Public safety groups appeal project

The Manchester Crime Prevention and Public Safety Group filed an appeal on Wednesday in opposition to Kitsap County’s proposed Manchester pipeline project.

The plan is designed to end road flooding and reduce stormwater flows into Duncan Creek by replacing piping to Manchester’s Main Street Stormwater Drain and moving the drain to discharge north of the northernmost dock at the Port of Manchester.

The 36-inch pipe would be laid underground down to the beach’s three-foot tide level and then surface for discharge. Stormwater currently drains at the south end of the dock, high on the beach.

“We fully support the project, if it is revised to meet Kitsap County Code and addresses navigational hazards and health standards,” said Bud Larsen, the group’s coordinator.

In a recent letter to the Kitsap County commissioners, Larsen outlined the group’s concerns:

“There have been significant fecal coliform bacterial counts noted in the present storm water outfall,” he wrote, “and nothing has been done to mitigate this concern with the new outfall. The outfall is a known attraction to the youngsters who enjoy the beach regularly during the summer when the low tides will expose the outfall on a regular basis. The outfall discharging on the beach rather than at a deep water location will expose the population of Manchester to disease. 

“The plastic HDPE pipe will be exposed to damage from logs and other objects during a storm, and plastic HDPE is not as rugged as concrete or ductile iron. The concern is that the pipe could be damaged during a storm and thereby exposing an increased danger to the public.

“The exposed pipe will present a hazard to navigation that has not been addressed in the documents presented for public review. The 30-plus feet of exposed pipe within 20 feet of prime docking space will catch normal boaters unaware and will result in property damage and the potential for personal injuries.”

Larsen wrote that, in addition to the public safety concerns, the following issues create reason for concern about the project as it is presently planned: “The 36-inch pipe is capable of carry a very large amount of water at a rapid velocity, which means there will be a lot of energy to dissipate as the water leaves the pipe. No calculations addressing this concern were included in the public information packet. The diffuser pad appears to be inadequate, and if it is, a lot of erosion could take place on the beach. In addition this would impact adjacent private tide lands.

“The outfall being located above ground will effectively become a berm on the beach, which will disrupt the normal lateral movement of sand and other beach aggregate. Typically this causes unintended results in the build up of sand in a new location and erosion of sand in another. Our specific concern is erosion of sand around the dock. 

“The 36-inch diameter HDPE (plastic) pipe and concrete anchors are exposed, above ground and above water for many hours each day. This is very offensive from an aesthetic standpoint, and therefore very community unfriendly.  Manchester is improving rapidly, and public projects installed in Manchester should be neighborhood friendly. 

“These concerns can best be addressed by extending the outfall out to a location deep enough to permit burying of the pipe on the beach, and installing a proper diffuser at the end of the pipe which is well under water at all times. The bacterial problem will be lessened with this approach, but may require additional attention. It appears that this will be money well spent to make the difference between a successful project which is acceptable to the community, rather than a failure causing harm to our children and pets, compromising the structural integrity of the existing docks, and creating an eyesore on our otherwise pristine beaches.”

According to Dave Kimble of the Committee to restore Duncan Creek, while the committee did not file a separate appeal, members offered their comment and support.

“I think the (Kitsap County) Hearing Examiners decision should be stricken and ammended in that order due to the alleged misrepresentation by the county concerning the confusion over tidal depth and the depth of the outfall termination point,” Kimble said. “This is serious when people think the pipe is going to be below the water almost all of the time when it fact it is exposed on most every tide.”

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Read the Oct 21
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.

Friends to Follow

View All Updates