Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDENALI VIEW General Information (11)DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINING AND WATER MANAGEMENT TONY KNOWLE$, GOVERNOR 3601 C Street, Suite 800 Anchorage, ALASKA 99503-5935 Phone: (907) 269-8624 FAX: (907) 562-1384 November 21, 1997 Mr. Jim Cross Municipality of Anchorage Department of Health & Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650 Re: Denali View Subdivision RECEIVED NOV 2 5 1997 Mut~icipality of Anchorage Dept. Health & Human Ser¢ices Dear Mr. Cross, I have received a number of phone calls recently regarding the Denali View Subdivision and the progress of decisions, both by the Municipality concerning platting of the subdivision and by this Division in responding to eleven water right applications filed by Skiline View Corp. I have responded to these inquires by stating that the Division will not make any final decisions until the Municipality decides the platting issue. One of the concerns expressed is the fact that the developer has pending water right applications that pre-date some of the current homeowners in the area and the fact that not everyone in the surrounding subdivisions has water rights. Water rights in this case will not protect all current water users in the area, and the platting board should be aware of this fact. It is my understanding that the Municipality is considering hiring a third party hydrologist to review the data and past hydrologic work, and if necessary recommend a aquifer test that would address the situation and possibly allow for a more informed (independent) basis for the platting board's decision. If this is the case I agree with the approach. If this were not the case I would recommend that you consider it. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to participate in this decision making process and feel that a cooperative approach to this situation is in the best public interest. Sincerely, Gary J. Prokosch/~-) /' Chief, Water Resources Section cc: Roy Ireland, AHS DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ltEALTIt DlliECTOR'S OFFICE 555 CORDOVA STREET ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 http://www.state, ak. us/dec/home, htm TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR Telephone: (907) 269-7644 Fax: (907) 269-7654 E-mail: j adair~envircon.state, ak. us November 6, 1997 Sharon Minsch 16600 Centerfield Drive, #201 Eagle River, AK 99577 Dear Sharon: R[CEIVED NOV 10 1997 Mu.icipality of Anchorage Dept, Health & Human Services Enclosed you will find a copy of the letter I have sent to DHI Consulting regarding Keven Kleweno's letter of August 5, 1997 regarding Denali View Subdivision. I also wanted to respond to your October 2 letter to Art Ronimus, but let me start by apologizing for his not getting back to you. You had asked for clarification on a letter sent to Sheila Selkregg from Frank Cahill with McNalI and Associates about this project wherein Mr. Cahitl states that the state had already indicated approval of the subdivision. The state does not review for approval or disapproval subdivision plans within the Municipality of Anchorage. In fact, since the Legislature eliminated the funding for subdivision plan review in 1995, we have not reviewed subdivision plans anywhere in the state. The state has not "approved" the Denali View Subdivision; Mr. Cahill's letter is therefore incorrect. We were asked by the Municipality to provide comments on a report about this subdivision, which were provided in Keven's August 5 letter. However, even though we helped on this part, we won't be able to do more. The decision regarding the Denali View Subdivision is the Municipality's to make. Let me know if you have any other questions. Sincerely, air Director JA/id (j :\eh\directorhni.nseh. doc) CC: Commissioner Michele Brown Lura Morgan, Municipality of Anchorage Safe Food, Safe Water, Healthy Communities E~,~¥1RONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISIO t'[O"/ 1 0 1997 RECEJVEc DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIRECTOR' S OFFICE 555 CORDOVA STREET ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 http://www.state.ak, us/dec/home.htm TONY KNOWLE$, GOVERNOR Telephone: (907) 269-7644 Fax: (907) 269-7654 E-mail: j adair~envircon.state, ak. us November 6, 1997 Mr. Dee High DHIConsulting Engineers 800 E Dimond Blvd Anchorage, AK 99515 Dear Mr. High: RECEIVED NOV 1 0 1997 Municipality of Anchorage Oept, Health & Human Services You recently sent a letter to Keven Kleweno of my staff asking that he withdraw his letter of August 5 regarding the Denali View subdivision or provide you with the information upon which his letter was based. I have reviewed Mr. Kleweno's letter and our file regarding this area. Mr. Kleweno' s letter stands as the official comments of the Division of Environmental Health. The decision as to whether or not to approve the Denali View Subdivision rests with the Municipality. You are welcome to come in at any time that's mutually convenient for you and Mr. Kle~veno to review our files as the information that he used includes several area maps that we do not have the ability to replicate. I understand that this not the answer you had hoped to receive from us. You may ask Commissioner Michele Brown to reconsider this decision. She can be reached in our Juneau office at 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 105, Juneau 99801. Sincerely, Director JA/id (j :\eh\director\deehigh. doc) cc: Commissioner Michele Brown Lura Morgan, Municipality of Anchorage Sharon Minsch, President, Chugiak Community Council Safe Food, Safe Water, Healthy Communities Er,:'~ RONMENT.,~ SEE; ICES BI ~ . VIS 1997 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DiViSION OF MINING AND WA TER MANAGEMENT TONY KNOWL£$, GOV£RNOR 360~ C Street, Suite 800 Anchorage, ALASKA 99503 Phone: ($07) 269-8600 September 8, 1997 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Jennifer and Todd Carlson 19801 Sullins Drive Chugiak AK 99567 Subject: Free-Flowing Artesian Well Dear Mr. And Mrs. Carlson: RECEIVED SEP 1 1 1997 Municipality o[ A~onorage Dept. Health & Human Services The Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) is charged with managing and allocating our state's water resources so their use will return the maximum benefit to the public, while protecting existing rights. On July 28, 1997, the Department was notified that an artesian well on Lot 3, Block 1, Peters Gate Subdivision, has been running off water through a hole in the well casing at 8' below ground level since the well was drilled a few years ago. "11 AAC 93.290. COMMISSIONER'S ORDERS. la) In order to protect the public interest the commissioner will, in his or her discretion, issue any of the following orders: ... (2) a stop order to any person who, by means including free-flowing wells or drainage into lower strata underground, wastes water without putting it to a beneficial use;" A person causing an inefficient and wasteful diversion of water is in violation of state law, If you do own and maintain a free-flowing artesian well, the Department is asking for your cooperation at this time. You are requested to complete the development of this well, ceasing the wasteful flow of water, within 60 days of your receipt of this letter. Upon completion of the work, notify this office so further enforcement action will not be necessary. If you have an,/ questions, please call me at (907) 269-8642. Sincerely, Paul Myers Mayor Rick Mystr~'n Jim Cross, HHS Commissioner John Shively STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINING AND WA TER MANAGEMENT Alaska Hydrologic Survey Mr. Jim Cross Dept. of Health & Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 TONY KNOWLE$, GOVERNOR 3501 c Street, Suite 800 Anchorage, ALASKA 99503 Phone: (907) 26g-863g Fax: (907) 561-1384 September 8, 1997 Dear Jim, I have reviewed Jim Munter's plan for testing the Scimitar subdivision and the Denali View subdivision aquifers via the two wells they have already drilled. The plan appears to be adequate in the technical sense - upping the pumping rates and the duration of the tests would probably not add significantly to the information gathered, unless no observable effects occurred. That the aquifer could supply water in such quantities and yet have no effect on the observation wells is valuable information, but may not be sufficient for effective decision making. If there were no observed effects after the test, it could be inferred that the aquifer was not adequately stressed and thus would require either a longer test or a higher rate of pumping. The above tests would show performance under static conditions, but we also need to be aware of the consequences of added water extraction during the normal functioning of the subdivision. Water right holders may be impacted by the additional extraction of water, as they may already be by other water users. The combined impact of all water use needs to be determined. Would monitoring of wells in use during the test pumping reveal any additional information? Monitoring can be done manually, but requires diligence on the part of the field team. Data loggers are great in recording a high degree of detail, but any failure would be disastrous, so they would also need to be monitored too. Selection of observation wells at varying distances from the pumped wells should allow documentation of any observable effects. Interpretation of data observed in the recovery periods is also critical, and could reveal information regarding the size of the potential reservoir. Atmospheric pressure would also need to be observed so as to exclude spurious effects. A problem not addressed by any of these tests is the probability of coming up with a completely dry well within the bedrock. It is known that fractures are of finite extent, and wells in close proximity may vary dramatically in yield, even to the extent of some being dry. This is inherent in dealing with bedrock wells. Access to water should be proven prior to the release of each lot. The political (if that is the correct term!) aspects are much more of a problem. It is a severe imposition on a household to stop water use for one day, let alone the period asked for in the test plans (up to two weeks). While water users could cooperate with the plan, it is unlikely that ali would be able to do so for the duration of the testing. A model of the dynamic situation, if available, might avoid this situation. Sincerely y~,~ R~, Hydrologist. "Develop, Conserve and Enhance Natural Resources for Present and Future Alaskans" DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DRINKING WATER PROGRAM $55 CORDOVA STREET ANCHORAGE, AK 99501 ht~p ://www.stst~ak. us/decJho m efnim Mr. Dee High, P.E. Principle Dill Consulting Engineers Dimond Center ToWer, 5th Floor $00 E. Diamond Blvd., Suite 3-$45 Anchorage, Alaska 99515 · TONY KNOWI. E$, ~O'~'FINOR Subject: T~lephone: (907)269-7696 Fax: (907) 269-7655 August 5, 1997 Proposed Denali View Subdivision, Two Hydrology:Reports Dear IVlr. High: The Departmem of Environmental Coaservation (DEC) received th~ report of the "Analysis of Nitrmes in Well Water" and the repor~ of"Aquife~ Test Results" for the proposed Denali View Subdivision (curzently Scimitar Subdivision No. 3, Tract 1) on Suly 10. 1997. We have completed our review and provide the following comments on each document. General Comments It is the Department's understanding that the purpose of the "Analysis of Nitrates in Well Water" report is m provide information about nitrate patterns and trends in the area. Then, if possible, to suggest activities that may be appropriate to address concerns about possible long-term increases in nitrates in groundwater. The Departments understanding is l~t the purpose of the "Aquifer Test Results" repot~ was to determine whether sufficient quantifies of water are available for the planned development of the subdivision. Also, whether surrounding well owners would be unduly affected in their ability to. dde 1 obtain water by the propose ve oprnent. Based on our review of the noted reports, it is difficult t~ make a conclusive determination on the availability of water and nitrate patterns and Ixends in the area under review. Water availability.. problems do currently exist for some of the residents and it is not clear if an increased draw from the ground water supply in this area would or would not "unduly affect the current residents. Mx. Dee High, P.E. 2 August 5, 1997 Specific Comments · 2. (pg. 2) An__~j~_~is of Nitrates in Well Water Figure I should be clearly labeled with all subdivision. Nitrate data collected should be coupled with more information, such as: 1) the type and age of the existing wastewater disposal systems, 2) the soil classification/type that the soil absorption system ($)[$) was installed in, 3) the vertical separation distance from the lowest point of~e SAS to the top of the underlying bedrock, and 4) number of occupams in ~e home. Also, it may have been helpful to idenfi~t and list th~ existing wells finished in sand and gravel and the wells finished in bedrock along with the current problems associated with each. This way, it may be possible to view each well individually xo determine whether a water availability problem or a poor well exists. 3. (pg. 2) The report states that "the data do not appear to dernons~'ate the presence of a clear trend of increasing or decreasing nitrate value~ in the area" and this is slated once again in the conclusions section on page 3. This would suggest that the ,t~ is insufficient to draw sound conclusions. 4. (pg. 4) However, a conclusion was made that the Denali View Subdivision should not be expected to have a large effect on existi~ patterns and trends of nitrate concenuatlons in the area, yet no patterns have been identified. AqufferTest R~ults and Hydrologic Review I. (pg. l) From a site in.speefion, staffwas able to find bedrock outcroppings in the Denali View Subdivision on lots 4, 5, 6, and 7. hfformation on the bedrock outcroppings should be referenced in this report. 2. (pg. 1/3) 3. (pg. In the statement "The extent of the sand and gravel aquifer ml~l by the well is not well known", the phrase "not well lo, own' should be defined. Further, without knowing the extent of the sand and gravel aquifer, along with the irregularity in the depth to bedrock (.ground surface to 158 feet below land surface), calcula6nE long-term yield estimates would riot seem reasonable. There is no mention of other wells finished in the sand and gravel aquifer, ifth~ exist, and there is no comparison of the puml~ well with those wells. With becLrock outcroppings within the proposed subdivision, it appears that there is at least one' hydrogeologic botmda~ to the north of the two test wells. The need to Mr. Dee High, P.E. 3 Augus~ 5, 1997 4. (pg. 3) 5. (pg. look for similar wells to the south, such as Chug, ach l~ark Estates, for comparison should have been completed. The report stated that "there is significant hydraulic separation between the two aquifers". This s~atement could be supported by the n~t~ale ma~lysis. The wovfl "significant" should be defined. ~ According to this report, "Existing information indieaies ~ wells lapping the bedrock aquifer may need to be up te 700 feet deep i4 oxder to yield sufficient quantities for domestic use". There nee.~ to be a f~. imad rea~mable determinmion of'~mduly affected". When eonsideri~ the phase "unduly affected", Alaska State Statutes defines this term as ri.bred in the report. However this determination lies solely within the Department ~.dfNatur~l Resources (DKR) and should not be implied by other entities. Ba.~d on communieatimas between DEC and DNR regarding the phrase "unduly affected!', the derision mu~t be based on a sound found_at,on of conclusive in~ormati0n while taking in to account individual site circumstances under conditions which'a~e deemed "reasonable" as interpreted by DNR. (pg. 6) While the conclusions portrayed in this report may be valid, the i~fformafion provided within Chis repot~ and the Analysis of Nitrates in the Well Water repo~ flo not appear to provide sufficient facts to support the findings. In the best internist of all parties involved and the protection of the area g~undwater supplies, any det~n,~nation that is made regarding the Denali View Subdivision will require additional information to make sound, responsible decisions, Thank you for comments, please call me at 269-7696. supplying these reports m the DEC for our review. If you have any que$fioas o~ RS/KKYuDP:cs~h:~keve~\com~ctr 1 .wpd) Sincerely, Keven Klew*nO, P.E. Environmenud Engineer DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DRINKING WATER PROGRAM 555 CORDOVA STREET ANCHORAGE, AK 99501 http://www,state.ak.us/dec/homePatm Mr. Dee High, P.E. Principle DHI Consulting Engineers Dimond Center ToWer, 5th Floor 800 E. Diamond Blvd., Suite 3-545 Anchorage, Alaska 99515 · August 5, 1997 Subject: Proposed Danali View Subdivision, Two Hyd~ology:Repor~ TONY KNOWLE$, OOV~RNOR T~lephone: (907)269-7696 Fax: (907) 269-7655 Dear Mr. High: The Departmem of Environmental Conservation (DEC) received th~ report of the "Analysis of Nitrates in Well Water" and the report of "Aquifer Test Results" for the proposed Denali View Subdivision (currently Scimitar Subdivision No. 3, Tract 1) on July 10, 1997. We have completed our review and provide the following comments on each document. General Comments It is the Department's understanding that the purpose of the "Analysis of Nitrates in Well Water" report is to provide information about nitrate pa~erns and trends in the area. Then, if possible, to suggest activities that may be appropriate to address concerns aboutlpossible long-term increases in nitrates in groundwater. The Departments understanding is that the purpose of the "Aquifer Test Results" report was to determine whether sufficient quantifies of water are available for the planned development of the subdivision. Also, whether surrounding well owners would be unduly affected in their ability to. : obtain water by the proposed development. Based on our review of the noted reports, it is difficult ti make a conclusive determination on the availability of water and nitrate patterns and trends in the area under review. Water availabiliW problems do currently exist for some of the residents and it is not clear if an increased draw from the ground water supply in this area would or would not "unduly" affect the current residents. Mr. Dee High, P.E. Analysis of Nitrates in Well Water 2. (pg. 2) 2 Specific Comments AuguSt 5, 1997 Figure I shoUld be clearly labeled with all subdivisions. Nilxate data collected should be coupled with more ir~fonnation, such as: 1) the type and age of the existing wastewatar disposal systems, 2) the soil soft absorption system (S~S) was installed in, 3) the classification/typo that thc ' ' vertical separation distance from the lowest point.of ~ae SAS to the top oftbe underlying bedrock, and 4) number of occupams m ti}e home. ' Also, it may have been helpfal to identify and list th~ existiag wells finished in sand and gravel and the wells finished in bedrock along with the current problems associated with each. This way, it may be possible to view each well individually to determine whether a water availability problem or a poor well exists. 3. (pg. 2) The report states that "the data do not appear to demonstrate the presence of a clear trend of increasing or decreasing nitrate values ~n the area" and this is stated once again in the conclusions section on page 3. This would suggest that thc data is insufficient to draw sound conclusions, 4. C g. 4) However, a conclusion was made that the Denali View Subdivision should not bo expected to have a large effect on existing pauems and trends of nitrate conceutrmions in the area, yet no patterns have b~n identified. Aquifer/est Results and Hydrologic Review 1. (pg. 1) From a site in.spection, staffwas able to find bedrock outcroppings in the Denali View Subdivision on lots 4, 5, 6, and 7. Information on the bedrock outcroppings should be referenced in this report. 2. (pg. 1/3) In the statement "The extent of the sand and gravel aquifer tapped by the well is not well known", thc phrase "not well known" should be defined. Furth~, without knowing the extent of the sand and gravel aquifer, along with the irregularity in the d~pth to bedrock (ground sudace to 158 feet below land surface), calculating long-term yield estimates would not seem reasonable. 3. (pg. 3) There is no mention of other wells finished in the sand and 8ravel aquifer, if they exist, and there is no comparison of thc pumped well with those wells. With bedrock outcroppings within the proposed subdivision, it appears that thea~ is at least one hydrogeologic boundsry to the north of the two test wells. The need to Mr. Dee High, P.E. 4. (pg. 3) (pg. 3 August 5, 1997 look for similar wells to the south, such as Chugach P}ark Estates, for comparison should have been completed , The report stated that "there is significam hydraulic s~aration between the two aquifers". This s~atement could be supported by the nitrate analysis. The word "significant" should be defined. : According to this report, "Existing information indicates that wells tapping the bedrock aquifer may .need to be up to 700 feet deep i4 order to yield sufficient quantities for domemc u~". There need~ to be a fair. land r~a~on~ble determination of"unduly affected". When consi&m~lg the phase ~'unduly affected", )desks State Statutes defines this term as n~ted in the report, However this determination lies solely within the Department ~f Natural Re~ourc~ and should not be implied by other entities. Baaed on conununleafions between DEC and DNR regarding the phrase "unduly affected!', the decision mint be based on a sound foundation of conclusive information while taking in to account ........ ' ' ble" md~wdual sxte c~cumstanees under c, ond~tmns winch are deemed 'reasona a~ interpreted by DNR. 6. (pg. 6) While the Coneluslons portrayed in this report may be valid, the information provided within this report and tho Analysis of Nitrates in the Well Water report do not appear to provide sufficient facts to support the findings. In the best interest of all parties involved and the protection of the area groundwater supplies, any determination that is made regarding the Denali View Subdivision will require additional information to make sound, responsible decisions. Thank you for supplying these repons to the DEC for om review. If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 269-7696. Sincerely, Keven Klewen0, P.E. Environmental Engineer RS/KKK/DP:c~h:Xkeven\comlcbl.wpd) TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DRINKING WATER PROGRAM 555 CORDOVA STREET ANCHORAGE, AK 99501 http://www.state.ak, us/dec/home/htm Telephone: (907)269-7696 Fax: (907) 269-7655 Mr. Jim Cross, P.E. Program Manager, Environmental Services Municipality of Anchorage Department of Health & Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650 July 14, 1997 RECEIVED dUL 18 1997 Municipality of At~chorage Dept, Health & Human ,Services Subject: Notice of Compliance, Dawn Water Company Class A Public Water System (PWSID Number 211431) Dear Mr. Cross: On May 28, 1997, the Department of Environmental Conservation and Dawn Development Corp., entered into a Compliance Order by Consent (COBC). In addition, Dawn Development Corp. also hired a professional engineering firm to address the compliance schedule and provide management of the public water system. This resulted in the necessary water quality sampling being completed with results submitted to this Department. With the water quality monitoring being completed, leaks fo~:nd and repaired, and the capability assessment of the existing water system starting, it appears that the water provided to the public is safe. Thus, as of July 16, 1997, the Department will issue Bank Loan Certificates for homes connected to or purchasing water from the Dawn Water Company Class A Public Water System (PWSID Number 211431). Based on information in the Department's files, this action could affect future home sales in the following subdivisions: I) Meadow Ridge Estates, 2)Dawn Subdivision, 3) Wynter Park Subdivision, 4) Vern Haik Subdivision, 5) Eklutna East Subdivision, 6) Eklutna West Subdivision, 7) Eklutna Heights Subdivision, 8) Daniels Heights Subdivision, and Fassler Subdivision.