|
Community service project tangled up in county permitting
net
By Chris Fitzgerald
KP News
Since September 2005, the Key
Peninsula Metro Parks District (KPMPD) has been
attempting to obtain a Pierce County building permit to
allow the Key Peninsula Lions Club to construct a simple
picnic shelter for public benefit at the Home Park, at
the corner of Eighth Street and Key Peninsula Highway
North. Initial plans were designed by Ed Robison, son of
former KP Lions President George Robison. Ed Robison is
a civil and structural engineer, and donated his
professional services to KPMPD for this project. The
Lions chose the shelter as one of their community
service projects.
|

Photo courtesy
of Nancy Dardarian |
The KPMPD Website lists Home Park
as “a success story of what determined individuals can
do”: The park was created on an illegal dump site by
volunteers, who organized garbage cleanup and park
maintenance. The Website states that construction of the
18-foot by 36-foot, covered picnic shelter “is set to
begin in early 2006.” More than a year beyond that
projection, Pierce County Planning and Land Services
continues to reject each newly submitted requested plan
revision.
As early as November 2005, county
plans examiner Scott Erickson sent review comments with
four specific required changes to KPMPD. Erickson
concluded the plan review with the following comment:
“Please be aware that as additional information is
provided, further code requirements may be revealed.”
Also late in 2005, county development engineer Jeffrey
Sharp called for a “Flood Boundary Delineation Survey,”
which the county had said would not be required,
according to George Robison. A “Separate Driveway
Approach Application” was also required; site access for
parking must be off Eighth Avenue, and would have to
conform to specified county regulations.
One year later almost to the day,
in early November 2006, KPMPD sent a letter to plans
examiner Donna Magnussen in an attempt to reach county
compliance. KPMPD Executive Director Scott Gallacher
directed the planning department to its own language
identifying a “neighborhood park” as “small in size”
(about 3 to 10 acres) and may include “picnic
facilities, trails, nature area.” Gallacher subsequently
received an email from Magnussen stating, “Building (the
picnic shelter) has been approved and we are waiting for
development engineering (Sharp) to complete there (sic)
section.”
|
Investigate before
you leap into construction
Why has
construction of a simple 648-square-foot,
open-sided,
covered picnic shelter become so complicated
that it cannot
seem to get past county planners to be built on
1.74 acres of
park district-owned “parked-out” land? According
to Councilman
Terry Lee, all projects both large and small
must go through
Pierce County review. Pierce County must, in
turn, comply with
mandated state and federal regulations
concerning even the
most minute of details. The construction of this
shelter at Home
Park, he says, may “seem to be of little
consequence, but still
impacts neighboring properties of adjoining
uses, and requires
a wetlands review. What makes this so bitter is
that it’s so small
in scale… People are frustrated about the
process.” He admits
the county makes these projects “challenging.”
In retrospect, Lee
says it is in everybody’s best interest, prior
to
beginning a commercial project of any size or
kind, to set up a
“pre-construction” meeting with Pierce County
Planning and Land
Services. “There’s a minefield of regulations to
weave through,”
he says. Lee encourages anyone considering “the
fiscal impacts
on a proposed project” to call his office for
assistance in setting
up either a small ($300) or large ($1,700)
pre-development
interdepartmental meeting prior to layout of
construction-related funds. |
At about the same time, George
Robison sent an email to Gallacher and others requesting
their presence at a meeting on Dec. 7, with Pierce
County Councilman Terry Lee in attendance. The email
revealed Robison’s apparent frustration with the
seemingly endless permit resubmission cycle.
On Jan. 30, another letter was
received from Sharp, stating, “The (newly designed)
stormwater runoff control design is not acceptable,” and
calling for yet another revision of the site plan per
his “comments above and the attached redlined plans.”
George Robison reminded Gallacher that county staff had
agreed at the December meeting that the
5,000-square-foot exemption (of an engineered water
retention structure) applied to this permit. The
exemption does not, however, release the proposed
project from construction of an approved runoff
containment system. This was later corroborated in an
interview with Pierce County Councilman Terry Lee, who
said, “The Home Park picnic shelter must comply with
right-of-way constraints and make a PALS-acceptable
provision for storm water retention.” The good news is
that since the project is less than 5,000 square feet of
impervious cover, he says regulations do not require an
engineered retention system, although the design will
need to show how storm water is captured through
infiltration using the “county retention manual.”
Robison’s email was also his
resignation from the project. “Please advise the park
directors that I am withdrawing from the Home Park
project… I am sorry I ever got involved in Home Park.”
Robison said there is no doubt in his mind that
continuing planning department difficulty with the
permitting process is because he “forced them to admit
numerous discrepancies and errors in the original
checklist.”
Meanwhile, his son, Ed, has been
deployed to Iraq, where he continues to attempt
assisting in resolving the stormwater issue. In an email
to Gallacher in early February, Ed wrote, “By all
reasonableness what was proposed meets the intent of the
design manual and exceeds anything that should be
required for this project because of the receiving
waters and project scope.” He advised KPMPD to insist
that Planning and Land Services approve the current
revision. He concluded by writing, “If you allow them to
insist on these changes, the project cannot be built
without completely changing the site plan because of the
conflicts with the wetland and wildlife buffers that you
will incur.”
In his 2006 budget, Lee set aside
$2,500 to assist in permitting costs and construction.
Gallacher reports those funds were used to pay $390 in
permit/application fees to date, and to purchase
materials for the project. He takes a broader look at
the scope of difficulty encountered with getting this
small project approved. “Most of the requirements are
unfunded mandates set forth by the state through the
Growth Management Act,” he wrote in an email to the KP
News. “I know we don’t fall into GMA boundaries, but
those regulations have to be considered for not just
this project, but all.”
Meanwhile, Gallacher still works to
meet compliance with the county so construction can
begin. “I have a meeting with AHBL (the engineering and
design company that assisted with another initial KPMPD
design project) … and hope to be able to take care of
this issue,” he said. “I don’t know what it will cost,
but we have to move forward. I would hope to have our
permit and be completed by summer, but I would not want
to speculate.”
©Copyright 2005-2008, Key Peninsula
News, all rights reserved.
|
|