Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWG93-0297 and BLD93-1056 - SWG Letters / Memos - 11/30/1993 t � , PAUL S. JENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW TELEPHONE P.O. B6G_ FAX WASH(206) 275-4405 BELFAIR, A � b" 28 (206) 275-4406 �, 6� SZ1 "mow 00 October 14, 1993 Mason County Dept . of Community Development Att : Gary Yando C/O P.O. Box 1666 Shelton, WA 98584 Re: SWG93-0297 and BLD93-1056 Cady and Johnson & Lenhart Applications Dear Mr. Yando: I have had an opportunity to review your response to me dated September 15 , 1993 and other related documents in reference to the above captioned matters . Your department issued a "Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance" on the proposal prior to July 30 , 1993 . It appears to me that you were premature in this determination. Please provide me with a copy. I believe a full Environmental Impact Statement is only appropriate for the proposal to insure the proposed development adequately mitigates all adverse impacts it may cause. The reasons for the EIS are: 1 . DOT is still requiring additional information to make their decisions; 2 . The applicant has asked for a variance to place the drainfield within 100 feet from a year round stream; 3 . The applicant has asked for an alternate location for the reserve area; 4. The storm water issues have not been adequately addressed; 5 . The proximity to a fish bearing creek has not been addressed; 6 . Pollution of the shellfish at the end of Hood Canal has been a problem for years and the due to the extremely high water table at the proposal , further contamination is likely; 7 . There have been a large number of community objections evidenced by over 1500 signatures on the petition to stop it . Page 2 October 14, 1993 Gary Yando letter Please consider this request and respond as soon as possible. Si ere y ou , Paul S. Jen n llc/psj t � t w PAUL S. JENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW TELEPHONE P.O. BOX 296 FAX (206) 275-4405 BELFAIR,WASHINGTON 98528 (206) 275-4406 November 30 , 1993 Mason County Dept . of Health Services RECEIVED Att : Brad Banner C/O P.O. Box 1666 DEC 0 1 3 Shelton, WA 98584 HEALTH SERVICES Re: SWG93-0297 and BLD93-1056 Cady and Johnson & Lenhart Applications Dear Mr. Banner: I have heard that the above named individuals have resubmitted an application. I believe the county should charge for these re- submissions . Please provide me with all future applications and communications concerning this project . I will reimburse you for copy charges if necessary. Sin ere u , aul S. Je sen llc/psj C'6 I to rQ iL cj c CA Phillip G. Jensen & Associates Professional Engineering and Planning Services 5330 Aspinwall Court NW, Olympia, WA 98502 (206) 866-4515 October 25, 1993 Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer- c/o Mason County Dept. of Health Services P.O. Box 1666 Shelton, WA 98584 Ref; Little Deli Mart Septic Permit (AM/PM Mini Mart), Belfair Dear Dr. Trucksess: The purpose of this letter is to enter it into the record and to summarize the reasons for requesting denial of this permit. This appeal is being made in accordance with WAC 248--96--150. This summary is from our testimony given at the administrative hearing on October 21, 1993. Our primary reason for, appealing this proposal is to ensure that groundwater, shellfish, and the public health will be protected. Many of our shorelands are ideal habitat for healthy populations of oysters, clams, and other species of shellfish. Commercial, public, and native tribes harvest millions of dollars worth of shellfish each year. Nonpoint source pollution has damaged or threatens imminent damage to more than half of Puget Sound. More than 40 percent of active or potentially active commercial growing areas in Puget Sound have liar-vest restrictions due to bacterial contamination. In the past ten years 1.8 harvest restrictions have been enforced in rural watersheds. In Mason County where shellfish harvest is a mainstay of the economy, hundreds of acres of shellfish ground have been lost. The Growth Management Act requires that areas suitable for shellfish harvest be designated as critical areas. The perennial ''unnamed'' stream drains to the Union River, the Union River empties into the end of Hood Canal. The end of Hood Canal was recently closed again (1992) to commercial and recreational harvesting of shellfish. The first time was in 1987. Mason county has established a Clean Water District and is in the process of completing a Watershed Plan for the Area. There have been over, 14 documented cases of fail:Lnq on--site septic systems in the Belfair area, including Sand(gravel) filter sysstems that were designed. Two examples cited were the 3hel.1 station across the street and the Cut N Curl parlor (Salon). The appropriate action should be to deny the Septic Tank permit. The approved system is a "Recirculating Sand(Gravel) Filter'' system using a conventional. drainfield. The plans show a mound drainfield, but what was planned is a subsurface (SSAS) drainfield. Recirculating Sand(Gravel) Filters are considered "alternative systems'' by the Washington Department of Health. Accurate, site- specific information about wastewater flows through an alternative system is often the most important piece of information in the assessment of operational problems. Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer c/o Mason County Dept. of Health Services Page 2- The permit shauld_.._b.e...denied for the following reasons. 1. WAC 248-96-090 Minimum land area requirement For any development approved after June 30, 1984, including commercial establishments where an on-site sewage system is proposed. The minimum gross land area shall exist for each unit volume of sewage (450 gpd). Minimum land area requirements are 15,000 sq. ft. for each unit volume of sewage (450 gpd) for public systems in soil type 3 (method 1. Ref. a. ,Pg 14). Assuming 1500 gpd flow/450gpd = 3.33 3.33 X 15,000 sq.ft. =50,000 sq.ft. parcel required Existing parcel size is 39,204 sq. ft. (assuming .9 acre X 43,560 sq.ft./acre) Ordinances should be passed by the Mason County Board of Health declaring a Moratorium on building in Belfair until a Regional Sewage Treatment Plant is built unless it can be demonstrated that the soils for the facility and the reserve area are optimum. 2. WAC 248-96-090 Determination of site characteristics The textural classification of a soil shall be determined by using normal laboratory and,/or field procedures such as particle size analyses and percolation tests (Ref. a. , Pg. 16). If sufficient information is not available concerning water table conditions, the health officer or department may require that the soils analysis be performed during the months of suspected high-water table conditions (Ref. a. , Pg. 17) . All site evaluations shall be performed by or under the direct supervision of the health officer, a registered sanitarian, professional engineer, registered soil scientist (American registry of certified professionals in agronomy, crops and soils (ARCPACS)) , or certified designer having knowledge and experience in these areas (Ref. a. , Pg. 17) . Since a high water table exists The permit should be denied. 3. Vertical Separation For conventional drainfields, vertical separation is 24 inches following a Recirculating Sand(Gravel) Filter system using pressure distribution (Ref.b. , pg. 34) . Personal experience and previous test pit samples show a perched water table within 24 inches of the bottom of the fill material (3--6 feet deep). Average slope of the site is between 3% and 5% toward the creek. With a pressure distribution system the drainfield must be installed horizontal. For a 60 foot long field this will require the uphill end to be 3 feet deeper assuming a 5% grade. Comments were made that the primary beds would be skewed to run along the contour. This will undoubtly require a variance of the minimum 100 foot setback requirement. Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer c/o Mason County Dept. of Health Services Page 3- 4. Drainfield System placed in fill Only original, undisturbed, unsaturated soil should be allowed to meet the minimum area requirement for the initial and reserve effluent disposal areas. The site of the initial and replacement SSAS shall be selected and maintained so that it is f ree f rom encroachment by buildings and other structures. The area shall not be covered by any impervious material and not be subject to vehicular traffic or other activity which would adversely affect the soil ( ref. a. , pg. 20). 5. Minimum Setback Requirements The minimum setback requirements for Recirculating Sand(Gravel) Filter system is the same for septic tanks in WAC 248--96-100 (Ref.b. , pg. 27). An application for Variance was requested on September 9, 1993 to reduce the horizontal separation from the primary drainfield and the creek from 100 feet to 75 feet. Photographs were taken of the project location showing the proximity of the test pits to the creek (being 15 feet short) and the shallow depth. The replacement (reserve) area is also within the 75 foot distance. It cannot be demonstrated that the reduction will not have an adverse affect. Apparently it is also being proposed to change the approved design because of the 3-5% slope of the existing site. The proposed change is to skew the primary drainfield bed and place it along the slope contour. 6. Location of Reserve Area Apparently the 'approved" system is being once again modified to put the reserve area across the creek on another parcel within an easement. This will require the applicant to pump untreated effluent under or over the "unnamed" creek draining to the Union River and into Hood Canal. If denial is not made then postponement until all concerns are adequately addressed including winter test hole evaluation and other tests or information should be provided. The Septic design and approval did not adequately take into account the high groundwater table and the 3--6 feet of fill material placed on the site. Postponement should be made for the following reasons: 1. Wastewater strength measurement estimates were not made on this non-- residential new development from best available comparative information from similar, facilities (Ref.b. , pg. 27) . 2. Daily wastewater flow design estimates were...no„t made on this non--residential new development equal to 150% of the estimated daily flow. Estimated daily flow should be based on water use records of 3--7 similar facilities with use records of at least two years (Ref.b. , pg. 27). Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer c/o Mason County Dept. of Health Services Page 4~- 3. Soil textural classifications provide more detail, and maximum hydraulic loading rates are specified for each class of soil. Soil maps of the area are of limited value to indicate the type of soil in the area and give an estimated percolation factor (infiltration rate) to use in designing the proper sized system. Percolation tests using double ring infiltrometer tests are more accurate in determining infiltration rates during saturated conditions. However, it must be recognized there is approximately 3-6 feet of fill over the original ground surface. This was also noted in the septic drainfield report. 4. The present system did not take into account the french drain discharging onto the property from the Liquor store. Drainage from footing or roof drains or any other type of drain shall neither enter the sewage system nor be directed over the area where the on-site sewage system is located (Ref. a. , Pg 21). S. To ensure maximum protection of the environment and the public health officer should consider this site to be near a marine shoreline. The public health officer should require the proposed Recirculating Sand(Gravel) Filter system provide for treatment to meet Treatment Standard 1 with approved disinfection (ref. c. ). If the system, as it is currently designed, fails, the proposed alternative system would be required to have disinfection as shown in table 2, ref. c. 6. The health officer shall require monitoring of the performance of any alternative system installed for which guidelines have been developed. The frequency and duration shall be in accordance with the guidelines. Copies of records of performance evaluation shall be submitted to the Department of Health (Ref a. , pg 8) . 7. On-site systems which have the potential to serve food must be inspected by the health officer annually. Possible Future ..Findings :1.. The Planning Department should have required a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) because the perennial ''unnamed" stream drains to the Union River, the Union River empties into the end of Hood Canal. The end of Hood Canal is closed to shellfish harvesting. The Growth Management Act requires that areas suitable for shellfish harvest be designated as critical areas. The ''Mitigation Measures" required by the MDNS are not complete. They do not take into account: stormwater concerns, traffic concerns, or the 1500 signatures signed by local residents protesting this development. 2. The stormwater drainage design did not adequately take into account on-site water draining to the property, ie, the french drain discharging onto the property from the Liquor store. The stormwater drainage design should be comprehensive and sized to take into account on--site water draining to the property, ie, the Liquor Store Building and Parking lot.french drain discharging onto the property from the Liquor store. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Hydrographs, Basin Information and Storm Event Data for the developed site were Dr. Mark E. Trucksess, Health Officer c/o Mason County Dept. of Health Services Page 5- riot provided. Also, substantiation of the runoff curve numbers used. The plan is incomplete in that it does not specifically address the location of the detention facility in relation to the stream channel of the perennial "unnamed" stream draining to the Union River. Ordinances passed by the. Mason County Board of County Commissioners ''adopting the DOE stormwater manual'' could ensure maintenance of the system. Conclusion Because the perennial ''unnamed" stream drains to the Union River, the Union River empties into the end of Hood Canal, and, the end of Hood Canal was recently closed again (1992) to commercial and recreational harvesting of shellfish, and, Mason County has established a Clean Water District and is in the process of completing a Watershed Plan for the Area; And, the Health officer should take appropriate action in "areas of special concern'' to protect public health. These areas include but are not limited to: shellfish growing areas; And, there have been over 14 documented cases of failing on-site septic systems in the Belfair area, including Sand(gravel) filter systems that were designed. Two examples cited were the Shell station across the street and the Cut N Curl parlor (Salon). The proposed on-site septic system application made by Bayview Excavation, Inc. for Mr. Bob Lenhart in regard to the Little Deli Mart (AM/PM Mini Mart) Assessor's parcel number 123294100170 s,hou .d___be__de.ned until a Regional Sewage Treatment Plant is built. Sincerely, Phillip G. Jensen, PE About..._th .....Authp.r Phillip G. Jensen graduated from Humboldt State University in 1983 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Resources Engineering. He was employed by the California Department of Transportation since graduation until 1990. Mr. Jensen became a registered civil engineer in Oregon in 1989 and moved back to Washington in 1990 accepting a position with Thurston County Department of Water and Waste Management as a Design Engineer. REFERENCES a. On-site Sewage System Regulations, State Board of Health, revised November 1989. b. Guidelines for Sand Filters, Technical Review Committee, State Department of Health, August 2, 1989. c. Revised interim guidelines for treatment standards 1 & 2, State Department of Health, December 22, 1992. MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 1666 SHELTON, WA 98584 (206) 427-9670 FAX 427-7798 M DATE: October 28, 1993 E A4 O ■ TO: Dr. Trucksess R A N ■ FROM: Brad Ban r D U M ■ RE: AM/PM Appeal Hearing After consideration of the evidence submitted at the hearing, environmental health staff recommend the the septic system design be revised in one of the following ways: 1. Substitute an intermittent sand filter for the re-circulating sand filter and redesign the disposal beds to maximize vertical separa- tion, -OR- 2. Design a pressure distribution system on the other side of the stream. The second alternative is the preferred option environmentally because the soil on the other side of the stream is a better medium for sewage treatment and disposal and sand filter pre-treatment would not be necessary. Either alternative, however, would meet current state and local regulations. MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 1666 SHELTON, WA 98584 (206) 427-9670 FAX 427-8425 .................. .................. ................. .................. .................. ...... ........ D ...... .......... ................ t S I ` DATE t�/aa/43 ....... ........ ................... .................. .................. ................. .......... ...... N ` TO m K� SrcOi9�`c . ► FROMs v RE Ay, Pm P#/a3Aq'y/ 00 )'>0 Your design for the above referenced parcel has been reviewed and cannot be approved. The reasons for not approving the design are: ® -T-�mr &.qr� g Ant-/u sHou-) - J4 R ,IIn3`t'((,G 1.t)_c "to A �T I'S MOT- Rean'm m n Alo -iln e�xa'cr J /e ' I*N ��-- -___ Ct9 Next t3- is RIESim y 97- 1IRA I IDS § - cRMK C-8Q.0 I►a-60 1s c-r. AMQ �� I~t- HOW OJ4/I O VcT11121 PAUL S. JENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW 4 /n TELEPHONE AU 1 6 1993 P.O. BOX 296 /�� 1 , 6 1�a� FAX (206) 275-4405 ELFAIR.WASHINGTON 98528 14 T1 (206) 275-4406 10 NSON CO. FLArl;;:rdG NFF S /C FS August 12, 1993 Mason County Dept. of Community Development Att : Sean Orr C/O P.O. Box 1666 Shelton, WA 98584 Also to: Mason County Environmental Health, Att: Grant Holdcroft Mason County Building, Att : Don Fawver Re: Objection to Proposed Construction in Belfair of a Convenience Store by Little Deli Marts, Inc. , Elmer Johnson & Robert Lenhart adjacent to Union River Tributary Dear Mr. Orr, Mr. Holdcroft and Mr. Fawver: This is a follow-up letter from my letter to you dated April 19, 1993 in reference to the above mentioned matter. As I advised you before, I represent a number of concerned citizens in Belfair. They have retained me to voice their unanimous objection to the proposed construction of a convenience store in the heart of Belfair, submitted by Little Deli Marts, Inc. , owned by Elmer Johnson & Robert Lenhart. It is my understanding that it has been turned down twice and we are very grateful for this action. It is also my understanding that the developers are attempting to try it again. Please do not forget that my clients are adamantly opposed to the development because: 1. the site is adjacent to a creek which I believe to be environmentally sensitive. 2 . the water table is also very high at that location. 3. spillage will quickly seep into the ground water which would further jeopardize the already endangered fisheries in Hood Canal . 4. traffic flow will be unreasonably impeded. If you need any further information, please let me know. Likewise, please inform me as to what action you will take to protect the interests of the community in this matter. Mason county letter August 12, 1993 Page 2 - Sincer ly yo s, Paul S. nsen f FOLD �i 1. 3 �✓ FOLD ( ' m (} J • P Z r \s1� � •,,,,• t �. :. ; N CLI —4 . Q A rn �� 1 rn t � m m Z _ -�-1 ❑ _ ED CL D m o A m ❑ A-«� O A Z t0 ti pA FOLD FOLD z y low r v. v ,y. r Z Rti' cn � 4 41 T �' Z N �.. m, D 4 e 'ALNZ ti �'l � '��.� �'� �,� ❑ SEAL 0�� 03 svM�' O o (� I T T Z T no O m D zin c°- p N o � ❑ ooQ M o � r October 13, 1993 TO: Brad FROM: Carolyn PHONE MESSAGE: Taken by Phyllis RE: AM/PM Mini Mart Test holes #1, #2, #3 look good. Fill in test holes #4, #5, #6 is gravelly, loamy sand. There are roots present in places and the soil is compact in places. Test hole #4: Does have mottle at 45" from ground surface. Test hole #5: Mottle at 49" from ground surface. Standing water in bottom of test hole. Soils wet below 49". Test hole #6: Roots go down to 42" from ground surface. Real mottled at 29". Soil saturated at 42" and wet above 42". Standing water in test hole. 7 TO DATE / z TIME f(1L� PM H � FROM � AREA CODE rOF � � ' - __-- - -------- --- ---- -TEXT. ---- --- j E M r--- - - - EL-- --- M S - 1419& - SIGNED -_ -__ _ 'BACK CALL LL ETIRNED -J SEE YOUO 'AGAIN ALL h, WAS IN L ENT 1-------1PHONED IL --I 1C -L_ -__. MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 16( SHELTON, WA 9 85 E (206) 427-967 FAX 427-842 1 D 1�r Y DATE N � �2 � /, , TO ,K E e)Q Ko L)►'0- /f R FROM v RE E W Your design for the above referenced parcel has been reviewed and is hereby approved. C' �N p j 7-0 NA 1/I F-OA -Fp e- sin �- Cull 4W '09N� A ten-foot easement for septic lines for auxillary drainfield lying 5 feet on either side of the following described line: That part of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 1 West, W.M. , in Mason County, Washington, described as follows: COMMENCING at a point on the Southerly line of Primary State Highway No. 21, 618.6 feet Southwesterly, as measured along said Southerly line, of its intersection with the East line of said Section 29; running thence Southwesterly along said Southerly line 195 feet; thence South 36 degrees 07' East 253.59 feet to a point North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 204 feet from the Southeast corner of tract conveyed to Charles 0. A. Beck and wife by deed dated July 26, 1956 and recorded in Volume 176 of Deeds, page 351; thence North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 164 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 100 feet; thence South 36 degrees 07' East 245 feet; thence North 59 degrees 00' 30 feet East 20 feet and the terminus of said line. An auxillary drainfield located on the following described property: That part of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 1 West, W.M. , in Mason County, Washington, described as follows: COMMENCING at a point on the Southerly line of Primary State Highway No. 21, 618.6 feet Southwesterly, as measured along said Southerly line, of its intersection with the East line of said Section 29; running thence Southwesterly along said Southerly line 195 feet; thence South 36 degrees 07' East 253.59 feet to a point North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 204 feet from the Southeast corner of tract conveyed to Charles 0. A. Beck and wife by deed dated July 26, 1956 and recorded in Volume 176 of Deeds, page 351; thence North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 164 feet; thence continuing North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 100 feet; thence South 36 degrees 07' East 245 feet; thence North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 10 feet and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence North 36 degrees 07' West 25 feet; thence North 59 degrees 00' 30" East 75 feet; thence South 36 degrees 07' East 50 feet; thence South 59 degrees 00' 30" West 75 feet; thence North 36 degrees 07' West 25 feet.