The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREED Lots 12, 13 & 14st0 Sandra J. Wicks Attorney at Law 608 West 4th Avenue #22 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) ~.~-~ 258-6387 April 4, 1986 Mr. Bill Mans, Acting Division Manager Environmental Health Division Department of Health and Human Services Municipality of Anchorage P.O.Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650 Subject: Well Permits for Lots 12, 13 and 14, Reed Subdivision Dear Bill: Thanks to you and Susan Oswalt for taking the time to meet with Finis Shelden, Lee Reid and myself at the offices of the State Department of Environmental Conservation on April 3, 1986. I think it was important for all of us to meet with the various DEC staff members who are involved in this matter~ the details of which are spelled out in my letter to Bruce Erickson, the Anchorage/Western District Offices Coordinator for DEC. I have attached a copy of that letter to this one. I hope that as a result of our meeting all of us will be working toward a reasonable solution of the problem that will protect the public health and yet not cause undue consternation or dislocation to the owners of the lots involved. I believe you agreed that as long as we are working toward a solution, it will not be necessary at this time to involve the owners of Lots 13 and 14 or financial institutions that may have made loans on those lots. I am concerned to not disrupt the lives of the owners of Lots 13 and 14 and not to indirectly have any aspersions cast on Mr. Shelden's reputation, either as a builder or as a realtor. He, in good faith, constructed three private wells on Lot 14 after submitting the plans to and receiving the approval of DEC. His reputation should not be made to suffer because DEC has now decided it did not have the jurisdiction to issue the permits. If it becomes necessary to apply to the State for a public well permit, we will involve the owners of Lots 13 and 14 at that time. Bill Mans Well Permits April 4, 1986 Page 2 At this time, before any decision can be made to apply to the State for a public well permit or to the Municipality for three private well permits, two issues must be resolved, one by the State and one by the Municipality. The State must determine whether the three existing wells on Lot 14, designed and constructed as private wells to separately serve Lots 12, 13 and 14, in fact, constitute one public well. The Municipality needs to determine whether a lot can be served by a private well that is constructed on some other lot. We recognize that that is not the normal case, but do not read the Code as prohibiting a private well on one lot serving another lot. Of course, it would be necessary to clearly identify the lot on which the well was located and the lot to be served by the well. It is also necessary to have recorded easements to allow access to the well and water and electric lines. All of that was done in this case. Specifically, in this case, there are three wells on Lot 14. One well serves Lot 14. One well serves Lot 13 and one well serves rot 12. There are separate water snd electrical lines from Lot 12's well to Lot 12, from Lot 13's well to Lot 13 and from Lot 14's well to the house on Lot 14. There are easements providing Lots 12 and 13 access to their wells and water and electric lines. By having separate wells, in this manner, there need not be any coordination between property owners for water sampling and costs of repair or maintenance. Each property owner is responsible for his/her own well. My question is whether this type of arrangement is prohibited by the Anchorage Municipal Code. It does not appear to us that it is. Furthermore, as a common sense matter, This situation seems very analogous to the situation where a building of a certain size cannot be built on a lot unless adequate parking can be provided on an adjacent lot. That is done regularly by recording a parking agreement that acts as an easement on the adjacent property providing the parking space. It also seems a matter of common sense, where a lot has been shadowed by the radii from surrounding septic systems, that a well be drilled on another lot to serve the shadowed lot. By that means the lot is not rendered unbuildable by the actions of neighboring lot owners in the placement of their septic systems. Sandra J. Wicks Attorney at Law 608 West 4th Avenue #22 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907)X~(~2X 258-6387 Apr il 4, 1986 Mr. Bruce E. Erickson District Offices Coordinator Anc~horage/Western District Office Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E. Street, Suite 303 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Subject: Lots 12, 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Private Wells, Chugiak, Alaska Dear Mr. Erickson: I appreciate the time you and your staff members took to meet with Finis Shelden, Lee Reid and myself, as well as Susan Oswalt and Bill Mans from the Municipality, on April 3, 1986. The purpose of this letter is to summarize my understanding of what was discussed at the meeting. I explained to those present that Lots 12, 13 and 14, Reed Subdivision, are shadowed by the septic systems on adjacent lots, particularly those lots to the south in George Sehm Addition. Enclosed are the illustrations of the problem that I distributed at our meeting. Susan Oswalt pointed out Municipal permits were issued in May, 1985 for individual wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14. Lee Reid explained that when he became involved he realized there was no way to put wells on Lots 12 and 13 without violating the required 100 foot separation distance. Having worked on the drafting of the Municipal Code provisions relating to wells, and having had long experience in the administration of those provisions, he was aware of no prohibition against drilling 3 separate wells on Lot 14 to serve Lots 12, 13 and 14. He drew the necessary plans and presented them to the Municipality. Susan says that she told Lee to go to the State -- the implication being that he should apply for a public well permit. Lee says his impression was that the Municipality did not want to review anything but the standard on-site well design. He was not told to apply for a public well permit. So he took his plans for three separate private wells to DEC. Mr. Bruce E. Eri~ ,on Private Wells - Reed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 2 The plans and specifications were reviewed and approved by Steve Eng of DEC in a letter dated June 12, 1985. A copy of that letter is attached. During the summer of 1985 the wells for Lots 12, 13 and 14 were installed in reliance on the DEC permits. The septic systems were installed pursuant to Municipal permits. Houses were built on Lots 13 and 14 and have been sold. The water syst ems for Lots 1 3 and 14 were issued Certificates to Operate by Michael P. Lewis of DEC on October 11, 1985. A copy of that letter is also attached. A Certificate to Operate for Lot 12 was not applied for until March, 1986 as no house had been built on the lot. On March 6, 1986 you wrote to the Municipality that the approvals granted by your office for the wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14 were invalid because your office does not have the authority to approve private wells in the Municipality. I have attached a copy of that letter also. Unfortunately, the citation in that letter is not precise enough for me to verify that your office does not have the authority to approve private wells in the Municipality. I raised the question at the meeting, but did not receive a satisfactory answer, whether DEC, in fact, is without jurisdiction or whether DEC, as a matter of practicer defers to the Municipality when the Municipality wishes to assume jurisdiction. That, of course, will be an important question should we ever have to go to court over the validity or invalidity of the permits issued by the State. I hasten to add, after my previous comment, however, that it is not our desire to go to court over this matter. In our meeting, I continually stressed our desire to simply sort out the tangled threads in this matter and make sure that Lots 12, 13 and 14 have a safe and legal water supply. We would prefer, however, that the three wells continue to be treated as private wells so that the three separate property owners need not have to coordinate the taking of water samples and costs of repair and maintenance. That, I believe summarizes the background to the problem. Now what is the solution? Bill Mans raised the question at our meeting whether the Municipal Code permits a lot to be served by a private off-site well as in this case. We do not believe the Municipal Code prohibits the design created by Lee to solve the shadowing problem. I have written to Bill requesting a formal determination on that issue. You will find a copy of my letter to Bill attached hereto. If off-site private wells are prohibited, there is no .option other than to apply to DEC for a public well permit since it is impossible to put private on-site wells on Lots 12 and 13. Mr. Bruce E. Ericks_n Private Wells - Reed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 3 There is also the question raised by DEC whether three wells five feet apart that go to the same depth really constitute a public well. Jim Hayden of your office was going to pursue this question and provide us a written explanation. We pointed out that there are many examples of private wells that all tap the same acquifer (called a "public water source" by the September, 1985 Attorney General's opinion). Presumably, not all wells drilled into the same "public water source" are public wells. There are also many examples of private on-site wells where the driller drilled on one side of a lot line and then pulled the rig a short distance across the lot line and drilled another well into the same "public water source". The presence of a surface boundary line should presumably not affect your conclusion whether these two separate wells are private wells or one public well. I think the decision about what constitutes a public well should be very carefully made unless DEC suddenly wants to convert a lot of private wells into public wells. My understanding from both you and Bill Mans is that it will take some time to obtain the necessary clarifications and that, in the meantime, neither DEC nor DHHS will stir up unnecessary anxiety in the property owners or financial institutions affected. After the necessary clarifications have been obtained, we will then know what our choices are. They appear to be to apply to the Municipality for three separate private well permits or to apply to the State for a public well permit covering all three wells. Of course, I do not waive the right to assert the validity of the current permits, but that is a position of last recourse at this time. Regardless of which type of permit is finally obtained for these wells, some safety issues raised by Steve Eng in his letter dated March 27, 1986 also need to be addressed. A copy of his letter is attached. It identifies two concerns: drainage toward the wells, and danger of the wells being struck by vehicles. We agree that these concerns should be researched and resolved. If there is, in fact, a ponding problem, it may be necessary to raise the ground level around the wells. We know that the road maintenance crews have plowed the road onto Lot 14's property and, therefore, unreasonably close to the wells. It may be Mr. Bruce E. Erick~n Private Wells - Reed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 4 necessary to erect a barricade or markers to indicate the property line and protect the wells. As can be seen on the attached as-built, the wells are at least 5 feet in from the property line. Neither plows nor snow from the road should be in that 5 feet. We will be looking into these two areas of concern while DEC and DHHS are obtaining answers to their respective questions. I would like to stress that the wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14 were designed and constructed in good faith after consultation with DHHS and DEC and pursuant to permits issued by DEC. The houses on Lots 13 and 14 and all of the wells and septic systems were constructed in reliance on those permits. A great deal of money and numerous people's well-being are at stake here. Mr. Shelden and Dr. Reid have at all times attempted to cooperate with DEC and DHHS on this well question and will continue to do so. We hope that DEC and DHHS will similarly act in good faith and in a cooperative manner to resolve this matter. Sincerely,~_~~~, ~~ Sandra J. Wick~s SJW/ja Enclosures cc: Finis Shelden Lee Reid, Alaska Environmental Control Services, Inc. Mayor Tony Knowles Assemblyman Gerry O'Connor Assemblyman Fred Dyson Assemblyman John Woods Bill Mans, DHHS Susan Oswalt, DHHS Jim Hayden, DEC Mike Lewis, DEC Steve Eng, DEC ,I I~ 12 TP~CT '50:00 2O NBg°sg'oo"w 660 30 50,00 '50.00 / 5'0.00 / 19 18. 7 , O0 O0 330.00 330.00 %~,~ ~oo.oo 4 100.00 IO0,O0 5 t..~\'~ 6 lO0. O0 BARBARA 100. O0 I00,00 IO0,00 Street I00 O0 ~ oo CONTROL SERVIr?c3, INC., ! 200 West'3'3rd Aver,~v Suite' B ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 Phone 561.5040 SHEET NO CALCULATED BY _~) ~ CHECKED DY. I : ~ OF ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SERVICES, INC. 1200 West 33rd Aven~e, Suite B ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (9O7) 561.5040 OF DATE DATE 1 AS--BUILT I hereby certify that LOT /~- Anchorage Recording 3istrict, Alaska, has been surveyed by me and that no encroachments exist except as .shown hereon. It is the responsibility of the owner to determine the existence of any easements, covenants, or restrictions which do not appear on the recorded subdivision plat. Listed distances prevail and scaling should not be attempted to determine unshown dimensions. This survey is not adequate for, nor should it be used for establishing boundary or fence lines. LAND SURVEY COMPANY P.O. Box 671089 Chugiak, Alaska 99567 Phone (907) 688-4499 DEPT. OF EN%'IRONMENTAL CONSER%:&TION~9~,FLE -i: .... "~, ..~'~:- ANCHORAGE/WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 437 "E" STREET, SUiTE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 March 27, 1986 Alaska Environmental Control Services, Inc. 1200 West 33rd Avenue, Suite B Anchorage, Alaska 99503 SUBJECT: Lot 12, Reed Subdivision, Private Well, Anchorage Alaska 8621-DS-024 & 8621-FA-211 Dear Sir: The Department has reviewed the subject submittal. As can be seen by the attached letter, our department does not have the authority to approve private wells within the Hunicipality o¢ Anchorage. The subject Harch 24, the 3 ¢looded Surface systems hazard. uells snowplow. wells to approvals inspection. property was inspected by department personnel on 1986. We have grave concerns over the location o~ wells on Lot 14, Reed Subdivision. The wells are in a area which is in direct violation o~ 18 AAC 80.020. waters were observed ?lowing Crom an area with septic tooard the well depressions creating a potential health In addition, the location is such that damage to the can easily result Crom large vehicles such as a We have serious doubts as to the ability o~ the properly per¢orm in their present location. Any previously granted are rescinded as a result o~ this Sincerely, SWE:pkk cc: Bruce Erickson, ADEC, Anchorage Jim Hayden, A/WDO MOA/DHHS LASKA ENVIRONI~ ITAL S,E.~ No Or 1200 West 33rd Awnu~-~'Suite B ANCHORAGF. ALASKA 99503 CH~CKEO "Y- O~TE (907) 561-5040 ~ 2 Al o P.'~ H vv' o o u> $ ~u~3DIVI $ I OA~ TR.4CT C-I SAMPSON I 3s TRACT A2 Sandra J. Wicks Attorney at Law 608 West 4th Avenue #22 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (90 7) gflSK6718Yx 258-6387 April 4, 1986 Mr. Bruce E. Erickson District Offices Coordinator Anc.horage/Western District Office Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E. Street, Suite 303 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Subject: Lots 12, 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Private Wells, Chugiak, Alaska Dear Mr. Erickson: I appreciate the time you and your staff members took to meet with Finis Shelden, Lee Reid and myself, as well as Susan Oswalt and Bill Mans from the Municipality, on April 3, 1986. The purpose of this letter is to summarize my understanding of what was discussed at the meeting. I explained to those present that Lots 12, 13 and 14, Reed Subdivisions- are shadowed by the septic systems on adjacent lots, particularly those lots to the south in George Sehm Addition. Enclosed are the illustrations of the problem that I distributed at our meeting. Susan Oswalt pointed out Municipal permits were issued in May, 1985 for individual wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14. Lee Reid explained that when he became involved he realized there was no way to put wells on Lots 12 and 13 without violating the required 100 foot separation distance. Having worked on the drafting of the Municipal Code provisions relating to wells, and having had long experience in the administration of those provisions, he was aware of no prohibition against drilling 3 separate wells on Lot 14 to serve Lots 12, 13 and 14. He drew the necessary plans and presented them to the Municipality. Susan says that she told Lee to go to the State -- the implication being that he should apply for a public well permit. Lee says his impression was that the Municipality did not want to review anything but the standard on-site well design. He was not told to apply for a public well permit. So he took his plans for three separate private wells to DEC. Mr. Bruce E. Eric on Private Wells - Reed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 2 The plans and specifications were reviewed and approved by Steve Eng of DEC in a letter dated June 12, 1985. A copy of that letter is attached. During the summer .of 1985 the wells for Lots 12, 13 and 14 were installed in reliance on the DEC permits. The septic systems were installed pursuant to Municipal permits. Houses were built on Lots 13 and 14 and have been sold. The water systems for Lots 13 and 14 were issued Certificates to Operate by Michael P. Lewis of DEC on October 11, 1985. A copy of that letter is also attached. A Certificate to Operate for Lot 12 was not applied for until March, 1986 as no house had been built on the lot. On March 6, 1986 you wrote to the Municipality that the approvals granted by your office for the wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14 were invalid because your office does not have the authority to approve private wells in the Municipality. I have attached a copy of that letter also. Unfortunately, the citation in that letter is not precise enough for me to verify that your office does not have the authority to approve private wells in the Municipality. I raised the question at the meeting, but did not receive a satisfactory answer, whether DEC, in fact, is without jurisdiction or whether DEC, as a matter of practicej defers to the Municipality when the Municipality wishes to assume jurisdiction. That, of course, will be an important question should we ever have to go to court over the validity or invalidity of the permits issued by the State. I hasten to add, after my previous comment, however, that it is not our desire to go to court over this matter. In our meeting, I continually stressed our desire to simply sort out the tangled threads in this matter and make sure that Lots 12, 13 and 14 have a safe and legal water supply. We would prefer, however, that the three wells continue to be treated as private wells so that the three separate property owners need not have to coordinate the taking of water samples and costs of repair and maintenance. That, I believe summarizes the background to the problem. Now what is the solution? Bill Mans raised the question at our meeting whether the Municipal Code permits a lot to be served by a private off-site well as in this case. We do not believe the Municipal Code prohibits the design created by Lee to solve the shadowing problem. I have written to Bill requesting a formal determination on that issue. You will find a copy of my letter to Bill attached hereto. If off-site private wells are prohibited, there is no ~option other than to apply to DEC for a public well permit since it is impossible to put private on-site wells on Lots 12 and 13. I.Ir. Bruce E. Erick. ~ Private Wells -Reed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 3 There is also the question raised by DEC whether three wells five feet apart that go to the same depth really constitute a public well. Jim Hayden of your office was going to pursue this question and provide us a written explanation. We pointed out that there are many examples of private wells that all tap the same acquifer (called a "public water source" by the September, 1985 Attorney General's opinion). Presumably, not all wells drilled into the same "public water source" are public wells. There are also many examples of private on-site wells where the driller drilled on one side of a lot line and then pulled the rig a short distance across the lot line and drilled another well into the same "public water source". The presence of a surface boundary line should presumably not affect your conclusion whether these two separate wells are private wells or one public well. I think the decision about what constitutes a public well should be very carefully made unless DEC suddenly wants to convert a lot of private wells into public wells. My understanding from both you and Bill Mans is that it will take some time to obtain the necessary clarifications and that, in the meantime, neither DEC nor DHHS will stir up unnecessary anxiety in the property owners or financial institutions affected. After the necessary clarifications have been obtained, we will then know what our choices are. They appear to be to apply to the Municipality for three separate private well permits or to apply to the State for a public well permit covering all three wells. Of course, I do not waive the right to assert the validity of the current permits, but that is a position of last recourse at this time. Regardless of which type of permit is finally obtained for these wells, some safety issues raised by Steve Eng in his letter dated March 27, 1986 also need to be addressed. A copy of his letter is attached. It identifies two concerns: drainage toward the wells, and danger of the wells being struck by vehicles. We agree that these concerns should be researched and resolved. If there is, in fact, a ponding problem, it may be necessary to raise the ground level around the wells. We know that the road maintenance crews have plowed the road onto Lot 14's property and, therefore, unreasonably close to the wells. It may be Mr. Bruce E. Erick~ n Private Wells -P~eed Subdivision April 4, 1986 Page 4 necessary to erect a barricade or markers to indicate the property line and protect the wells. As can be seen on the attached as-built, the wells are at least 5 feet in from the property line. Neither plows nor snow from the road should be in that 5 feet. We will be looking into these two areas of concern while DEC and DHHS are obtaining answers to their respective questions. I would like to stress that the wells on Lots 12, 13 and 14 Were designed and constructed in good faith after consultation with DHHS and DEC and pursuant to permits issued by DEC. The houses on Lots 13 and 14 and all of the wells and septic systems were constructed in reliance on those permits. A great deal of money and numerous people's well-being are at stake here° Mr. Shelden and Dr. Reid have at all times attempted to cooperate with DEC and DHHS on this well question and will continue to do so. We hope that DEC and DHHS will similarly act in good faith and in a cooperative manner to resolve this matter. Sincerely, Sandra J. Wicks SJW/ja Enclosures cc: Finis Shelden Lee Reid, Alaska Environmental Control Services, Inc. Mayor Tony Knowles Assemblyman Gerry O'Connor Assemblyman Fred Dyson Assemblyman John Woods Bill Mans, DHHS Susan Oswalt, DHHS Jim Hayden~ DEC Mike Lewis, DEC St eve Eng, DEC 1370 66 DLM 4 /0 // 5X 6, L 83.64 83.{,4 33 14 O0 ~P ~.J .I 5 I O0.00 7P4 C 7' ,oo. oo ,oo.oo "'-'-~'~ Street ~oo 'bo I00. O0 BARBARA IOO,O0 tOO. r)~ ~S 8 ht 3~ 5!,20,,¢ ./ 33.0.00 g ~°° O0 CONTRO. L SERViC"$, INC: 200 West ~l'3rd Avel Suite' B ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99,503 Phone 561.5040 SH[ET NO CALCULATE[:) BY _JJ ~ CHECKED E~Y ~CALE I ~' OF AS--BUILT I hereby certify that LOT /~- , -DLOC'~ Anchorage Recording ~istrict, hlaska, has been surveyed by me and that no encroachments exist except as .shown hereon. It Is the responsibility of %he owner to determine the existence of any easements, covenants, or restrictions which do not appear on the recorded subdivision plat. Listed distances prevail and scaling should not be attempted to determine unshown dimensions. This survey is not adequate for, nor should it be used for establishing boundary or fence lines. LAND SURVEY COMPANY P.O. BOX 671089 Chugiak, Alaska 99567 Phone (907) 688-4499 / DISTRICT OFFICE ANCHORAGE/WESTEPJ; 437 "E" STREET, SUITE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 June 12, 1985 274-2533 Mr. Finis Sheldon P.O. Box 67-1087 Chugiak, Alaska 99567 Subject: Lots 12, 13, and 14 Reed Subdivision, chugiak, Alaska (8521-FA-211) Dear Mr. Sheldon: We have reviewed the plans and specifications for the subject project. This letter constitutes the permit required by A.S. 46.03.720(a) for approval of the water systems. It should be remembered that final approval will necessitate the submission of Engineer As-built Plans and owners name, address and telephone number. This will consequently mandate that a professional engineer conduct l~sic inspection of this project so as to be able t~ sign off on as-built plans. Arrangement for this inspection ark is the responsibility of the developer. Any future expansion of subject project will require additional approval from this office. Sincerely, SWElmsm DE~. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION 437 "E" STREET, SUITE ~0~ ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 Telephone: (907) Address: 274-253G October ti, ~985 Mr.. Finus Sheldon P.O. Box 67-~087 6hugiak, Alaska 99567 SUBJECT: Lots 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Chugiak, Alaska (8621-DS-024) ? Oear:."Mr'. Sheldon: The Department has received current water, analyses for. the subject lots and hereby issues the Certificates to Operate for the water systems. Any future expansion of the subject project will require mdditional approval fr.o~ this office. Sincerely, Michael P. Lewis Er, vir. or, me nt al Engineer MPL/~sm ANCHORAGE/WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 March 6;, 1986 Municipality of Anchorage Department oF Health & Human Services PO Box 6-650 Anchorage, Alaska 99510-0650 SUBJECT: Lots 12, 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Private Wells, Chugiak, Alaska (8621-DS-024 & 8621-FA-211) Dear Sir: Per your request, we have reviewed our files on the subject properties. In our review, we have found an error in our review process in which all three properties had been approved as private systems. Under Alaska State Statute Chapter 80, our department does not have the authority to approve private or single family residential systems in the Municipality of Anchorage. Therefore, approval given through our department on these systems is invalid. However, in the case a subject property owner ac nhoosee, they ~ay submit to our office an application for approval oF a public water system. If you have any questions, please contact me at our A~chorage/- ~estern District office. erely, District OFfices Coordinator BEE: HPL: pkk Hike Lewis, A/~DO Jim Hayden, A/WDO / EN%IRONMENTAL CONSER%'ATION · i ~ ~,.,'~' ANCHORAGE/WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 437 "E" STREET, SUITE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 ~arch 27, ~986 Alaska Environmental Control Services, Inc. 1200 West 33rd Avenue, Suite B Anchorage, Alaska 99503 SUBJECT: Lot 12, Reed Subdivision, Private Well, Anchorage Alaska 8621-DS-024 & 8621-FA-211 Dear Sir: The Department seen by the authority to Anchorage. has revieued the subject submittal. As can be attached letter, our department does not have the approve private uells within the Municipality o~ The subject property uas inspected by department personnel on March 24, 1986. We have grave concerns over the location o~ the ~ uells on Lot 14, Reed Subdivision. The uells are in a ¢looded area uhich is in direct violation o~ 18 AAC 80.020. Surface uaters uere observed ~louing Crom an area uith septic systems toward the ~ell depressions creating a potential health hazard. In addition, the location is such that damage to the ~ells can easily result ~rom large vehicles such as a snouplou. We have serious doubts as to the ability o¢ the uells to properly per¢orm in their present location. Any approvals previously granted are rescinded as a result o¢ this inspection. Sincerely, SWE:pkk cc: Bruce Erickson, ADEC, Anchorage Jim Hayden, A/WDO ~IOA/DHHS Sandra J. Wicks Attorney at Law 608 West 4th Avenue #22 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) ~R~-~{~ 258-6387 Apr il 4, 1986 Mr; Bill Mans, Acting Division Manager Environmental Health Division Department of Health and Human Services Municipality of Anchorage P.O.Box 196650 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6650 Subject: Well Permits for Lots 12, 13 and 14, Reed Subdivision 0~#~. O~ HEALT ~ ~OTE~io APR ? 1986 Dear Bill: Thanks to you and Susan Oswalt for taking the time to meet with Finis Shelden, Lee Reid and myself at the offices of the State Department of Environmental Conservation on April 3, 1986. I think it was important for all of us to meet with the various DEC staff members who are involved in this matter, the details of which are spelled out in my letter to Bruce Erickson, the Anchorage/Western District Offices Coordinator for DEC. I have attached a copy of that letter to this one. I hope that as a result of our meeting all of us will be working toward a reasonable solution of the problem that will protect the public health and yet not cause undue consternation or dislocation to the owners of the lots involved. I believe you agreed that as long as we are working toward a solution, it will not be necessary at this time to involve the owners of Lots 13 and 14 or financial institutions that may have made loans on those lots. I am concerned to not disrupt the lives of the owners of Lots 13 and 14 and not to indirectly have any aspersions cast on Mr. Shelden's reputation, either as a builder or as a realtor. He, in good faith, constructed three private wells on Lot 14 after submitting the plans to and receiving the approval of DEC. His reputation should not be made to suffer because DEC has now decided it did not have the jurisdiction to issue the permits. If it becomes necessary to apply to the State for a public well permit, we will involve the owners of Lots 13 and 14 at that time. Bill Mans Well Permits April 4, 1986 Page 2 At this time, before any decision can be made to apply to the State for a public well permit or to the Municipality for three private well permits, two issues must be resolved, one by the State and one by the Municipality. The State must determine whether the three existing wells on Lot 14, designed and constructed as private wells to separately serve Lots 12, 13 and 14, in fact, constitute one public well. The Municipality needs to determine whether a lot can be served by a private well that is constructed on some other lot. We recognize that that is not the normal case, but do not read the Code as prohibiting a private well on one lot serving another lot. Of course, it would be necessary to clearly identify the lot on which the well was located and the lot to be served by the well. It is also necessary to have recorded easements to allow access to the well and water and electric lines. All of that was done in this case. Specifically, in this case, there are three wells on Lot 14. One well serves Lot 14. One well serves Lot 13 and one well serves rot 12. There are separate water and electrical lines from Lot 12's well to Lot 12, from Lot 13's well to Lot 13 and from Lot 14's well to the house on Lot 14. There are easements providing Lots 12 and 13 access to their wells and water and electric lines. By having separate wells, in this manner, there need not be any coordination between property owners for water sampling and costs of repair or maintenance. Each property owner is responsible for his/her own well. My question is whether this type of arrangement is prohibited by the Anchorage Municipal Code. It does not appear to us that it is. Furthermore, as a common sense matter, This situation seems very analogous to the situation where a building of a certain size cannot be built on a lot unless adequate parking can be provided on an adjacent lot. That is done regularly by recording a parking agreement that acts as an easement on the adjacent property providing the parking space. It also seems a matter of common sense, where a lot has been shadowed by the radii from surrounding septic systems, that a well be drilled on another lot to serve the shadowed lot. By that means the lot is not rendered unbuildable by the actions of neighboring lot owners in the placement of their septic systems. Bill Mans Well Permits April 4, 1986 Page 3 We await your response and the response from DEC so that we can decide how to proceed. Our preference is to continue treating the three separate wells as private wells. If the existing arrangement can be permitted under the Municipal Code, we will apply to the Municipality for new well permits to replace the well permits the State now says it issued in error. Sincerely, Sandra J. Wicks SJW/ja Enclosure cc: Finis Shelden Lee Reid, Alaska Environmental Control Services, Inc. Mayor Tony Knowles Assemblyman Gerry O'Connor Assemblyman Fred Dyson Assemblyman John Woods Bruce Erickson, State of Alaska DEC CONTROL SERVICE,% INC: :1200 West'~'3rd Avenl' · Suite'B ANCHORAGE, ALAS~ J9503 Phone 561-5040 SHEET NO CALCULATED BY CHECKED 8Y OF DATE DATE · DEPT. OF £N%'iBoNMENTAL CONSERVATION 4._37 "E" STREET, SUITE 3(:13 ANCHORAGE, A~ASKA BILL _~HEFFIELD, C~OVERNOR Telephone: (907) Address: O,:tobeF. il, 19S5 Mr-. Fir, us Sheldon P.O. Eox 67-1087 Chugia:, Alask~ 99567 SUBJECT: Lots 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Chugiak, Alaska (862i-DS-024) [lea' Mr-. Sheldon: The Depar. tment has re,:eived cur. rent water, analyses for- the subject lots and her. eby issues the Cer. tifi,:ates to Oper-ate for' the water- systems. Any futur, e expansior~ of the subject project will r. equire additional appr. oval fr. om this office. Sin,:erel y, Michael P. Lewis Er, vi r. or, mer, t al Engi r, eer. MPLtmsm ANCHORAGE/WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 437 "E" STREET, SUITE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 June 12, 1985 RILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR 274-2533 Mr. Finis Sheldon P.O. Box 67-1087 Chugiak, Alaska 99567 Subject: Lots 12, 13, and 14 Reed Subdivision, Chugiak, Alaska (8521-FA-211) Dear Mr. Sheldon: We have reviewed the plans and specifications for the subject project. This letter constitutes the permit required by A.S. 46.03.720(a) for approval of the water systems. It should be remembered that final approval will necessitate the submission of-Engineer As-built Plans and owners name, address and telephone number. This will consequently mandate that a professional engineer conduct basic inspection of this project so as to be able to sign off on as-built plans. Arrangement for this inspection work is the responsibility of the developer. Any future expansion of subject project will require additional approval from this office. Sincerely, District Engineer SWE/msm ,f STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION APPLICATION FOR ON-SITE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM APPROVAL Approval of individual water and domestic wastewater disposal systems is offered by the Department of Environmental Conservation to the public for their convenience. This approval may not be required by the Department, however it may be required by other authorities, INSTRUCTIONS TO THE APPLICANT 1. For a water supply system, complete Sections I, II and IV of this application form and attach the following items as part of your application. a) as built plans signed by a registered land surveyor or engineer. b) a well log for all new systems and, if it is available, for existing systems. c) a photograph of the well casing to clearly show its height and the sanitary seal. d)a copy of the test results for a water sample taken from this water system. 2, For a wastawoter disposal system, complete sections I, III and IV of th'is application form and attach the following items as part of your application; e) as built plans signed by a registered land survevor or engineer. b) a copy of the adequacy test report (if appropriate), c) a copv of the receipt for having the septic tank pumped (if appropriate). 3. This application form with the appropriate attachments should be submitted to the local district office of the Department of Environmental Conservation at the address listed below: Box 2420 Room 203 State Office BIdg, Box 450 Juneau, Alaska 99803 415 Main Street Sitka, Alaska 99835 (907) 789-3151 Ketchikan, Alaska 99901 (907) 747-8614 (907) 225-6200 Box 1601 Box 1711 Box 188 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 Nome, Alaska 99762 Tok, Alaska 99780 (907) 452-1714 (907) 443-2600 (907) 8834381 437 E. Street 2nd Floor Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) 274-2533 8ox 1207 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 (907) 262-5210 Box 515 Kodiak, Alaska 99615 (907) 486-3350 Drawer 1709 Box 1064 Veldez, Alaska 99686 Wasilla, Alaska 99687 (907) 835-4698 (907) 376-5038 STATE OF ALASKf, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION APPLICATION FOR ON-SITE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM APPROVAL I. GENERAL INFORMATION Legal Description of the Location Applicant is: (Check one) ~ Bank [--]Certified Installer NO. ~ Owner/Builder Ii~Sin01eFamily [] Multi-Family ~.)3 II. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM t~c:¢~r~-I~J~ ~m~ ~,,~' ¢,,, /d/~ - Source of Water end Containment (Ch~k all ~het Apply) Type of Water Suppl~System Treatment of Water (Check ~11 tha~ Apply) ~Well(Drilledor Driven)~ Surface (identify) ~Private ~None ~Chlorination ~ ROOf Catchment ~ Other (Identify} ~Public (Se~es more than one ~Filtretion ~Mineral Removal ~ Holding Tank family) ~Other: Well Data-- ~ I Is dreina~ direct~ away from or around the casing within a radius o~ 10 feet of the well casln~7 a Date Dr'lied Depth of Well (Feat) Static Water Level (Feet) [Yield (If Available) Pump Rate (If Available) Separation Distances from the Well Casing to each o{ the Following Sources of Contamination: Septic/Holding Tank on Lot ~ ~ewer Lines on Lot Absorption Area on Lot Closest Septic/Hol~ng Ta~k on Adjacent Lot C o~est Sewer Lines on Adjacent Lot alo~*t Ed0e of ~n Ab~orptiomArea on Adjacent L~ If toxic materials are stored on the prope~, including fuel tanks, paints, lubrican;s end other petroleum On Lot On Adjacent Lot based materials, pesticides. ~unoicides or herbicides, indica;e distance from contaminants to well casing: ~& .... ~0M[ ,- Water Sample Taken by: Name ~ampler ~ Buyer ~ Engineer Address ~ Banker ~ Government Official Water Sample Resulls: ~ Satisfactory- Date: ~ Unsatisf~tor~:UF -. [] (Spacif¥ Brand Name 'gLees) Where Waste i~ Disposed I FreQuency of Pumping Other (Specify): [] (Outhouse, Incinerator, etc ) Size [Gallon~) Number of Compartments JDate Installed Body of Water Water Table/Bedrock Lot Line certify that the above information is correct: Signature Typed/Printed Name {Ti~ie, Reg./Cert. No.,Inst. No. Date I NOTE: Must ba signed by a certified installer, professional engineer or DEC Staff. [--I Existing System Name of Installer { Date Installed [] Owner/Builder No. Septic Tank Size (Gallons) Number of CompaFtrnents Soil Type or Rating Type Soi~ Absorption System Dimensions/Size Soil Absorption System Type/Quantity Backfill Material used for Soil Absorption System Adequacy Test Results: AdequacyTestPerformedBy:(AttachCopyofReport) Pete Septic Tank Pumped (Attach Copy of Receipt) [] Pass [] Fail Minimum Ground Cover over Septic Cteenout Pipes/Caps installed on Cleanout Pipes/Caps Installed on Minimum Ground Cover over Absorp- Tank Septic Tank Absorption System tion Area I certify that the above information i$ correct: Signature Typed/Printed Name I Title, Reg./Cert. No., Inst. No. [Date I NOTE: Must be si~nad by a profession, al engineer. SEAL Registered Professional Engineer I~ a pla~ v~ew, locate and identify eec' ' the following: ~) V~eli b) All - ctures c) Septic Tank d) Soil el Surface Water f) Sources of Contamination g) Property Line (Include hi CIose$~ well on an adjacent property i) CIo~es'[ septic tank on an adjacent property j) Closest edge of an absorption field on an adjacent property 2. Show distances between the well and each of the other items listed in 1. ~ 3. Show distances between water bodies and each of the other items listed in 1, 4. tn a croSS section view of the soil absorption area, identify each component and show the depth (thickness) of the following: "i a) Soil Cover b) Absorption Material d) Bedrock e) Discharge Pipes c} Watar Table ALASKA ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SERVICES, INC. 1200 West 33rd Avenue, Suite B ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 561-5040 / SHEET NO OF DATE. CHECKED DY DATE ._: ~.E -" S~,B.'! .'!c n~ REED SECI10'4: 18 TC:414E'HIF': rS~.FT 0F ACRES) L0~.: · t4 G';-,NGE: lN BL OCI-:.;: NA _ . .,-~,~w are, the r.p~ ions aval)able ~c, yo,_, Ir, de~:,.~,ln9 '>'~,L.r s'-~pt, ic ~'..,StFn,, Ch(:,'t, s6 the oFtlor, th~.t best fits your site. TRENCH BED W . 1)F;:A I N DEPTH T~] PIPE BOTTOM (FT. 6)RAk;EL DEPTH (f"T.) , TOTAL DEPTH (FT.) GRAVEL~ WIDIH (.FT.) GRAVEL LENGTH (FT. GRAVEL VOLUME (E~U. YDS. ) T~qNK SIZE (GALS) ~OIL RATING (SQ.FT, 4.0 4.0 B.O · 2.5 ,; 17.0 47.0 ., . :~q.O 1~.6 21.5 ~i, 000.0 ** 1,000.0 125 125 TANK MUST HAVE AT LEAST TWO COMP~RTMENTS I certify that: . - I. I am Familiar with the ~equirements For on-site _~e~e~s and well~_ as set forth, bi the Idun~cipality or Anchorage (MOA) and the State o¢ Alaska. 2, I will instal t the ~_,/stem in mccor0ance with all MOA codes mhd er, d ~n compliance with the design criteria of thim permit. %' ~ I ~:11 adhere to al! MOA and State of Alaska requiremen&e for the set bac~ diste~ce~ frop a0y existing well~ wamtewmter disposel syste~ or public se~,¢erago system on this or any adjacent or nearby, lot, ' I under st a',d that this permit is v~!id for a ma'.imum o~ ~ bedrooms end ¢r,') er.]~rgc.,T, Er, t ~ill requJr'e an addi[ior, al permit. IF A L IFT ST¢~iON ~S INSTALLED IN AN AREA CO'.'ERE[' B'," ~DA BUILDING CODES, THEN ,1~ AN ELECTF'~EAL PERMIT AND tNSPECT~ON MUST BE OZ'TA!NED; (2) AS-GUiLTS . . 14.f [~E AF'F'F:OVED WITHOUT AN ELECtRiCAL. INSPECTION REPORT; Af~D (~) THE W~' L ELEE'iRiCAL WORK MUST BE DONE BY A LICENSED ELECTF:ICIAN. " ~ · ~ / ' ' DATE: }EF'TH ]0 F';FE 3RAVE~. DEPTH (rT.) tOTAL DEPTH (FT. ~RAVEL WIDTH (FT.) ~RAVEL LENGTH (Fl. ~RAVEL VOLUME' rANK SIZE (GALS) BOIL RATING .) 4. ,".. (:,.~ 7.5 8.0 4.5 7,5 2.5 20.0 5.0 ~7. O ,. 40.0 58.0 2B. 0 .2e. 7 43.0 OO0. O ** 1,000.0 ~* 1,000.C) ~-~ 177 177 ~77 TAN,'- MUST HAVE A'f LEAS] TWO COMPAR'fMENTS ?, 1 we ]~ ;r =+ ~] i IP.' ~,:._.-,, ir. E'c.,-¢~, dAn~[¢ (*CCh, al; ~i{'~i:. c,:,.::'e~ a:",,J . ''- "~'" ' "' pub, ',F A L:F'T E.T~TiC. N IS ]l~;7.:Li. EP Ir4 Al-4 AREA COVER'ED ~"F MOA E:LJTI.DJNC- CODES, 'HE:lc f!l At4 ELE;ZTF~ICAL ~F'I''~ A"41~ ~4SPECTIOf4 MUST EE (31~'t. ' · ' ' , L,[.D, [,E') AS-/qJI L ~7LL fJ~'T BE: AF'FS:?~ED Ie]THOdT AN ELECTF'ICAL INSF'ECTION F~E'F'DRT; ANL (~,) tHE --- .......................... ...... iF'F',. ' m "~l ~ ~ N' 1"~ ........ ~'~'~'~' ~-r .]_ ..... ;... . . _ _ _ ,.. ~ · , , . Q? . . ........ ~.' f-~:,~ T.~] ~:~,: .~ ~..':.' , ' . DEPARTME~ /F HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROT~T~TION 825 L. Street, Anchorage, Ata~(. 99501 264-4720 SOILS LOG- PERCOLATION TEST [] PERCOLATION TEST 6 DATE PERFORMED:_ ~ITE PLAN 10 11 12 13 14- 15 16 17 18 19 2O COMMENTS ~3(~'I n~ PERFORMED BY: ,~ ~)C~ (6/79) WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? IF YES, AT WHAT DEPTH? Gross Net Depth to Net Reading Date Time Time Water Drop PERCOLATION RATE ~ , ikute~/Inch) TEST RUN BETWEEN ' ,. 4 7 14 'UNICIPALI.TY OF ANCHORAGE DEPARTMEN, OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRO'~ 825 L. Strut, Anchor~je, Ala~kB 99501 264-4720 SOILS LOG- PERCOLATION TEST rlON I~ PERCOLATION TEST SLOPE °i WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? . mC;) L~ P iF YES, AT WHAT E DEPTH? ", Reading Date Gross Net Depth to Net Time Time Water Drop ~0 ,a~a O~ · PERCOLATION RATE //. c~ ,',, ' ' (minutes/inch} - 72-008 INICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE DEPARTMEN'r OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTE,., ION 825 L. Street, At~, Alike 99501 264-4720 SOILS LOG- PERCOLATION TEST [] PERCOLATION TEST 6 6 7 8 g 10 SLOPE ol 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 COMMENTS~.z~'~d ~[ PERFORMED BY: DATE PERFORMED: LITE PL/AN WAS GROUND WATER E.COU.TERED~ IF YES, AT WHAT DEPTH? Reading Dete Gross Net Depth to Net · Time Tim Water Drop PERCOLATION RATE : ' ' ' ' ' ¢~inuterJinch) · TEST RUN BE'I~VEEN FT.~kND ; FT',~ ~! r3' ~ I · ' ~ ~, ' , . , ,: .'."~~Z .... :'. ~ ~ MEMORANDUM State of DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL & GEOPItYSICAL SURVEYS TO:DLwMBILL WRIGHT : 3-i4-86 688-3555 FROM: LARRY DEARBORN~ Hydrologist TELEPHONE NO: SUBJECT: Hydraulic effect of cluster wells This writing is in response to your recent request for a brief discussion by DGGS of the hydraulic effect resulting from pumping a cluster of wells tapping the same aquifer. Generally, a well cluster implies very closely spaced individual wells, on the order of about 3 to 10 ft apart. With few exeptions, the purpose of constructing a well cluster is to monitor water levels or water quality in separate aquifers at a given point in a groundwater flow system or a drainage basin. Occasionally, two to four wells may be clustered to tap a thick aquifer (50 to 100 ft or more) at various pre-determined depths. Your question, however, was "what is the effect of three wells, constructed only a few feet apart from one another, pumping from the same depth within a single aquifer?". Such an extraction system where all wells would be pumped simultaneously is technically absurd and certainly uneconomical, I know of no such installation in Alaska. Essentially, if such a cluster were put in operation, the resulting drawdown would be hydraulically almost identical to pumping the total rate of, say, three wells from one well. However, because of their closeness to one another, the wells would most likely perform less efficiently and, therefore, cause greater drawdown in the aquifer at the well cluster site. LLD/j lw cc: Robbie RobinSon, Municipality of A~lcborage J iL ~-%/ L . _ . . :~ :/ ~ ~.'" -- -', ~.:,~,II ! : ,::.~ 8ILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR / %.*I/''~ _ .. ..~. DE~. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION / -~"~ '~/'~:,::_. ANCHORAGE/~ESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 437 "E" STREET, SUITE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 Alaska Environmenta] Control Services, inc. 1200 West 33rd Avenue, Suite B Anchorage, Alaska 99503 March 27, 1986 274-2533 MUNICIPALITy OF ANCHOP, A(~8 DEPT, OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION APR 1986 SUBJECT: Lot 12, Reed Subdivision, Private Dell, Anchorage Alaska 8621-DS-024 & 8621-FA-211 Dear Sir: The Department has reviewed the subject submittal, As can be seen by the attached letter, our department does not have the authority to approve private wells within the Municipality of Anchorage. The subject property was inspected by department personnel on March the 3 flooded Surface systems hazard, wells snowplow. wells to approvals inspection. 24, 1986, We have grave concerns over the location of wells on Lot 14, Reed Subdivision, The wells are in a area which is in direct violation o£ 18 AAC 80,020o waters were observed flowing from an area with septic toward the well depressions creating a potential health In addition, the location is such that damage to the can easily result from large vehicles such as a We have serious doubts as to the ability of the properly perform in their present location. Any previously granted are rescinded as a result of this Sincerely, PE Oistrict E~ineer SWE: pkk cc: Bruce Erickson, ADEC, Anchorage Jim Hoyden, A/WDO MOA/DHHS ANCHORAGE/WESTERN DISTRICT OFFICE 437 "E" STRERT, SUITE 303 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 Municipality of Anchorage Department of Health & Human Services PO Box 6-650 Anchorage, Alaska SUBJECT: Lots 12, Chugiak, Dear Sir: March 6, 1986 MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE DEPT. OF HEAl. TH & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION APR :i 1986 RECEIVED 99510-0650 13 & 14, Reed Subdivision, Private Wells, Alaska (8621-DS-024 & 8621-FA-211) Per your request, we have reviewed our files on the subject properties. In our review, we have found an error in our review process in which all three properties had been approved as private systems. Under Alaska State Statute Chapter 80, our department does not have the authority to approve private or single family residential systems in the Municipality of Anchorage. Therefore, approval given through our department on these systems is invalid. However, in the case a subject property owner so chooses, they may submit to our office an application for approval of a public water system. If you have any questions, please contact me at our Anchorage/- Western District offloe. ~ri un~ ~/~erely' District Offices Coordinator BEE: MPL: pkk cc: Mike Lewis, A/WDO Jim Hayden, A/WDO