to the drywells...°; none of virhich are shown in the construction plans_ The above items are not all-inalusive. Please verify that the construction plans agree with the drainage report. 17. Provide a pre-developed basin map. . 18. Sub-basins need to be more cleariy labeled and correlate with the calculations. label the time of concentration routes and show any existing drainage oourses. 19. It doesn't appear that the deterrtion facilities store the 50-year storm because the calcufafions are utilizing ouiflow ra#es that are not consistent with the structures that are shown in the ptans. Also, the geotechnical report indicates that marginal soils are present at the lacatron of the drywe(Is. . The active barrel section of the dryweil appears to be in soils that have more than 12% fines; therefore, the outflow rates for the drywelts should be adjusted. : 20. Verify the catculations for the `208' area required. It appears that not enough area is provided in ' the ponds. ' 05/16../2005 09:26 FA% 5094777655 SFOI{ANE COUNTY r:PVG1NliEKS lgvu4 ' - ~ 29. Provide further explanation of the catculation tables in the drainage report, i.e. equations, factors, ' road widths, units, etc. 22. Veriiy that ditches have adequate freeboard and non-eroding velocities. MISCELLANEOUS 23. Provide a fire district approval letter. 24. Provide a maintenance manual and sinking fund calculations. 25. Provide a draft copy of the CC&Rs along with tlhe Homeownees Association UBI#. ' tf you have any questions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, ' Matt Zarecor, P.E. Oevelopment Services EngineerlManager Wendy . Ins P.E. Plan Re ' glneer cc: Bryan Waiker, Owner File . . " iyx ~ . - , . ~ ~~Q~~$'~~ .~r.,A~JHr1~~/ ?L.OA..1' ~ MAY 2 5 2005 s c,I 1ame ~ p ~ ~ :BY*: alley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valtey WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1006 ♦ cityhallCspokanevaltey.org ' '--."i'-? _ ~ ;=~~..--,i`--..~ , . ' _ ` ' _:i _ - '--~.?1'~-'''_-'~•- - . " . , :rt May 23, 2005 Todd Whipple P.E. Wlupple Consulting Engineer 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane, WA 99206 CE 91-05 Mica View - Certificate of Exemption Road and Drainage Plan Subinittal #1 Todd: We have reviewed your Apri123, 2005 submittal of the road and drainage documents for the above referenced projects. The following items need to be addressed prior to the acceptance of the plans: 1. Provide a grading plan; 2. Specify bearings for the road centerline; 3. The public ROW extends to the terniinus of the Pierce Road cul-de-sac. _ Because there is a private easement between the cul-de-sac and the plat boundaries, a private road needs to be constructed instead of the extending the public road as shown in the plans. 4. The proposed design uses standard outflow rates but it is not located in pre- approved soils. The ALLWEST geotechnical investigation indicates that the use of drywells does not appear feasible. The two samples collected in the vicinity of the proposed swales have estimated permeability rates at or below 6 in/hr. In addition, refusal was encountered at 5.5 feet near the nroposed location of drywells. 5. The disposal mechanism needs to take into consideration irnpacts to downstream/down gradient properties; 6. Flood width and Bowstring calculations: e The bowstring calculations need to take into consideration the proposed curb type; e Verify the calculations as they indicate that all basins have the same flood width of 6.4 feet. Please note that the Bowstring spreadsheets requires iterating the flow until the "Q" _"Qc". For Basin 2 for example, 0.57 cfs is not equal to 2.19 cfs; and, • Verify that flood width requirements are met at the median. 7. Provide a pre-developed basin map and pre-developed calculations. 8. Post-developed basin map & calculations: • The contours shown in the post-developed basin map indicate that plat may receive offsite flow contribution. Please verify and revise calculations to be consistent with site conditions; • Please provide bypass calculations and verify that rates and volumes releases do not exceed pre-developed conditions; • Clarify the basin boundaries and show flow paths and • Verify that the basin map & calculations are consistent; • Clarify if the areas outlined near Basin 3 area closed depressions and how they will be protected. If these are closed depression, they need to be analyzed when determining pre-developed rates and volumes; • Provide an example of the basin areas were calculated (i.e. roofs, driveways, treatment areas). In addition, verify that treaiment is provided for driveways. 9. Please verify how runoff is treated and disposed downstream of Station 62+50. Please note that a mechanism needs to be proposed prior to entering the City of Spokane Valley. 10. Drainage Facilities: • Some swales have the top of berm below the top of curb; if the capacity of the swales is exceeded runoff may go towazds private structures. The design should propose a design that directs runoff away from shuctures for rain events in excess of the design storm; • Basin 3 has the drywells and biggest facilities at the most upstream point of the basin. This &sign approach does appear appropriate, please verify. 11. USGS topographic data indica.tes the presence of a large channel within the plat. Please verify and protect, if appropriate. 12. Specify a grassy cover for the road-side ditch. 13. Water Qua.lity Treatment: • Demonstrate that the swales provide the appropriate treatment for the . road runoff that reaches them. • Clarify in the report narrative and calculations how treahnent is achieved using the biofiltration and bioinfiltration swales. • Include the assumptions and calculations used to determine the treatment flow rate and how the minimum requirements are met (detention time, minimum channel width, minimum channel length, velocity). • The report indicates that check dams are provided to slow down runoff. However, the plans do not appear to have a detail or construction note. • Need to break down basins and demonstra.te that the most downsri-eam swales provide the treatment for the portion of the roads and driveways located downstream of most upstream swales. Also, the disposai mechanism needs to be located at the most downstream point and not upstream. • Clarify how runoff gets to the roadside ditches as inlets only appear to be provide near the proximity of the swales. 14. Provide the following documents: • O&M manual; . e CC&Rs; • A fire department approval letter; • Lot plans (if applicable to Spokane Valley City limits . If you have any further questions, please contact me at 688-0174 or Gloria at 688-0226. Sincerely, , Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer Gloria Mantz, P.E. Stormwater Engineer cc: Bryan Walker, Property Owner Matt Zarecor, Spokane County Division of Engineering Public Works Development File ~ SCill'l 00 p6koane ;OO*VaIIey 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhallCspokanevalley.org May 23, 2005 Todd Whipple P.E. ~ Whipple Consulting Engineer 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane, WA 99206 CE 91-05 Mica View- Certificate of Exemption Road and Drainage Plan Submittal #1 Todd: We have reviewed your Apri123, 2005 submittal of the road and drainage documents for the above referenced projects. The following items need to be a.ddressed prior to the acceptance of the plans: 1. Provide a grading plan; 2. Specify bearings for the roa.d centerline; 3. The public ROW extends to th.e terrninus of the Pierce Road cul-de-sac. Because there is a private easement between the cul-de-sac and the plat boundaries, a private road needs to be constructed instead of the extending the public road as shown in the plans. 4. The proposed design uses standard outflow rates but it is not located in pre- approved soils. The ALLWEST geotechnical investigation indicates that the use of drywells does not appear feasible. The two samples collected in the vicinity of the proposed swales have estimated permeability rates at or below 6 in/hr. In addition, refusal was encountered at 5.5 feet near the proposed location of drywells. 5. The disposal mechanism needs to take into consideration impacts to downstreain/down gradient properties; 6. Flood width and Bowstring calculations: • The bowstring calculations need to take into consideration the proposed curb type; • Verify the calculations as they indicate that all basi.ns have the sa.me flood width of 6.4 feet. Please note that the Bowstring spreadsheets requ.ires iterating the flow until the "Q" _"Qc". For Basin 2 for example, 0.57 cfs is not equa.l to 2.19 cfs; and, • Verify that flood width requirements are met at the median. 7. Provide a pre-developed basin map and pre-developed calculations. . 8. Post-developed basin map & calculations: • The contours shown in the post-developed basin map indicate that plat may receive offsite flow contribution. Please verify and revise calculations to be consistent with site conditions; • Please provide bypass calculations and verify that rates and voluxnes , releases do not exceed pre-developed conditions; • Clarify the basin boundaries and show flow paths and • Verify that the basin map & calculations are consistent; • Clarify if the areas outlined near Basin 3 area closed depressions and how they will be protected. If these are closed depression, they need to be analyzed when determ.ining pre-developed rates and volumes; • Provide an example of the basi.n areas 'were calculated (i.e. roofs, . . driveways, treatment areas). In addition, verify that treatment is provided for driveways. 9. Please verify how runoff is treated and disposed downstream of Station 62+50. Piease note that a mechanism needs to be proposed prior to entering . the City of Spokane Valley. 10. Drainage Facilities: • Some swales have the top of berm below the top of curb; if the capacity of the swales is exceeded runoff may go towards private structuxes. The design should propose a design that directs runoff away frorrs structures for rain events in excess of the design storm; • Basin 3 has the drywells and biggest facilities at the most upstream point of the basin. This -design approach does appear appropriate, please veri.fy. 11. USGS topographic data indicates the presence of a large channel within the p1at. Please verify and protect, if appropriate. 12. Specify a grassy cover for the xoad-side ditch. 13. Water Quality Treatment: • Demonstrate that the swales provide the appropriate treatrnent for the road runoff that reaches them. • Clarify in the report narrative and calculations how treatment is achieved using the biofiltration and bioinfiltration swales. • Include tbe assumptions and calculations used to determine the treatment flow rate and how the minimum requirements are met (detention time, mi.nimum channel width, mi.nimum channel length, velocity). • The report indicates that check dams are provided to slow down runoff. However, the plans do not appear to have a detail or construction note. • Need to break down basins and demonstrate that the most downsiream swales provide the treatment for the portion of the roads and driveways located downstream of most upstream swales. .Also, the disposal mechanism needs to be located at the most downstream point . and not upstream. ~ ' ! - - . • Clarify how runoff gets to the roadside ditches as inlets only appear to be provide near the proximity of the swales. 14. Provide the followi.ng documents: • O&M manual; • CC&Rs; • A fire department approval letter; • Lot plans (if applicable to Spokane Valley City limits If you have any further questions, please contact me at 688-0174 or Gloria at 688-0226. Sincerely, 1 . Sandra Raskell, P.E. Development Engineer Gloria Mantz, P.E. Stormwater Engineer cc: Bryan Walker, Property Owner Matt Zarecor, Spokane County Division of Engineering Public Works Development File , , Page 1 of 1 Merrijean Gadd From: Iris, Wendy [Wlris@spokanecounty.org] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 12:03 PM To: Sandra Raskell Subject: RE: Mica View C of E review comments ~ Attached are the comments I made on the flllica View C of E. -----Original Message----- From: Sandra Raskell [mailto:SRaskell@spokanevalley.org] , Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 1:01 PM To: Iris, Wendy Cc: Gloria Mantr Subject: Mica View C of E review comments Wendy, Could you email me the comments you sent Whipple for the C of E's. We are trying to get our comments together to send out, but I would like to review yours first. Thanks, Sandra Raskell, P.E. Assistant Development Engineer City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue . Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 688-0174 Fax: (509) 921-1008 5/13/2005 May 4, 2005 Mr. Todd Whipple, P.E. . Whipple Consulting Engineering Company 13218 East Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Subject; CE 91-05 Mica View - Certificate of Exemption Road and Drainage Plan Submittal #1 Mr. Whipple, We have reviewed your April 15, 2005 submittal of the road and drainage design documents for the above noted land action. Before the Certificate of Exemption can be accepted, the private road proposed to serve the lots must meet the current design standards. The following items need to be addressed or resolved prior to acceptance of the plans: PLANS 1. Provide bearings for the roadway centerline. 2. Sidewalks are required on the public road section. 3. The maximum grade on public roads is 8%. 4. Verify that the nose of the private roadway median island is no closer than 20' to the public roadway curb line. 5. Provide BCR, MCR, and ECR stations/elevations on all curb returns. 6. The following items are required for cul-de-sacs: a. The station of the center of cul-de-sac; and, b. The profile of the cul-de-sac curb. Verify that the grades are 1% minimum. 7. Provide profiles for storm pipes and verify that the minimum cover requirements are met (Stormwater Guidelines page 4-3). 8. Verify call-outs on Drainage Details sheet; it appears there are several inconsistencies including but not limited to the following items: a. Elevation busts; b. Wrong curb inlet call-outs; and, c. Inconsistent stationing. 9. Specify dryland grasses for bioswales and ditches. 10. Organic carbon testing is only required for water quality depths that exceed 6° (measured from top of sod to drywell). It does not appear that all of the swales/detention ponds will require organic carbon testing. 11. Verify that the total storage depth is 1' for swales with drywells and 6" for swales without drywells. . . 12. Verify that the swale floor is >6° below the gutter flowline at curb inlets without drywell and/or >12n with drywell. 13. It appears that the drywells to be installed in Swales B and C may encounter a limiting layer within 4' from the bottom of drywell. Test pits excavated in the vicinity of these Swales refused at 5'/z'. Please verify and provide justification that 4 feet of minimum clearance to any limiting layer is provided. 14. For pond berm heights that exceed 4 feet in height the design is to include a keyway, clay or geotextile liner and is built in accordance with Figure 47 of the Stormwater Guidelines. Please provide these details on the plan sheets. 15. The drainage facilities that lie outside of the existing 70' private road and utility easement (Auditor's Document Number 5194998) are required to be placed within easements. The easements shall meet the requirements of the Stormwater Guidelines. Please provide the following documentation so we can prepare the easements: a. Plat certificate: Deed, Deed of Trust, or Conveying Instrument (recorded copy); b. List of signatory names; c. Legal description exhibit of the easement area: Include a title "Exhibit An, it shall be stamped by a licensed Surveyor, all margins shall be 1" or greater, 8 point minimum font size, and the text shall be reproducible; and, d. Easement area exhibit: Include a title "Exhibit B° and meet the requirements of the legal description exhibit. DRAINAGE REPORT 16. There appears to be several discrepancies between the drainage report and the construction plans. Either correct the drainage report to correlate with the construction plans or visa versa. Following is a list of items that were inconsistent: a. The elevations, areas, volumes etc. in the Pond Summary Table of the drainage report are not consistent with what is detailed in the plans; b. The bowstring calculations indicate drywells in swales that don't have drywells or are utilizing outflow rates for double-depth drywells where single-depth are called out in the plans; c. There are curb inlet and check dam calculations in the drainage report for several curb inlets that are not shown in the plans; and, d. The drainage report narrative states "Each narrow swale overflows through a grassy weir into a ditch that channels the flow to the drywells... none of which are shown in the construction plans. The above items are not all-inclusive. Please verify that the construction plans agree with the drainage report. 17. Provide a pre-developed basin map. 18. Sub-basins need to be more clearly labeled and correlate with the calculations. Label the time of concentration routes and show any existing drainage courses. 19. It doesn't appear that the detention facilities store the 50-year storm because the calculations are utilizing outflow rates that are not consistent with the structures that are shown in the plans. Also, the geotechnical report indicates that marginal soils are present at the location of the drywells. The active barrel section of the drywell appears to be in soils that have more than 12% fines; therefore, the outflow rates for the drywells should be adjusted. 20. Verify the calculations for the '208' area required. It appears that not enough area is provided in the ponds. a ' 21. Provide further explanation of the calculation tables in the drainage report, i.e. equations, factors, road widths, units, etc. • 22. Verify that ditches have adequate freeboard and non-eroding velocities. MISCELLANEOUS 23. Provide a fire district approval letter. 24. Provide a maintenance manual and sinking fund calculations. 25. Provide a draft copy of the CC&Rs along with the Homeowner's Association UBI#. If you have any questions about this review, please contact us at 477-3600. Sincerely, Matt Zarecor, P.E. Development Services EngineeNManager Wendy B. Iris, P.E. . Plan Review Engineer cc: Bryan Walker, Owner File • A PR ~ ~ ~005 WCE Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99037 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 TRANSM ITTAL COMPANY: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DATE: - April 27, 2005 DELIVERY TYPE: HAND ATTENTION: SANDRA RASKELL, P.E. FROM: ROYAL MYHRE PROJECT No.: 2004-19 REGARDING: MICA VIEW C OF E TRANSMITTAL OF: PLAN I FORGOT TO SEND ON DRAINAGE REPORT ~ J-: - AS REQUESTED X FOR REVIEW X RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: NO.OF EA SET DESCRIPTION ITEMS 1 1 BASIN MAP FOR ABOVE NAMED PROJECT NOTES/ COMMENTS: I FORGOT TO SEND THIS BASIN MAP WITH THE DRAWINGS AND DRAINAGE REPORT ROYAL . CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIPIENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU RECEIVE THIS TRANSMITTAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE MAY RESULT IN CIVIL PENALTIES AS ALLOWED BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SENDER NOTED ABOVE. THANK YOU. Print Map Page 1 of 1 .ti 1s; ~,3{ y:,`<{~;;`•'~s . o:""' , ~ 1 S ~ N I ti, t ~{,:1{ ..r•i J, }M1 ~ • o~• , ,,,"Q ~ r``}~ i. ~3!'~ t.t •r• ~ 2/-' • v t~T~ 4~/ ~ : :S ~ r..... .<3 <a (~i_ i . ~ . . ~ - r . :z , z.,,..._. • 3~f - • ~ `;l ; ~ M: ; ' y FV!~+f~".fN~ ~;,,Y : i ' < „ r ~ v~.:.., •ti,.•,7S'_, ~ : i'~` 2 j%< .,t~:~ n . ,,r'~v ~•.y l1i } •i.: y1~..'' ..J.~' J~ . ".Y,~ , r, x ,i~' a ~ • : } c•', i ' + ~'yd~~ f;. .?•S•-~ . ~ . , f~ti.::.n S:.w.,X~n% ~,~C;. N' Y^' f 'Y~`~n~~ ' ~ . ~ , ~ • • . . < vA ~ r•~.7~~0~^ r i '~'~:.a` ~ ~:ifti~~ I sr# .:~j? ~r2: ...~s..:••.tijt~ ~}f~'t~ `f~.• _ ~ ,,,,~...t~^.'r jKrT, ~ ~~:r, ~o , ~ . } ~ y~,•>3'' .Q:<• • •f, , 't': •n.iti Yµ' : r r < . t . ~ ti~ . , ~ ~ .J~ ; , ' 1;,: y.;iF::,~j:••~ y:~ ' l 1. ~ . 1, ~s.,:'i" ~ Y~'~" r'.; ..y ` TM•iv~ h.a r%.'+~.:!~':;~ ~ ..o• ~ r{ "drox ♦ t . ~ o~.......,.y V ' ~ ' .,q ~ ~,y. ,~:<•'':N<~,.....:.~,;.~ X>;~ r- . ♦ ~t~s ..l~':~~ s ; i ~ 2'^ : • C'~6.•:ti~~ i'.w ~ t'• t~~•:'.-~ w~{` ~ ~ I,, v . . >6;i . . 7 - y • -ib . y~ ~ a7 f?-` ~ ~g 4 . ~ . • • . • • ^Y✓' r 4;..,;;; , i:+p`'; . . ~f, ' ~ ~ . 4 ~ ~ , ~ ^•_-:t•Yt ~~v , ~;ij.:is~C.%'r•..1te `12W;•'••`^}`1„ ,a~ F,~. ♦ ! ' o.~~~` . • . . ..y.,s.•',d,,µ•:, r ,~'t •vS.:.^.` a^ .,;a~~• ......N`' ~;:.~fi' i ~ f. , I t4~P,y ~ v '~Y ~ , ♦ . ! . v f ~ ~,...•p ~ < J'i ''ca"'-=-..~,,,. , v ' o+ , a, , ;v .n .w ~ ' ~ w . i t.. ~\r. , 1 : ~ ~r i. .4 \ t f .f ( < ' v. ♦ ,w ~ . s ~ 1~~• ~ ~ ♦ n I N` S ~i .92~ ~ \ I t r• 7 'Q,7' c..L"s s~ ; d~ £ . • ~ ~ i"' o , t ~ < { ~i'~% C '4e:. ' ~ Z ~w{.yw ~ ~J~F, s} : ~ {tl, ~ i ' )i~',`•"; . , . \_.i~ a ~?`Y ♦ < ~j~~~t ri ~ 'v ~ ~.,1 j 5~. ~i` ~ `~\w'~ ~ ,~v ~w4.\ . ~ •:f>r~v S ~M1.1 ~ < ~1Te ,r ~ " ~S' y ~r..; : ~~<~Q ' ~ ',(''St ' ' ~ • ~ ^..M~ i: : < < ~ .a.. . o„c~ ~ Q ♦ . . „ ~ ~ , v C~ ~C ~ #r , ;ii{ ~ , <6n~ .,,~.`~}a~ ; °~.,t~~ ° ti~; 5,.... '"S-..~ ~ ~l~J'~ p ~ )J~i ' Kt £ ~ i ~ ~ ' ~ ' . ~ .4 . ~ ~ ' ' r ~ •'4 ~ a i ~.i~ ~ . ~ ~ ..~_r.-•~ , ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ti~~ ~ ~f ' ; 1~ • s a ~ • 4 ~r ~4, ~t:t',.S } ~ n•, , • < ' C 'e r .~e' ' f , . ^1. , < t1v.j~w i ' ~,.y.•~r E n •Y ~ dr~-0 ~7, x~y~%v ' 'y~ • t f~v'~'~+Z ~~1 i ~ • `.!>.^i4~ a.w:i.•r.otia•.~o`„~-r,.dy.+w. .t i2•%\ r`^'' ~ ) n.. ~ ~ .t ~ { ~Y~ 1'' r.': > ~ ~ I~/•' ~ rti~ ~ < " ~ iii• ~ 1 v .v.rr.Lr.~„i,s•:i' i v 1;,, $ ♦ f n.h. 'v~ ' i:v. . • • • ~'ti M'v...: ' C ' ~ t ~ ♦ l:w r.... r'~'~~ Ir <~.ti.5.~~.. . ~ .r ~ ~ ~ ~~i.:'. ti'~ t w > t ~w: Y>; S~ .;{f C•~.><•>.- > jr }V`' t', ~..:d:.w„L ~ ; y ` ~'~~'n~ -S: ~a~:,~ R; ' 4 ~ •'i.>,:/~f ~ ,~~r. ~ :v i K~'4~ ~ ~i• < ~f~ "L;:'~'~^~ y.~,.,'~~: ;~I•' ~ ~~•~ti~f ~S i zj<Jr ~l • ` 'v.f ~ ~ ..~r ..w ~ ~.v~ d\. \y~ Zt{ i• . f ' -`I , e. ~ , . ~ { + • ~ „ ~•-~.y:r.~. r'hl~p~ • I~ .i~ • ^"h M,~Y ~ ~ i. t<~. !t•' Z~ .d ~'i Y~ r ~ v 4~~i ~1 ' 42 . a S. 'Sf' •~t`'. r •1• \ +v.. ' ~►'wn'~`..~v,- 7., ~ S.,~,,1.:~ ~ , • 06-May'05 08:53 AM f ; i a3.:ifo`'!'... fi ' . .s;,: "0'~i q~- ••x , , > { ':~~~i` ! a,.,,ir ~ ~ ~ ~ <1~~ ~1..4'~~~i•. ~ ` ' n~j~(~~~t Y~,~b ~~,1 i t . t'w . '^C.~;~'~ib,~'CA ' ♦ • '7.' h ♦ '1..,~ P 6 ~ ~ ~ w - i;'r.,,A \i; . ~t^.ti ~ +t~. dV ~ . ' ~{~.j:/t ~ S vY-}••• ( ~ ; i ~ . ♦ 4 M1 ~ ~ i G t~' r1~ { ' aa,>`• ' . ;,v ~ 'L•i:. ` ~'~;t tb ~ ; `~.,J ' . • : , ,i., ' \ > f ~ , r~~. Legend ~ r ~ ` c.~. . ~ t ~jj~ ,~C ' C< ~f~ i ~ t S•'~ t. 5 Z . ' t'~ ~ 4, ,.;~r O ~ft ~ v ~.Y, l~ ~ ✓ +~x~w• ~ ~Y~.Y.~ ;~c r,'r•y ~ ~ Y~ti f ' ~6 i , t ^ ~ r;. / • { 4 ~ + ~,t?` t ~ ~s. s aG`~j^1.1~ ' ~ .>!i ,.,F c d !'s 3 ~ ~%C , .t~;~~ \ • ~.t• • . ' s, 1^: .~w~~"M ~ . n 'f\ • : 'f' 7 1 F 4. ~.ySp"ti + AF' ~ 3~~'.r. v ~w}• 7 • J T. 4.. '.n~4~~, ~ ~ ~`3-°~;~y-fof~.• , e ~ , ~.'~C>,'tii'~ ~ > ~ ~ A ~'~`r 4:l~• a ',r. ~ ' ~ ' b.0 1„ ° '4,;•;1 ; .,a.-: ; • . . ~~!/~:i: i. o ~'•r ' . a' ~ f ; S :/w?' < t ii ti Y ' t? `i~~ . _ ~ : • : { ~ ' 1• `t' 1. . v, ` L , <.; •tit,i ~ j ~ f ~ . ~1~.. ti ~ t 2 ~ w,~. . ~ S~'!~~.:° < w_r: ; f <'''ey< ] ~t:~• ~ : x 2^• `~s ~C : ; , • l, ^,t ~ 4.9~ :'l 4 i a • : ` t~'`~ f~ ^ S ~4 ~ 4:S ~ `=b\Y_ ~ . ( % ~ • /A •41 i ;fi~ ~~~y V n f . n v+C ~ ~r'S~ . fi~ r+\• ~ i ;4 ♦•i^~. {y MV ~ ' ♦ ~;K; t p f •/{,~r ~ i t r ~ ~ i. . ' ~ t ~ " . ♦ j~ .k J~ ♦ Yi ~ p ~ ~ i h j ' ~ d ~ ..:k r 4 ~ v S. t { i ' E~N S• ~'s ~ ? ° y: •`,s,`•;\'`~• , r~' f i.. ' , r i`t 1 a i• r' F' + ~y~+~ 1. ~ 4- ~ ~ .y. ~ ~J ~ : - - / r +v.n ~ . S ~ . y ~ • ~ ! ~ ''ti~ . M1„~ ~C • ' < ~ . • ~„j ~ ~ 4 ~ • ~ ~T..n ~ L • ♦ ~~<C~ y ~ • /J ~ ~ w • S'J ' \q.M^~....ir~~r ij: ~r1 t ~ .1~ p 1 ~ 1 i . `~~v . ~v '~C- ~i~: ' ~:,r't> i . :a~d'h • ' r~5 o r i < \ . : ~ ' F' . { . : ; , • . f.~, ' . : f , - ~ z~`', ,r.- ,.,r. ~ > . , . . w,~ . , f,` f t; • ~ ~ . ; Y ~!i w F','~• ~~`n~ w~~~:.~`+.. . :.•'~yti ~j ~ r- { t~ .n' ~`4c ~i~.••~~N.l:t ~n•f~+~i:~,~..,'~ ~ ...✓w~ I; •n . ~ i;? ~ • i . ~r... , r • ` • i J i~~ ' t'{;~ ~j.::- . ~ ? . f,~ti~ ~~yy.~• ' . ~N~ ~ ~ r~ ~ . < v.,y ii ~ ~:.n< a" f , : ; < . ti,,,,,, . , y , t: ...:..,,~r `M t ~s a `;Y; ~ ~ ~ > f t.,.iS: > < ; , •v.. < .~.NN:+.w... .3J~: o-~ vp v. ♦ o J~~ , \ t. f ~ ~L.. ~1% ti~ . nri,~? S~ Sti~S~'•2i ~ . <•.J`` ~,,,,/`P w... ~ '1 f7 ~"r:. ♦ ~ i~ ♦ ..:~r~ %~•.~.',~qs.•c ~ ~ + ~ `~e`-L ;ti 4 V A . c a . • r;:2'h^~'° -"r 1~~ : ~ > -ti % <h ~1_~ ~ ~ ~N w. . S r f~,'~• ! 't~r. ti~,'~y• ~ :ti~ ~ 4 , : nt w ~ . ~ v.~ k ` ' ♦ ~i' ' 1 ~ Y ,a'2.~~~~ :~14 ~~v~'~/.~.'f<Si';i'•' ~'t~y,~...'~ 4f'~ ~ /^r ~ ~w • ~ ` ~Z,'~ 4y{t ~ „i~.,.y„w~. ~o..?:. ; ;v ~~c.}' • C ~o)\,,. ~ , , . , } 4'~ 1s y ~ • . ; 4 ~ . f `'C?,.~. ti..`•,. ~ o~l). ~f, y ~ < ~ t~ y •I 4', 1 ~ }y ` o.,: • Y' ° t '~~w ~:o~...,, . . ~ • ` J a .v. t • : ~?~,~;+•ot\>.❑ l:s~. . ^r,t , - n • :•~4 . s{ ~ ~i` ~ .i,"~ ~ /•.y, ~ti A'~•1 i •}iZ:7'- : S' y ~ y ~ ! ~ t ~L~ ~ . y~ ~ '•S% ~ .w f+ ~ y f ~ ~ ! 1~ Yv ~ . y,j r • t , ♦ ' " r. ~ /O tii+~ 't+~ Y'< * t ~ , ~ . J J , ~ i ~ . . +ij ~ i J 4 • jo . t i f y:•, 4 ~ ) % ,~w„ • V , q ~ : 1}'i. f}Z• v~~~\,. ~.`i f~' 4~,,' ~~'+a~.. r?~CiZ°~ 1.~~'`t e4;~ y' ` ,i f~ y £ i i ` ' : `S ' S.' ~s o 'ti..,. ~i; ~ ..j~ • cs < . < ~ SI: ! 4 \ + . t • .}-•vJ! ~ 3,':.+ ' i} t <"1 %~r 1v,'•• , i : / r C ••Sy• ; }l,i•• . ~A 4 V'1 1 f ~ Y~ ~'fl.. ~ F .F,.Y Cp:' . .~S.tQ,* t ti~` ~`..~t;a ~ r.. ~+v1 ~,SCti oG;~r s ' ~ ~ ,~j.'~:,,',.:'w_,~„~~ ~:n,• . ..l~~.< 1`:..t.~ .'.~:s;,`t' '°s A'~..,,, ~ ,s ~ j'•>.,~~ : ,~<< -h ti ~ {f~.;. tiy ) ~S ~ 4•. . ; .it ~ ~ '!~'i~^4}v ~ f yki y:~Z • ~ ^f' a'` ry; ct.' ; ~ r^~>.: ~ ~ r+F•s ~ . ~''i -•:HY;•..',,,~ es r `S•°` ~ i.. , i:c f:;p. <4 < , ?c~: •ry_" , ~f~.... ~j.:,S'.~ ~'~'e1.,~. d ~,:'~,,.;h,,~c~r.^r~"`'~,` ' ; ~ ~ Z' tt,,;.• •~~f ~p ~t • J ~ 3• o ; , : t i. - •Z: : , ~ ~ . : ' ti : , t . . s ~ t i. o . ^A'' t . ~S`:.)-;_c.~'-.~'9,\ ~ ~.2:'. y o ° . \0:~~3~i ~ .~~5.. . k•..e'-~~~f:~~eF2~9.0;~~I,;"' t Infonnation shown in the PRISM application is compiled from various sources, subject Scale 1:6,000 to ongoing changes and is not warranted for accuracy. PR.ISM should serve as a starting 1 in = 500 ft point for your investigation or inquiry. Legal documents should be obtained from the ' appropriate agency before taking any action. Please contact the appropriate county division or department for additional information. http://dorado/mox42/index.cfm?action=mox42 view_prism_printablemap 05/06/2005 oropo S i n~ n -r-lon --p(e a.,pp„C)v-e A SC`r lS ~ ropD Jed C~f ojtl%det f S- YYi OS J- D F lo-ccJ`G Q r` 0'~_,O v ~t ~ .-r ~J /p 1~1,~• V~ C'~ ~ S 'Pi ec co-- - ~~1--~ -~~-=~f ~ ~f-~~---- - --R---~ - _ ~ ~ ~ . oD e~-~•~ _~'Y`-~- Vc~.~ ~ . ~ =a_~ . . 1?~.~.~~ r ~ 3 e f ce- saC. - - _ ov-0-4e ; ~ ~ s • _ ~ - APR 2 6 21~7 WCE.TIV.. - Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc 13218 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99037 Ph 509-893-2617 Fax 509-926-0227 TRANSMITTAL COMPANY: CITY OF SPOKAIVE VALLEY DATE: April 26, 2005 DELIVERY TYPE: HAND ATTENTION: SANDRA RSAKELL P.E. FROM: ROYAL MYHRE PROJECT No.: 2004-19 REGARDING: MICA VIEW ESTATES TRANSMITTAL OF: STREET DRAINAGE PLANS ~ - - - - - - AS REQUESTED X FOR REVIEW X RESPONSE REQUIRED DOCUMENT CC: NO.OF EA SET DESCRIPTION ITEMS 1 1 1 EACH STREET AND DRAINAGE PLANS AND DRAINAGE REP4RT NOTES/ COMMENTS: SANDRA, THE COUNTY SAYS THAT THE FIRST PORTION OF THE PROJECT IS INSIDE THE SPOKANE VALLEY CITY LIMITS THEREFORE THE CITY ALSO HAS TO APPROVE THE PLANS. tx-o Gsi"046 ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE GIVE ME A CALL 3~-C) .-QS THANK YOU ROYAL . CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE THIS DOCUMENT IS INTENDED FOR THE NOTED RECIPIENT(S). THIS INFORMATION IS C, RECEIVE THIS TRANSMITfAL IN ERROR, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLc BY LAW. IF RECEIVED IN ERROR PLEASE DISCARD AND NOTIFY THE SEN ' AUDr►OR'5 CERTIFICATE 901341' ~ L ~ K15~83 fll,~O,~ pfar neo~.EI1 Nh ~ E of ~Lt~b~f e4 ~_.1-______,_____ 191C., atQi~Y. In rf ,o! Plate at pope Q•7 at IM rpueot af r~ S RICHARD LANE u, I I _ --7--------~------- I ~ De" 2 I r~I 1nv T~IAflT^ ~ I ~ ~ vv,flf~iL inini~.i ihn.,~„ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - I w~ I WI i n ~ a I ~ BASIS O F BEARINGS ' I ~ ~ ~ I I I THE BFiNtNG OF 5.8838'57'E. 110NC THE SOUfH 90UNDpRY UNE 0F fAl1NR1E F/uiRY TRP.CTS 15 RECOADED IN BOOK 20 OF PU115 PACE 86, WAS USED IS THE 8ASi5 OP BEARtHCS 30' .30- I ~ fOR iH15 WIP. , ± ~ I I fNO. REB ~ S.t01B 191Y, 0.79' FND. ~ 1 FEB 5J9'221v., 0,86'I ~ ~ I ~ I l5 12901 LS N.8 12901 ~ I I I A 57~ 210'00- 0 se~3a's7'E ACCURACY STAT M 3000 i 2 1o.oo Q 2o4.7s' g E ENT ? N01'21'O3'F ~ ~ s•., 204,79' a TMi5 5URvEr was rEFtrpRum usiuc e Tovca+ crs 303 ` JO.DO' _ 5622 z 1EN-SECOND THfODOLfIE ANO ELECiRONIC U6iMiCE Sll'e7'E pRE55lARE SE15ER 1'. 5613 ~ YEfEA. F1ELD 1RAVERSE IIETHOpS USED WERE IN UNE GSEUEM SOACCORWnCE WRf1 wAC 332-130-90 SECTiON 'C'. m; f CRAPH[C SCAIE' SO 0 25 50 100 m to' wioE ~ o m Uill. ES~. ; 1 1:~ rv p . O " ~5 r2 ~ ( ix rsar ) a ; T~ ~ _ TRACT B ~ I ince - 60 fL ~ o o TRACT A T3 ~ LOS AL0.E5 ,.oe ncars . 1~ .30 3011 r: c i i ; o LEGEND co zs zs. w Z N E%ISTINC 50' m0E I I "+10' w10E N UTILfiY NID DRIVATE : I I 'J I IT-IL 6MT. p RO►D FaSEUENi AECOROEO n • $ z UND£R AI. No.9701010321 ~ N o I I 0 i zso+~ rc~c u~n+R µsrtivaeo '~c u+c ~E h ML15 RECORDED Z IN BOOK 20 Of PIATS PAGE 86 (UNLE55 I I: OiNERWISE NOTED) 240. 0 0' I I i 24 3.60* 0 S E f 1/ 2- A E B~ R w/ Y P C S T A Y P E O ' I P E 33126 N88'J8*57ti1' ~ /IB091' (UNIES$ O1HERNLSE NOTEO) B.S. -BU4DiNC SEi&CN UNPIATTED 15024 -sra[Et ADDRess O RADIAL BE4RINGQ NuMeErs i aLkxiNC ~ SURVEYOR'S NOTES 1 588'JB"S7 E E' (A) P CURVE INFORMATION ' 021' A5 REfAROFA IB 0001t 20 OF P1~1 S, ~SiT►LE 86 , S ~{6560Q1Y ~ CURYE i pMIUS 1 IENGTH ~ 1NtCEN7 ~ CF70A0 I DELTA 4 S4V I 4 (B) - THE IRFA Of THE $U80NPSION IS 2,11 ACRES ~ ! N4658'051 • u6tt Cl Y0.00: 15.50 816 IS.12; N'2155' I 6 5BE36'S7"C (C) - S£F FROVERfY FitSEUENf 1'0.E0 UNDER AUqTOR'S C2 2000 1530 &16 15.17 14'21 55" 7 N88'3857W ~ bY,~i LWOS F0.F N0. 42N3Q} iDp SEM~ACE OISD051L GOR . C1 29.00' 15.50' 8 16' 15.12' 44'24'u- I ' ~ iRlCi 'A' U 20.00 I550' 5.18' 15.12' 44'21-75 I aE~Eb 12 oe CS 50.00' 1752 1689 69,89 8819'50- I L6 51000' 77,51 48.99' 89,89' BS49'50" I TANGENT TABLE uNE I olRECnou I asw+cc ri sor2i•diir 9.i• 12 N01'21'03-E s.2,FINAL PLAT T3 SBB'38'57'E 60.00 ~ a OF O a SHORT PLAT SP-1126-87 ~iMAM ' LOCATED IN THE N 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 ? PAcIRc SECTION 4, T.24 N., R.44 E., W.M. ~ EN ~ '0 SPOKANE C4UNTY WASHINGT ON SHEET 2 OF 2 ~ . IS 3 DEDOC,TO„ y~~oTaa " w ALL NEN Br 1H6E PRESEMS, U,ot LSA DreD"y. e ~~~+Oten ~l Bx r5 Pg 8a NNO PartnenAip, Ms tauftE te D1 plottrd Ml0 hocL IM ImE sMm hwren, te M knom iM uN o} qMle weIb ond matn ry+tmn 1s proAfbked. The puDk wola ~ ~ ~ ~v Plan ae SPqlAME COUNIY SMGNT %A1 N0. tt2D-07e.+~c 0 sAdFAsbn d a portbn d the ~ ~y fin Ablriet, Couapprvwod n~l ~ on d ~ ondt Plormth~ AUDITOR'S CERTIFlCATE NorM Hall of ttro SoutArM d Seclion 1. T.24 N, R.u E. wr.. Counq d s~cM, h g tne , sloU ol wmbbqla+ aevc~ed m faAo.r, one rolw punqor, shoN bo mrtaAed .IIM+ MIo sfwrt pa1 md ov~ .noe voo+aeo fa MeMa~m amn.sk .ata .e^~ce cs wen os fh. Filed for record thia J~th doy of J)atober , Beyinninq at tM eoiMwest tomo of lot J. Bbelt 2 Of GUITIRIE FMIILT iR/CT5 w DrutocUo^ tc weh troet prfar to mab of eah hocl and pAor b i„uona neordsd In BooY 20 al Pbb, Pa" 86 M+ Ifu Spokem Cauny kdNas ONke: 11unct d o bt*d Oe^nll la waA trocL 19,9- ol9WM. In Bodc of Plole at poge , S,Bb38'67'E eldp tM saRh Ilm ol saM phl o dhlana cl 204.79 fMl to Me ot the reqve7t ot L5Je erd2C[1-4G5 eoNAeaet comar e1 wld l01 7; thwco S.01'03'04'L almq IM bd IIm ol tM M.• 1 fa utiNlin b hereq Orontad l0 1M serrinq utRilin wer o T~ Ncrthweel OuoAa of fhe SauNwel Ouarhr d dd SecUon 4, a dstmce ol 210.00 lon leat w!fi " adJoLdrp pvirote ond Courky Rood. ab m pblle0 anE laet 17bnro N.BS3E'57'Yf pareMl wiM tM ioLAMrf~ Deuneorr dsa3d CUTMRIE FNn1Y sheon liwson la IM tontWctbn. nconMKlbn, mah+Nnmin aM 1RAC15, a dldana al 463.80 Iwl; tlMna 14.01'210.1T. o dntana ot 209.84 fht to opwati0^ TM servb"q utroty C0"panlee alw Aave the riqht lo Depuly ,owsouthery eouneo7; am be. eWy uM seuUwlr beu+dery ol sald qRIHtIE fAMILY M+vec •ae unimies a,a ro tr+m ana/m . enr,n ord a.o .niah may TRAC?5 the IotlawMp itNren (11) causn: Mlnfwv wAh IM toneltution. maintNwna and opootion ol mme. 1. S.BS36'37'E a e'Mm+n d 210.00 Iwl to IM Dpkmtng of o non-lmqsint eww, WHERE t a i0 ornen how hero9nyiR thefr Iwna SUiivEYOR'S CERTIi1CATE eoncew to IM weN Mytnq a raElus af 20A0 Iwt (hom wnkh a rodld Ilne Man IL. N,8F38'57M'.: ~ p~tl~, lhfa mop corteeth reprcsenta o eurvey mvde by me or under mr directlon in 2. soulMry elonq ~aid anv~ Mrouqh a amlrol enql~ 14'2t'SS' m, orc di~lw,e~ of 15.50 Ixt lo a . . . neve to Uw oett AmFq a radue of 50.00 bsC o wasl+tnqton Cmerd PortmmrsA'ry tonfortnonce wilA tAo requinmmb oi'tM Spokom Courtty Subeiriaion Ordinanee. J ioutreAy obn9 sa+A cvne tlucuph a aaitral anpU ef Et49'30* en ore Aftona of 77.52 Ioal lo a.. upre to tlro walAovnp o rodnn af 10.00 Iwt; 4, wJNerlr abnp fa4 am tlhiaph a amlrol onp1e af 14'24'55' en are Qhtarrce a! 15.50 leet' Wh~~ rtner Polrid J. Noore. PLS • S. 5.01'21b314, a distance ol 9.24 leet o•. ~ion Cerlil'Kate NumDer 18091 6. S 8~ 3 E' S 7' C o detaiue ef 60.00 Iwl 7 N.01'21'0.1'E e dlslonn ot 9.21 fwt to tM Aeqlnrdip of o acw ceneaw te fM ~ RklqM 1. Gerterel Portnv ~A'yIP~p' east horinq a fodiua of 2000 leel: ~M~ t 8, mMay along wk arva hueupA a cmtrel anqN o! 44'21'53' an ard+ dhWnoe . ~RE5 ,10a $POKNIE COUNIY OMSION 0F UllllflES of 15.50 reet lo lhe Deqhnnhp of a wv+ . to IM ,nt hmhiq o ro6us ~r °f fC6t' ~ GutAAe, ral P er Fxamined and opproved Uie~doy ol DtE01no 9. naMrlr olonq wid curw WapA a tentrol orpb of W48'50' on orc dhfance ef - 77.52 feet lo Ne beqinnirq of o rnms ewre lo the easl Ac+inp a rodlm al AC 2~.00 Net 10. rwMery aforq wk curve Ihrouqh a cmUnl oiple of 41'21'55' an acA dLtmm ' c1 15.50 feet le Ihe PoMl a1 Bpiminq: SfATE OF MASlUNCTOH ) korw Coun UUQliea ~ Slda yord nnd raar rard nlbocb dwE Da bhrminod ot Ihe Ume buAWinq perntib aro Counh -(76f160 ~ SPOKINE COUNTY OMSION 0F ENCIMEERIHC npueMed unun IAn. ..t0adu mm sp.arKay erallod on wo fina .nun wal 1M aioocke ineKaua on u,is aeaivision moy a ron.a imm uproar :«ang or roria,a 0. tw ~ aor .1 sr 19 Oetme me. x appm.roh on o6takd, tM undrdpmd, o Pu I f No State ol RmAlnqton. Examined and oppmved lhia"4day o7 , 1MF ,..11 opp~or~d MECto me krwwn to M a pnnd l1r antr(f) m suceevor(s) In h1mH oqm ro autnorin tna Cauny to pbn lhdr pmb+M of ISR. PpOPERIIES, lM wasAinqtm Cwnaal PortirMip, Nal • r~armi on o polUon Iw lM famatbn ol U110 Ar pwUlbn metlwd purnoont lo RCM es~rbd tM wIlhln ond fapdnq Imirvmml, ard a#n~'~dged Ihe rold 36.94, wAkh pNilion hwlu0a 1M . . properfy; ond Iw1Mr nol to obJeet Dy Ihe Imtnurn+nl lo b Cr fin end wtunlary at ond dMd of rolE paAronMp, eigolny d o pratest palilbn eqdnel Ne lomatian of o UllD br raoMbn mstlwd la tM wn uM purposo Iha-in rmntkned, and on aoU rtoted thot Ao Spokarw Covnty E nser pusuanl to HC'N Cnapter 36.04 whieA incluea tM omai propertr. PRONDED, tho b wthoA:M lo ascuU IM wk InstnnrNnL condiUon tnmi not prohlDn Ur mnwn or n.. . fran objecUrp to anr SPOKANE COUNII' OF 9UIl01NG AND PWIMMC anesrmmb on tM propwAr af a r„ull ol krq. ..,'.11 nned fa In eonJunUbn wtM civw rtry M1and d o}fk ual IM Eq and Year Iwt a Ne IormaUan ol a WD b/ s3lha pdtlbn w moNUon unEw RC11 da01a 36.01 Eeamined ond approred thie day a1 , 1 Thepropery o+nm RiMm Ihb pbt sMtl b hak nspamihN la kapfnq opan end q07MtY PUIIUC M aM la N f ' mdnloid^9 tM mrfae paW al roturol a man-modo droiroqv Oow wu ad atron Mhshin9tm. n~l6nq al ~ Udr rnrpaeUv~ propeAin. tl Uu prop~rly o.nn(s) faih tu malntaln Ne wfaa paU M' com ot noturol or man-maee Ordrwr flon, ar tM eranoqe itnle, a nofia ol wcli faNn ~ •Oiredar, Wrieion ol Bu1dfnq and Pknning mvy pe qiwn to IM Dropntr owwr(s). H nd cancled wftMn Ue perbd Indkaled on v , niE notin, Spokaro Coamty ha I1» rfqM lo cortut IM makml failun, a Amw SUiF 0F YAQNNCTDN % cancted, at tne exWa ot tno DroP" aw^mi• ~p Couna a1lfu,vl SPoKANE RECIONII. HEN.iH D~TRICI ) Thero mry ezld propeNa bca1eE upNll and odjxent lo Nu wDdmdon which ¢ periodiedlr ~iiclwrae slorm.olo nmofl mto ndnidual bb ~n1Ain Ws plal. Runofl On IMo ~ mr vl 10~, befon rta, Examined Cnd Cpproved lhil~d0y ol hom oearby upnll pop.rtlu .naAe a ap«aa, ona eoAip . dl poriods a.ot ln. una«rqn.a, o o dor In. s1o1. or ra.ninpton. xaxne tne iov o+or ea o~~lad to lupher emamt of riormml~r nmo}I tAOI RAat b L. ,.lry or,p.or.a eo rm wtom to a o "nerm nortnalry o, , J or antldpotaQ 8ecaua atormwolar runofl Irom odpccrnl popertNs por6iw ol LVI, Pltp{+E E5. Ne Mwhinqfon C,omrd PoMenAip. Ual i Move daharqk mlo thla p6ot prior to OrrloprtMrt. domirola rwsofl wil Ikdj oxneuled Un atAM nnd lonpdnq hMiumml ord akiwr1edqed tM sai0 iw pokona Re ional He Oflieer canlinua W do so otler de~lop~L n N tlw Mpomi6i~y b lM YmdNidu~ bL Mlnwmnt to M tM Im ond vebntary at and dod of sab partnertMp. 9 ~ o+nan to mablein exlsUn9 surfan paths ol nmolf tFrough tMlr nspeclM bG md l0 1a lM aa ad pnpOsn Uerein rtentiorwd. ond on oalh stoled Ilwl M qrode Ihe lots in attmdena wib uppricaDN niM and rpubtam, so es Ie , ! b oulhahod lo aoeuN tM ealE IminnmnS. SPOKANE COUMY ASSESSOR pqrrSy domaqe. p~ C1wn urtgof mr Aand and atflild wol !M doy ond rar lort ~ Examined and oppromd Uia,J6 711 doy of OG'[O&SR , 1BJS lrvy DuAdinq Nat b terotnicled m a bt In tMa Short Ra1 eMl Ee al ath on . abwHon so as to proYiee pouthe ardrwye n«n ony aralooy..olry pomi to tn. , SADIB Gr4A0.L6i1E GoolV6Y ~Yr bildinq (inNudinq but na1 imled W ow+ndow »I, owinEOr unpraUebd Dy o r1Mow NOTN11' In oM Im tM Rate of ' reA, a a doatiay). Sok podllw drdrope Mol torubt ol a minlmum tlop~ ol Jx wori,yton, ~.~q ot p M~~A ~ ~r.. ~~'0-.Q'A(.' owInm Iho bu'Idmq for a d'stmin of ot Vwt~t 10 INt from ihe M6ldinp, iM bb commhdon • m~ Z » S akor~e Coun /use»or De u dwi~ e. Qroaed .o uwt .iurr e) al nu+oft b ran.a n.ry nan nN euUelny, mie ~ xd v b ~Y v b cmveyed aa 1Ae bb lo a nolvrd Emiw" n~ah a npprowd drolno" facihy, a b) drohnge IntereepteA on tM bt h ObpowO of on tM bt M on oppiove0 dminoqo SfA7E Of kAG11MCfON ) loa'Fty. The approwd dminoqe laihy Nal M tomtnxleE In aecordonu wfU my )q SPOK'NE f:0UN1Y Tt1FJ5URER appllcabk acepted Dicno on file ot Uw County Cnplreers OHiu. ,Am ravbbm to lho CauMp d~ol~eno ) aeceptea aroinayo plane mwt G oa~ptoe q tne Counry Enqiner 9 bttia pria to 4 I do hero ceAl tM1Ot aA towee M~ich have Deen leried and becomey1rorgeo6le canelruclfon of wid midmu. On 1H+ Z_ eq of yCA-- 19 r• . Wlae me, ogoinel la ~n ~thin Nis have been lullp qold 1h9s /'S doy of lM undwMpnod, a ory WbNe N ond fa lhe State ol Mashh+qloti ~A jSpokene Counh dees nat oxpl IM nepondMiry ot mdntalnlnp IM bahaqe coune ~..:y appeand FJl,G~ to rm barn In De a qeneral on pfirole IoL a Iloadaldn meaa n"Wn prhtte bb. na tha roapmsIDliry for orvy po,br, oi M, PROPEIMES. tM MhsMngt.m Grera1 ParUrnAip, u,at art dartiogo wMtromr, intlu~inq. dA not GmIUd lo, Invwp tondmuqtbn b my erscybd tM ►~itldn end lanqdnq Mtrurtwil ard oeknorl~~d (M cald ~,~,..t ` - proPertka due tc Mfcbnt conrUvettlon aid/a molnl . of dminoqe tounw In imtrumwnt to M tlr tra and volunlary act and GM ot sad pertnersAip. ~it' ~I/! JC . drmnoge eaumen~ on prhalo praprtr. la !M an and purposes, Ihwwn manliwd, ard m oolh dnted tlat he Y outAartc~! le a~evN U~ ~oid Matnrew~. Spaf~arw County Tnaeursr by Deputy 1M propertr oh+an ~IMbn IhU pk1 NaA mainldn dl wotr quolitr naln ('2DD• ~.ala ond drainope QpeMit eIdxkM m ItuEnspecS" PropeAi„. ond orry pation d CMn wda rtry honE and oNic6d wol Nw dar md rear lost abow aiiton. 0 206 avpale aluated In a pudk rfpAl of rq adjoant lo tAeh rapttliM popvUn, .ith o . grourtd cove. W opedfW in the currenth a~ ~ ~ceptb 4?-.r...tQ~..... do FINAL PLAT plam on Me ot SDakane Caunb's ErqlnwrtYp's ONiu. tb shvcSum. IncAdkq fmns, IqIMY PUBUC'In nn0 1or lM StaU al ehon ee eonetnKtea aincty ovw a,itn►n a•soe' wmb ,ruotA u,. .r. . i.fln.n Waii*wton. ~«~o a+ Sv~ O~'' a wmaM of 1M Spokane tounti Enp4mw. Spotom Camh don nd aaapl Ihr ly '.n erplres nsporolblliry to Impat and/a moinidn IM drah+oqe a"mmft a Erafnop~ nvb, N nor eoes Spotone Counry acapi anr AaeAtly la ary fothrco q tM bt mia(s) to SHORT PLAT SP-1128-97 ° """"`at' mu`" LOCATED IN THE N 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 y Sueja+ ro sp«me oppneatkn oppora one y.Lone. or parmtts Dy tn. Hwann ane.r. ~ IILAID ~ the un of lndhiducd o,-idte ...a..rt.ms outhodred. e«~, n.. u,k .~a pA~ SECTION 4, T.24 N., R.44 E., W.M. ~ a~~e pum~o a.. ._lon to fudm aw-~ co ctio "tmm. A E~ SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON rron-enMhe l M Trai la Sr+ra Pnaure Unp oi plorik ond sfawn nneon h nereby roerroa by +M qranta ra tM adJount vrovab refen•a to a ,m limi•.r im (!an s.wo Porcet CE-18-97-A lease M~ CM) 406-0", SHEET 1 OF 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ Page 1 of 1 Merri'jean Gadd From: inga Note _ r ~ Sent: Tuesday, May 2402005 11:04 AM To: Carolyn George - Cc: Sandra Raskell ~ Subject: RE: Stop Sign Request We are checking with the county to see if a stop sign was required. If it is then we will ask them to put the sign in now. Sandra hasn't heard back from the county yet. If you get any other cails just tell them we are working on it. From: Carolyn George Sent; Tuesday, May 24, 2005 10:56 AM To: Inga Note Subject: Stop Sign Request Inga, I have had 2 calls regarding Bates Raad and Ponderosa Drive. Apparentiy they have opened up Bates where it was a dead end and there is no stop sign at the intersecbon. One man said he thought it was part of the Developers requirements to develop. I believe this development is in the county. John has some information regarding this as well. I was hoping you could research whether there is a need for the stop sign, is there already an approved stop sign that has not been put in, etc. Thanks. Carolvn ~ b/9/2005