|
|
||||
|
|
           
|
|||
|
"Rath Addition" Final Plat Letter January 12, 2004 CERTIFIED MAIL / RETURN RECEIPT Doug Randles Bruce Rath Re:
Hamner Springs Final Plat (Rath Addition) Dear Mr. Randles: As you know, the town’s code,
together with requirements of Pierce County and Washington State
Statutes, govern the process and procedures for the filing and approval of a
final plat. In addition, there are other regulatory requirements established
by the Town and other state agencies. As well, as you are aware, the Town
has adopted the Pierce County Storm Manual and all the terms and conditions
thereto are applicable to your final plat requirements as well. The Town has worked with you in
establishing the terms and conditions required for moving your plat
forward for council review, adoption, and acceptance of public facilities.
These rules and requirements are imbedded in our code and remain the owners
/ developers responsibility for compliance. We have provided you with the
necessary information and support to help guide you to that end. Your final
plat process compliance is, for the most part complete.
However, we still do not have the required plat drawings with
applicable plat notation and other related detail, including as-constructed
plans and documentation. This is not a large matter, only one that requires
your attention and submission accordingly. We have reviewed and concurred
with your proposal to bond certain improvements for construction at a later
date. In addition, we have
worked with you to insure the appropriate and applicable maintenance bonds
as required by Town code. The Planning Commission, Board of
Adjustment, and Town Council established terms and conditions for the
preliminary subdivision. For the most part these general terms and
conditions have been met. However, a Mitigated Determination of Non
Significance (MDNS) was also considered part of your process and it
identified five items requiring compliance. A copy of that MDNS is included
for your records There are three MDNS items remaining
uncompleted and all of them are substantive and cannot be reduced in
their scope, waived, or otherwise negotiated by Town staff. Any substantive
modification to the MDNS must occur through a public hearing process.
I have checked those items on the attached copy of the MDNS to better
identify them *Item
number 5 on the MDNS requires that you build a reservoir of appropriate and
of adequate size, together with the dedication of
property, in order to provide service to your project above the 900’
elevation. The town has been working with you, the prior owner, and others
to design and construct a facility that is not only compliant with your
needs, but also addresses some of the Town’s deficiencies and future
growth requirements. This
approach results in cost savings to all parties. The estimated cost to the
town to construct this reservoir is $1.35 million. By the most
sensible analysis, we have identified your participatory requirement
at approximately $180,000.00. The
other option yet remaining is that you construct a reservoir, to town and
Washington State Department of Health (DOH) standards and of adequate size
and capacity to meet your specific needs and fully comply with all
regulatory requirements. We believe that approach will result in a higher
cost to you, and additional maintenance and operational burden to the town.
If this is your approach and intent, the town will alter its plan and design
– relocating the town reservoir to another site and or consider other
design options. However, in fairness to all, we have prepared four basic
alternatives for consideration by the Mayor and Town Council.
Each has some “policy” implication and may be subject to DOH
rejection. The costs of these
alternatives range between $124,000 to $185,000. Mr. Rath stated that the town’s
planner, Mart Kask, provided you with cost estimates for the construction of
a 60,000-gallon reservoir and suggested location, cost sharing, and
preliminary design perimeters. The
Town does not have a copy of this analysis or agreement.
I would be most appreciative if you would provide me with the
applicable Kask report stamped and certified by him as a professional
engineer in the State of Washington. The prior owner of the property, Mr.
Bruce Rath, has been in contact with the Town’s consulting engineer
(RH2) to discuss the reservoir sizing and potential financial sharing
options. Following his discussion with RH2, I have directed our consultants
to prepare four cost sharing scenarios.
They are described in the attached technical memorandum from RH2. On another, but related matter, MDNS
item #5 also requires the clear title dedication of applicable property for
the reservoir site and the dedication of offsite utility easement(s) for
sanitary sewer and other potential public facilities. Neither of these two
requirements have been met. The Town requires that all
development complies with Town Standards including concurrency management.
We can find no concurrency analysis in our records and no
level-of-service impact determination from the additional 980 vehicles per
day expected from your project. A
traffic/transportation analysis is necessary and any identified off-site
mitigation must be defined and an agreement reached for mitigation costs.
Enclosed you will find the applicable Town code. Recent snow and rain fall have
resulted in excessive inflow and infiltration evidence in your newly constructed
project. Some pipe sections, with no domestic connections whatsoever, were
indicating flows of between 1/8 and ¼ full pipe.
We have identified a number of manholes that were either un-grouted
or improperly grouted with excessive leaks and we believe that there are
pipe joints and other infiltration points throughout the system as well. The
town took the opportunity to perform television inspection of the sanitary
system and discovered a number of construction faults/flaws. In fact there
were significant lengths of pipe with resting water far in excess of that
allowed by typical and customary standard. The effective capacity of the
system, in some cases, has been so significantly reduced that the only
resolution is to remove and replace the offending pipe segments. The
remedial work required, had the plat been finalized, would be accomplished
under the surety established by your posted maintenance bond. However, since
the plat is not yet final, we are making the demand/request that the
applicable and required repairs be made at the first available opportunity.
All repairs necessary in that part of the system for which final plat
approval is requested (without delayed construction approval) must be
accomplished before the plat final process can be completed.
As mentioned, we have observed excessive inflow and infiltration into
the sanitary sewer system and this has resulted in a significant
loading/processing demand at our wastewater treatment plant. Town staff, our consulting engineer(s),
and others as may be appropriate, are prepared to meet with you and the
Town’s planner to discuss this matter in more detail.
However, until resolution is reached and an agreement established,
together with the appropriate surety and property dedication, we cannot move
your final plat forward for Council consideration. As mentioned previously
in this correspondence, significant modifications to the MDNS will require a
public hearing and that option is always available to you as well. If you
choose to have your project, or the MDNS component reheard, please let me
know and we will provide you with the particulars necessary for both process
and schedule. As you know, the town has adopted the
Pierce County Stormwater Manual. The
Town’s ordinance reads that wherever conflicts exist between Town
rules, standards, or code and the Pierce County Manual, the more stringent
application is to be imposed. Your fenced detention facility meets the
Town’s standard but does not meet the more strict requirements of the
Pierce County Manual. You have agreed, and the town has concurred, that you
will be allowed to paint the galvanized fence with an appropriate coating
applicably certified so as to be and or “equal” to the vinyl clad
requirements established in the Pierce County Manual. We have allowed the
minor variance associated with a narrower gate entrance to the facility. Your project, as well, has not been
fully complied with the erosion control requirements established by the
Pierce County Stormwater Manual and we have notified you a number of times
regarding erosion control fencing, slope protection, catch basin maintenance
and cleaning, etc. The town has not been party nor privy
to any third party agreements between yourself, Mr. Rath, Mr. Christian,
Mr. Nybo or others associated with this project. Any terms and agreements
between these or other involved parties do not constitute an agreement with
the town. Any verbal approvals, discussions, acknowledgements or other such
related matters by and from the town also do not constitute an agreement by
the town for the specific action associated. We do not know what your
arrangement is with Mr. Rath or Mr. Christian regarding the reservoir,
property dedication, easements and the like. The town’s concern is only
that such instruments be prepared such that we have clear title to the
reservoir site, that all easements be appropriately dedicated and accepted
by the town, and that a reservoir be constructed either by the town or by
you in compliance with local, Department of Health, building, and other
rules and regulations. It is important that Mr. Rath and
other interested parties understand that all contacts with the Town’s
engineers, planners, or other consultants, must be authorized through
the Mayor’s office or the office of Public Works. It is particularly
inappropriate if they are town officials and have a vested fiscal interest
in the outcome. The town did, after the fact, authorize RH2 to spend up to
one hour of billable time in order to better understand your position on the
water tank and related matters. Beyond that contact, and as mentioned previously, all
discussions of this matter will be confined to the town staff. I regret the ongoing and evolving
amount of confusion regarding your project. Typically each and every one
of these items is addressed through the preliminary plat process, full
compliance with code and associated standards and regulations, and with the
execution of a development agreement. Each
and every item presented in this letter, together with others that may not
yet have been established or discovered are defined and the compliance
responsibility is yours. Chapter
13.28 of the Town’s code requires the execution of a Development
Agreement. This agreement was apparently never prepared nor executed.
However, the general terms and conditions of the code, the MDNS
requirements, the preliminary plat findings and requirements, and other such
similar requirements “may form” the essence of an agreement. We have
asked the Town’s attorney for advice regarding explicit compliance with
this section of the code. As you also know, the town does not
currently have electrical service available to serve your project. As part
of your engineering review, we have reviewed your electrical submittal, made
comments and subsequently approved the electrical component of your project.
However, the town does not have electrical service immediately adjacent to
your project and must extend the service to comply with your need. We have
hired Gray & Osborne to design these extensions and provide the
necessary construction oversight to insure their timely construction and
completion. As well, we have directed them to calculate your fair share cost
for these extensions and associated and necessary equipment. We expect the
town will have that project completed within the next four months. If you have concerns and questions I
look forward to you bringing them to my attention at your convenience. I remain, Sincerely yours, F. Gregory Wilder, Interim Director
of Public Works Cc:
James Crabtree, Riipinen Surveying *Please
see MDNS
|
|
|
||
|
|
||||
We Care! |
