Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MEP2000-00016 Muliti Parcels - MEP Letters / Memos - 3/1/2001
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Mason County Bldg.1 411 N.5th P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 985" (360) 427-9670 Belfair(360) 275-4467 Elma (360) 482-5269 Seattle (206) 464-6968 March 1, 2001 MEMORAAD UM To: Mike Clift, DPA, Prosecutor's Office �(/l�ZL 6�1�� From: Allan Borden, Long Range Planner, Dept. of Community Development RE: Vacating county roads to property located in Detroit Township #2. Affected parcels are as follows: #12105-51-13004, 12105-51-14004, 12105-51-15004, 12105-51-22001, 12105-51-22016, 12105-51-23001, 12105-51-23006, 12105-51-23016, 12105-51-24001, 12105-51-25001, 12105-51-26001, 12105-51-27001, 12105-51-28001, 12105-51-44001, 12105-5145001, 12105-51-46001, 12105-51-54001, 12105-51-54004, 12105-51-54008, 12105-51-55001, 12105-51-55004, 12105-51-55008, 12105-51-56001, 12105-51-56011, 12105-51-57001, 12105-51-58001, 12105-51-59001. Mason County Department of Community Development has been evaluating proposals to develop the above properties. The owner is Mr. Glen Jurges, Jurges Enterprises, 2020 Enatai Beach, Bremerton WA 98310, and he has discussed with this department the topic of developing a recreational vehicle park just north of Grapeview and compliance with some of the standards of this type of development. A critical standard of development for Mr. Jurges is Ord. No. 118-91 Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks Sec. 5,01,120 Road Standards A. All interior RV park roads shall be private roads, owned and maintained by the owner or operator of the RV park. There are county roads that access the above noted properties and Mr. Jurges does seek to stay in compliance with development standards for roads and setbacks. He has sent an e-mail inquiry and statement concerning the process of vacating road easements while providing access to adjacent landowners. He wants to know if there are problems that he may encountered if he makes application to have Mason County vacate the county roads adjacent to his property as stated in his e-mail inquiry. Based upon a Prosecutor's Office response, he can then decide on how to proceed. I have enclosed the e-mail inquiry, a map of the properties and roads involved, and two pages from Ord. No. 118-91 Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks (which appears in the Mason County Code Chap. 16.22). If you have questions on this matter, contact me in the Department of Community Development at ext. 365. Allan Borden Part.001 Page 1 Allan, I made an attempt to prepare a point paper that you can forward to your district attorney. When dealing with attorneys I like to ask questions that can be answered yes or no,otherwise,we may get an answer we don't like. I can send you an official letter when needed. If your attorney wants an official response from adjoining property owners that they are not interested in participating before vacating 60 feet to me I believe this request should come from the county. I will be glad to prepare a rough draft letter if it will help. SUBJECT: VACATING COUNTY ROADS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF MASON COUNTY ORDINANCE 118-91 "MOBILE HOME AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARKS". BACKGROUND Mr. Glen Jurges owns Mason County property consisting of nine blocks (Blocks 44, 45, 46, 54 through 59) or 180 lots located between Atwater and Griswold Avenues on the north and south sides respectively and Sixth and Tenth Streets on the east and west sides respectively. This property is located 200 feet west of the Grapeview Loop Road and part of the Plat of Detroit#2 recorded 30 April 1890. All adjoining and internal roads, with one exception, are unmaintained county roads providing ingress and egress to adjacent property owners. The one exception is Seventh Street between Blocks 45 and 46 which was vacated prior to Mr. Jurges purchasing his property. Each block has a separate tax account number and each lot is a legally platted parcel. Each lot or combination of lots outside the wetlands and buffers will be RV Park sites in accordance with Mason County regulations._ ISSUE Mason County Ordinance 118-91 "Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks" Section 5.01.120, Road Standards, states "All interior RV park roads shall be private, owned and maintained by the owner or operator of the RV park". Mr. Jurges is agreeable to make application to Mason County to have all the remaining internal roads vacated. He is also willing to make application to vacate the 60 foot wide county roads around the perimeter of his property. Mason County has traditionally vacated a 60 foot county road equally to adjoining property owners. When both owners are in agreement, each owner purchases the adjacent 30 feet from the county. However, in this situation, three of the adjoining property owners have no interest or cannot afford participating in the vacating process. If Mason County vacates 30 feet of a 60 foot road to Mr. Jurges the remaining 30 feet is still owned by the county. RECOMMENDATION Vacating all appropiate 60 foot roads to Mr. Jurges is in the best interest of Mason County. Therefore, recommend these roads be vacated and purchased by Mr. Jurges after he makes proper application to Mason County in conjunction with his proposed RV Park. I hope the above provides you with enough information to sent to the county attorney. If you Allan Borden.- Part 001......:........::.............. .. Pale 2 need further information, please call me on (360) 377-0274. ;Allan Borden Vacatin Roads : ....-.. ...::.. .......:9...:::.:.. .... Page 1 From: "Glen Jurges" <gfj urges@ prodigy.net> To: "Allan Borden" <AHB@Co.Mason.WA.US> Date: 1/30/01 8:49PM Subject: Vacating Roads Allan, After I left your office Monday I talked with Bill Bullock about Mason County Ordinance 118-91 "Mobile Home and RV Parks", Section 5.01.120 stating "All interior RV park roads shall be PRIVATE roads, OWNED and maintained by the owner ............. Bill and I can read this section several ways which may or may not meet the intend of the ordinance. It can either be the internal roads only which leaves the perimeter roads with at least 30' of the 60' still being county roads. This assumes the county vacates to me the 30' adjoining my property. The other 30' being county property unless the other adjoining owner request it be vacated to him. Right now, this owner has said he is not interested in pursuing the vacati:�g of any roads. The ordinance could also be interpreted that the perimeter roads should be included under private ownership. This means the adjoining 30'would be vacated to me. I could still use the entire 60' because of existing easements but I would own only 30'. 1 asked Bill if I can ask for the entire 60' be vacated to me. He said normally the roads are vacated to property owners on each side. His immediate reaction was it would require the other owner would to release, in writing, any desire to ask for his 30' of the road to be vacated now or in the future. It is to my advantage to own all the roads so I can control vehicle traffic, speed and those who have no business in or around the RV Park. Of course, my ownership does not negate any existing easements for surrounding property owners who use these roads for access. This issue raises several questions and Bill suggested asking your Prosecuting Attorney for a reading on how the ordinance could be interpreted. The above questions are a good starting point. Please let me know if I can help you prepare a memorandum for the Prosecuting Attorney CC: "Craig Baldwin" <wse@ix.netcom.com>, "Bill Bullock... Howard D. Noyd, J. D., Ret. R E C E I V E D 1756 Bellevue Way AUG 0 6 2001 Bellevue, WA 98004 425-454-5394 MCCD - PLANNING E-5260 Grapeview Loop Road (no P. O. Box) July 29, 2001 Allan Borden, Long Range Planner Mason County Planning Department Court House Building 411 North Fifth, P. O. Box 279 Shelton, WA 98584 RE: Eldridge and Scott. RV 1997-98 Glen Jurges, MHP 2000-2003, filed 6/20/01 Dear Mr. Borden, Thank you for your time discussing the applications on July 11. We make reference to correspondence Nov. 24, 1997, Mr. Yando's reply Dec. 1, 1997, our reply March 2, 1998, and copy of letter to Corp of Engineers. In substance we voiced our concerns arising from the Eldridge-Scott RV project and do again with the continuing construction activity by Glen Jurges. In our view, the conversion of land has resulted in massive blight and damage detrimental to the environment. There has been deforestation, clearing of vegetation, re- grading of uplands and wetlands of a drainage basin in a natural fish and wildlife habitat. Consequently this has disturbed the aesthetics and visual compatibility of our rural residential community in the greater Grapeview and Island area. Lack of communication with adjoining land owners: Since Mr. Yando's letter of Dec. 7, 1997, there has been no follow-up information regarding regulatory outcomes, required notices, hearing procedures or opportunity for comments. Under Commissioner Bolender's leadership the community developed the Grapeview Growth Management Plan. However, its adoption in 2000 was not communicated to the adjoining property owners. Location issue for the RV Park Mr. Yando cited ordinance#82-96 as permitting RV parks because it shows the property to be located within"the rural area" (no map was cited to identify the entire location.). His letter refers to Richard Scott's proposal"off of Grapeview Loop Road". All of the construction, movement of heavy machinery, and trucks used the gravel road off of Grapeview Loop Road just west of the Fair Harbor Marina. Jurges uses the same 1 road for access. It has been known that a cut-off county road between state highway 3 and Grapeview Loop Road has been planned for a long time but has not been done yet. This would reduce traffic north and south through the center section of Grapeview Loop Road from the marina to Cronquist Road. The Grapeview Growth Management Plan of land use outlines three designations: Rural Areas--limited land uses to maintain"rural character"for residential use. Rural Community Centers--these areas are not intended to accommodate urban scale development. Rural Activity Centers--these areas are designated where existing communities with established settlement patterns exist. The Matrix of Permitted Use--allows RV Parks under"rural", and Mobile Home Parks under both RAC and RCC but not under"rural'. The final draft indicated by map 4 shows that rural use was outside the boundaries of the Grapeview store and the marina(now referred to as Grapeview Hamlet). It is significant to note that land use planning excluded Detroit 2 (see map 4). There are no references to Detroit 2 in the planning documents. Therefore, the location of an RV Park designated by Mr. Yando was in error allowing Eldridge and Scott to go on without authority from any of the governing divisions of government, Fish and Wildlife, Forestry and Corps of Engineers before bulldozing and re-grading. In our opinion, this was in violation of the related policies, regulations, and ordinances in effect from 1997 on. Compliance leading to complete restoration by Eldridge and Scott is in the interest of the Grapeview community and the County. We would appreciate your communication on this issue. Geological Consideration of Rural Land Use Consistent with the State Growth Management Act, the provisions assure reduction of sprawl,protection of rural character, of criticaj areas, and against confliets with resource lands designations. Not to be overlooked,geology and topography primarily determine land use and water use. This leads to the eligibility of"rural use"at any location that is, in fact,a critical area to be environmentally protected. United States Geological Survey identified the acreages involved in Detroit 2 section 5, T.21N.,RAW of Vaughn quadrangle map. Thereon the Survey identified Fair Harbor-Type V creek(14.0092)Sub Water Shed. The map clearly depicts contour line elevations of uplands and zero elevation surrounding the creek, flowing into Case Inlet. This would indicate wetlands and flood zones with water drainage into Case Inlet as salt-water tidelands. This is a critical resource. 2 Underneath this area is a productive aquifer protected by the natural forested ecosystem of a water purification and drainage basin. Washington State Department of Ecology, "Wetland Preservation",Publication # 90-5 states: "Never before has preservation of Washington wetlands been more critical to our quality of life and maintenance of the natural environment than now." "In addition, resource use has suddenly intensified. Clear-cut logging practices are significantly affecting the landscape. Wooded wetlands are being logged and/or are losing their protective forested boundaries. Recovery from these impacts is questionable, as these actions can severely alter the hydrology of the wetland and open the door to invasion by exotic species." Functions of Wetlands The State Dept. of Ecology summarizes the critical functions of the wetlands: 1. Flood water retention 2. Water purification 3. Sediment entrapment 4. Ground water recharge 5. Maintenance of stream flows 6. Shoreline stabilization 7. Habitat for fish and wildlife 8. Aesthetic values Environmental Impact on Water Use Long range planning of growth management practice considering future population growth for land use has to weigh the water resources to assure the quantity and quality of water needed (Clean Water Act). The public common good has the right of environmental protection from polluting surface water, ground water, aquifer water and salt water. The wetlands are critical to the functions listed above. While the wetland percentage may be small in relation to the upland area it should not be traded off for land use advantage. The Corps of Engineers mitigated the wetland areas 11/24/97, reference 97-402125, inspector Hamidi. The sketch shows cleared uplands on both sides of the hill which had been deforested. Without the forested uplands the wetlands cannot function naturally. Robert Pastore, who owns the surrounding wetland acreages of the uplands, bought the property years ago to preserve the wetlands from commercial development. (See Detroit #2 plat). Mason County Ordinance 17.01.070 Wetlands 12/30/97 "The purpose of this section is to avoid, or in appropriate circumstances, minimize, rectify, reduce or compensate for impacts arising from land development and other activities affecting wetlands;to maintain and enhance the biological and physical functions and values of wetlands with respect to water quality, maintenance, storm-water 3 and floodwater storage and conveyance; fish and wildlife habitat;primary productivity, recreation, education and historic and cultural preservation. When avoiding impacts is not reasonable, mitigation shall be implemented to achieve a no net loss of wetlands in terms of acreage, function and value." Permit Review "The basic concern in the permitting process is to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. Permits are issued when the applicant can demonstrate that the activity is both unavoidable and necessary. The applicant must state the purpose of the proposed project, and demonstrate the requirement for a wetland location or access across wetlands, and the reason it cannot be located at other sites, or at another location on-site." Under this ordinance it would appear that the applicant would have the burden of showing that the conversion of the uplands of a watershed to rural or urban use for their business is both unavoidable and necessary. Administration of Permit Process Coordination with Fish and Wildlife, Forestry, Wetlands and Shoreline is essential. The central issue for a decision is whether or not an ecosystem of water use such as a drainage basin can be converted to land use for a business venture. Restoration Solutions Consistent with the State Environmental Protective Act and Growth Management, the leadership of Commissioner Herb Base has an opportunity to restore a wildlife habitat and the functions of the watershed into a fish and wildlife refuge. Steps should be taken to communicate with the leaders of Grapeview Hamlet, Detroit Township, the islands and the many government and private programs preserving and enhancing fish and wildlife and wetlands (see Dept. of Ecology publication#90-5) The Mason County Conservation District is an excellent source to coordinate local, state and federal efforts to protect natural resources. The Simpson Timber Co. may be willing to loan expertise to reforest the natural habitat for wildlife adjacent to their timberlands. Volunteers from the community at large would welcome opportunities to participate in expanding the vision of greater Grapeview to enhance the aesthetic and economic value of rural residential living. The community needs a wildlife refuge park. Sincerely, Iva �- Oward D. Noyd CC: Michael Fogde 4 S-�u►l l6, 19 GRAPEVIEW GROWTH MANAGEMENT 1. A designated small part of Grapeview(1/4 mile circle),(elongated rectangle),or(2 small areas)will be designated as Rural Community Center or Rural Activity Center. 2. All the rest of Grapeview will be designated Rural Area. 3. The definition of these 3 designations is as follows: 1.02.042 Rural Areas Std 1 du/5 ac. Max. 1 du/2.5 ac. These areas are intended to allow for a limited range of land uses which will maintain a"rural character." It is expected that the predomina_� rt development patterns will be rsci Pntial and wmIU alkQ,fora ran„ of hn UZ ng typs. Residential subdivisions will be encouraged to develop in a cluster type of development,in order to maxi�uzelhe preservation of o en ce. New industrial uses will be"resource_based." Existing industrial and commercial uses will experience limited expansion opportunities.' 1.02.046 Rural Community Centers St& 1 du/5 ac. Max. 1 du/2.5 ac. These areas provide a geographically small focal point and community identity for surrounding nual areas. Such a focal point may revolve around a church,a post office,a community center,or even an automobile service station. These areas are not intended to accommodate urban-scale development,and they shall not promote residential development except at densities consistent with General Rural Areas: �( I VF44 Rural Activity Centers Std. 2 du/acre Max. 8du/acre These areas are designated where existing communities with established settlement patterns exist. These areas are smaller in both size and scale than urban areas. The areas are characterized by small-scale concentrations of P commercial,service,industrial and civic uses,as well as a mix of residentn small lots. Further development in these areas shall not allow for extens*,9nQf urban services or facilities. 4. Matrix of Permitted Uses Rural RR CC Rural RAC RCC Accessory apartment or use x x ` x Adult Day Care Facility x Agricultural Bldgs. x x x Agricultural Crops,Orchards x x Ambulance Service x Animal Hospital x x Aquaculture x x x Assisted Living Facility x X Auction house/barn(no veh. or livestk. x x Auto Service Station x x Automobile Wash x Automobile Repair x Bakery x x Banks, Savings&Loan Assoc. x Bed&Breakfast x X Bicycle paths,walking trails x x x Boat Yards x X Bowling Alley x k Cabinet Shops x Carport(accessory use) x x x Cemeteries x x x Child Day Care(commercial) x x Child Day Care(family) x x x Church x x Club or Lodge(private) x x Commercial Outdoor Rec. x Confectionery stores x if Contractor Yards x Convenience Store(3000 sq.ft. or less) x x x Cottage Industries .x x x Distributing Facilities x Drug Stores x Dry Cleaners x Dwelling, multi-family(4 family or less) x x Dwelling,single-family x� x N Espresso Stands k x Fire Stations x1 x x Flea Market x x Food Markets&Grocery Stores x x Forestry x Fuel Storage Tanks(underground) x x x Fuel Storage Tanks(above ground(x' x x Furniture Repair x Garage(private) X. x x Gravel Extraction x Greenhouses,private&non-comm.x x x Group Homes x x Hardware Stores,10,000 s.f. or less x x Health Club x Home Occupation x x Horti.Nursery,wholesale&retail x x x Hotel x Industry,light x Inn x x Kennels x x x Libraries x x Liquor Stores x x Livestock x x x Locksmiths x Lumber Yards x x Rural RAC RCC Rural RAC RCC Machine Shops(punch press to 5 ton) x Marina L' x x Medical-Dental Clinic Mining �( Mobile Home Park —_ T Mobile Home Sales x Morturaries Motel x Motor Vehicle Impound Yard in enclosed bldg. x Paint Shop x Parcel Service Delivery x Parking Area,private Q x x Parking Area,public x Pasture x x x Pesticide Application Service x Pet Shop x Plumbing Shop x Plumbing Supply Yards x Post Office x x Professional Offices x it Public Parks x x,% Radio&TV Repair Shops x Radio&TV Transmission Towers x x x Recreational Vehicle Park y . Resource Based Industry x x x Restaurant x x Rifle Range x Sawmills x x x Schools,private,elementary or secondary x x x Secondhand Store x Self-service Storage Facility x x x Shoe Stores or Repair Shop x Special Needs Housing x x Stable,private x x Stationary Store x Studios(recording,artist,dance)x x x Taverns x Theaters,enclosed x Tool Sales&Rental x x Trailer-mix concrete plant z Upholstering x Video Store(rental, not adult)5000sf x x Vocational School x X l(3 7 A--N h cc_ A%-&P o.4�L d x+ S 5. It has been recommended and most items have been voted on in past meetings that if we should decide on staying a RCC, that we add on to the list of permitted uses,the following items: A. Adult Day Care Facility B. Agricultural Buildings C. Bed&Breakfast a D. Boat Yards E. Confectionery Stores F. Professional Offices ✓ G. Vocational School H. Wholesaling,Retailing& Smoking of Seafood Productst/ 'WO viod Ile�ncfC1„-.�' � oo't' �14j\ � S lBf l h ono lit PN .40 It !� . ♦ -` .. ( _.i n 'fir ( rj it _ IV ll.: - ll' 1 �II •I I�' /(CV/ �,1 r^N / i, J/In% ///�/ -7,�(`� z -mot f 09 near dxarj ll Ji •d.r;. op �• / / � �•' .!:1'iyts. ':: :.(y�N � �/ / `ii� .Wfj r we I *:b ej 91) fl rj IX 91 whoa *.. __/ l-1\+ I // /' �l ' ! 0 �'•/ , ///^, rya. r�s:arn• ���� �� rasa �Ares+o � l'Stl � flfY•:. � ra7•.��t ■Ii.• •�t i ` - a� r� r�r tt� !•� i�.ai,,�! � � �� ee •..��at�rr a... � ' i ice'-a ��R� sac'rw m:. Ot-►• YI••r�,� .a�.:: I _r � ��i �®l irrrti•1� �R - � s tea_ a i. •s � ai loop - � • i �� �� ci�� �a oi�wr� r���T er a�r� a�asu �asswIn '• �f w ffJ• w F���:�o�i flIIC1�eR fAi nlet��a )trz^ao� am- saw P _ Nl = w e OL fr• et i �! V _�. •sLzan e-..--s e_► a teas:r•�si�a �.r rr nree■ t� ae r �ne o .u faes felfae tlee� eaw = trr� was rm m tety� t+s �• _ nollf>iNMM se ie� to fps fJe fete ��� se=a� fn �e#Ili r is tea F7.7 mar• �>• • ttg wsrt2Js u � itlta..t i •, M � fs� e/ men et r /I/ ohm r n flltar�y rls.■e fJ♦ �! M MM ear rZ'i rlRr1 t �>•A .M �� ....e letew 4erlr r i.e. A m 0 v r� at.,rt fsF .�tR2' era - il3Ca �LCJi M �t � M� II i i x 1 >r unc1 ARaD roKEST" J t a PPYa`� 1_Lo c4 O '3 a M b \`it X� / r �t t lc,r�C►S CO.►loQCYT NOT ;�.. CLEAR oc 11 ti-i #� Fr + I V7,1 w N Ti 1 n � gY�llYy r 7 Wc�IQna�S 2 AD16' j I i I � 1�7 �rcti \ 44 JI; � . �� argv2 I 2oa yYpvG� CcaO— To 'rar,'n4 \ 2Par: n �la>�S S?YcaM xv v 01 ! 74 JS .I '1 i� P a)gol/^hw i c`�D ad.T� �.-o s�✓iT e n C�, 47 Nk 1 yl�ge dia� 3�/ayja> /Jfnx1+- ' rt ,1 t, t a pop, 74 : • i j i • Iv�)o • Howard D. Noyd, J. D. , Ret. 1756 Bellevue Way N. E. 425-454-5394 R Nov. 5, 2001 L-` C E , Ep NOV 01 2001 MCCp - PLANNING Allan Borden, Long Range Planner Mason County Planning Dept. Court House Building 411 North Fifth, P. O. Box 279 Shelton, WA 98584 RE: Eldridge and Scott RV 1997-98 Glen Jurges, MHP 2000-2001, filed 6/20/01 Dear Mr. Borden, Your office has not acknowledged my letter of July 29, 2001, regarding this case. Our Grapeview, Treasure Island, Stretch Island and Grapeview Loop Road community is vitally interested in knowing the status or position of Mason County concerning the future of the devastated Fairharbor sub watershed and wildlife habitat. This is the fifth year of winter rain runoff polluting, clogging and accumulating soil, sediment and silt of the wetlands, creek and shore lands. The extent of pollution is exacerbated this winter because of runoff from the huge pile of soil dumped in the open and the soil from the graded platform which would be the base for the proposed mobile home park community and infrastructure. From the notice of our letter in 1997 protesting the developer's bulldozing operation, Mason County knew or should have known that deforestation and de- vegetation would severely damage the critical water resource and the balanced ecosystem of the area designated by the U. S. Geological Survey as a Sub-Watershed. The permit procedure itself did not environmentally protect this critical water resource land and wildlife habitat. We may think that our forests and rainfall, creeks and rivers and lakes assure a surplus of fresh, clear ground water, but note this: The attached New York Times report of 8/13/01 states that the country faces a critical shortage of water in 20 years and that Puget Sound's demand for water is outstripping the supply. This means that the population of the east will migrate to Puget Sound where it"rains all the time"and we have nothing but water. 1 This places increasing responsibility on the counties to plan and manage population growth efficiently with regard to water resources availability and protection of the hydrological system inherent in watersheds. Sprawl must be avoided and the regulation of land and water use must be consistent with environmental laws and practice. We understand that the process of clearing the bases of governments for decision of enforcement and restoration takes time but 5 years is long enough. We want to know what is going on so that we can respond and take appropriate action as outlined in our letter of July 29. Sincerely Yours W'0. ' vow Howard D. Noyd CC: Michael Fogde 2 Water: The new liquid gold SHORTAGES: Once plentiful across the nation, water supplies are slowing at an alarming rate Timothy Egan;The New York Times SOUTH ELGIN,Ill. -People who live at the emerald edge of this Chicago suburb have noticed that something seems out of whack this year.The water that has sustained a little pocket of life-beavers,muskrats,frogs and cattails-has disappeared,and the land around it looks puckered,despite a wet spring. A dried-up wetland in a township that gets as much rain as Seattle every year,in a region where floods are a fact of life and the summer humidity can make it seem like being inside the mouth of a dog,was odd enough But it could foretell something bigger,even more out of character,according to a study that has stunned people in the Chicago metropolitan area. Parts of six counties in a region that borders one of the world's largest freshwater sources,Lake Michigan,could be in for serious water shortages within 20 years,the report by a regional planning commission said And while the June report surprised people who live near a lake system that contains one-fifth of the world's surface fresh water,it did not surprise a handful of corporations that have been saying that water will be for this century what oil was for the last. This year,with shortages appearing in places that have never doubted the future of their supply,many parts of the country have discovered water may indeed be a commodity more precious than oil.Cities are cutting deals to siphon water from far away,destinies are being reshaped and species put in peril by new plans to dip straws into underground rivers or withered rivers. A general warning trend,sAW that covers the sponge of land that normally replenishes the nation's vast underground reservoirs,and the growing demands of agriculture and expanding cities are the reasons most often cited for accelerated water shortages. The problem,which used to be limited to the and West,has dominated community concerns in some of the most unlikely places. Around the country In the Pacific Northwest,where water is the master architect of a lush land,too little water has been promised to too many people, leaving farms and wildlife to wither in places like the Methow Valley in north-central Washington or Klamatli Falls. Ore. -precursors of coming water clashes,according to many experts. 'Mursday found that even in the Puget Sound region demand for water is outstt ppin shortages.within 20 years. 040W Florida's reservoirs below and above ground are badly depleted and becoming briny with saltwater seepage.The water shortage is so bad in parts of the state,despite a recent tropical storm,that people have been hauled into court and fined for violating strict water rationing standards. In Kentucky, more than half of the state's 120 counties ran short of water or were near shortages this year before heavy rains brought relief. Some major cities in the Southwest,including El Paso, San Antonio and Albuquerque,could go dry in 10 to 20 years.But a number of towns in New England and the well-watered half of the Midwest are also facing the prospect of running out of water in a generation's time. In the Great Lakes region,a fourth year in a row of declining water levels has caused millions of dollars in losses for shipping companies,marinas and other businesses and prompted further restrictions on future water withdrawals for expanding suburbs. "A lot of people just can't believe that we may be running out of water,living this close to the Great Lakes,"said Sarah Nerenberg,a water engineer with the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission,which conducted the study on shortages. The federal government,which controls water to 31 million people in the West but has far less control elsewhere, has offered little guidance.In the absence of single power broker,a veritable free-for-all has emerged,with private companies and individual states and cities cutting their own deals. Rivers dropping to a trickle In northeast Kansas,for example,the water shortage is so severe that state officials are discussing plans to build a pipeline,costing as much as$200 million,to the Missouri River to keep the area from going dry. But most of the water in the Missouri is already spoken for,other users say, setting the kind of conflict that is endemic to the and West. Some of the other big rivers that have long sustained American communities,from the Ipswich in Massachusetts to the Rio Grande in the Southwest,are running thin. The Rio Grande,drawn down by fanners and fast-growing cities in New Mexico and Texas,is down to a bare trickle where it snakes through Big Bend National Park in Texas. It is so braided with chemicals and salt that fish,birds and animals that use it are dying,park rangers say. The problem in Chicago's suburbs is typical of the predicament facing other traditionally wet areas.Water looks abundant here. Kane County,for example,which lies between the nation's biggest river,the Mississippi,and its biggest lake, Michigan.But appearances are deceptive. Most of the nation's fresh water-about 60 percent-is out of sight.It comes from below ground,in rivers and pools known as aquifers.These aquifers are being depleted at the same time that surface water in lakes and rivers is stressed by growing demands and heat. Many of the nation's biggest aquifers,such as the 175,000-square-mile Ogallala in the southern Plains,have long been depleted by fanning.To the east,the underground river that brings water to the nation's most bountiful rice crop,in Arkansas,will be dry in less than 15 years,hydrologists say. Placing the blame Global warming,which has been blamed for increased evaporation rates of surface water and low mountain snowpack that feeds major rivers like the Colorado and the Columbia,is cited by many scientists as the biggest single culprit in some of the emerging water shortages. Last December,federal researchers said a gradually warning climate could reduce levels in the Great Lakes by five feet at the end of the century,but they also noted that the lake levels fluctuate,regardless of climate changes. And a strict agreement signed by the governors of all the states surrounding the Great Lakes and two Canadian provinces has made it unlikely any new communities can tap into the big basin of fresh water. Sprawl is coming in for its share of blame as well. In the Chicago area,hydrologists say land that would normally soak in water and replenish aquifers has been paved over,effectively blocking water needed to refill the underground basins. In past shortages,people tapped into Lake Michigan.When Chicago was coming of age,it reversed the flow of the Chicago River,draining water out of Lake Michigan instead of into it.Now,the so-called collar counties around Chicago,which are expected to add 1.3 million people over the next 18 years,find that the lake is off limits and supplies below ground are not being adequately replenished. Water as a business It was the prospect of these growing national water scarcities,combined with a global problem in which nearly a billion people do not have access to clean drinking water,that prompted Enron,the Houston energy conglomerate, to enter the water business. Already,bottled water costs more than gasoline in most stores,but nearly 90 percent of all municipal water systems are publicly owned. Enron,the nation's No. 1 marketer of natural gas and electricity,saw water as a commodity that would eventually be deregulated,just as electric power was in California. If that happened,Enron would be free to buy and sell water to the highest bidders-no different from oil or megawatts. The company set up a Web site to trade water,and went prospecting for liquid gold. The people at Enron followed a trail already blazed by a fellow oilman,T.Boone Pickens,who has been buying underground water from fanners in hopes of selling it to parched cities in Texas,and the Bass brothers,who bought 46,000 acres in the desert of Southern California,only to be stymied by legal and technical problems over underground water rights. "In the next 10 years,the United States will experience serious water shortages,"Rebecca Mark,chief executive officer of Enron's water division,Azurix,told business leaders in Texas two years ago as she outlined plans to lay a claim to a global industry worth about$400 billion. At the same time,another top Enron executive,Roger Fragua,told a Congressional subcommittee, "Just as Enron led the evolution of natural gas and electric restructuring,we are excited to take a similar role in the water industry." But Enron discovered that water was not as easilycorralled as oil or gas.Public agencies and consumer groups. many critical of Enron's role in the debacle of energy deregulation in California,fought the company and others pushing for privatization. This year,after two years of foraging for water,Enron's water spinoff collapsed,reporting losses of more than$300 million and retreating from the stock market. A spokesman for the company,Keith Miceli,said Enron was "disappointed that the global market for water did not develop for us." Other companies,most based in Europe,have had more success. "I still think we're moving toward privatization,but water is different than oil-it's so much more emotional,"said Deborah Coy,a water market expert at Schwab Capital Markets. "Look what's happening:you've got shortages all over the world" Pickens plans to pump water from the Ogallala and pipe it to cities in Texas.In Southern California,a private company, Cadiz,is negotiating with the agency that provides water for 17 million people to store water from the Colorado River in a Mojave Desert aquifer and then sell it back in dry years. The plan has won approval from the board of the Metropolitan Water District,which has been draining water from far-flung places throughout California since the early 20th century.But environmentalists oppose it,saying it could suck dry the vital springs that keep bighorn sheep and desert tortoises alive in the Mojave. Battle for water "The urban areas are going to get the water they need,"said Thomas I Graff,a water expert at Environmental Defense. "The real battle is at the margins-between the environment and agriculture." Farms use a majority of American water. At a time when most farms are subsidized by the government-failing to make money in a global market-many water experts say it is inevitable that water to meet future needs will have to come from agriculture. The same amount of water it takes to support just 10 farm jobs can support 100,000 high- tech jobs,said Peter Gleick,a water expert with the nonprofit Pacific Institute in Oakland, Calif. Some are concerned that the fight over water will come down to a numbers game,involving mass transfers from one group to another,and ultimately leaving out wildlife in wetlands and along rivers. "Already,in some places of North America,we have freshwater species extinction rates that rival those of the tropics," said Sandra Postel,an author of two books on water and director of the Global Water Policy Project, in Amherst,Mass. "What worries me a lot is when we start to think that drinking water can only come from a bottle,"Postel said "We're not just talking about something like oil,or pipes and transfers. We're talkingabout a public good, something that keeps everything alive." Certainly here in the suburbs,facing an advance guard of new houses, some longtime residents said they realized the value of water only when it was gone. "We were just appalled by what happened this spring,"said Sue Schudel,who has lived in South Elgin for 45 years. "The cattails were all dead The pond dried up. We'd never seen it like this." ©The New York Times 0811212001 O STA? MASON COUNTY PEN F O� mo Planning Department S v z P O Box 578, Shelton, WA 98584 N Y y (360)427-9670 OJ �O 1864 MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT August 28, 2000 GLEN JURGES 2020 ENETAI BEACH BREMERTON WA 98310 Parcel No.: 121055122001 Issued: 00-08-28 Case No.. MEP2000-00016 Project Description: Excavation of upland and buffer area to create 24,480 sq ft area category 2 wetland connected to existing category 2 wetland; 2500 cu yds of material excavated and 85 foot deep vegetation buffer to be created / replanted adjacent to new wetland area and completed as part of mitigation for recently wetland and buffer impacts, project to be completed as detailed in wetland mitigation plan (July 2000). The following critical areas are present on this property: Long-Term Commercial Forest Aquatic Management Areas Ch. 17.10.060; Ch. 17.01 .110; Mineral Resource Lands Frequently Flooded Areas Ch. 17.01 .066; Ch. 17.01.090-1 Inholding Lands Landslide Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01 .062; Ch. 17.01 .100; Wetlands Seismic Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01 .070; Ch. 17.01.102; Critical Aquifer Recharge Erosion Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01 .080; Ch. 17,01 .104. This permit, with conditions, is granted pursuant to the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01 MCC.) Nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state.. or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded if the permitee fails to complete the project as proposed or fails to comply with the standards of this ordinance. 174W Authorized local Government Official Date Mason Environmental Permit 00-08-28 Case No. MEP2000-00016 Conditions: 1.) Approved per dimensions and setbacks on submitted site plan included in wetland mitigation plan (July 2000). 2.) The applicant acknowledges that the all aspects of the project as presented in the B&A Inc. wetland mitigation report (July 2000) shall be completed: site preparation and debris/soils stockpiling, excavation, grading, stormwater swale installation, vegetation planting, and site monitoring and reporting to the Planning Department. 3.) The applicant acknowledges that the project will be completed as proposed, so that the project will be consistent with all applicable standards of the Mason County Resource Ordinance. 4.) All construction and excavation debris must be removed from the mitigation area after project completion. Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter or cause water quality degredation of State waters. 5.) All upland areas disturbed or newly created by construction activities shall be seeded, vegetated or given an equivalent type of erosion protection (silt fencing, straw matting, or replanting). 00-08-28 3 of 3 MEP2000-00016 emu._ r as ! t w 1 ( � �/ � , X � a l 1 • lb 16 BPS S It c; If f,r~ i w41 41 If It It It - 1 ,7'' !, 1, it ' /I� PO P7Hh :�A6N}r co c it It 'rIf • /'/ I „ / / p Z.' ' �O'L r TOPOGRAPHY U.S.G.S TOPO _ WATERSHED MAP JURGES/OLD DETROIT M B & A, INC. GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 BA# 3016 vnr� 0 11LL' f 1 13 I 14 15 B/C B4O 5� I I I _... 49 23 END 9� .:.:.. PROX%B/I - . - �4 rY 500'° "''' B27 1 48� ECKLEM AVENUE B18 B EW4 B 829 E►7 ,l EW8 I t B30 13 E B B31 12 EW2 I ss V O 10 Wi O cS 23B . EW11 B32 N � 3 END B2 WO DBRIDG AVENUE VERTICAL DATUM ASSUMED 500 FEET AT N.E. CORNER BLOCK 59 there is a swamp to the west of the of the stream the water Ievc1 Is 4 1L+ hfgber than the stream wateIeveL so 2SOG0 -TfFF�'7 0,C XACk, SLjTZ � Bt 13 14VC ' I I �. .: BWSC _ 7 7 - - — ..__.�....... W5 i1 823E � }}j t . e F+sA _ 40 AMPLE. B27 . :1Y�; 21 _, •.. .......\. _ ...— — EH --� 2U _ C EN .KLEM i�VUE- - : e \M1 EW3 BhTQ� B31 12 (`� `„0 7 ! wi 1y�i 2 2 3 cWI1 6 i 832 �� i ass �� ' C3Gr/-t/d�532iES BS ; O I Ss34 i I 4 } 'B36 END / ! O - 2 l � WOODB-RIDGE AVENUE B1 YE17T1CT N.E. CO ASSUMED 5U0 FEET AT .E. CORNER BLOCK 59 0 6 ! IS' cogs cul.ertl 1a 1n 48&0 ; j 1. out 464.26 - -- there Is a .,ralap to the r+eat of the he lnntna 2a' cone culvert of the rtra..m. the water level Is 4 fL+f— Lc In a Mahar than the atmarn water—lawl Le out 464.7 t i 1 N SCALE L. uVD- t EW5F EW6 E I I EW7 814 EW8 , 19 E ern *70 L-3 7 0 B e� W 1 EW1 I � I e B 5\ 4 \ \ i I FIGURE 6 : MITIGATION AREA JURGES GRAPEVIEW SITE --- B & A, INC. GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 BA#3016 e1 B1 ' N - ,ALE (� t VV D t EW5E EW \ ; E d Ed7 -is� qaK E W8 EW B„ \ L \ sic f $ flno 1 7 6 !\ y?g us 5 \ B 4\ 3 FIGURE 7 : MITIGATION TOPOGRAPHY 2 JURGES GRAPEVIEW SITE B & A, INC. GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 BA#3016 B 1 a C.0 N co co SCALE w co1" = 100' QQ � 13 4 15 � Lu CO - / BIC I I Q B/C "B/C 0 w I Z - — Q0WZ � - - - - - _ L I � •E WSB[ � 006 � 00 24 :� EWSD — — . . . Q "' co .. . . _........ . ......... . ._. EiN5E' B B 2 I _ u ' E � co827 ViYE 21 w TOE 0-A CKL1 uj o o g S x B18 j 6 EP19 EW4 = L _ im im i _ .7 S I B �B29 I ► EriS EW7 I SPRE{30ER 1 I 1 swACE EWB�e} Q11 _ - •TO B30 I 4 13 EW3 E I I �_ BhK B31 (✓e (a.vc� �� I 9 EW2 SS i 1310 g 1 W1 �7 � WS1 _ 1 EW11 `B6 832 ; I •B5 I I i B34 j 1 4 I i 836 END I B3 j �(B2 \\WOODBHIDGE� AVENUE \\.B1 VERTICAL ASSUMED 500 FEET AT N. j 1 j j I i ., i 10 rrR 14 tiv oe - - -� - - v Cv^ i i F i ` FIGURE 11 : SAMPLE PLANTING PLAN JURGES GRAPEVIEW SITE f B & A, INC. GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 BA#3016 TABLE 3: WETLAND MITIGATION PLANTING MATERIALS Genus species (Common Name) Symbol Used Size Spacing TREES Acer macro h llum Bi leaf maple) BM 1-4' 12' Thu'a plicata Western red cedar RC 1-4' 12' Pseudotsu a menziesii(Douglas fir DF 1-4' 12' Tsuga heterophylla(Western hemlock) WH 1-4' 12' Po ulus trichocar a Black Cottonwood BC Whips 12' SAPLINGS Cornus stolonifera(Red-osier dogwood) RD 1-4' 6' Salix sp. (Willow sp.) WI 1-4' 6' Acer circinatum (Vine maple) VM 1-4' 6' SHRUBS — — — --- - - Ribes triste Red currant WR 1-4' 4' Corylus cornuta Hazelnut HN 1-4' 4' Ph socar us ca itatus inebark NB 1-4' 4' Rosa ru osa Ru osa rose RR 1-4' 4' Holodiscus discolor Oceanspray) OS 1-4' 4' Rubus s ectabilis Salmonbe SB 1-4' 4' Sambucus racemosa Red elder RE 1-4' 4' S m horicar os albus Snowbe SN 1-4' 4' LOG LO 10 STUMP ST 15 3016MRf2/ajb/7/13/00 30 e S� i ALA / U4F7G4/c/DS E#F 13 14 15 arc -B/,c - — — -- �UF�t?7rL _ 823 END / EWSC \ J�G/t�T�AQ eel w MAPLE -327 "vr� 21 � IEC'K�,EItiI_AVENUE 20-�- Fes. d -y 929 -Eg y : ` _\v I CB31 55 -I .;S /Q 11103� ogB7 WiC-fir !� tJ f2 -a32 lit/ETL AND s� SS 836 END �93 4 1 \WODDERIDGE AV-E UE d1 VE471CT E C J -- ASSUMED 500 E AT N.E CJRNER BLOCK 59 � Y W E--4 I 18' cons ontrert 1 e. In 44SS Q fe. out 444.2116 on 24' cone- culrezt Were is a seam to the est of the be \ _of W m \-e strea th cre voter 1ere1 Is 4 ft+ le. e- IlleIler than We stream water-level Lc. out 4tf4.7 �I J r I � RS do of �, ♦ � r %� �'� l�Y,�7., I_....r P55C __ —1S_1-�/ r �!I \� � �� i� /// I 41 9M ";/ ZT .mil ,' ; ! I 1 /'� / bU • •, •� /1 / �' / ,� r �I �, 1"PSG' i� ,' ,�' / � 'i \ i• i H It Y 5 1 /' %;l ` 'i /!r/Jr (1 i l� I W /4 i • Nr'Imo- :4 .. ,..� + , 2FM11' 'i ri t� l l i 'If •' 1 ' / 1 ° "�i/% � �` '. � C- (;I %; �1 rl � '• 'u _ .1'/• l�: ram: . �, It Poll-it, ,ll 1� ,ly Ir `'• :�A6Nk ' It A t3 it r I r I / '/e C C�CIIfJIr /7� I�j•� i � /i U S.G.S TOPOGRAPHY , I WATERSHED MAP L�rw JURGES/OLD DETROIT •N. �y t B & A, INC. �- GIG HARBOR, WA 98335 BA# 3016 i i i • I I �o i Z19 ... NINTH EIGHTH `r I SEVENTH I� r I .. ��- :•ii iii� f e 0 " jJF I R SIXTH air 474 � � � ::i� ,� .>, ter• a rp I ait V b1►/ • 7 /11 � o . �cc 38. �u1E7,1q.6+,t�/11�� k/EztNA.v�� ' , 4-Q-Cz o -, 2 -EA TREE WE;LUMS l` \ RUFicepQS 9s �eot.dDer i tl _ La out 4 D. i 4-7 44 ;F" 46 'hA wErcip.�o A � c �w •—J�OE/w£;/GR • ECG. t i.a toe , 1 P20P�.St 0 .PC•9DS El OF -- .�� 4SS WET S -04 ,E.LADS - 'O1VGR ' 1 WErc.4N0 AUF<�lZ � � n- - �;; 1,, �g d SCALE 117 150' :: GRIS WOLD g T/TNUE September 18, 2000 R E G E I V E 0 . der Mr. Allen Borden OCT 10 2900 1 C Mason County Planning Department P. O. Box 186 MASON CO, PLANNING:Q�K• Shelton, WA 98584 RE: MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT 2000-00016 OF AUGUST 28, 2000 Dear Mr. Borden, I inspected the new wetland Mr. Jurges is developing in Grapeview on 13 September 2000. Several test holes from 5 and 10 feet were dug so I could inspect the depth of the various soils. After the holes were dug at or below the water table it was apparent the water for the new wetlands would be from ground water vice the surface runoff as I had concluded from previous site visits. The stormwater swale from Mecklem Avenue to the new wetlands as shown in Figures 8, 9, and 10 of BA Report #3016 of 13 July 2000 is not required as there is sufficient ground water to saturate the new wetlands. Mr. Jurges conveyed my recommendation to Mr. Allan Borden on his site visit on 15 September 2000. 1 hope the above provides you enough information to delete the stormwater swale requirement from the subject environmental permit. If you have any questions or need further information, please call me on (253) 858-7055. Sincerely A. . redberg Cc: Jurges Enterprises, Inc. 3303 43rd St. NW, P.O.Box 1337, Gig Harbor WA 98335 USA 253.858.7055 Fax 253.858.2534 ba@harbornet.com 301619 ELK 1 3 r 12" DIAMETER PIPE OUTLET N I B L K 14 B L K 1 5 PIPE OUTLET PIPE OUTLET __ ` _ - �► 8 G WETLAND C� PIT #1 - 43 APPROXIMATE B L K 16 B SOIL PIT #2 BOUNDARY B-23 FLAG 0SOIL PR A (STING J -- ---- -- 6 qp 5 8" DIAMETER - ------ 9 CULVERT _ 1I.E. 34.89 DRAINAGE DITCH ---- WETLANEX_ _- ---------- -- --—--- -- i WETLAND ELK 21 *SOIL- PIT-B _ POND AREA i i ELK 24 BLK 23 �����i , B:LK 22 - LEGEND DITCH >--< CULVERT f-- 5 PHOTO POINT • SOIL PIT ® EXISTING WETLAND WHEAT FIELD EMERGENT SCRUB/SHRUB - FORESTED OPEN WATER 2 _ _ HERRERA E ET c.�V/ROUL TANTL :.ONSUL7AMS FIGURE 6. Existing conditions at the proposed mitigation site for the Grapeview Loop Road improvements project. /7 1 1 MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BUILDING I . 411 N. 5TH ST. • P.O. BOX 578 SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 (360) 427-9670 July 25, 2000 Mr. Glen Jurges Jurges Enterprise, Inc. 2020 Enatai Beach Bremerton, WA 98310 Mr. Jurges: Pursuant to our meeting today, I wanted to confirm the issues that we discussed regarding your project in Grapeview. RELEASE OF STOP WORK ORDER 1 . We will relapse the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of processing and issuing a grading permit, on the following parcels: 12105-51-22001, 22016, 23001, 23006 and 23016. It is understood that ingress, egress, relocating existing stumps, and temporarily storing material on Mecklem Avenue during or after the wetlands are developed is acceptable to Mason County. 2. We will release the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of conducting a well site inspection, on the following blocks: 44 & 57. 3. We will release the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of conducting a septic site inspection, on the following blocks: 55 & 59. PREAPPLICATION MEETING 1. A Pre-Application meeting been scheduled for August 16, at 2 PM. Your interest at the pre-application meeting is to confirm how many lots you can develop, to address a road system and stormwater design, to address the design of a community septic system, to locate a well site, and to address appropriate fire protection issues. 2. We will also determine how our RV/Mobile Home Park Ordinance applies to your project. r LEASING OF SPACES 1. We will submit your letter of June 11, 2000, to the Mason County Prosecutor's Office for analysis regarding your question about leasing spaces. BONDING FOR WETLAND MITIGATION 1. We will determine the process for bonding of this activity. ISSUANCE OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 1. At the conclusion of the pre-application meeting, you may begin the subsequent permit process, which would include permits for additional grading for site preparation, any applicable building permits and permits for the installation of water and septic systems. However, we will not issue any further permits until the wetland mitigation has been completed and inspected by Mason County staff. We are reminding you that none of the work that is covered under these additional permits should be commenced until the permits are issued. I trust that the preceding information represents the issues that we discussed. If you have any questions, please contact me. Bes a rds, Dave Salzer Planning Director Cc: Allan Borden Tami Griffey JURGES ENTERPRISES, INC. 2020 ENETAI BEACH BREMERTON, WASHINGTON 98310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SINCE 1984 (2ft 377-0274 (360) February 29, 2000 Michael MacSems, Planner III Mason County Permit Assistance Center P. O. Box 186 Shelton, WA 98584 RE: GRAPEVIEW PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT; INITIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE FOR A RECREATIONALVEHICLE (RV) PARK Dear Mr. MacSems, Please find the attached Commercial and Non Residential Development Initial Review Questionnaire for developing 65 to 70 leased RV spaces in the existing Plat of Detroit#2 in Grapeview, Washington. My objective for submitting this questionnaire is to obtain a review and feedback from the appropriate Mason County Departments so I can better understand your requirements and prevent unnecessary delays as the project moves forward. Several of the questions require more explanation or information than the space allows so I have referred to figures and attachments which are included. This questionnaire will address only the southern parcel. For your information,there are several issues currently under review by the Mason County Planning Department. They are: 1) Wetland buffer restoration, 2)Mitigation of previously filled wetlands, 3) Road locations, and 4) Stop Work Order ENF 98-0125 of 19 October 1998. The final wetland buffer restoration and preliminary mitigation reports were submitted to Ms. Bennett-Cumming of the Planning Department on February 15, 2000. This project is unique in that the property is part of the Plat of Detroit#2 having been recorded on 30 April 1890. It consists of 15 full and 4 partial blocks which have been further divided into 322 individual lots. Nine blocks (Blocks 44, 45, 46, 54 through 59) or 180 lots are located south of Atwater Avenue are referred to as the southern parcel. The remaining blocks (Blocks 23 through 25 and partial Blocks 13, 14, 15 and 22) and lots are located north of Randolph Avenue abutting the Oakdale Development are referred to as the northern parcel. Each block has a separate tax account number and each lot is a legally platted parcel. Each lot or combination of lots outside the wetland boundaries will be separate RV spaces accessed by existing platted roads. Figure 3 is the existing platted lots in each block showing the wetland and buffer boundaries. There are 20(30' x 100') lots in each of the nine blocks for a total of 180 lots. I am proposing a park-model RV Park with leased spaces. Each leased space can be a combination of one or more existing lots depending on the location, view, and access requirements. Each park-model unit will meet the floor space and 1 utilities requirements for a recreational vehicle. A few of the spaces may be occupied by motor homes leased on an annual basis. The roads, landscaping, septic system,water, and a community center will make this park a fully contained community for a variety of potential users. Attachment"B"shows the typical floor plans, options, and standards for park-model units manufactured by Nor'Wester Industries in Tumwater, Washington. No other type of permanent structure except the community center will be located on the property. There will also be motor home parking, laundry facilities, and other amenities normally associated with an RV Park. I believe there is sufficient space for 65 to 70 park-model units in Blocks 45, 46, 54, 55, 57, and 58. Block 59 and one half of Block 55 are for the community septic system drain field and reserve. Blocks 44, most of Block 45 and Block 56 are unusable due to wetlands as shown in Figure 3. All proposed roads for ingress and egress are 40 feet wide to minimize the impact on the wetland buffers as shown in Figure 3. This road dimension allows sufficient width for constructing all weather roads and ditches in accordance with Mason County Public Works Department road specifications. Roads on the west side of Blocks 57 and 58 and the north side of Block 57 are fifteen feet wide. They are not shown because they do not impact any wetlands or buffers. Other configurations including having some roads one-way can be discussed at our initial planning meeting. The access road from Grapeview Loop Road has been discussed with the Public Works Department and was determined that routine ingress and egress from Griswold Avenue(also called Onsrud Road)would not be allowed. Accessing from Crogan and Congress Avenues would require crossing existing wetlands and/or vacated roads. That leaves only Atwater Avenue which is preferred by Public Works Department and has existed for many years. Crogan Avenue west of Sixth Street has been used to some degree for the last 50 years. This road also provides the normal and customary access to Blocks 42 and 43 along Ninth Street which I do not own. After you have reviewed this information I would appreciate if you would schedule a meeting with all involved departmental representatives to discuss my proposal, answer any questions, and obtain feedback so I can proceed to the next step in the planning process. I hope the above information provides you some insight into my plans so the project can move forward as soon as possible. If you have any questions or need further information, please call me on (360) 377-0274. Sincerely, Jr len Jur 2 Mag 13.00 \cS Wed Feb 02 10:39 2000Scale 1:31,250(at center) 2000 Feet 1000 MetersMi'1 Pond iis. Lake Secondary SR,Road,Hwy RampState Route Primary State Route Olympihore Railroad 0 Town,Small City •UC--ICy/BClV 0 Geographic Feature i Rocky Point Locale ® County Boundary N470 20.37' W 1220 50.20'�or � / e V land t,t', Grapeview St-e ch Islamd Stadium--/ MN ne ove FIGURE S �" T M.,&P o � Lots four (4) to seven (1) , ba1:h inr.7 uS I ve, Block thirteen (13) ; 1_ats four (4), to seven (7) , both inclusive, Block fourteen ( 14) ; Lots four (4) to seven (7) , both inclusive, Block fifteen (15) ; Lots one (1 ) to five (5), bot: inclusive, RIock twentytwo (2.2) ; Lots sixteen 16} to twenty (20) , both inclusive, Block t:went.),two (22) ; L.ots one (1) to twenty �20) , both inclusive, Block twentythree (23) ; Lotsone (1) to twenty (20 , both inclusive, Block twentyfour (24) ; Lots one ( 1 ) tc, twenty (20) , both Inc�usive, Block twentyfive (25 ; Lots one i to t.wPnty (2G) , both inclus-ive, Block twentysix (26) ; L.oi.s one (1; to twenty �10) ) , bc.►th inclusive, Block twent,yseven �1 .ots one 1 to twent 20 both inc usive Block twent • evan o wen a� o . IncIusiI e; �(c�c ysrx (5 Cots-one 1) to twenty ( 0) , both inclusive, Block fiftyseven (57) ; Lots one (1) to twenty �2U , both inclusive, Block fiftyeight (58) ; Lots one (1 to twenty (20) , both inc�usive, Block fiftynine (59) all in the Plat of DetroC No. �1 21 Volume 1 of Plats, page 23, records of Mason County, Washington. Parcel Nos, 12105 51 13004, 12105 51 14004, 12105�51�15004, 12105 51 �22001 , 12105 51 22016, 12105 51 2.3001 , 12105 51 23006, 12105 51 Z3016, 1,�c0„5 5 2400 �j�'�Q�iu 51 001 1 05 51 260U �110s � �0n1 11 ,,� � �.�.N.�"2105 , 11�8� and 1210 PARCEi[:L,_?! Lots one (1) to twenty (20) , both inclusive, Block fortyfour (44) ; Lots one (1) to twenty (20) , both Inclusive, Block fortyfive (45) ; and Lots one (1) 1;o twenty (20), bot;h inclusive, Block fortysix (46) , all in the plat of Detroit No. 2, Volume 1 of Plats, page 23, records of Mason Country, Washington. TOGETHER W11H all that portion of vacated 7th Street adjoining said Blocks fortyfive (45) and fortysix (46) , and lying between the South line of Atwater Avenue on the North and the North line of Congress Avenue on the South. Parcel Nos. 12105 51 44001 , 12105 51 45001 and 12105 51 46001 PARCEL 3: Lots one (1) , twv (2) , three (3) , the North ten ( 10) feet of Lot four (4) , the North ten (10) feet of Lot seventeen (17) and all of tots eighteen (18) , nineteen ( 19) and twenty (20) , Block fiftyfour (54) , Plat of Detroit No. 2, Volurne 1 of Plats, page 23, records of Mason County, Washington. 7i X s©v7,;1,A,^2,00V IPA I t1 rl' p � "� 2M `� ! 6f , rr,�'rd''��ry ,a�4a � •�h / t�ai9'l`'Try ��y1�r;iy t !�P g � r: ( �k�- ,• �X '.x?` � ��� sa�`.° s .(�� f �;,� { ��Jt4rt d'r�\�f��s f ♦«, ` f 'k !y__ir''�,��N, f � �' ��'' �..sx,t A i�+, T� -r'!r E 'ty +' .µ r' .a� ,,a6f *� t,. I�A� ,�ra,-.�s9t„ 1 �, ; � .. l'•.�r t., � �+ .M; Ole _-AMA" wr.°rrrt . W. -.- /� x Y . - � ! �.. .. �3 ;;,rat t i..n" � � r ' a ••/F�'�'q y, t�! ' .56 A61t.'In aX36 ]n,'2T AA 50 3A4. i Fg"lr— DFIAWERS � 9319p BELOW_ L ONING 26.(n Mr. Y log SHEI}WTTN HOD 5 5 G D 1'E7ITAGDN'MT11 Vl(f4vGDE5% �'(Y� 26x� \ RinP5A0(RF FTD�)f)11,11TIOf1 CASCADE FLOOR PLAN 26'OCIAGDH - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - — — — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — — — — — — — -- — — — — — — — — — — -- — -- --- C \ / OPTIONAL MTHROOM O R r Iv.T LINEN 40 X 38 EGRESS 36,8 - 1A 001{56 39 x 511 OINItKi �+ I COVERED PORIH WITH RAIL 4;OPTIONAL BEDROOM SKY LIVING ROOM 28'POCKET 24' POCKET r i KITCHEN CLOSE(WIN DRAWERS UNDER li \ 1 REFRIO. FUHN l ` LINEN i _I___i F ___ _____ WIN 00 N _9�El.P WITH NijD L—J_- O O %STEREO — 72`EXT DOOR :10x27 - 5SG0. PENTAGON WIM _ _ _ TRAPS ABOVE -^_— LINEN pEFRIO. �_�`xI I--SHElFW-1 H ROD— •-_-`-_ __•- -__--' ��„ MT. RAINIER FLOOR PLAN OPTIONAL WRITING DESK OPTIONAL 6 SLICING GLASS DOOR WITH OH CABINET.OR 2A'OCTAGON WINDOW ]OFn f)aT10NN. F%IEMDEO +I LOLNIER L L� �x27 x� SNELt WITH Im LARNEI GLtfSET v,Iri UTNVIFF6OELflMr � MTN S h LIEN. 2 i o IMNG R(701A R - ,0 CtnETED I+pfICN %fA'TI(Yt4 � �� VATH RAq.S REVF.RSC 1 �•.LIJI - --_— u "IRCN OF.DRDDIA 1 +�I Y. P7,Nrnv ilsrnlG. ii'x (,aNLAe Y.Y ?I D('.tA(f.X1 .. r,, IA`� - -- 5 S.D.O PIIDNAL V.56 (CNIAGDK.ITN 1RMS AIX). IXIIUNAL62 ROAN ODOR/ U-4 ]0+59 J6 TIESIDFNTIAL DOOR(Or— MT HOOD FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLANS WITH OPTIONS MCKENZIE RIVER FLOOR PLAN � wxw "WIG ONEN MFLR 10"1 YI ¢I I.MNG MLOH WITH RAILS 1 V NAnTN NRt?1FN 1 WM\i 2,1'OC,TAGON 19.27 JJ a 2I }1•'E Y.I x 5B __._ _-_ MT. BACHELOR FLOOR PLAN 30.27 30 A SB 30.58 SHELF ABOVE HOD_ Nero I 1 O`t' I ON LAB - STORAGE: ��� ` CABS DRAWERS BELOW m L �� KITCHEN ',K OATH' p LMNG ROOM I Ai 10'COVERED PORCH WITH MILS BEDROOM LINEN - STORAGE I� BELOW OPTIONAL LARGE TRAPAZOID WINDOWS ABOVE I - I LOFT ABOVE OPEN VP REFRIG. DINING I TO LIVING ROOM _ 469 aS 5'SOD' PENTAGON WITH ?yx� 30.58 flA 9 TRAPSABOVE A FRAME A-FRAME DORMER DORMER 30 x 27 30 4 27 I A-FRAME DORMER F OPEN TO L "ANG HOOT.^r RARINGRAINIER OPEN TO I LOFT AREA- LIVING ROOM I n6.27 HIEING I IQ'SHED DORMER 1D a 58 8'SHED DORMER 2A 1`'B Pqk 46x39 30 n 5S 30.58 DINING 1 1 BATH I i' m I LIVING ROOM ! ,p BEDROOM WCOVERED PORCH WITH RAILS KITCHEN DRAWERS BEII)W I OPTIONAL LARGE IMPAZOIO �^ WINDOWS ABOVE REFRIG V O SHELF WITH ROD 32 EXT DOOR 30 z¢7 5'S.G.D. PENTAGON WITH TRAPS ABOW ft-. MT. RAINIER WITH LOFT INE ..: _ - REFRIG. _ _ j WM! l FLOOR PLAN .SFIELF WITH OPTIONAL WRITING DESK OPTIONAL B'SLIDINO GLASS FXJOR WITH QH CABINET,OR OCTAGON WINDOW OPTIONS AND STANDARDS "Custome Home" Quality Construction LIVING ROOM/DINING ROOM: EXTERIOR: Ceiling Fan and Light with Switch on Wall 1/2" Cedar Lap, Log, Vinyl or Hardboard Siding 4 Window Bay on Living Room End Steel Inswing Front Door or 5' SGD(6' SGD optional) Designer Windows Above End Bay Dual-Glazed Alumnium Windows Glass Chandelier with Switch on Wall in Dining Room Architectural 80 Composition Shingle Roof,25 Year Warranty 3 Window Bay in Dining Room Optional Metal Roof China Cabinet/Hutch (per plan) Exterior Weather-Tight Electrical Outlet(GFI protected) KITCHEN: Heat Tape Receptacle 14 or 16 Cubic Foot Double Door Frost-Free Refrigerator Exterior Lights at Entry Doors Free Standing Deluxe 30" Kenmore Gas Range Exterior Frostfree Hose Bib with Glass Door GENERAL CONSTRUCTION:" Single Lever Kitchen Faucet with Sprayer 10" I-Beam Frame Ceramic Tile Backsplash Detachable Mitch Vented Range Hood with Light Heavy Poly Underbelly Recessed Can Lights 2"x 6" Floor Joists 16" On Center 8" Double Deep Stainless Sink (Porcelain optional) 5/8 OSB Tbngue & Groove Underlayment . Slider Window Above Sink 2" x 4" Exterior Walls, 16"On Center Double.Wall Construction — 7/16" Sheathing BATH: Engineered Roof Musses 16" On Center Fiberglass'1Lb-Shower Combination/ 7/16 OSB hoof Sheathing Corner Tirb-Shower/Shower Stall (per plan) 15 lb. Felt Roof.Underlayment 1.6 Gallon Porcelain Tbilets 12" Eaves Around Home w/Soffit Vents. Porcelain-on=Steel Lavatory Sinks with Overflow Nominal 4/12 or 10/12 Roof Pitch(per plan) Single Lever Faucets Up to 901b. Roof Load(per plan) Medicine Cabinet Above Lavatory Sink Insulated Floor Heat Ducts, for Comfort& Quiet Ceiling Bath Fan Tape,'Textured and Painted 1/2 Drywall Interior Finish GFI Receptacle (Walls and Ceiling) Ceramic Tile Backsplash Vaulted Ceilings Throughout(per plan) Space Saving Pocket Door Floor Insulation R-11 Blanket Glass Window, Opens for Ventilation per plan) Wall Insulation R I1 Batt BEDROOM: Roof Insulation R-1.9 Batt Double Mirrored Wardrobe Doors Cold Weather Insulation Packages Available Closet Rod with Shelf Above (up to R-30 in areas) Space Saving Pocket Door UTILITY. TV/VCR Center 50 AMP Panel Box Ceiling Fan and Light with Wall Switch (per plan) 20 Gallon Water Heater w/Drip Pan and Drain Valve Emergency Escape Window Propane 42000 ETU Gas Furnace Metal Water Shut-Off Valves OTHER FEATURES: Polyethylene Waterlines Plush or I-Ii/Low Deluxe Carpet $elections, with Pad ABS Drain Lines Outside Access,Insulated Water Heater Door Copper Wiring Fire Extinguisher, Smoke Detector,Propane Detector and Carbon Monoxide Detector "linteriors" for Luxury Living All U/L Approved Electrical Devices and Wiring CAB1`NETS:Located for Convenience and Usability Mini Blinds on all Windows Simulated Oak Cabinets Throughout Drapes on all Sliding Glass Doors Solid Oak Face Frames(optional) Valances over all Main Floor Windows All White Drawer Sides with Side Roller Drawer Guides (Loft Window Valance, optional) Lazy Susan in Overhead Kitchen Cabinet(per plan)' Privacy Locks on all Doors Adjustable Shelves in Overhead Cabinets Space Saver Microwave (optional) Pantry with Pull.Out Drawers (per plan) Built-in Stereo w/Speakers(optional) Built in Clothes Hamper(per plan) TV and Phone Jacks (optional) Storage Drawers Below Wardrobe Many Other Options also Available AUTHORIZED DEALER Nor Wester Industries Quality without question 1144 79th Avenue SE • Tumwater, WA 98501 Fax 360-709-9253 • 360-709-9233 1-800-346-5701 "lb Our Customers-Due to the constant process of improving our product,all of tore components and equipment used to manufacture our product,are subject W change without notice or obligation.The floor plan layout,'And diagrams may change.Our prices are subject to change without notice or obligation.visit your Nor'wesler Dealer for specific current details. fit S'd ,A J { { tAl+is1J e� � b , t� R e a' m aa, fP � + Sfl +1� v xtgt•° r i Y� � � � G'L•+" J 11r. s1 31 � +t 1%�� of i 1 t r R �f . 7i t.�t`�:_ ow � ) t a�4: ti ' s Alo yY e At, ,���]yp N E 44. ��,, � ,r/ �N 'GYQf"d:.1h4:.Y4'L•.L .C�: V � t6 �..r' ra SU:,}% AOSbnuv4.ws-esr •..».I Y ^R:#ri °s. �'i r:tadnc�u o#v c ire Sm c en • �p' w.3 � $ W 1 i� R K ae to r9".. a.A`.'1.+ ,•\\`\� 'e ti°Yir'2a 'd', ;a,A + ;A "'1x4*tow,w. Y[ lift a '. rrwrfk..:Ay y♦I,fi'c .l�".Y`wFFr"' ��� t�}° �+�` =k r.�Att� akt W �.r,fii .. � .. t4 ,. �::,� .'E° "�l 1 f at�a��� � �'rf,C��,rr,•' r �. '!1"� 3• 1?` y � � eh'�+i .� t��• t la^1..J3h �,'bl (� 1 R AL I '.� {VF•ft44i n �. 8r • ,t r �..,:tro ,a ��"�•'!'•. t 4�1♦ �1,� 1^.e g ew.f.. +' {i�A�r:f.A �� ' t.-:h ,+, .�1w„n,}�../L � .•.c,r.r ,+: �I,In,t awme'�'� + 1 e: .: `♦"'mil• - ' Z ' t lei dtY`' '.) i� ��., i�'�i,.:.ri' '•�.; ,5. a •,.•n+A1 i" r tr, R / / / y�� // � / �' t=axma aka N �`• • r I r � / / /, j / , 1 l •p f n , , • PFOC 77, i 1 i w AI IL Ll Al it it 6 / \ nA B E 2 N I. 1it u 5 1 /.1 r+ '+ i1 G f S .� k r ' // // it r � �!-',• 1 ' �/ . ; i FIGURE 2 : U.S.G.S TOPOGRAPHY / WATERSHED MAP �S/TE Z 0 71oxI Y r ` GARY YANDO,DIRECTOR STgr�O o A° N u DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S T i PLANNING -SOLID WASTE -UTILITIES i� N Y y BLDG. I • 411 N. 511'ST. • P.O. BOX 578 SHELTON, WA 98584 • (360) 427-9670 1864 arch 20, 2000 Glenn Jurges 2020 Enetai Beach Bremerton, WA 98310 Re: Wetland restoration and mitigation, ENF98-0125, Grapeview site. Dear Mr. Jurges: Mason County Planning Department is in receipt of the wetland reports you submitted to us on February 15, 2000. Two reports were received as follows: (1) Final buffer restoration report - wetland D and stream corridor dated February 10, 2000. (2) Preliminary wetland mitigation report dated February 12, 2000. A cover letter was attached, dated February 11, 2000. This letter provides information to you and your wetlands consultant on our review of the wetland reports. Copies were also sent to Department of Ecology for their review and comment. To date we have not yet received their review comments but in the interest of time we are providing you with our review. Please note: The cover letter from AJ Bredberg states that all lots not in wetlands are buildable lots either individually or in combination. Development must meet the setbacks from and shall not encroach on buffers for wetlands and streams, as provided for within the Mason County Resource Ordinance. In addition, development shall meet the provisions of county regulations including those of Planning, Building, Environmental Health and Public Works departments, and requirements of the Fire Marshall. Revisions to Wetland Reports: We have reviewed the submitted materials as one document, because both parts must be considered in combination to provide a complete picture of your proposed restoration, mitigation and enhancement. The material submitted is closer to complete than the earlier report. The information below is intended to assist you in making the necessary final revisions. Again, for the purposes of this review we reference the submitted reports as a single document. 1. Comments from DOE. Local jurisdictions utilize wetland professionals from DOE as an expert resource when working on review of the proposed resolution of wetland violations such as yours. At this time we have not yet received DOE's comments on a duplicate copy of the report which was sent to them, but will forward them to you when received. Please be aware that any comments or concerns that DOE has relating to appropriateness of this mitigation will need to be incorporated into your revision. r f 2. Scale for Figure 4: Thank you for providing a correction for the scale of this figure. Based on your verbal request we have corrected the scale to read 1"=80 feet on our copies. This correction information will also be provided to DOE by way of this letter. 3. Buffers for the category II wetlands are 85 feet, as stated within the wetland report. These buffers apply around the wetland, including across existing or proposed roads. Thus buffer restoration must meet this requirement. 4. Buffer widths and references to square foot areas for buffers. As you are probably aware, it is not always easy to verify square footage when referenced on reduced maps. In addition there appear to be two different sets of references to buffer restoration square footage which don't seem to match (see Figure 4 and table on page 11. As provided for within Wetlands Chapter 17.01.070 of the Resource Ordinance, buffer widths shall be as provided for the particular wetland and/or stream type under review. 5. Soils: We await DOE's comments on review of the soils information provided, our observations thus far are as follows: (a)From the soil logs on the southern site it appears substantial fill occurred. However we have not been provided with enough information to know if holes 1-5 were dug down to previous grade or not. How do the hole depths relate to the elevation of the existing undisturbed wetland soils adjacent to it? What conclusions can be drawn or inferred from this regarding the potential for this site as a mitigation site? (b) Since Harstine soils on the northern site are described as"well-drained" in the Soils Survey for Mason County, please provide narrative which addresses how success of a mitigation wetland would be ensured under this circumstance. 6. There is an intermittent stream which flows southerly into wetland F (which is an arm of wetland D); this needs to be addressed in the report. 7. Drainage crossing on northern parcel by wetland F: we understand the need to provide a crossing over the drainage on the northern parcel, in order to reach Block 25. The crossing needs to allow for continued flow. In accordance with Wetlands Chapter 17.01.070, which requires avoidance as the first choice, please address other access options. If none is available (explain) please provide detailed plans for this access, including culvert information. 8. Mitigation for stream crossings: Per our letter dated October 18, 1999 the dirt track which starts in the area of the platted road known as Crogan did not appear to cross the stream. This determination is based on aerial photos, and testimony from county employees. Mitigation for the Crogan crossing needs to be provided for in the same way as you have provided for mitigation of the drainage crossing on the northern parcel. 9. Crossing of northern end of wetland E: Per Wetlands Chapter 17.01.070 of the Resource Ordinance, avoidance is the first and preferred mitigation option. In order to use this location, you will need to show that another non-impacting access is not possible, (e.g.) north of Mecklem. 10. Spreader Swale: runoff from a proposed road will need to be treated prior to discharge into waters of the state (including wetlands). This does not appear to be addressed. 11. Wetland rating sheets, soils information: We await DOE's comments on review of the information provided. We note that your rating sheets have been revised to identify wetland D as a Category II. 12. Choice of plant species for mitigation: We await DOE's comments on review of the wetland information provided, our observations thus far are as follows the plant species identified for mitigation appear consistent with those to be found in similar settings in the area with one exception: Quaking Aspen is specified for buffer plantings. Research through the Mason County Conservation District indicates that this would not normally be found in wetland buffers in this area, and would not be appropriate. 13. Criteria for success: Per DOE letters provided to Mason County and to you, mitigation success criteria for survival and cover are referenced by them as 90%. The report's provision is for measuring success as 80% survival and cover. We await DOE's response to this change, and will comment on this portion of the mitigation criteria at that time. The next step: We look forward to receiving a revised report which incorporates these and DOE's comments. Following review and approval of a satisfactory final report, Mason County will issue SEPA on this project, and initiate processing of the Mason Environmental Permit. That is the time at which the process of bonding of the mitigation and monitoring would be addressed. From this date forward your Mason County contacts for this restoration and mitigation will be as follows: Dave Salzer, Planning Director (360) 427-9670 extension 273, will be your administrative contact, and Allan Borden, Senior Planner(360) 427-9670 extension 365 will be your current planning contact for the Grapeview area. Please feel free to contact them directly if you have any questions. You will be in good hands --both are aware of the mitigation project, its history, and the issues to be addressed and resolved. Sincerely, Pamela Bennett-Cumming, Senior Planner cc: Dave Salzer, Planning Director Allan Borden, Senior Planner Ann Boeholt, Wetlands Specialist, DOE AJ Bredberg • � GARY YANDO,DIRECTOR STgTFo O O DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT O A N iJ o T Z PLANNING - SOLID WASTE - UTILITIES Y y BLDG. I • 411 N. 5T11 ST. • P.O. BOX 578 SHELTON, WA 98584 • (360) 427-9670 1864 April 5, 2000 Glen F. Jurges 2020 Enatai Beach Bremerton, WA 98310 Dear Mr. Jurges, This letter is in response to your Initial Review Questionnaire (IRQ) . You should be aware that all development applications are subject to an order of invalidity issued by the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, effective January 14, 1999 . The effect of this order is that Mason County will not be able to issue some types of permits until the invalidity is removed. Enclosed is a pubic notice that explains the situation in more detail . You are proposing to develop a 65 to 70 unit Recreational Vehicle Park within the Plat of Detroit #2 near Grapeview, Washington. According to the Mason County Comprehensive Plan your facility is located in a portion of the county that has been designated as a Rural Area. According to the recently invalidated Mason County land use matrix (Development Regulations figure 1 . 03 . 020) a facility such as yours would be classified as a conforming land use. In addition to the Comprehensive Plan, your project will need to comply with a number of other county ordinances including, but not necessarily limited to, the Mobile Home & RV Park Ordinance, and the Resource Lands and Critical Area Ordinance. Any existing on site violations of the Mason County Resource Ordinance will have to be resolved prior to issuance of any permit . If you wish to pursue your proposal further, your next step is to schedule a Pre-Application meeting, please find the proper forms enclosed. At that meeting you will meet with representatives of the various county departments to discuss how their regulations would affect your project . I would suggest that prior to scheduling such a meeting that you make yourself familiar with the ordinances listed above . Sinc ly, 5; Dave Salzer Planning Director ANON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE In accordance with Washington State's Growth Management Act, the Mason County Comprehensive Plan regulates the placement, expansion or modification of commercial, industrial and public facilities to certain areas of the county. In the interest of saving you time and money the Department of Community Development requires this initial review check list to be completed and reviewed by this department prior to the submission of any building permits. Applicant Name _ L Gl/�6�� Phone # (360 Mailing Address © oZ U Z-- V- Site AddresssS!-� 6�/,�ti�7 f Z Directions to Site �.����Gli b ,CB�,,� /201.20 .0 AFT B /.eT 2d.40 ,G' T 8�•9�� ucLc// XJ;6 i L.L o e-3 z9 Septic or Sewer <-- Yl'i�'l�C,c1��� Water Supply /212Gc4-1i� 11;-ZLS 72 e� Air Tax Parcel # �5e55 � iG/lalT /� y Legal Description Type of Development -n-,XIG'1-9dc7.CQ Applicant's Signature OFFICIAL USE IUGA Approved By E)dsting Commercial Date D HERE eZ 4-0 ( �- MAR 41 2000 PERMIT ASSISTANCE CENTER L-10.- NON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT INITIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE In accordance with Washington State's Growth Management Act, the Mason County Comprehensive Plan regulates the placement, expansion or modification of commercial, industrial and public facilities to certain areas of the county. In the interest of saving you time and money the Department of Community Development requires this initial review check list to be completed and reviewed by this department prior to the submission of any building permits. Applicant Name LG//�6� Phone # (36:�) Mailing Address Site AddressClG�/�f�7 Directions to Site zgA0Z;Q 77//qu e---% Septic4C _ or Sewer Water Supply 72 Zf;- 29,402Z-L 60 Tax Parcel # Legal Description �L _ Type of Development s r�bG/. �� � ��9d . Applicant's Signature OFFICIAL USE " IUGA Approved By EAsting Commercial Date cl�a +9 MAR 01 2000 PERMIT ASSISTANCE CENTER 1 MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BUILDING I . 411 N. 5TH ST. . P.O. BOX 578 SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 (360) 427-9670 July 25, 2000 Mr. Glen Jurges Jurges Enterprise, Inc. 2020 Enatai Beach Bremerton, WA 98310 Mr. Jurges: Pursuant to our meeting today, I wanted to confirm the issues that we discussed regarding your project in Grapeview. RELEASE OF STOP WORK ORDER 1 . We will relapse the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of processing and issuing a grading permit, on the following parcels: 12105-51-22001, 22016, 23001, 23006 and 23016. It is understood that ingress, egress, relocating existing stumps, and temporarily storing material on Mecklem Avenue during or after the wetlands are developed is acceptable to Mason County. 2. We will release the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of conducting a well site inspection, on the following blocks: 44 & 57. 3. We will release the STOP WORK ORDER, for the purpose of conducting a septic site inspection, on the following blocks: 55 & 59. PREAPPLICATION MEETING 1. A Pre-Application meeting been scheduled for August 16, at 2 PM. Your interest at the pre-application meeting is to confirm how many lots you can develop, to address a road system and storm.water design, to address the design of a community septic system, to locate a well site, and to address appropriate fire protection issues. 2. We will also determine how our RV/Mobile Home Park Ordinance applies to your project. r LEASING OF SPACES 1 . We will submit your letter of June 11, 2000, to the Mason County Prosecutor's Office for analysis regarding your question about leasing spaces. BONDING FOR WETLAND MITIGATION 1 . We will determine the process for bonding of this activity. ISSUANCE OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 1 . At the conclusion of the pre-application meeting, you may begin the subsequent permit process, which would include permits for additional grading for site preparation, any applicable building permits and permits for the installation of water and septic systems. However, we will not issue any further permits until the wetland mitigation has been completed and inspected by Mason County staff. We are reminding you that none of the work that is covered under these additional permits should be commenced until the permits are issued. trust that the preceding information represents the issues that we discussed. If you have any questions, please contact me. 7BessZerds, Dave Salzer Planning Director Cc: Allan Borden Tami Griffey MASON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/COUNTY ROAD ENGINEER Shelton,Washington 98584 DATE: Aug. 9, 2000 INTER-DEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS TO: Tammy Griffey, PAC—Building Inspector FROM: Alan A. Tahja, P/W - Co. Hydr. Engr. PAC WO# 2K-0077 SUBJ: Gradiny, Plan Review NAME: Glen Juryes\ Grapeview RV Park GRD2K-00014 The wetland mitigation plan developed for the GRAPEVIEW RV PARK, developed by Graig Baldwin P.E., has been received and reviewed by Public Works. The area claimed as mitigation, (32,700 sqr ft) appears correct, and the volume of material to be excavated appears to be approximately 2,500 cubic yards as claimed on the plans. Without additional information regarding the existing soils underlying the proposed excavation, or some indication that onsite surface topsoil is salvageable for use as a hydric soil, it cannot be determined from the materials received by Public Works, whether the desired mitigation will be achieved, or what classification of wetland is being created. Please feel free to contact me at County extension 461 if you have any questions pertaining to these comments or this department's review. Sincerely, QAA Alan A. Taw----, File: H:\WP\GRADING\Grpvw-RV-mitigation-IDC.doc 1 VULIv vvvl\1\V L.JI_( I � Date: �-��(� � Work Order PERMIT#:�wpgwo .��I�' (� Number. Requested by: Authorized by: / Date: Type of Work: CHARGE TO: NAME AGENCY/COMPANY BILLING ADDRESS PHONE S (B) Pub. Works Person In Charge: (C) Protect Time Line: (from - to dates) TO Project Start date: Estimated FWsh Date. Apprmdmate hours: ESTIMATED TOTAL$S: COST ESTIMATE_ (D) Dat En"yee — I Rate H Houri sut0tal - Fringe -- � _ TOTAL$ B 9 oD �Li � V3Z./9 -(-* Z. l Z8, /72 y _ I VNE BAIL TOTAL IS EQUIPMENT USED: MATERIAL USE): - .c.....x>.aw..c.,�..n-+rY.�):..�,.-A.J.4�::.::4i:J:.::....::...........[...:�Y.Y.h-...'W.F)-�M:Y•i..W.:[Ofu!�wS:viM...,.[:.:or;r::.:'%.1G:.:::::::::::>i�Glh..a"ctw:`5�:.:>::�i:i (Il Actual Cost $ BARS: PROJ 1 DATE Employee WORKED Narle S Rats Flours SrcaW Fritwe% TOTAL$ EQUIPMENT USED: pale vni att TOTAL;S MATERIAL USED: TOTAL ALL (G) BILLED DATE INV 0 PAID DATE REC.f CKX MASON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/COUNTY ENGINEER SHELTON, WASHINGTON INTER-DEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION August 17, 2000 TO: Tammy Griffey, FAC-Building Inspector Allen Borden, Planning-Planner THROUGH: Alan A. Tahja, PW-County Hydro Engineer FROM: Robbyn Myers, PW-Environmental Coordinatoor� SUBJECT: Mitigation Plan Review-Grapeview RV Park (PAC WO# 2000-0077) Per your request on August 14, 2000, 1 reviewed the proposed mitigation plan for the Grapeview RV Park (GRD2K-00014). Additional information is needed to ensure compensatory mitigation is complete for the proposed activity. The Preliminary Site Plan and Mitigation Report did not clearly state or show wetland and buffer impacts. Information from the following questions would help clarify. 1. Indicate on the site plans, by shading or crosshatching,all impacts to wetlands and the associated buffers. Quantify these impacts and show them on the plans or in a table format. 2. Project plans show blocks 57, 58 and 59 encroach on the associated vegetated buffer. If these impacts can not be minimized or avoided please quantify these impacts to the wetland buffer and show them clearly on the site plan. 3. From the Preliminary Site Plan, Wetland B appears to have direct impacts. Please quantify these impacts and provide adequate mitigation. 4. Vegetative buffers are missing on wetlands B and C. Please show these buffers and quantify impacts. t 5. Please provide mitigation to offset impacts to the vegetated buffers within the project area. 6. The wells and access road impact the vegetative buffer. Please quantify these impacts. 7. Both drainfields are within 100 ft of either the wetland or intermittent Type V stream. Please provide documentation assuring that the drainfield will not have a secondary impact to these critical areas. 8. Property lines extend into the vegetative buffer on lots 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. Please remove these property lines from the buffer or provide documentation indicating that potential landowners will be aware of the restrictions on the property. 9. Please address storm water management for the proposed project. I am not fully aware of the authority or the regulations the County has when dealing with mitigation plans. For instance, I do not know how the County addresses impacts to vegetative buffers that are required per County Ordinances. Therefore please use this information according to your legal authority. I am hesitant to evaluate the probability of success in the mitigation area without a site visit. Likewise, the proposed 2.1 ratio should be adequately verified in the field. The Army Corps of Engineers starts at a 3.1 so in all aspects more mitigation may be required. If you have questions please feel free to contact me at extension 770. ROBBYN MYERS Environmental Coordinator Allan Borden - Mason County 16.,Auq_ ing resul ts d o c Page 1 RESULTS OF THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING ON 16 AUGUST 2000 The Pre-Application Meeting was convened in the Mason County Department of Community Development Office at 2:30 PM on 16 August 2000 to discuss the proposed Recreational Vehicle (RV) Park located off the Grapeview Loop Road. Glen Jurges will make corrections and/or additions to the minutes of the meeting on 16 August 2000 after they are reviewed by the attendees. If comments are not received by 31 August 2000, it will be assumed the minutes are correct as written. The minutes will be sent to the Department of Community Development for record purposes. Attendees were; Dave Salzer, Director of the Department of Community Development; Allan Borden, Senior Planner; Craig Baldwin, RE, WestSound Engineering; Deborah Riley, RS, and Pam Denton, RS of Environmental Health; Kelly Mayo, Permit Assistance Center; Allan Tahja, PE, Public Works, and Glen Jurges, P.E, Owner'of the Property. Mason County Department of Community Development Letter of 5 April 2000 stated"that the subject property has been designated as Rural Area. According to the invalidated Mason County land use matrix a facility such as yours would be classified as conforming land use". The proposed Hamlet around Fair Harbor does not include the subject property. Purpose of the Pre-Application Meeting; a. Mason County representatives present their requirements and comments regarding roads, septic, water, lot configuration, fire flow, setbacks, community center, etc. for the proposed RV Park. b. Determine if the sewer line being installed along Grapeview Loop Road will extend to the subject property. C. How will the amended Title 16, Mason County Subdivision Ordinance, of 12 October 1999 stating this title shall not apply to "A division for the purpose of lease when no residential structure other than mobile homes or travel trailers are permitted to be placed upon the land" affect the proposal? 1. Glen Jurges reviewed the history of the subject property noting that it is part of the Plat of Detroit 92 recorded in 1890. There are two parcels of approximately the same size are classified as rural but only the southern parcel is being proposed for an RV Park. The previous owners logged, stumped, and roughed in the platted roads. Previous wetland violations are being corrected. The Seattle District of the Corps of Engineers violations have been satisfied. The proposed RV Park is unique in nature, low impact, and provides affordable housing in a sensitive area due to the wetlands and buffers. 67 lots are designed for Park Model RVs which can be used as a permanent residence. Each lot will be leased with a full time on-site manager. Allan Borden Mason County 16 August 00 Meeting results.doc Page 2 ` 2. Department of Community Development, Allan Borden. a. The Mason County Ordnance 118-91 of October 1991 for Mobile Homes and Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parks must be followed as it provides the general guidance. It was agreed the proposed land use is an RV Park and NOT a Mobile Home Park. b. 78 proposed spaces, 67 for Park Models and 11 temporary, was acceptable as long as all the other county regulations and procedures are followed. C. Structures cannot be located on lot lines. It was unclear if the existing lots (30' x 100') shown on the original plat resulted in actual lot lines or not. Each block was definitely a legally platted parcel. ACTION: Kelly Mayo was to investigate the lot line issue. d. If a unit is located for greater than 6 months it must be permanently attached to the ground. e. A building permit is required for each installed unit. f. A SEPA is required as part of the permit process. g. A public hearing is required. h. All internal roads must be privately owned. ACTION: Glen Jurges will apply for the roads to become private. i. Buffers will be required between lots and around the entire RV Park. j. The the Community Center must be defined in the permit application. 11. Department of Heath Services, Pam Denton. a. The proposed RV Park is considered a development and the density must be in accordance with WAC 246-272. The state requires a"Method Two" Analysis. The results must be documented in the SEPA with the permit application. 'b. The daily flow rates determines the size and number of septic tanks. Several units can discharge into one large septic tank and the liquids pumped to a community drainfield. C. 3500 gpd and less is under the local jurisdiction. When aseptic system is designed to be 2000 to 3500 gpd Mason County uses the state guidelines for larger on-site drainfields but still can approved locally. d. The existing soil log data is acceptable for the proposed use. e. An approved septic system permit is required before installation. f. The flow requirement for a 2 bedroom unit is minimum of 240 gpd. g. Provide flow data from a comparable RV Park with peaks and valleys during the highest demand months can be used to determine water requirements. ACTION: Glen Jurges will obtain water usage data from Whaleshead Beach Resort RV Park in Oregon. 8. Department of Heath Services,7Deborah Riley and Dave Salzer of the Department of Community Development. a. If the proposed RV Park requires greater than 5000 gpd water rights from Allan Borde _. _ _ . .. _......... ..... n Mason County.16 August 00 Meeting results.doc Page 3 DOE are required. ACTION: • Glen Jurges to investigate if water rights were ever granted for the property. a. What if two wells are drilled each having less than 5000 gpd? ACTION: Deborah will investigate the specific regulations with drilling more than one well. b. Water systems that serve more than 6 connections have been allowed without water rights when daily water usage does not exceed 5000 gpd. C. Fire flow requirements are in addition to the domestic water. d. Fire flow is 1000 gpm for one hour at 20 psi at the hydrant. Spacing of hydrants is usually 500 feet but can be evaluated on a case basis. e. A looped water system can use 6 inch mains. 6. Department of Public Works, Alan Tahja. a. Dead ended roads require a turnaround if longer than 150 feet. b. Use only one access off Grapeview Loop Road for ingress and egress. C. The Storm Water Drainage Site Plan must conform to the 1998 Puget Sound Water Quality Standards. d. Will require justification if detention ponds are not needed for erosion control. e. There are two methods for determining storm water drainage-, the long and short methods. Can use either method but need to justify. f. Must provide downstream analysis for discharging storm water. Make sure there is no discharge into any environmental sensitive areas. g. Water quality treatment is based on the six month storm. h. An operation and maintenance covenant is required. i. Must estimate road traffic generated from the RV Park and Mason County will determine if any improvements are required for Grapeview Loop Road. 10. Permit Assistance Center, Kelly Mayo. a. A separate permit is required for each RV Park Model placed on a lot. b. Setbacks are 5 feet from property lines and 10 feet from county roads. C. Decks less than 30 inches above grade do not require a permit. d. Mason County does not regulate motorized vehicles. e. A community center less that 4000 square feet does not require engineering, however, a electrical and plumbing schematics are required. f. If the community center requires a commercial kitchen then additional specifications are required. g. Can use a residential style kitchen and laundry facilities. h. Non-Residential Energy Code Compliance requirements was provided. These minutes have been reviewed and agreed to by Glen Jurges and Craig Baldwin.