HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLD2009-00195 Pre-Inspection - BLD Permit / Conditions - 3/23/2009 Inspection Line(360)427-7262
MASON COUNTY DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Phone: (360)427-9670,ext.352
Mason County Bldg. III 426 W. Cedar P.O. Box 186
M" lrf,, Shelton, WA 98584
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT BLD2009-00195
OWNER: JOHN WILKINS RECEIVED: 3/20/2009
CONTRACTOR: LICENSE: EXP: ISSUED: 3/23/2009
SITE ADDRESS: 591 E NORTH BAY RD BELFAIR EXPIRES: 9/23/2009
PARCEL NUMBER: 122174100082
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TR 8-13 OF GOVT LOT 3 & NW SE &TR 9-A OF GOVT LOT 3 S 10/59
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: DIRECTIONS TO SITE:
Pre-Inspection On North Bay Rd.
Generar Information Construction&Occupancy Information Square Footage Information
No. of Bedrooms: Type of Constr.:
Type of Use: SF Insp. Area: No. of Bathrooms: Occ. Group: Lot Size: Deck.
Type of Work: PRE Fire Dist.: 5 No. of Stories: Occ. Load: Building:
Valuation: Building Height: Occ. Status: Basement:
Manufactured Home Information Setback Information Shoreline&Planning Information
Water Body:
Make: Length: Ft. Front: Ft. Shoreline: Ft. SEPA?:
Model: Width: Ft. Rear: Ft, Slope: Ft. Shoreline Desi
Side 1: Ft. g..
Year: Serial No. Side 2: Ft. Comp. Plan Desig.:
Plumbing Fixtures Mechanical Fixtures FEES
Type Qty. Type Qty. Type By Date Amount Receipt
Building Pre-Site Inspection KKK 3/20/2009 $73.00 S22009000
Total $73.00
BLD2009-00195 Please refer to the following pages for conditions of this permit. 1 of 2
CASE NOTES FOR
B LD 20 09-00195
CONDITIONS FOR
B LD 20 0 9-00195
This permit becomes null and void if work or construction authorized is not commenced within 180 days,or if construction or work is suspended fora period of 180 days at anytime after work is
commenced. Evidence of continuation of work is a progress inspection within the 180 day period. Final inspection must be approved before building can be occupied. Proof of continuation of
work is by means of a progress inspection.The owner or the agent on the owners behalf,represents that the information provided is accurate and grants employees of Mason County access to
the above described property and structure for review and inspection.
OWNER OR AGENT: DATE:
BLD2009-00195 Please refer to the following pages for conditions of this permit 2 of 2
o CONCRETE MECHANICAL MANUFACTURED HOME
Footings I Setbacks Date By Ribbons
1P Gas Piping
Z
C)
C) Interior Date By interior-Ooze By Date By U)
(0 Exter*r Date By Exterior-Date By Set-up C_
Point Load I Isolated Footings INSULATION BG I SLAB INSULATION Dale. 0
=
Date - By Date, By FIRE DEPARTMENT Z
Foundation Walls Floors Date By
Date BY Data By DECKS
FRAMING Walls Dale By
Date BY Data By PROPANE TANKS
PLUMBING Vault Date By
Date 'y OTHER
Groundwork Attic
Date By Date By Type.
Date By
DRYWALL Type
InL Brace Wall Date By co
Date By Date By r-
FINAL INSPECTION
(D Water Line Fire Seperation
2) CD
Date By Date By Date By CD
(D
Pass or Request Inspect CD
CD
0
Type of Insp. Fail Date Date Done By Comments
(D
'y--3 6 5-t-co
_0
CD Cn
0
:3
(n
cn
-a
(D
w
6
U3 C) J s �a
5 k" rs
4- s �v✓
roo
Please have ESC make the necessary revisions and forward them to my attention.
MEP REVIEW
On September 30te I initiated the 14-day comment period for your MEP for the restoration of the
wetland buffer. I have reviewed The Wetland Corps(TWC)Restoration Plan and find it
acceptable. What is needed at this point is a copy of your contract with TWC for the restoration
plus three years of annual monitoring(note,only three years of monitoring is required--not five
years--as this is restoration,not mitigation).I also need a performance bond or similar security
in the amount of 150%of the contract.The County will hold this amount until the three years of
monitoring are complete and TWC has declared the restoration to be successful. I am enclosing a
form that you may use for this purpose.
If you have additional questions,I can be reached at ext. 571 or by e-mail at
mmsgco.mason.wa.us.Thank you.
Sincerely,
1 �
V
Michael MacSems
Subdivision Reviewer
cc: Wilkins Northbay LLC
Christine Clark
The Wetland Corps
tie°N CO MASON COUNTY
� rp Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O. Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
854
Nels Rosendahl
1950 Lost Creek Road
Bremerton,WA 98312
October 1,2009
RE: 12217-41-00082
Dear Mr. Rosendahl,
This is a follow up to my letter of letter of September 23'd and specifically concerns the status of
the geo-technical review and the MEP for wetland buffer restoration.
GEO REVIEW
When I was on site yesterday to post the Notice of Application for the MEP I looked at the cut
bank on the west side of SR 3,which are the 40%+slopes I alluded to in my previous letter.
Based on my filed observation and a close look at the County's GIS contour map it does not
appear that the cut bank on SR 3(within 300' of the NE corner of this parcel)is tall enough(over
10' high)to trigger a geotechnical report.In your e-mail of September 24`h you explained the
reason for the lack of any discussion of slopes to the west of the parcel being a lack of permission
from the adjacent land owner(s)to inspect their property.You also offered to provide a more
general statement about off site conditions.Because of the difficulties your team has encountered
and because there appears to be no significant change in topography within the study area,I will
accept a general description of the off site area within 300 feet,provided that Figure 2 is revised
to cover this area.Had the topography been significantly steeper,I would have reached another
conclusion.
I have completed a preliminary review of the ESC geotechnical report and submittal checklist and
have identified the following items that need to be satisfied before the checklist and report can be
deemed to be complete:
Item 6: I could not find the quasi-static analysis coefficient value.
Item 7.d: I could not find a discussion or recommendations for buffers from landslide hazard
areas.If none are required,that should be clearly stated.
Item Te.: Same as Item 7.d.
Item 10: I could not find a discussion of on and off site impacts.
Item 12: Same as Item 10.
Item 13: The site map should include land with in 300 feet of the proposal.
I can be reached at ext. 571 or by e-mail at mms@co.mason.wa.us if you have any
additional questions. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Michael MacSems
Subdivision Reviewer
cc: John Wilkins
Christine Clark
Fred Perryman
rB°N co MASON COUNTY
� rp Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
1 54
Nels Rosendahl
Rosendahl Engineering
1950 Lost Creek Lane
Bremerton, WA 98312
Re: 12217-41-00082
August 4, 2009
Dear Mr. Rosendahl,
This letter concerns the short subdivision application for your client John Wilkins on the
above referenced parcel. On July 23`d you delivered to me the following items: 4 plan
sets, 1 set of Lot Closures, 2 Geo-Reports by ESC, 1 Submittal Checklist for the ESC
Geo Report, 1 photocopy of Declaration of Short Subdivision, 2 Wetland Receiving
Waters Analysis by TWC and 2 Wetland (buffer) Restoration Plans by TWC.
I will forward the lot closures, a plan set and a copy of the Wetland Receiving Water
Analysis to Fred Perryman at Mason County Public Works for review.
I note that the Declaration of Short Subdivision that you provided me is a photocopy. I
will need to original when it comes time to record the Declaration.
The geo-report will require a review fee of$255.00 payable to the Mason County
Treasurer. You may send the check to my attention and I will deliver it to the Permit
Assistance Center. I can't spend any time on this document until the submittal fee is paid.
Regarding the Wetland Restoration Plan, there is a$455.00 (HMP) fee that must be paid
prior to review. The check should be payable to the Mason County Treasurer. You may
send the check to my attention and I will deliver it to the Permit Assistance Center.
Please don't forget that a Mason Environmental Permit (MEP) with triple fees ($1890.00)
plus a$255.00 planning violation fee is also required per Christine Clark's letter of
3/23/09.
Also, for your information,per 15.05.040.C, you have up to 180 days to provide the
items requested in this letter. Failure to provide the required material with in 180 days
may result in the closing of this case.
(3/25/2009) Charell Holcomb - Fwd. Re: David Squires Recap Page 3
7. June 2008: Of the few incorrectly sized plants planted in the wetland,
most were dead. There was no plan detailing this submitted.
8. December 2008: MEP2006-00073's condition that the road be removed was
not met.
There is an important part to all this which I should also include. In
August of 2005, Lots 15 and 16 were purchased together and cleared by both
David
Squires and his father. In February 2006 David Squires transferred Lot 16 to
his parents, which is where the wetland fill and road are located (the
wetland spans both lots). At a March 2007 meeting on Scott Drive, Emmett Dobey
asked whether I thought David Squires may declare bankruptcy, leaving Lots 15
and 16 unrestored, and his parents with Lot 16, while he was allowed to walk
away. It was a prescient question as David Squires is now dealing with his
bank over that exact issue. However, it should not prevent the county from
requiring that this unpermitted road be removed and the wetland be restored.
Jules
**************Great Deals on Dell 15" Laptops - Starting at $479
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575xl220029O5Oxl201385914/aol?redir=ht
tp:%2F%2Fad.doub
leclick.net%2Fclk%3B212974460%3B34272906%3Bh)
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above.See yours in just 2 easy steps!(
http://or.atwola.com/promocl k/100126575x l220685763xl201394209/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fvvww.freecreditr
eport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpaID%3D62%26bcd%3DMarchfooterNO62)
(3/25/2009) Charell Holcomb - Fwd: Re: David Squires Recap Page 2
At this time, I do not know when this property will be scheduled to go before the
Hearings Examiner. We are experiencing another notice of lay-offs, and this will
possibly result in a shift of employee duties and work load. At the moment, my
priority is to respond to new complaints to prevent these potential situations, secondly
work with those wanting to obtain compliance, and then attempting to make progress
with such a large back log.
The violations that have occurred at this property are serious, and Planning will not
consider the case resolved until all items in the restoration plan are met. Thank you
for your assistance in this matter.
Christine Clark, R.S.
Department of Community Development
(360) 427-9670 xt.577
>>> <JJNM@aol.com> 3/19/2009 10:28 AM >>>
Hello Christine - I received Kell's note regarding your picking up the issue
with David Squires' unpermitted wetland clearing and road construction which
occurred in August of 2005. Kell can confirm all of what follows (except
for Emmett Dobey's question at the end, as I believe she had left the meeting
before he made it). It is important for you to have in order to appreciate the
frustration the neighbors and I have about this. There are far more details
than those described below, but you'll get the idea from what's provided.
1. July 2004: A site pre-inspection described wetlands and shoreline
buffers on lots 15 and 16 to a prospective purchaser who, based on that
inspection, chose not to purchase the property.
2. August 2005: Those shoreline buffers and wetland (Category 2 with a
high habitat function) described in the inspection report were cleared and a
road was constructed through the wetland without permits or notification.
3. October 2005: The above was confirmed by the county and Ecology.
4. September 2006: The county rejected the wetland delineation and
restoration plan and required the road to be removed which Squires agreed to.
5. September 2006: Squires committed to the Army Corps to remove the road
and restore the wetland by June of 2007.
6. June 2007: HEX2007-00016
(http://www.co.mason.wa.us/permits/main.php?caseno=HEX2007-00016) was
canceled after the restoration plan and agreement to
remove the road were received. The restoration plan detailed quantities and
sizes of plants to be used; that planting would be completed by December;
and that a follow-up plan would be submitted by June of 2008.
(3/25/2009) Charell Holcomb - Fwd: Re: David Squires Recap Page 1
w
From: Kell McAboy
To: Charell Holcomb
Date: 3/23/2009 8:45 AM
Subject: Fwd: Re: David Squires Recap
Can you make sure MEP2006-00073 gets cancelled?
Thanks.
Kell
>>> On 3/22/2009 at 7:41 PM, in message <d29.414511e2.36f850f3aaol.com>, <JJNM@aol.com> wrote:
Thanks for getting back to me Christine. I believe the MEP2006-00073 and ENF2005-00285's restoration and monitoring are two
separate issues. MEP should simply be canceled. It did not meet the conditions set in the permit. After cancellation,then time can
be found for the remaining road and ENF2005-00285 to be heard before a hearing examiner.
After two years and then the threat of a hearing (HEX2007-00016), in June 2007, David
Squires submitted a restoration plan in order to move the enforcement case ENF2005-
00285 to a "monitoring" phase. This required specific plants (not planted) and a
monitoring plan to be submitted in June of 2008 (not submitted). I believe this is
appropriate for a Hearing Examiner.
MEP2006-00073, an environmental permit issued for the construction of his bridge, was
conditioned with the work being completed by December 31, 2008. Nor did it meet the
Corps' requirements, now a violation with them. Therefor the permit should be
canceled, as his greenhouse permit was. After the cancellation, a decision on when to
submit this case to a hearing examiner can be made.
Unless there is something I missed, it would seem that the cancellation of MEP2006-
00073 is appropriate.
Jules
In a message dated 3/20/2009 11:26:18 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
ChrissyC@co.mason.wa.us writes:
Thank you for the informative background information. As you know, this is still an
open enforcement complaint with our Department. This means that we do not
consider this matter resolved. From the brief over view that I've had concerning this
case, brief meaning today, I would consider taking both properties before the Hearing
Examiner.
The enforcement actions would be pursued against the current legal owners.
Currently, this would include David Squires and his parents. Bankruptcy may
complicate the process, but it would not stop the property owner from being held
responsible.
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Shelton(360)427-9670
Mason County Bldg. I Belfair(360)275-4467
411 N 5th Street Elma(360)482-5269
,> PO Box 279 HOME PAGE—www.co.mason.wa.us
t,ti,r Shelton,WA 98584
March 23, 2009
Nels Rosendahl To
1950 Lost Creek Rd 8E KEPT IN THE
Bremerton, WA 98312 PARCEL FILE
PARCEL NUMBER: 46217-41-00082
SITE ADDRESS: 591 North Bay Rd
OWNER INFORMATION: Wilkins Northbay LLC
Dear Mr. Rosendahl,
Thank you for speaking with MCDCD on March 20, 2009. As stated, I am sending the following information that
describes the fees and steps associated with gaining compliance for the enforcement case.
• Pay Planning violation fee, $255.00
• Submit after-the-fact Mason Environmental Permit, $1890.00. Project description should address logging
within slopes>15%, encroachment within wetland buffer,and proposal to install fence around pond.
• Submit Habitat Management Plan, $445.00. Section of plan will need to include description describing the
tire-lined pond,and how maintaining it this way is the better option vs. removal of the tires.
• Geotechnical study does not need to be submitted at this time, but will need to be submitted in conjunction
with your short subdivision review as discussed with Michael MacSems, $255.00.
If you have questions regarding the compliance requirements,please contact me at (360)427-9670 ext. 577. Thank
you for anticipated cooperation.
Sincerely,
Christine Clark, R.S.
Planner, Code Enforcement
As for the speed limit question, please contact Mason County Public Works at ext. 450,.
and ask about how to petition for such a change.
In conclusion, you should assume that this application will eventually be approved
provided that the applicant can demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with all county
codes and regulations.
The owner,of the property will be required to repair damage to the wetland buffer and
come into compliance for stormwater and other impacts.
The short subdivision process is an administrative review, meaning that a public hearing
is not, and can not be,required. However anyone may comment on the proposal. For your
information a public notice(identical to the one you received in the mail)was posted:at
the site for members of the public to read and respond to.
If you have further questions,I can be reached at the address above,by telephone at ext.::
571:or by e-mail at nuns Ca co.mason:wa.us. Thank you:
Sincerely;
Michael!MacSems
Subdivision Reviewer
Barbara Adkins
= Fred Perryman
Christine Clark
Arlene Hyatt
�00S cop,4�A MASON COUNTY Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N. 5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O. Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
1854
Lorraine Plumber
1516 N 121 St
Seattle, WA 98133-8439
March 20, 2009
Re: 12217-41-00082
Dear Ms Plumber,
This letter is in follow up to your letter of March 4`h,concerning the Wilkins Northhay
LLC application to short subdivide the above referenced parcel into nine lots. I do
appreciate your concerns and take them seriously. Some things I can help you with and
some I can't.
You are quite right that land clearing and road grading activities have occurred on this
parcel without the required permits. Code Enforcement Officer Christine Clark has;-,.,,,,-.,:
started a.file for this case,but much of what was done without the proper permits will .i i
have to be addressed through the short plating process (steep slopes, stormwater control
and wetland protection). You are correct that the stormwater code does require a no net �:;i ; •: _::;::+ ::
increase of stormwater runoff from the site. In my.opinion, this would apply to the
relatively recent unpermited activity as well.However I expect that the onus will be can
you and your neighbors to prove the hydrological changes to you property that you have
described in your letter. The stormwater,piece:of this project is being reviewed by Fted:
Perryman(ext. 625) in Mason County Public.Works.
As far as the wetlands go, a wetland study was conducted in 2007 by Wiltermood &: r
Associates and it was determined to be a Class III wetland with an 80' buffer and
additional 15' building setback. I expect that the new road will ultimately be relocated:!:
out of the wetland buffer and the buffer restored. It is true that the original stretch of
driveway will need to be widened to meet code,and this will require a Wetland Impatdt
Mitigation Plan.
In regards to your concerns about the well and water system for this project, the water,
system is being reviewed by Arlene Hyatt (ext. 293) of Mason County Public Health. I
have forwarded your letter on to her.
Regarding the density, I can understand you concern,but this property was zoned
Residential 1 (R 1) in 2007 which allows for single family residences and duplexes with a
density of up to 4 dwelling units per acre(which is a greater density than what is being
proposed here).
Y�
�n+ 1
r
1'i 4
L����oq 5ql Ala�rN 13,4y R�
a
• ,;
V
T �
f
.ter
4
C
j . .
315 to 9 5O'1 W#r�l MY fD
more than one unit per acre) should have a buffer zone of 80-150 feet rather than
the 30 feet shown on the proposed plan_ Has this map been approved by Mason
County, or were the wetland borders proposed by the engineer or the property
owner? Even as approved, it does not appear feasible to install a 20-foot wide
access to the property without further encroaching on the wetland area.
f. The current speed limit on E. North Bay Road is 50 mph. The road is essentially
a straightaway from the town of Allyn until the road veers northeastward beyond
the old oyster farm. Many drivers exceed the speed limit in this area. I am
concerned that the addition of nine (and possibly a total of eighteen, if a
proposed subdivision to the north of the current proposal is also approved)
residences will put many more drivers and passengers at risk of harm unless the
speed limit is lowered. The additional residences will mean that school buses,
postal vehicles, garbage trucks, and other personal vehicles will be using the
road and turning into and out of the subdivision(s). Unless the speed limit can be
lowered to 40 mph (as it is for the road on the other side of North Bay), this
subdivision poses threats to personal safety.
Because of these concerns, I request three actions:
1. This application should not be approved, and
2. The owner of the parcel should repair the damage that he has already caused by
capping the well, restoring the wetlands, re-planting the parcel, and complying with
Mason County requirements in this area, and
3. A public hearing should be held so that all community members can comment on the
proposed sub-division.
Thank you very much for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Lorraine Plummer
Copies to: Mr. Fred Perryman, Mason County Public Works Department
Mr. Gary Burleson, Mason County Prosecutor's Office
V
c. Since the owner of the parcel had a well dug, we have noticed a decrease in
water pressure from our own well, and, at times, a sulfurous odor from the water.
3. In addition to my concerns about the impact this project has already had I have
additional concerns about the further impact the project will have if approved.
a. I am concerned about additional negative effects on storm water management
from:
i. roof run-off from nine single-family residences and assorted outbuildings,
ii. pesticide and herbicide run-off from lawns and gardens,
iii. increased run-off from impermeable surfaces of roads and driveways.
b. I am concerned that the addition of nine additional residences will have a serious
negative effect on the quantity and quality of water for the existing residents.
Since both quality and quantity of water from the aquifer have already been
negatively affected, the situation can only deteriorate when nine families are
added via a community well on the parcel.
c. I am concerned about the impact of the proposed project on the management of
the wetlands in this area and their important relationship with the health of Puget
Sound. Our concerns were raised when Mr_ Nels Rosendahl, an engineer acting
for the parcel owner, approached our neighbor (with whom we share a driveway)
to ask if he could run a nine-inch drainage pipe down the driveway to drain water
from the proposed sub-division. He told our neighbor that he had a permit for
this work, but we could find no evidence for such a permit having been issued.
We did not give him permission to run such a pipe. Evidently, Mr. Rosendahl has
similar concerns about water management since he stated in a telephone call to
my daughter-in-law that if we did not grant permission for such a pipe to be laid,
our property would suffer degradation. It is our understanding that it is the
property owner's responsibility to manage water within the confines of his
property. Since we have already suffered damage because of what has already
been done to the parcel in question, we are even more concerned about the
management and safety of these wetlands if this application is approved.
d. The section of E. North Bay Road for which this sub-division is proposed is
almost exclusively single-family residences on lots of more than one-quarter
acre. The proposed sub-division includes nine lots, the majority of which are
quite a bit smaller than the surrounding lots. This represents a drastic change in
the character of the neighborhood, one that I believe affects more than the
owners who live within 300 feet of the proposed sub-division. I believe that all
the owners along this section of E. North Bay Road should have an opportunity
to comment on this proposed sub-division.
e. The plan of the proposed sub-division does not show the wetland border clearly.
Is the wetland on the parcel a Class III wetland? My understanding is that
potential development with a high impact (such as a residential subdivision with
�1
\ILorraine Plummer
1516 N. 121 St.
A S Seattle, WA 98133-8413
March 4, 2009 R 'GENE
Michael MacSems MAR 1 ? ZUO
Mason County Department of Community Development
Planning M CC D - PLANNiN(r
Mason County Building
P.O. Box 279
Shelton, WA 98584
Dear Mr. MacSems:
Subject: Notice of Application, Nine Lot short Subdivision with SEPA (SPRL2007-
00023, SEP2007-,9-00139)
I am writing a public comment regarding the above-referenced permits. I own a
property within 300' of the proposed subdivision, and have several concerns and
questions about the project:
1. There appears to have been considerable work done on the parcel in question
without any approved permits that I could find. For example:
a. The parcel has been logged and the stumps have been removed.
b. The parcel has been graded.
c. A road has been bulldozed from one end of the parcel to the other.
d. A well has been dug at the site on the proposal map that shows a "proposed"
well.
e. A large drain pipe has been installed that carries over-flow from the well down
the parcel into the drainage ditch at the edge of E. North Bay Road.
2. The impact of this un-permitted work has already had damaging effects on the three
parcels (including mine) to the southwest. This damage includes:
a. Standing water in the wetland area has increased dramatically since the parcel in
question was logged and graded. This has caused de-stabilization of the trees in
the area, threatening the residences to the east and south of the parcel, and
changing the wetlands from seasonally flooded to permanently flooded.
b. Since the logging, the increased water flow has caused considerable erosion to
the north side of the creek that borders the north boundary of my property and
that flows into North Bay. This erosion is endangering the integrity of my
neighbor's bulkhead and has changed the character of the creek from seasonal
flow (down to a trickle in late summer) to a permanent flow.
the wetland buffer.I am enclosing the Wetlands chapter of the Mason County Critical Areas
Ordinance for your review.
Geo-Technical Review
As we have previously discussed,a geological assessment was submitted for this project as well
as for the Kinney project in April 2007. It was forwarded to Mason County Public Works for
review. Initially there were exchanges between the reviewing engineer John Sliva and the author
David Strong.In March 2008,John Sliva concluded that a full geotechnical report was required
due to the proximity of the 40%+slopes in the SR 3 road grade. As nearly as I can tell Mr. Strong
never provided a report and the review has been on Hold in Public Works ever since.
If you wish to restart the review,you can have a complete geotechnical report,along with a
Submittal Checklist (form enclosed)and$255 (payable to the Mason County Treasurer)
delivered to the Mason County Permit Assistance Center at 426 W Cedar Street(P.O.Box 186,
Shelton,WA 98584). Consistent with newer procedures,I will then review checklist.
Other Departments Reviews
Your application is also under review by Environmental Health,Public Works,and Waste&
Utilities.The Fire Marshal has already signed off on his review.
Water System
As you know this project is dependent on the County approval of a nine-party Group B water
system.According to Arlene Hyatt,the well site has been approved but an actual water system as
not.
SEPA Review
I will be able to issue a threshold SEPA determination once the geo-report and the wetland issues
have been resolved.
If you have additional questions,I can be reached at ext. 571 or by e-mail at
mms(i,co.mason.wa.us.Thank you.
Sincerely,
_W�
Michael MacSems
Subdivision Reviewer
cc: John Wilkins
Bob Emerson
Christine Clark
Fred Perryman
Tom Moore
Amanda Reynolds
Pg014 oo&'t� MASON COUNTY Shelton (360) 427-9670
A DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Belfair (360) 275-4467
Planning
Mason County Bldg. 1 411 N.5th Elma (360) 482-5269
P.O.Box 279 Shelton,WA 98584
N
Nels Rosendahl
1950 Lost Creek Road
Bremerton,WA 98312
March 2, 2009
RE: 12217-41-00082
Dear Mr.Rosendahl, '
I ma writing to you in regards to the short subdivision application that your client Wilkins
Northbay LLC has submitted on the above referenced parcel. It is my understanding that you are
now my contact person for this application please let me know if I am mistaken.
On February 23`d I inspected the Wilkins property and must say that was dismayed by what
saw. In the past year or so, someone has completely logged,denuded,graded and built a road
through the property without any of the required permits.Mason County has aerial photos of this
site from the summer of 2005, so we do have a recorded of how the property has changed over
time.Additionally the newly graded road encroaches into the buffer of the wetland at the bottom
of the site.Based on the aerial photo,I will give Mr.the Wilkins the benefit of the doubt that
logging was not jurisdictional under state forest practice laws(1 '/2 tree lengths from homes):
However the work done does appear to be a violation of the Landslide Hazard and Wetlands
chapters of the Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance as well as Chapter 14.44(Excavation and
Grading)and 14.48 (Stormwater and Erosion Control)of the Mason County Building Code. 1
have referred the matter to Code Enforcement Officer Christine Clark(ext. 577).It is not known
how these apparent land use violations will eventually affect your application,though it is
possible that the road through the wetland buffer will have to be removed and restored.
Beyond the code enforcement issues, I have the following comments:
Business Relationship with Kinney Estate
I forwarded your explanation of the business relationship(or lack there of)between John Wilkins
and the Jay Kinney Estate to the Prosecuting Attorney's office for review. As of today's date I
have to heard back.I will assume that your letter has been found acceptable until and unless I
hear otherwise.
Wetland Buffers
As you know the existing driveway crosses through the 80'buffer of a Category III wetland. In
order to bring this driveway up to Fire Code requirements(20' all weather surface) some
widening will be required.However I am not convinced that all of the new road grading in the
wetland buffer is necessary to achieve reasonable use of this property.In either case a Wetland
Impact Mitigation Plan(17.07.070.F)will be required for whatever necessary work is required in
BLD
MASON COUNTY _
PRE-INSPECTION APPLICATION �D )
426 W. Cedar—P.O.BOX 186, Shelton, WA 98584 - (360)427-9670
$73.00 Fee Required prior to Inspection
PLEASE PRINT
Owner DaytimePhone#
Site Address S h / citye ` f
Mail Address S201 u ys' Z'
cityAe ✓ e State (,{/ Zip9g�0�6
Applicant O k" -e
Applicant Address
cityState Zip
Parcel No. : /ZZ/2 ^ y� —' (700 Ff 2
Legal Description: ze,w eC 17 Za, Z
Purpose of Pre-Inspection:
Use of Building: j
Indicate by checking the applicable source if any water is on or adjacent to subject property:
0 saltwater ❑ lake ❑ stream ❑ marsh ❑ river M'pond ❑ wetland ❑ seasonal runoff ❑ other
Directions to site:
Show the following on the site plan below: Lot dimensions, existing structures, structure setbacks, water lines, septic sytems, flood
zones,wells,shorelines,easements,name of flanking and grontage streets. Indiate direction by N, S,E, W,etc.
Applicant signature --- Date ��zc'
Date: D
FOR OFFICAL USE ONLY Acce ted b
Returned to:
Receipt No.
DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Planning: Proposal Proposal
Approved Denied
Building:
Fire Marshal:
Special Conditions:
�fC
3
01 7C
v '
� N
2
1 1 � t 1 1 11 � I I � I I I I`�/( \ \ I ► I�--1-/ --f --� \�
GRAPMC SCALE , iop000000ap "O
��y,-! III o�,E
4-1 /
_ P()OMAI)P.
Ifoaea I
!i 1
II I
It l
I I l l l I l' r � I + I I I
l I I l l l l i Il I I l l l l I 1 I CLEARING AREA
l ( I I I l l l l l l l l l l l l l l I 1. / 1 1 I I I I evwawwa. 3, ACRES
rrnuud+.�.emst (Cross—Hatched)
` l I illlllliiilllll � �:ll I I
O
cD
1 :3
Q
o 70
m
Wilkins Plat Nels Rose.,dahl;.,P.E
Final Drainage Report January 19, 2009
26