The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDENALI VIEW General Information (12) DHI CONSULTING Civil · Surveying ENGINEERS · Planning RECEIVED October 30, 1997 W.O.: 96298 NOV 4 1997 Municipality of Anchorage Oept Health & Human Services Mr. Jim Cross Department of Health and Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 RE: Denali View Subdivision/DHHS requirements Dear Jim, To follow up with our telephone conversation on 10/29/97, I would like to point out the following: 1) The developer has made tremendous efforts in trying to obtain concurrence with your department and the neighbors on a pump test program. For the last three months, we have not only met with the neighbors, we prepared and distributed a questionnaire, provided written comments and suggestions about a test, and drilled an additional well in preparation for conducting a test. We have also made several attempts to outline testing programs which would be used to define the testing and interpretation parameters. To date, there has been no progress on this program. 2) During the last month, you have tried to work out an agreement with the neighbors that would allow the aquifer testing to proceed. Mr. Williams had no better results than I had. There is a lack of necessary participation for the magnitude of the test. As a result, the project is again delayed. 3) It is unreasonable to continue to insist on a test that requires the developer to enter onto private property in order to obtain the information you have requested. It is unreasonable to expect cooperation from home owners that have nothing to gain by changing the statues quo. The continued insistence that we some how obtain their permission to use their wells is in fact a denial of the subdivision. 4) The requirement to show effects on the neighbors is a stretch of the subdivision regulations. This is substantiated by the fact that DHHS has no procedures or even a definition for defining effect or undue effect. What subdivision standard are we being asked to meet? Dimond Center Tower, 5th Floor · 800 E. Dimond Blvd., Suite 3-545 ° Anchorage, Alaska 99515 (907) 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 O~ober 30,1997 W.O.: 96298 page 2 5) The developer has provided more concrete information about adequate water than has been required of any other subdivision. That information has shown, within reason, that the chances of impact from Denali View upon the surrounding well is small. The right of the developer to subdivide his property is being infringed. I can find no grounds for you to withhold your approval. Based upon the information you have to date and the comments from the Municipal hydrologist, it is reasonable for you to approve this subdivision. I am requesting that you change your recommendation to the planning staff. Very truly yours, Dee High, P.E. Principal cc: Myers Munter, BSE 298dc29o.ltr 10-30-1997 05:44P~ D H! ONSULT~NG 90? 344 1383 P.01 DHI CONSULTING __Civil · S}i..? v e yin g Post. W",brand fax transmittal memo 7671 I# of pages October 30, 1997 W.O,: 96298 ENGINEERS · Planning RECEIVED Mr, Jim Cross Department of Health and Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 OCT 3 1 1997 Mumc~pah~y or AnCl~orage Oept. Health & Human Services RE: Denali View SubdivisionlDHHS requirements Dear Jim, To follow up with our telephone conversation on 10/29/97, I would like to point out the following: 1) The developer has made tremendous efforts in trying to obtain concurrence with your department and the neighbors on a pump test program, For the last three months, we have not only met with the neighbors, we prepared and distributed a questionnaire, provided written comments and suggestions about a test, and drilled an additional well in preparation for conducting a test. We have also made several attempts to outline testing programs which would be used to define the testing and interpretation parameters, To date, there has been no progress on this program. 2) During the last month, you have tried to work out an agreement with the neighbors that would allow the aquifer testing to proceed, Mr. Williams had no better results than I had. There is a lack of necessary participation for the magnitude of the test. As a result, the project is again delayed, 3) It is unreasonable to continue to insist on a test that requires the developer to enter onto private property in order to obtain the information you have requested. It is unreasonable to expect cooperation from home owners that have nothing to gain by changing the statues quo, The continued insistence that we some how obtain their permission to use their wells is in fact a denial of the subdivision. 4) The requiremer~t to show effects cfi the neighbors is a stretch of the subdivision regulations, This is substantiated by the fact that DHHS has no procedures or even a definition for defining effect or undue effect. What subdivision standard are we being asked to meet? Dimond Can[er Tower, §th Floor · 800 E. Dim.nd Blvd., Suite 3-545 · Anchorage, Alaska 99515 (907) 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 10-~0-1997 05:44PH D H! ONSULT]NG 90? ~44 i~B~ P.02 O~ober 30, 1997 W.O.; 96298 page 2 5) The developer has provided more concrete information about adequate water than has been required of any other subdivision. That information has shown, within reason, that the chances of impact from Denali View upon the surrounding well is small. The right of the developer to subdivide his property is being infringed. I can find no grounds for you to withhold your approval. Based upon the information you have to date and the comments from the Municipal hydrologist, it is reasonable for You to approve this subdivision. I am requesting that you change your recommendation to the planning staff. Very truly yours, R:l-C.o n su Iting En~ginqe~s Dee High, P,E, Principal cc: Myers Munter, BSE 298dc29o,ltr TOTAL P. 02 10-~3-1997 12:14PM D HI ONSULTING 90? ~4 1383 P.O1 FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHH$O~tobar 23, 1997 FAX NO.: 343-4786 W.O. NO.: 96298 ATTENTION: Jim Cross NO. OF PAGES: 10 SUBJECT: Pumping Test Report (Includ[ng~isco~e~sheet) FOR YOUR INFORMATION: Original Disposition: [] Mailed [] Call for Pickup [] Flied FI For Your uae [] Foz Review & Comment [X] As Requeste~ [] For Approval MESSAGE: SENT BY: Dee High DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 E, 0IMOND BLVD. SUITE 5-545 ANCHORAGE, AK 99515 PH: (907) 344-1586 FAX: (807) $44-1393 10-2~-1~g? 12:17PM D HI ONSULTING 90? ~44 1~8~ P.06 fracture but docs n~ i~ ~ (Kruseman ~ dc ~dd~, 1~I), ~ ~ ~i~wd~n dina for MW-~B, weU ~ PW ~ l~Jo~(~. At ~ ~, ~l o~fion ~a~ ~ ~ de~ from the ~ ~c~t~ ~ ~ ~m ~ nz~ ~ ~ c~y ~ ~ ~ ~ f~ of ~ ~ ~ by r~ iow ~tl, ~ ~ ~Pi f~ i o~i the lo~ ~Y ~ f~u~. ~ of ~ o~ ,~). hnplieagom for ,Cm3ail~ Scsk Paapb~g I'ests ~S ~t wo~ net ~ ~ ~y Ub~n w~. Some ~ ~a~ ~ may ~pr~ that p~g~ w~ ~ ~f~m ~o~, I~ ~ ~ p~ lO c~ a 10-::~-1997 12:2~ 19ff-/55~671~ P.~6 On-Site Fram Ori~mtlom--Om~rop Data Fm~s obsen~d in ~y ~ o~p w~ ~ ~t ~ 10 ~b~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CONTOUR DIAORAM OF POLES ~OMTOUR DtAORAM Dr POl..~S TO ~OREHO~ 3~ P t mci~ ~7 1~-2~-1D97 12:15PM D HI ONSULTING 907 ~44 138~ P.O~ hD lb hD t~/r~o 1~-22-19T 12:17F~1 1~1"~'5636713 P.03 10-23-1997 12:lSPM D HI ONSULTING 907 344 1383 P.03 Detailed Pumping Test to Characterize a Fractured Bedrock Aquifer by Jeffrey D. ~emmd' ~nd Jeffrey !'. Heidtn~n,s ~e for ~e~~e~ ~~t~at ~v~o~n~t~ ~fl~ ~ s mat m~ ~g ~ ~ am~ m ~ ~ ~ ~'o~ Kz~,, lhgfimare, Maryla.~ 21~.10. eral aualytioal emdels that ean 5~ ~ ~c ~u~ fr~ (~ 1982}, Eq~ poro~ ~dim ~PM) m~ ~cF ~ ~e~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~a ~T data ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~e ~ (~c la), Th~ ~ ~ ~ for I~ ~ or ~ ~ ~ ~f p~ b~ ~ ~r~ flow (S~J~ ]~ ~ ~ o~ 10-2~'-1997 12:l~P~ mils The PW D HI ONSULTING flow to a 907 344 1~8~ P.87 Acimowkd~mmn~ We tttank {:~, Paul ~ a~d with am- cullc~,u~ Kol~t S. Pm~e~an, of pl~k~s d~af~, at~ ~ ~t~k forh~ ~v of th dls~ss~n of dm~drav~imvn 12: 2~:q"l 19~t~?l:E P, ~? rot, 9 v~, (2~7) 333-5388. G~! ~ of Amain, 1993 ~ Me~mg ~ ~siti~ will ~ ~ ~o~r 25 og~ ~1l ~ ~ent~ hv ~ O~ H~lo~ ~g GSA M~ ~e~g EO. ~a 9140, ~a~, ~ ~I, (~0) 472.1988 ~ ~x (303) ~ky M~ ~ ~r Co.fe~e ~ f~ ~r 27-19, 1993, m N~ M~i~. ~ ~m ~il[ ~ on all c~ce ~a~an Mi~el ~mp~ ~ a~ P~e~ ~ences, Univ~ ~N~ Mex- (ava~able u~n ~t ~m J~kie M~k. AGUE T~aa No. 187, ~t. Patq~ del PM~I, D.~ 14010. Rive~dc~e Dr, · ~1~ ~ 43017 Fax.' {$1'"} 19~756,3~?1 Z Certified Ground Water Professional Status Awarded to 23 In March 1986 the A~sociation of Groar~l Water Scientists and[ F. tlgioeea~, a divifion of National Ground Warm' A~mctatian, offered a l:~'r, reviewed p~sional gt~and watex o~rdilcation knowla ~-~ C~e- tifi~d Otem~d Watelr ptofi~sional (COWP}. The CGWP Review C~-~mit~e~ requLres each ap~ltcart~ to ~ve a bache)x:r;'s ~eg~.~ and seven years of pmgte~. stvd¥ more u=pu~ibl= work expeder',.ce Ln chg ground In 1993, Z65 g~.md wam~ la'ofi~s~Jo~a, ls letters GOWP fol|o~in~ their name, wkich proclaims to the public and their pee~$ chmt they bare ra~r rl~ standards of g~e CGWP pr~.,m and subicrib~ to rJ'ke following Canans o,~ Professional 3, ~c ~e ~ ~ir ~p~ees, ~ ~ clt~ 5, Act ~ fai~} ~ or ~ m p~s~on~ m~tgs for ~gh ~1~ ~ them ~1 P. 08 10-25-1997 12:20PM D HI ONSULTING 90? ~4~ 1~83 P.09 1~-22-1997 12: 2~M 19~636715 P. 09 d NA 30 ~ 1.0 ~ NA L61 NA 150 1~ ~.57 O,~ ~ Nd 0.61 1~ 3 150 10.3~ 1.~ 4 ~ HA 4,~ 4,~ NA ~ ~A O~ HA ~ ~ 6.16 L4 1 ~ 21.5~ ~f~ 1. ~ ~ ~o~ flow ~ ~ ~r ~ two- ~~ ~ ~ ~ thc ~a of two ft~ ~. ~ ~t~ ~ ~ ~e to t~N~43S~ ~by~n ~f~ ~t~ ~ ~ f~u~ ~ N~B~ ~ ~N80E ~ ~r~ ~ ~of~ ~ ~P~Y~ ~~ TOTAL P.10 10-21-1997 0~:01P~ D H! ONSULTING 90? 344 13B~ P.01 FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHSDATE: FAX NO.: 343- q78'~ October 21, 1997 Ri iENTION: Jim Cross W.O, NO.: SUBJECT: Denali View/Pump Test NO. OF PAGES: ~ (In~ludln~ *~hk~ oovef FOR YOUR INFORMATION: 0 F~Y~ruae 0 ~R~A~ 0 AaR~ 0 F~ MESSAGE: Jim, I received this from Jim Mun~er today, Commen~s on le~ are his, The need m have full pa~icipation within the effective ama is essential. Here are three more problems with this pump test, Thanks, Dee SENT BY: D~e High .... DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8~ E, DIMOND BLVD, ~UITE 3-54~ ANCHORAGe, A~ 99515 PH: 1~7) ~1~ F~: (~7) ~1~3 Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data .~o m.~' Editb:m (Completely 8e~ised) an~ L~ta-oveme~t. We~eniu~eu P~o£easa~ in Hyd~l/sology, Free University. Wi~h assistance/rom J.M. Verw~i~ F~cs hytrogeolt~ist Pub!L~a~on4? Internationa!'~itute for Land Rec ~lamation and Improvement, P.O. Box 45, 6700 AA Wagimlngan, The Netherlands, 1994. - D~ on ~e ~oua~-flow ~s~: ho~gt~ or ~rti~ flow of ~wa~t, - Any cxi~ng ~ls in ~e ~. From t~ ~ of ~ ~, it ~y be ~M d~a app~ma~ v~ of~g ~r% ~ssivi~ ~d s~ra~ and S~ v~ou. R ~y e~n b~ ~ m ~ eno of ~se ~lh for t~ ~ ~c~ ~g ~e mst of A~d work. So--cs, how~, s~h · ~ may p~ ~ u~n msul~ ~e ~ of im ~n and ~igaa ~ not a~- amc. 2,3 Selecting the site for the well When ~ ~g w~ ~ m ~ u~d for t~ ~ or w~ ~ h~ ~a~a~c~cs go ~o~, ~1~ mom s~ble si~. ~ ~ b~ the f~ m ~om~, ho w~. ~O.~.~,b ~ - Tha~dmScotogimlc~aditionsshouldnotcha~o~shortdista~cesaudshould ~fcr; ~ - ~ ~tmt of~ wadable or p~c ~ ~o~d ~ I~; - M~ and ~pm~t m~t ~ able to r~h ~ si~ ~Oy. 2A Th~ well After the well si~e has been chosen, drillin8 op~-a~ioUs ~m begin. The well will cou~is! of an opeU-euded pipe, p~rforsted or fituM with a screen in the aquifer to allow wa~er to e~ter tl~ pip~, ami equipp~ with a. pllmp to lift. thc water to ~he smd'a¢~, For The (1981~k and C~nc~ (198¢), wher~ full dc~iLs n.~ g~ve~, Some of the major points am s~ b~low. 2.4.1 Wetl diame~r A tmmpin~ t~st do~ not mqui~ cgpensiw lar~-d~mamr walls, If a s~gon pump Of ~ W~ ~n ~ s~. A su~iblo ~p ~ a ~1 ~am~ ~gc eno~ ~ ~mm~g~ t~ ~mp, 28 P. 02 TOTAL P.03 To D.H.I. CONSULTANTS 10/1~/97 Dee POlt-ltTM brand fax transmittal memo I have bean informed that you were inquiring as to the nature of our response, to the question, will the community cooperate with the pump test for Denaii View. When we came up with our well conditions test list it was to provide some way for the community to feel comfortable that their wells would not be harmed during the pump test, Whether or not this in fact replaces the hold harmless is not a question that can be answered with a definitive yes or no. The main concern of most residents w~ the lack of information on the part of the developer with regards to the intended plan for the pump test, and the opm-ended hold harmless with no protection forthe property owner. If you wish to change the hold harmless to state that it goes with the well protection agreement, you could do this. I am not sure how many people would still agree to participate, without seeing the new hold harmless (although I believe people would), a~ I did not ask them if they would sign the hold harmless agreemant. I did not feel that it was my place to ask my neighbors if they would sign an a~reement, which could potentially be harmful to them. If you wish to discuss this you can contact me at 90?-??6-6844 until 10/20/97 12:00pm. I will be home after that for one week. ~noerely Jeffrey D. Williams Cc: Jim Cross, Dan Youns 1'o D.H.I. CONSULTANTS 10/18/~/ UNOCAL DOLLY VA~DEN PLATFOF~'~ P.01/01 Pest.l~' I~'a~d lax transmittal memo 76rl I*-'~ I have been informed that you wets inquiriR& as to the namm ofunr response, to the question, will the community ounperate with the pump teat for Danani View, When we same up with our well conditions test list it wtm to provide some way ~r the community to feel eomtbrtable that their wells would ~t be harmed durh~ the pump test Whether or not this in thet replaces !he hold harmless is not e que~ton that mmnot be answered with a deflntlive yes et no, The mann centers o~ mo~t residents wes the IKk et' infl~rmalton un the pan of'the developer with rellm~ds 1o the intended plan fbr the pump test, and the opm-ended hold harmless with no protection fm the property owner. If you wis~ to ~ the hold harmless to state *_q~ it ~es with the wee protection agreement, you could do this. ! am nat sure how many people would still agree to partiolpate, without seei~ the new hold immlle~s (elthou~it ! believe people would), aa I did not ask them it' they would snarl the hold harmless a~qgement. ! did not feel timt it yam my piece to esk my nei~hbor~ i~they would anon en a~reemant, whirls could potentially be Immatul to them. If yon wJ~h to dl~coss this you mm contact me at ~07.776.6844 until 10/20/97 t2:00pm, ! will be home after that t'or one week, Jim Cmaa, Dan Yoan8 Sia0ently Jei*Dey D, Williams 18-19-1997 08: 14PM 90???66845 P, 01 DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS Civil ° Surveying · Planning October 18th, 1997 W.O.: 96298 RECEIVED Mr. Jim Cross Department of Health and Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 OCT 2 ? ]997 . MunicipaJi[y of Anchora,-~e Oept. Health & Human Ser~'~ces RE: Denali View Subdivision/Meeting of October 17th Dear Jim, This letter is to summarize our meeting of Friday, October 17th, 1997 where we discussed a plan for analyzing the effects of additional well pumping on the adjoining lot owners in Scimitar, Petersgate, and Chugiak Park Estates. It is my understanding that you are in general concurrence with the modeling program as outlined in Mr. Munter's letter dated October 8, 1997; and that, without adequate participation from the neighbors, the pump test of the upper and lower aquifer is not feasible. The final decision to proceed with the modeling program is pending your rewew of the homeowner agreements provided by Mr. Williams. Participation will require the neighbors to sign the Hold Harmless Agreement as provided by the Myers. It is my understanding that you will make this discussion on Monday morning. Provided that you give us notice to proceed with the modeling program on Monday morning, October 20th, Mr. Munter has agreed to have a modeling report completed and on your desk by October 23rd; you agreed to complete your review by Monday, October 27th, and we are to provide a final report which addresses your comments by October 31st. I believe the above summarizes the content of our meeting. Please let me know if you have any different understanding. Sl~ngineers Dee High, P.E. Principal 298dc 18o.ltr Dimond Center Tower, 5th Floor · 800 E. Dimond Blvd., Suite 3-545 · Anchorage, Alaska 99515 (907) 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 10-18-~997 05:0~PM D H! ONSULT]NG 90? Z44 ~Z83 P.B~ FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHS DATE: FAX NO,: October 18, 1997 ATTENTION; dim Cross W.O. NO,: 96298 SUBJECT: Denali View/Hold Harmless NO. OF PAGES: 1 (Inol~lding thia cover sheeT) FOR YOUR INFORMATION: Original Dlsposl~an: F1 M~i~ed [] Cell for Pickup [] Filed C] F~r Your uae [] For Review & Comment [] As Requested [] Fei Approval MESSAGE: Jim, I talked with Mary Williams today, She has discussed their agreement farm with the neighbors and Jeff. The agreement form was intended to replace the Hold Harmless Agreement. I'll see you at eight o'clock Monday morning. Thanks, Dee SENT BY: Dee High DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS TOTAL P.81 P.O1 October 18, 1997 W.O.: 96298 Mr. Kevin Kleweno Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 555 Cordova Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 RE: Denali View Subdivision Dear Mr. Kleweno, I am requesting that you with draw your letter commenting on Mr. Munter's reports and provide us with the a copy of the nitrate report that you stated you had in draft form. Your letter raised very serious concerns about nitrates in the area which we have not been able to verify based on available information. In a recent discussion with Mr. Ronimus, I understand that ADEC does not have any additional information that would change the conclusions drawn by the Municipality and Mr. Munter. Your letter has delayed the project by causing the Municipality to withhold its approval of the preliminary plat. Without direct action by ADEC concerning the letter, it will continue to cause undue harm to the project. Your immediate attention to this matter will prevent further unnecessary delays. Very truly yours, DHI Consulting Engineers Art Ronimus 298dk180,1tr Dee High, P.E. Principal TOTRL la-iS 1997 08:20aM 9 HI ONSULTINa 90? ~44 13a3 P.O1 DHIi CON. SULTING .ENGIN.! Civil 'Surveying Plann~ October 15, 1997 W.O.: Post. It"' bi~rld fax trensm ~! mernoT671 ~o~p.~es · RE: Denali Vitw Dear Mr. Cross,I In response t° ~eff Wili~ tins letter, please note the following: 1) You andll were! asked, to delay the project because Jeff ~=(a) indMa~ represented the a~rea residents and (b) that he could get the cOncurren~ce Harmless (theref(~re, participation). His response is not a lot greater that with our i)riginal ~luestionna re( currently have 15 responses). Jeff didn't gel much .~f a response for several reasons, one beingithat w~ si undevelo ~ed Iots~ We carefully review the MOA tax records tot every 1200 fo.c radius ~f influence. Questionnaires went to ~very I~ that Was for havin~ a hous~ on the Io~. One other lot owner received a I~tter wh~ a house, )ut we know of a well on the lot. I am confident that ther~ is wel~s In t~e area ~f influence identified.. You ~eeds to answer the quesfio, asking "With uncontrolled pumping w~thin the radius of ~nfluehce, how c be interp~ted with anycertainwT" The bottom line is that it cannot be dc accuracy~ 2) How is ~e Mu~icipaliW going to interpret the data in terms of the standard~ of "a~equate water"~ We were asked to define it an~ 3) The .Mun~clpahW~ ~s contemplating asking the developer ~o perform requ re h lm to eq~er 'upon pr vate property n order to comply .with M~A and there We aske¢ our negli! many ca,, addressl I can be re fore in c~rde:r to subdivide h{s property. We responded with a Sim I the pr0~perty owners to release us from any liability that is not ~ lance. This is straight forward and common practice~ I am qbit( e inclucling the Munlciphllties own contracts. Mr, Williams ~es ability The issues that they d d'addces$ are helpfu (~nly if tt~e solved. rower, 5{;h Floor · 800 E, Dimon& BI~d,, Suite 3-545 -Anchorage, (90~') 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 Dimond Center ERS g .~d that he ~n the Hold what I got ;ares that I iht some to ~ within the ~3eing taxed ~esn't have close to 69 , that I have an the data ne with any subdivision Jif. Munter ts that will regulations ~le request. he result of willing site onse didn't ~biliw issue aska 99515 15-1997 08:20AM D HI ONSULTING 90? 344 13B3 P.02 / We have been!v~orking ¢or three month on an aquifer testing progran~. We a~re I developing a Werkable'~ ~ an than we were then, The reason is not !for lack,' of because there a~e major problems with suc a plan and they cannot'be ovetco~ resulting in noticing mo~e than undue delay. I have been just as much a proponent of the aquifer test, but it is tirade to adn~it 1 test of this magnitude m not practical and cannot be accomplished. Last mpnt agreed to pos~p.)ne, yo~ were going to work with us on a modeling program!an pump test on the upper'aquifer. On Friday(October lOth) Vou stop l~his proces.' your approval ol~ the mbdeling concept and upper aquifer pump test in ord!er ' commitment to,he Boaid. These test are workable, legitimate, and v~ill provide ~ for everyone. T~hey certainly will not hinder the process· I strongly u!ge you ~o ~ Munter's plans ~and let Us start wot,king on the final details. I also request !tha response from~l~l~ r. Whereon; as again, it was agreed that we would use him ~:o ~ technical assistance in ~;his,matter. I understand that Mr. Wheaton has spent career doing gr(~und w~ter investigation in both the public and private secto?s. us,e h. m as muc~h as possible or find another qualified individual. Th,is project pr~or~ty. Pleaselrespon~l today, ', cc: Munter, Myers, 298d~l~o.lt~ ..~.V~.ry truly y.ours, onsultmg Engineers Dee High, P.E. Principal E ner In closer to trying, but ne, This is hat a pump ~ when we J a 24 hour · We need o keep our seable data pprove Mr. t you 9et a ~elp provide most of his We should eed to be a TOTAL P.D2 1~-15-1997 06:57~ D H! ONSULT~NG 90? 344 1~83 P.02 O--4 / -'." 'i./'" 10-15-1997 06:57RM D HI DNSULT[NG 90? 344 13B3 P.01 FAX MEMORANDUM ~ , TO: DHHS I D~T~: FAX NO.~ 343- I Octobei 14, 1597 ATTENTION: Jim Gross W.O. N~}.: 96298 SUBJECT: Denali View (In~uding t~ie cover eh~et) FOR UR INFORMATION: O~i~l Ois~e t~n: . Mailed Cell for Pickup Filed ~ For Review & Comment ~ As Reque=t~ a Fo~ App~va MESSA~ E: ~ Thanks, ~ r ~ Dee ; SENT BY:': )ce Hig D~I CONSULTING ENGINEER,S DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS Civil · Surveying ° Planning October 15, 1997 W.O.: Mr. Jim Cross Department of Health and Human Services P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99501 RE: Denali View RECEIVED OCT 1 6 1997 Municipality ot An(;~orage Oept. Health & Human Services Dear Mr. Cross, In response to Jeff Williams letter, please note the following: 1) You and I were asked to delay the project because Jeff (a) indicated that he represented the area residents and (b) that he could get the concurrence on the Hold Harmless (therefore, participation). His response is not a lot greater than what I got with our original questionnaire (I currently have 15 responses). Jeff indicates that I didn't get much of a response for several reasons, one being that we sent some to undeveloped lots. We carefully review the MOA tax records for every Iot within the 1200 foot radius of influence. Questionnaires went to every lot that was being taxed for having a house on the lot. One other lot owner received a letter who doesn't have a house, but we know of a well on the lot. I am confident that there is close to 69 wells in the area of influence identified. You needs to answer the question that I have asking "with uncontrolled pumping within the radius of influence, how can the data be interpreted with any certainty?" The bottom line is that it cannot be done with any accuracy. 2) How is the Municipality going to interpret the data in terms of the subdivision standards of "adequate water". We were asked to define it and Mr. Munter responded. To date we have got no response to his recommendations. 3) The Municipality is contemplating asking the developer to perform tests that will require him to enter upon private property in order to comply with MOA regulations and therefore in order to subdivide his property. We responded with a simple request. We asked the property owners to release us from any liability that is not the result of our negligence. This is straight forward and common practice. I am quite willing site many case including the Municipalities own contracts. Mr. Williams response didn't address liability. The issues that they did address are helpful only if the liability issue can be resolved. Dimond Center Tower, 5th Floor · 800 E. Dimond Blvd., Suite 3-545 · Anchorage, Alaska 99515 (907) 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 We have been working for three month on an aquifer testing program, We are no closer to developing a workable plan than we were then. The reason is not for lack of trying, but because there are major problems with such a plan and they cannot be overcome. This is resulting in nothing more than undue delay. I have been just as much a proponent of the aquifer test, but it is time to admit that a pump test of this magnitude is not practical and cannot be accomplished. Last month when we agreed to postpone, you were going to work with us on a modeling program and a 24 hour pump test on the upper aquifer. On Friday(October lOth) you stop this process. We need your approval of the modeling concept and upper aquifer pump test in order to keep our commitment to the Board. These test are workable, legitimate, and will provide useable data for everyone, They certainly will not hinder the process, I strongly urge you to approve Mr, Munter's plans and let us start working on the final details. I also request that you get a response from Mr. Wheaton; as again, it was agreed that we would use him to help provide technical assistance in this matter. I understand that Mr. Wheaton has spent most of his career doing ground water investigation in both the public and private sectors. We should use him as much as possible or find another qualified individual, This project need to be a priority. Please respond today. ~ngineers Dee High, P.E, Principal Munter, BSE Myers, Owner 298d¢15o.ltr 10/14/97 TUE 13:~ FAX 907 694~§~ CHUGIAK/EAGLE RVR BR ~005 Dear Mr. Dee High We would like to make oor well 'available for monitoring during your aquifer besting of the Denali V-~w Subdivision- ,. that: damage may oc~l~, r to . .. we are concerned our well or system. The following conditions wilt be required of the devaooer ir ne uses m,~ well: ~. eefore the wels used, a qualified pum.p installe~.. ~mu~do,_a_ tP~r~ test of the s~l. The test~esults must t)e recolGeo. ~.o~o-~, u, =.. . will be the responsibility of the devekxoer. 2. Before the developer users, our w.e~,.l, the q,u._atlr~ilsninS~f~r~nti~n~ evaluate the electrical System and recom l~e .resu~?:. .__ must be provided to the homeowner the same nay or me mst. w;~: ~i~lv to'We house for the time that ne .we,.~ o.u~ o, ;L'g--~;~[~;,:~'~ e~o~;nse~ As an altemaUve, the aeve~per can ~o"t~l~r't~'~,~Gtion of time the well is out of set,ce. The aeveleper be respunml~le for the cost of the hotel and meals away from home. for restoring the well to the same con.eon as u~u,c -,~ ~,,~, ' and .~.~.-'t~'ical tests qualified pump installe.r tha.t con. d_u~:~l_,, the pressure must do work that i~oone ,n thls,e~. The condition of the well will. be verified by the installer using the sa. me techniques during the pre-test (see #~ above). ~11 ic di~:inf~ld, A cluallrleo pump in~t~llle~l [l~ua~ ~u ~_.,~. __~ __ ~'n~i~"~v~l-I-~:~e do~e, at: a minim.urn, by followl.ng.~t~.~proceeure~ described in ~oundwaaer arid Well~, 2 edition, pages 6. If any flow tests are conducted from our well, the developer must supply all pumping equipment. 7. Within 48 hours of collecting dale from our well, the developer will provide copies, of all data to the homeowner. ! agree to abide by the above conditions. Developer Date DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS Civil * Surveying · Planning October 14, 1997 W.O.: 96298 Mr. Jim Cross Dept. of Health and Human Services Environmental Services Division P.O. Box 196650 Anchorage, AK 99519-6650 RE: Subdivision/Aquifer Testing and Modeling 0el 1 6 ~997 nic~ ahoy ol Anche~'age Mu , P,.,. °Human Services Dept. Heam, ~* Dear Mr. Cross, Referencing your October 10, 1997 letter, I have the following comments: You state that the best way for determining effects on surrounding neighborhoods is conducting an aquifer test involving existing surrounding wells. In our meeting in September, we addressed several serious problems with this approach and decided to move ahead with a modeling program. One major problem with the aquifer testing program is uncontrolled pumping. Uncontrolled pumping anywhere within the 1,200 foot radius could result in a drawdown in one of the existing wells. Should this happen, it will be impossible to determine whether that drawdown is caused by our pumping or the pumping of another well. The data will be marginal and open to a wide range of interpretation. To require this type of testing without controlling all the pumping would be disastrous for everyone. We will have spent lots of money, expended more time, created the appearance that we were going to provide people with solid information; but in reality will not have gained anything that would answer their concerns. The second major issue that has to be addressed prior to attempting an aquifer test is the interpretation of "adequate water." For instance, what if we see: 0.1' drawdown?; or 1.0' drawdown?; or 10' drawdown?; or 100' drawdown? How will this be interpreted? How will we define adequate water? Mr. Munter has provided a logical approach to interpreting the question of adequate water. advise that his recommendation be carefully reviewed and approved. We suggested modeling as a reasonable method to determine the probability of effect on adjacent lot owners. Modeling is used extensively by the public and private sectors to address these types of issues. Modeling is exactly what the Municipality should be requiring for future projects. For example, for large commercial septic systems, the State requires Dimond Center Tower, 5th Floor · 800 E. Dimond Blvd., Suite 3-545 · Anchorage, Alaska 99515 (907) 344-1385 · Fax 344-1383 October14,1997 W.0.96298 page 2 modeling to determine the effects of contamination to adjacent water bodies. The positive aspects of modeling are that it can be done within a reasonable time, the results can be interpreted by other professionals, it does not inconvenience adjacent land owners, and it gives the Municipality and the property owners a reasonable estimate as to the probability of effects on adjacent lots. It is not one hundred per cent foolproof. However, it is considerably better than attempting an aquifer test with partial participation. Mr. Young and I have used modeling to predict ground water effects on past projects. His concerns over boundary conditions and type of model are minor items. These issues are part of the modelingprocess and are a!ways addressed during the setup of the model. Thgy can be easily addressed. Sometime ago, you, I, and Mr. Young agreed to use a third hydrologist to help us work through issues. You suggested Mr. Wheaton with the Municipality. I wold be interested in hearing his reaction to the modeling program and the testing program if we have uncontrolled pumping. Very truly yours, ~'-DFII'-C.O nsulting Engineers 298dc13o.ltr 10-14-1997 04:47PM D H! ONSULTING 90? 344 1303 P.02 II / TOTAL P. 02 FAX MEMORANDUM. TO: DHHS ] DATE: i FAX NO.: 143- ~ October;. 1¢, 1997, ATTENTIOlt: Jim Cross W.O. NO.: 96298 ' SUBJECT: Denali ?iew NO. OF;PAGES~ 2 ! Including th~$ ~over FOR YI)UR I FORMATION: : O~iginel Disposi Ion: ~ ~M~P~ D Ca~ for Pickup ~ Fi[ed Jim, ~ , Third weD I?g for ~our reference along wlth sketch of its appr°~imate; T°C tlon. Thanks, ~ .'I ~ I Dee I ~ i I $~NT BY:~ lee Hig~ , , I D,,.I CONSULTING ENGINEER,S 8O0 E. O1~ OND BLVD[ SUITE 3-S4~ ANCHORAGE, AK 99~15 PH: (907) ~4-1385 FAX: (~7) ~1383 I I 10/14/97 TUE 13:49 FAX 907 894 2955 CHUGIAK/EAGLE RVR BR ~002 Mr. Dee High DHI Consulting.Engineers 800 E.Dimond Blvd. Suite 3-545 Anchorage, AK 99515 O~ober 13, 1997 Dear Mt. High: Enclosed please find signed forms from local residents granting permission for you to use their wells for monitoring during your aquifer testing of Denali View Subdivision. Most residents within the zone of influence defined by Terrasat (see attached map) have agreed to participate. Please note this map does not include the third well', if pumping of the third well is anticipated more residents (eS. On Solleret) may need to be contacted. Your previous request received little response because a) many residents didn't receive it until after the response date you indicated', b) some l~ters went to owners without wells or residences on their property, or they lived so far from the test area they considered responding unnecessary; an~or c) the enclosed 'tiold harmless agreement' was so unacceptable it didn't merit a response, As you are welt aware we have repeatedly asked for an addendum to your 'hold harmless' agreement that includes a clause protecting our wells; your client has been completely unresponsive. Therefore we have provided our own agreement form whinh stipulates the conditions of our participation. We understand from experienced professionals that these conditions represent standard operating procedures in the industry and axe commonly employed in situations such as this. Our intent is quite simple: if nothing untoward happens there is no problem; but, if you break it, you fix it. Since the develope~ startds to benefit greatly from this project and we do not, hh should bear any and all risks and inconveniences associated with it. It should be noted that the potable water that is to be supplied to homeowners needs to be an adequate amount for normal water usage. We would appreciate a few days notice before the tests. The developer needs to sign and date the forms and return to the homeowners. We believe our contract safeguards the interests of both the residents and the developer in the long run by careful pre- and post test evaluation of well eonditidns, 10/14/97 TUE 13:51 FAX 907 694 2955 CHUGIAK/EAGLE RVR BR ~oo3 It is our position that these stipulations are fair and reasonable. We hope this resolves once and for all the issue of our cooperation, and that'the process may move tbrward. We anticipate hearing next from you about the details of the pump test. Sincerely yours, Residents of Scimitar, Chugach Park Estates and Petersgate Subdivisions cc, J~m Cross Paul and Arlene Mycr~ Sharon Minsch Jim Mumer Dan Youn~ The Platting Baard Lex3ol deacrl~'on ~~~ ~ . Dear Mr. ~ High We w~ld like ~ ~ke ~r ~11 a~lla~ f~ monit~ng dud~ your aqui~ ~ng of ~ ~ali ~ Su~i~n. ~oa~ c~ ~at damage may ~r ~ our well ~ pumping ~m. ~e w~ng ~lUons will ~ r~ul~ of ~e ~o~r if ~ u~ ~is w~l: 1. ~ w~l b ~,.a ~uali~ ~mp ins~ll~ must ~ a ~z or ~ ~em. ~ ne ~ ~ul~ must ~ r~. Co~ f~ ~is ~sk will ~ ~ r~nsi~i~ of ~e d~. ~ ~. ~m ane ~ ~e result. ~is inf~ma~ m~ pmw~ m me nom~wn~ ~e ~me day of ~e ~. Zf ~ter ~ Is dl~onUnu~ ~ ~e ~u~ for m~e ~an 3 hou~ in any one ~y, ~ d~eb~r will ~ ~nsi~ ~ ~de ~ble, ~u~ ~te~.~ ~e h~ f~ ~e Ume ~at ~e well b out of ~ s ~n~. ~ an alternate, the deve~ ~n .... ' ~ ot ~. ~ ne develo~ w I ~ ~ns~ae mr ~ ~ of ~e ~1 and m~ls a~y ~m ho~. _u_.~ ~ u~ ~m~.~mon a{ ~ me ~u~ ~Ung. ~.~ ~.~1~ ~ conou~ ~ p~um a~ e~l mu~c ~ w~ mat ~s gone ~n ~b,~sk. ~e ~dlUon of ~e w~l will v~fl~ by ~e I~1~ using ~ ~ t~niq~ dud~ ~e pr~t~ · 1 a~ve). Di,._~ ....... q . ~p In~l~er must ~ ~ dlsln~. d~~ ~ ~ o~e, at. ~. mm~ W fol~i~ ~e ~u~ ~.~ .~ ~war~ ang ~ ~ ~i~n~ ~g~ 61~. ~f any flow ~ am ~d~ ~m our well, ~ ~o~ mu~ ~pp~ all pum~ng ~ulp~L Wi~in ~ ~m of ~ng ~ ~m our well, ~e ~elo~ ~11 ~v~e c~ or all ~ to ~e ~m~wn~. ! agree to abide by the above conditions. Developer Date Qualified pump installer means a person or company that routinely conducts water well pump inst~llations. The installer must be an active member of the Alaska Water Well Association and the National Ground Wate~ Association. 10-1~-1997 O?:~iPM D HI ONSULTING FAX MEMORANDUM 90? ~44 TO: DHOW FAX NO.: AI-I'ENTI01 SUBJECt: Orlgb~&l [] MESSAGI Jim, S ~ d: Jim (~ross Daniel ~iew FOR Ye)UR IN Commenl~ lconcerr Please call Thanks Dee SENT BY: i FORMATION: Mailed [] Ceil for Pickup [] Filed X FQ~ Review & Comment n Ae Refl~este~ DATE: Octoberl 1 3, 19~7 W.O. NO.: 962,98 NO. OF?AGESJ 3 (InoludIng this ~ove¢ sheEet) ,lng the aquifer test and modeling> ~fter ¥~u have had a chance to read them. )ee High! i D~-II CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 E. DIMtND SLVDJ SUITE 3-545 ANCHORAGE. AK gg515 PH; I~O?) 3~4.138~ FAX; (947| ,-1383 P.O1 D HI ONSULTING HI CONSULTING C"i vi 1 · Surveying October 13, 1997 W~O.: 96298 Mr. Jim Cross / ' Dept. of Health~nd Hurhan Services Environmental S~rvices bivision P.o. sox 19665p , Anchorage, Al( 199519~ ,650 RE: SubdivlslOr r Aquife Testing and Modeling Dear Mr, Cross, Referencing YOm 907 344 1383 P.02 ENGINI · P !l a n nl i ERS g ' Octobi~r 10, 1997 letter; I have the following comments: You state that t~e best way for determining effects on surrounding pe~ghbo h ods is conducting an abu fer te~st involving existing surrounding wells. In Our meel~in in September, w~ ~'ddressed several serious problems wath th~s approach and ~le ided to move ahead with a mode ng program. One major problem with the~aquifer~teating program is unC~ntrolled~pumping. Uncontrolled pumping anywhere wtthm t~e 1,200 foot radius could resblt n a draw down n one of the exstmg wells. Should thls~ a3pen, it will be impossible to de~ermine whether that draw down is caused by our p~m3ing or the pumping of anb~her we~l. The date will be marginal and open to a Wide range ~f interpretation.: To requi~e this type of testing with out controlling al~ the pu~p ng would be disastrous for evew6ne. We will have spent lots of money, expended more time, created the app ~arance~that'we were going to provide everyone with solid i~fc rmation; but in reality wi not have gained anything that would answer the cOncerns~. The second ma 3r ~ssue{ that has to be addressed prior to attempting an aq ife test is the interpretation Ol "adeqUate water." For instance, what if we see: : , 0.1' dr,~ ~own?~ or 1.0' draw~own?; or 10' drawdown?; or ~00' dr~w~own? Ho~ will ~his b( interpreted? How will we define adequate water? Mr. Munter has provided a logical approach to interfering the question of ade uate water. I recom~nend t~at his recommendation be carefully, reviewed and a~prc ved. We suggested modehng as a reasonable method to determine the probabd~tM o: effect on adjacent lot o ers, Modeling is used extensively by the pubhc an~ prwate s~ clots to address these:t~pes of~issues. Modeling is exactly what the MunicJpaliw should be requiring for future projects, For example, for large commercial septic system the State Dimo~d CenSor ~ower, fi~h ~loor * 800 E. Dimon~ Blvd., Sui~o 8-~4~ · Anchorage, A aska ~8515 requires modeli '~g to determine the effects of contamination to adja,cent wa~e~ The positive as )ects of,,. modeling are that it can be done within a re~asonable e t ' ' ' results can be i ~t rpre ~ed by other profess onals, t does not nconv~enlencelad owners, and it ]ives th~ Municipality and the property owners area, sonable~ es to the probabili' y of ef~cts on adjacent lots, It is not one hundred ~er cent fc However, it is ,onsiderably better than attempting an aquifer test ~ith partial participation. Mr. Young and I have ~sed modeling to predict ground water effec~ on past His concerns o~ er boundary conditions and type of model are mino~ items, are part of the nodelin9 process and are always addressed during the setu~ o~ They can be ea ~ily addressed, you, I, Dnd Mr. Young agreed to use a third hydrologist to ~el[ You s~ggested Mr. Wheaton with the Municipality~ I wol~ b~ action to the modeling program and the testing pro~ ram if ~e ~ping. Very truly y~urs, j ~onsulting Principal Sometime ago, through issues. in hearing his r, uncontrolled pL 298dc13o.ltr ,ber13, 1997 W.O, 96298 page 2 bodies. me, the acent land !imate as olproof. rojects. ese issues the model. us work interested TOTAL P.O1 Momeowner$ name Address Legal dezcription Dear Mr. Dee High We would like to make our well available for monitoring during your aquifer testing of the Denali View Subdivision. ' We are concerned that damage may ocCUr to our we or pump ng system. The following conditions w be required of the developer if he uses this well: 1. Before, ..the well is used, a qualified pump installer* must do a pressure test or [ne system. The test results must be recorded. Costs for this task will be the responsibility of the developer. 2. Before the developer uses our well, the qualified installer must evaluate the electrical system and record the results. This information must be provided to the homeowner the same day of the test. 3. If water service is discontinued to the house for more than 3 hours in any one day, the developer will be responsible to provide potable, hauled water directly to the house for the time that the well is out of service (at the developer's expense). As an alternative, the developer can make arrangements (at least one week in advance) for our famly to stay in a hotel for the duration of time the well is out of service. The developer will be responsible for the cost of the hotel and meals away from home. 4. .[~mediat. ely..af~er testing, the deveJoper will be responsible for restoring ~ e well to the same condition as before the aqu fer testing. The same qual?e.d pump Installer that conducted the pressure and e]ec~rical tests mus[ eo work that is done in this task. The condition of.the well wtll be verified by the installer using the same techniques during the pre-test (see #1 above), 5. Upon well restoration, the developer will be respons b e to insure that the well is disinfected. A qualified pump Installer must do the disinfection. DisinfecUon will be done, at a minim~um, by following the procedures described in Erouadwater and H/e//~, 2"~ edition, pages 619-623. 6. If any flow tests ~re conducted from our Well, the developer must supply all pumping equipment. 7. Within 48 hours of collecUng data from our well, the developer Will provide copies of all data to the homeowner. I agree to abide by the above condiUons. Developer Date Ouatified pump installer means a person or companv that routinely conducts water 'well pump installat(ons. The (nsti~ller must he an active nlember of the Alaska Water WeII Association and the National Ground Ware( Association. 18 89-1997 12:51PM D HI ONSULTING 90? 344 1385 P.O1 YAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHSI DATE: October 9, I 1997 FAX NO.:l ~ w'O' N~O': 962~98. All ENTI'ON: Jim.. ~.ross NO. OFiPAGE$!: 2 SUBJECT: ,ew (Including t~hie oever FoR Y, r F,ORMAT ON:__ Or~gln&l rsb~pos ~m ~ : Msiled ~ Call ~ar Piokup ~ Filed ,, ~ Foq YoUr ~ use ~ For Review & C=mment ~ As R~uested ~ ~ For MESSAGe: I just foxed the revised hold harmless agreement, The sentence on ne~li{';ence has been~r~worde~ so it reads better, The agreement covers the wor~Jn~that you and I~ ~iscuss~d last evening. I have fax it to Jeff William'and wil~ discuss Here is ray, read on where we are, Jeff is saying that he can get ever~on join in the ~lan. I ~hink we need ~o work closely with him and~ we ha~e ~ een. I have faxed Jeff th~ name~ and address of all the people that. we sen~ ~he~ auestionna~ re to, i have discussed the schedule with him,, ~lm ~unte~ contacted ~our of {he seven people that he wan~ed to participate ~n th~ Ul)per well test, ~ou have contacted the Carlsons as discussed. I have had be~ n talking wit~ Jeff a:~d I am working on getting everyone to understand the Hold Harmless ~greem~nt. We are working wi~h Jeff and I am hopeful that~w~ can get some ~eople involve in the upper testing program. However, plan ~p~ royal should not be con~mgent on community participation. We have spent thr,~e months try rng this ~process and it has not worked. agreed ~o We pos~one the public hearing on the basis that you and I ~o[ Id work out a pumpiqg plan for the upper well, a modeling plan per Mun{ers suggestio:n~and meet the schedule that we outlined. We need to get ~he pumping a,'~d modeling plans approved and get the upper well pumping:st~ rted, Since Dan foung has not responded, how about talking with Wheaton, / In the mea~ time, I will keep trying to get people on board in time for the~pper pump test. They Can be included in a moments notice. ; . Thanks, J ; I T0TAL P.O1 10-09-1997 01:10P~ D HI OMS~hTIMG 907 344 lEOS P.O1 FAX MEMORANDUMi TO: Barbra~ Peratr(~vich DATE: ,Octobe 997 FAX NO.:I 561-2273 W,O, NO.: 96298 A1-TENTIC N: NO. OF PAGE~: 3 SUBJECT: Denali ,View Subdivision O.*,udi.; FOR Y DUR INFORMATION: I O~[nal Di,poe~ien~ n ,M~;led n Cell for Pickup ~ Filed [] Fei Your use [] For Review & Commen~ [] Ae Reque~l;ed D For Appro¥~l E SA E: Barbra, i T Here is a c~opv of ~he questionnaire that was sent to selected property1 Dy,hers. Also, .I ha~e attacBed a copy of the revised Hold Harmless agreement.} Tile quest~onn~ire wasi sent in an effort to find out some informatidn on indivi dual wells that would I~elp us complete a pumping program. We are not as~kirg people to .tgree roi participate at this time. There is not enoug available a~t this ti~e for people to make a final decision, Please calll if you have any queszions or suggestions. Dee ! SENT BY: pee High, ,,,,,, i o.i.I co.su,.,.o E, I.EE.!S 8OO E. Dli~IOND[ BLVD. SUITE 3-B45 ANCHORAGE, AK 99S15 PH: {907) ;344-1386 FAX= {907) J344-1383 ~0-~9~997 01~10P~ D HI ONSULTING 907 ~44 1585 P.02 O~t. 09 19~7 09:15RM Pl RRLI~ASR and liOLD HARMLF~,~/ ~R A~ I ~ ~NS!DERATION of~ sum ~ by ~ o~nny cl~s ~a~s. inj~, ~m~ T~s RE~SE ~ I{OLD HAR~ AGR~T ~ ~s~n~ t~s R~ n~ HOLD Date 10-~1~97 ~: 05Pl~ HYDROLOGICAL TESTING PROGRAM FOR DENALI VIEW SUBDIVISION The Municipali.t~/of Anti)crags has requested that additional information be collected in ore er to make a better informed decision about Denali View Subdivision, The following questiohnai'e will be used to help~ determide the number of residents in surrounding Subdivisions who woul¢ be willing to participate in a~ testing program for Denali View Subdivision. The questions ~lre c esigned to help the hyd~rologist d~e~srmine the feasibility and logistics of the testing program. The uccess of the testing p~rogram very much depends on the cooperation and invotvement of the surr, ~unding property owners. Please answer ~he following questions. The questionnaire can be returne~d by faxing itito (~ne of the following n~mbers: !688-1238 or 344-1383. No cover sheet is required. Or you mayJcal[ 688- 1236 or 344-I~385 and .we will send a courier to pick it up. We would appreciate a reSPo! se by Thursday, September 25th. 1 ) Name: Phone: 2) Physical A~dress: 3) Legal Description: Lot .... Block Subdivision 4) Do you ha~e more than one well on the property? Yes No 5) If yes, do they both'~ave pumps in them and are they both being used? I 6) Do you ha~e a holding tank? Yes ~ No Size Gallons 7) Do you kngw any of[the following about your well? a) Depth of Well feet b) Rat~ of recovery or yield gpm c) Wh~t depth ils your pump set at? feet 8) Would you be willing [o let the water level in your well be monitored? Ye~ No 9) Wou ~u I~e'~ ng To go a day or more without pumping your well? __Ye~ __No 10) How man, days? il day 5 days __ 2. daya ~ 6days ~ days __ 7 days ~4 days 11) What days,' of the week are best for you not to pump your well? I 12) How man~ people Uae your well on a daily basis? 13) Are you w;illing to participate In the tasting program if your well pumping, can be sche luled and monitore~l to minimize impacts on you and still provide useful data for the test7 __Ye~ No 14) Would you be willing to sign the enclosed Hold Harmless Release?__ Yes __ No If you have c.~cerns oF revisions that you would like to see concerning the Hold Harmles please write the changes on the form. 298test. Itt ,' Release, TOTAL P.03 G~, Jim A. by ~ of' any cl~ms fm D~li V ~ S~v/slon om ~B~s K~ ~ HOLD TAts P*~.~AI ~ trod HOLD HARMLF-g$ AGR~PAMIENT con. ins fl~ ENTIRE he;~.~n thc I nnio~ hett~m and th~ 1~ms ofth~ ~lease ~,re conttaclual ~nd nm a Jn~m rn~imi WI~ m r l~nds ~ th. da~ be~nw writt.n 10-09-199'7 Da~ Post-It' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 [* of pagee ~* ~L~,-'~. Co.~ ul V. w~y IT P. 01 TOTAL P.01 10-0~-1S97 10:3?AM D H! ONSULT~NG ~07 ~ 1~0~ P.01 DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS [ FAX MEMORANDUM DATE:O~tober 8, 1 ;~97 TO: DHHS] FAX NO.: W.O. NO.: 96298 ATTENTIO! h Jim (~ross NO. OF PAGES:'. 4 · ~.~' (including th;B cover sheet) SUBJECT: )enah ,tew FOR,yOUR INFORMATION: O~ginol Dispos~ion: ~ Mail~ D Call for Pickup ~ F~ed X For ~our ,s~. ~ Fo~ Review & Comment ~ As R~ue~ ~ For Apprpva[ . MESSAGe: I faxed a c~ of t¢o homeowner list to ~off ~ostord~ aftorno~n and a~a n this a.m. I al,~talkod ~, him about what wo ar~ currontl~ doin~ add our I ~ncoura~d hlm ro fl,t thi~ information Io th, homoownOrs agd to sot u~. somo method of ~commuh:icat~on' bocaus~ I in~ond to forw*rd to him ififormafion r~ach ~r~mont on ~ch ~to~. Therefore,il will fax him today, copy of the schedule and hopefully copy ,f ~he pump test~hg program for the upper aquifer. I Jeff and J~m Munt~r have bo~h talked with the Carlson. Once ~we have details of the pump test worked out, you should talk with the~ an se~ if :here is some co[mmon ground that we reach. My guess is that there is, Next question. Has ADEC with drawn Kevin's earlier letter, We need something~in writing from them, Is there anything I can do on:this wi~h /,DEC? Dee SENT BY; ~oo Hiflh . 8~ E. Dt~OND BLVD. SUIT; 3-5~5 ANCHORAGE, AK 99515 PH: (907) ~-1385 FAX; 19071 1~.1383 ~ : i ~0 'd D HI ONSULTING 90? ~44 138~ P.~ 10-08-1997 10:38AM D HI ONSULTING 90? 344 1383 P.03 8~!~BB9 ~-08-1997 10:~@~M D HI ONSULT]N~ ~07 ~44 ~8~ P.04 TOTRL P. 04 Mr. Pa~l ~ Sk~,- vi~ P.O. ~ox ~ Bristol Knvtroument~l'$ervfc~ C~rporation Posbl? F~,'[ Nots 7671 DItHS ;evi ~v and ~ period October Our ~ ~c ~ r~ of ~t bm~ on D~S c~: O~ 2%29. r~~. . ~-31. I ~e ~t ~ ~m ~ ~ow D~S ~ C~ ~s~ to ~ ~O~ v~ if f~ ~ W~ d~ ~ y~y's ~ r~ly~v~id, ~~ ~ ve~ ~i~v P. 01 TOTAL P.02 ~0-02-1997 09:48~H D HI OMSULTIMG 907 ~44 1~0~ P.01 i FAX MEMORANDUM : I' TO: DHHSi DATE: October 2, 997 FAX NO.: 43-,47 6 w.o. NO.: ATTENTION: J,m Cross NO, OF PAGESi 2 FOR Y~UR I~FORMATiON: : ~ ~el Dispes on: ~ Mailed ~ Call for pickup ~ Filed D For~Yo.r use ~ For Review & Comme~ ~ As Requeet~ ~ For App~ova~ MESSAGE: j , This is the schedule that I briefly discussed wi[h you yesterday evening, Munter is ~o get ~ith you todav to start working out the modeling dea~ail~. We need to gec a definite path for [he modeling by Friday to 91ye J~lm enoqgh time to do the ~ork. This is not a complicated procedure and I believe between you, Jim and y~ur hydr~logists, a course of action can be quickly established., I will leave coor~inationlwith Dan Young in you hands. I think he needs to involved, Uut i dod't see him responding in timely fashion, As far as ~eeping the public informed, I suggest that we keep them infor ed of the work ~very st~p of the way, I'll fax out the schedule and the details ~f the modeling as soon as you approve the program.,I , I'm open t~ suggestion. Let me know if you want me to do anything~els~. Thanks, ~ SENT BY: bee High ~ D~HI CONSULTING ENGINEERS Coo E, Di~ONO BLVd. SUITE 3-S45 ANCHORAGE, AK 99515 PHi {~07} 3~-13~ F~X~ (907) 4-1383 FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHS DATE: October 2, !997 FAX NO.: 343~4786 W.O. NO.: 96298 ATTENTIOI~h Jim Cross NO. OF PAGES: 3 SUBJECT: Denali View (Includin9 [his ~eve, aheet) FOR YOUR I:NiFORMATION:," Original Disposition: n Mailed [] Call far Pickup [] Flle¢l I-] For ~Yo~lr usa D For Review & Comment rl As Req~lested [] For Appr, oval~ MESSAGE: I : I was hand,ed the Conditions of Approval a few minutes before last nights! meeting, the wording of note # 9 has changed from what ;~you & I h~d discussed With Margaret O'Brlen some time ago. In the bound:packet. Nd;re 9 reads "Pla~e a note on the plat which reads: Nitrate reducing systems may be required by the Municipal Department of Health and Human service (DHH~) for the development of each lot within this subdivision." Did you make a change? If not, I will get with Margaret and have her chalnge it back. She may need confirmation from you. I I Th~-~ ' SE.NT,i~Y: I~ee High ... : : DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 E. DIM~,OND BLVO~ SUrTE 3-$~§ ANCHORAGE, AK 99515 PHi i907! 344-1385 FA7(: (9Q7) ~44.1383 TOTAL P.04 10-82-1997 08:~8RM D HI ONSULTINB 989 344 1~83 P.01 , FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHSI DATE: October 2, !1997 FAX NO,: ,343-4786 W.O. NO.: 96298i ATTENTIO~I: Jim ,C:.ross NO. OF:PAGESi 3 SUBJECT: IDenali ~/mw On*lud~.e this covet' FOR YOU" INFORMATION: ..... I Original Dlspos tlon: [] Mailed n CeE for Pickup [] FUed [] Fei Your uae [] For Review & Comment ri Aa Req~e;ted [] For Appl, ovel MESSAGE: I was ham ed the Conditions of Approval a few minutes before last night, meeting. ' ha wording of note # g has changed from what ~J~you &,l h ~d discussed ~vith M~rgaret O'Brien some time ago, In the bound~ packeti N~te g reads "Pla¢e a note on the p at which reads: Nitrate reduc ng Systemsmgy be required b,, the M~nicipal Department of Health and Human service {DHH~) for the develo3ment Of each lot within this subdivision." Did you make a change? If not, I will get with Margaret and have her ~h~nge back. Sh~,may need confirmation from you. Dae~~ ,l, ,, SENT BY: ~ee High ~ ~ DHI CONSULTING ENGINEER'S I 1~-0~-1997 O~:~AM D HI ONSULTING 90? ~ 1~ P.O~ Case S- 10054 Denali View Subdivision Platting Board Meeting October 1, 1997 If at th~ conclusion of the public hearing, the Board: approves preliminary plat, the following conditions are recommended: Approval of the plat subject to: i. Re~olving utility easements. 2, E~tering into a subdivision agreement with the DPW for: the a, providing improvements on Kullberg Drive, (Sutlins) Drive and Solleret Drive to a rural 24 foot ~vide gravel standards. b, providing street signs and traffic control devices. __e,. constructing the t~ ~.'" · Dedacatm~ Kullberg Drive to a 60 foot width. Providing a turnaround at the northerly terminus of Tho ton [S~llins) Drive. Resolve the need to dedicate the turnaround {with Dp:W, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning. Prbviding a trail easement on the plat along the west bound ,a~y of Lot 11 and extending along the lot line between Lots 10 and l 1 to the Kullberg Drive cul-de-sac. Resolve a 12' or 20' width fo~ the trail easements with Division of Parks and with Transport~tion planning. drainage and drainage easements with Pr~iect Rdsolving M,anagement and Engineenng, DPW, OBtaining ADEC approval for development within this subd vi ton Demonstrating that minimum lot area and minimum lot '~dth requirements of the R-10 district based on the average slo ~e of each lot are met with Land Use Enforcement. 10-02-1097 08:39~M D HI ONSULT~NG 907 3~4 138~ P.O~ S-lO05~ 9/3/971 Page 21 10. 11. Resolving with DHH$ the need for additional hydrologic testihg or rdodeling: to ensure that the appropriation of water by the pro] ~osed D~nali. View Subdivision will not unduly affect the ex sting su,' rrounding residential wells. R,~solving with DHHS the need to place a note on the plat reqt dring the installation of nitrate reducing septic systems. C~rrecting street name: Sullins Drive north of Malcolm Dlqve is new Thornton Drive. C[orrecting the title block information to read: Grid NXV 1261, toro C;\M$O FICE\WINWORD\WORK~=ILE\PLA'I'TING\97PLAT~10054CO~.DOC Oct-01 -97 01:35P # of Post-W' ~- ' Note 7~?~ D~te Jp~ges~ MEMORANDUM -22O F.l.a. P .02 DATE: OcLober 1, 1997 TO: THRI ]: FROM: Platting Board p heila Ann Selkregg, Ph.D,, DirecLor, Department of Community lanning and Development. Margaret O'Brien, Senior Planne~r '~/ SUBJECT: Case S-10054 Dena.Ii View Subdivision HISTORY OF THIS CASE: 03/07/97 Preliminax-y plat application submitted for Denali View Subdivision, a resubdivision of Tract 1, Unit #3, Scimitar subdivision illt. o 11 lots located in the R-10 (Alpine/Slope At'fected District) zone. 05/21/97 Scheduled public hearing beibre the Platting Board. The Board was unable to hear all items in t_hc time allowed by ordinance a~xd four cases were postponed to the June 4. 1997 meeting including Denali View Subdivision. 06/04/97 The Platting Board moved to postpone the Denali View Subdivision pending completion of on-going water studies without. a dale certain. The motion cm~ied. 06/05/97 A Notice of Reconsideration was spread by Boardmember Klein to address the following issues: postpone the case to a date COl'Cain for the public hearing; allow both the petiLioner and the communi[y more time to effectively prepare their cases, a.nd allow thc applicant time to c~mplete a nitrate and hydrology study for the area. 06/21/97 The Platting approved reconsideration of the Denali View Subdivision and postponed the case to the August 6, 1997 lrleeting. 10-01-1997 04:01PM D HI ONSULTING 989 ~44 1~8~ P.01 ' FAX MEMORANDUM TO: DHHS I DATE:October ~, 1997 FAX NO.: 343-47~6 W.O. NO.: 96298 ATTENTIOI~I: Jim Cross NO. OF PAGES;~, 1 SUBJECT: Denali V~iew (m~u~ing lhls ~over FOR YII I ATION: Original Dispos~ion: I~1 iMailed [] Call fer Pickup I~ Flied n ForlYo~lr uae , [] For Review &.Commen; [] As R~ques;ed [] F;r Approval MESSAGIF: . This is to c~nfirm my understanding of our phone conversation thls P'~' That w~tho~t the full participation of the well owners within the 1200'~:ra~ii of each well, ,then we are going to: 1) Agree t~ a model that would look at the probability of impacts to 2) if the m~del sh~w no or Yer¥ Iow probability of impact, no further t~stl~§ would be r~quired;~ or 3) if the, m,odel shows a high probability .of ~mpact, then testing of the ?e~l wtll be required 'to add~ess the concern, provided the test will have a reas~nat~le chance of 2 results, i I ~rov~ding usable 4) An 8 tol24 hou~ flow test will be required of the upper well. Its my understanding that items 1,2 & 4 can be completed and reviewed ~vith in two to thr~e week~. If item 3 takes effect, then the schedule may tango I )nger. Call me if ~ou hav~ any additions or corrections to the above. Thenks, ] · SENT BY; ~ee High( I , DHI CONSULTING ENGINEERS ~00 E, DIMOND gLV~. SUITE 3-54~ ANCHORAGE, AK 99515 PH: i9071 344-158~ FAX: 9~)7) ~4-1383 TOTRL P.01 i FAX MEMORANDUM FAX nO.: ~43-4-78~0 September 30, &TTENTIOI~: Jim Gross W.O. NO-: SUBJECT: Denali ~iew NO, OF PAGES:~ 1 I (I.ol~dlng th~ o~ver ~0~ ~O~R I~O~llO~: ~ , Odg~al Dlspos~n: ~ :Mailed ~ Call ~r Pickup ~ Faed ~ ~ ~ For App~valI ~ ForiYour use ~ For ~evlew ~ Comment As R~ue~ted : UE'SS G : The lack o~ response from the neighbors has a significant impact on obr ability so ye this ~specT of the test. Can you, plan on spending enoug~ time ~tH us this afternoon to ~ork through ,his point. We may need a couPle~ of h~u?. i I Thanks, ~ I ' Dee ~ ~ .. i SENT BY: pae High [ DHI CONSULTING ENGINEER,S 800 E. DI~OND BLVD, SUITE 3-545 ANCHORAGE, AK 99S15 PH: (90~) ~4-1385 FAX: (9~7) ~44-1383 TOTAL