Bathroom in the shop

[etpm]

A couple of years back the Hirst decision effectively killed building permit issuance in Growth Management Act counties (King, Pierce, Snohomish, Spokane) where the building permit relied on a Permit Exempt Domestic Well for water. Spokane county allowed you to grandfather your well under the pre-Hirst rules if you got your building permit in to review prior to the effective date of Hirst.

Now they are issuing permits relying on wells by means of a water bank ( similar to Kittitas county). Other countries may have handled it differently.

I just read the Hirst decision, what was so idiotic? Also, the "beneficial use" that you mentioned, is that something your county requires? And what exactly is it?
Thanks,
Eric

 

[GSVette]

I just read the Hirst decision, what was so idiotic? Also, the "beneficial use" that you mentioned, is that something your county requires? And what exactly is it?
Thanks,
Eric

The idiotic thing was that it overturned 150 years of western water law precedence and all of the lower court rulings which consistently held for the original application of water law for permit exempt domestic wells. Additionally the ruling basically put the onus on counties ( and thus on the applicants) to prove ( via some undefined means and method) that their water withdrawal for domestic use did not materially effect senior water rights nor stream inflows. Take a read of the dissenting opinion(s)- it clarifies some of the points that I considered idiotic,

Currently it takes years and tens of thousands of dollars to perform a hydro geological study to determine if inflows or senior water rights could be impacted and frankly, in my considered, civil engineering opinion the studies rely on voodoo science and materially unprovable simulation and assumptions regarding infiltration rates, water migration and subsurface transportation.

I could go on for a long time over all of the scientific flaws in the thinking that underpinned Hirst but you’d be bored to tears. Take a hard look at who was paying the freight for Hilary Franz (one of the plaintiffs attorney- I think the lead attorney). I won’t deny that the original cause for the case was some fast and loose applications of the permit exempt domestic well by some developers in Whatcom-but there was a deeper agenda that drove it to the state Supreme Court.

‘Beneficial Use’ was a term applied by Spokane County to ensure that an applicant trying to grandfather prior to Hirst’s effective date wasn’t gaming the system- it meant you had to be building something with a bathroom with h/c running water and toilet. That then necessitated a septic system ( or sewer hookup) and power.

 

[etpm]

The idiotic thing was that it overturned 150 years of western water law precedence and all of the lower court rulings which consistently held for the original application of water law for permit exempt domestic wells. Additionally the ruling basically put the onus on counties ( and thus on the applicants) to prove ( via some undefined means and method) that their water withdrawal for domestic use did not materially effect senior water rights nor stream inflows. Take a read of the dissenting opinion(s)- it clarifies some of the points that I considered idiotic,

Currently it takes years and tens of thousands of dollars to perform a hydro geological study to determine if inflows or senior water rights could be impacted and frankly, in my considered, civil engineering opinion the studies rely on voodoo science and materially unprovable simulation and assumptions regarding infiltration rates, water migration and subsurface transportation.

I could go on for a long time over all of the scientific flaws in the thinking that underpinned Hirst but you’d be bored to tears. Take a hard look at who was paying the freight for Hilary Franz (one of the plaintiffs attorney- I think the lead attorney). I won’t deny that the original cause for the case was some fast and loose applications of the permit exempt domestic well by some developers in Whatcom-but there was a deeper agenda that drove it to the state Supreme Court.

‘Beneficial Use’ was a term applied by Spokane County to ensure that an applicant trying to grandfather prior to Hirst’s effective date wasn’t gaming the system- it meant you had to be building something with a bathroom with h/c running water and toilet. That then necessitated a septic system ( or sewer hookup) and power.

I live in Island County and so things may be different here. I will do more reading on this decision. It looks like at first water management was basically non management, given that the amount of water for one house was extreme. 5000 gallons per day for one dwelling.
One thing I don't understand is the non permitted well. When I had my well put in about 26 years ago I had to get a permit. I don't recall if this was a county or state permit, though I think it was a county permit. Once the well was drilled I registered it with the state. This provided me with protection in the case of someone drilling a well into the same aquifer and drawing down my well. I actually may have benefited from this. Some folks were looking to buy the property across the road from me in order to start a tree farm. They were expecting to use enough water to require a water right. I informed them that since my well was registered they needed to make sure if we shared the same aquifer that they didn't draw so much water that my well was affected. Because if my well started to produce significantly less I would force them to reduce their water use. They ended up buying a parcel a mile or so away that already had a well that produced the amount of water they needed and had the water right they also needed.
Here on South Whidbey Island the land is a 3000 foot thick formation of glacial till. Because of this aquifers are crazy. So it is a way different situation than Spokane or Whatcom counties.
I will read more about the water situation in WA state and if you have any links you could post I would appreciate it.
Thanks,
Eric

 

[ray66v]

My shop has a full bath.

The sewer line from my home ran diagonally to the septic system right under where I laid out my barn. And, it turned out to be running exactly where I wanted the bathroom. So, it was almost too easy.

The bathroom, and the adjacent closet where the utilities enter the building, are well insulated, (including using exterior doors), and heated in winter for year round use. This is all on the inside of the building, (no outside walls), so it doesn't take much to heat them.

A bathroom out there was a must for me.

 

[GSVette]

I live in Island County and so things may be different here. I will do more reading on this decision. It looks like at first water management was basically non management, given that the amount of water for one house was extreme. 5000 gallons per day for one dwelling.
One thing I don't understand is the non permitted well. When I had my well put in about 26 years ago I had to get a permit. I don't recall if this was a county or state permit, though I think it was a county permit. Once the well was drilled I registered it with the state. This provided me with protection in the case of someone drilling a well into the same aquifer and drawing down my well. I actually may have benefited from this. Some folks were looking to buy the property across the road from me in order to start a tree farm. They were expecting to use enough water to require a water right. I informed them that since my well was registered they needed to make sure if we shared the same aquifer that they didn't draw so much water that my well was affected. Because if my well started to produce significantly less I would force them to reduce their water use. They ended up buying a parcel a mile or so away that already had a well that produced the amount of water they needed and had the water right they also needed.
Here on South Whidbey Island the land is a 3000 foot thick formation of glacial till. Because of this aquifers are crazy. So it is a way different situation than Spokane or Whatcom counties.
I will read more about the water situation in WA state and if you have any links you could post I would appreciate it.
Thanks,
Eric

I suspect the ‘permit’ you are referring to is the well log that is filled out by the well driller and submitted to the state for recording purposes. The county health department also gets a copy along with the water quality test report prior to issuing either a COO or (in my case) a septic operation permit.

All the permit exempt domestic well really means is you are a very junior, subordinate water right.

Under the water bank process the volume limits are tighter in many locales. I don’t recall the specific numbers for Spokane County but it is less than what was permitted under the old system.

At the heart of the issue is local/regional governments wanting to get compensation for the use of a public resource (water) that you (and I) in their minds are using for ‘free’. I would counter that with the following-I have 1.32 million square feet of dirt which has, on average, 18” of rainfall per year yielding 1.98 million cubic feet of water per year or 14.8 million gallons per year-doesnt seem too much to ask that I be allowed to utilize 12% of the water that lands on my property ( and mostly returns to the rivers, streams and aquifers anyway.

 

[Username Taken]

The idiotic thing was that it overturned 150 years of western water law precedence and all of the lower court rulings which consistently held for the original application of water law for permit exempt domestic wells. Additionally the ruling basically put the onus on counties ( and thus on the applicants) to prove ( via some undefined means and method) that their water withdrawal for domestic use did not materially effect senior water rights nor stream inflows. Take a read of the dissenting opinion(s)- it clarifies some of the points that I considered idiotic,

Currently it takes years and tens of thousands of dollars to perform a hydro geological study to determine if inflows or senior water rights could be impacted and frankly, in my considered, civil engineering opinion the studies rely on voodoo science and materially unprovable simulation and assumptions regarding infiltration rates, water migration and subsurface transportation.

I could go on for a long time over all of the scientific flaws in the thinking that underpinned Hirst but you’d be bored to tears. Take a hard look at who was paying the freight for Hilary Franz (one of the plaintiffs attorney- I think the lead attorney). I won’t deny that the original cause for the case was some fast and loose applications of the permit exempt domestic well by some developers in Whatcom-but there was a deeper agenda that drove it to the state Supreme Court.

‘Beneficial Use’ was a term applied by Spokane County to ensure that an applicant trying to grandfather prior to Hirst’s effective date wasn’t gaming the system- it meant you had to be building something with a bathroom with h/c running water and toilet. That then necessitated a septic system ( or sewer hookup) and power.

Power for the sake of power. Power is its own reward.

Whenever the 'woke' crowd gets involved, keep that in mind

 

[repete]

I have long felt that the "real" consumers of water are the urban areas. What I remove from my land via my well is returned to my land via my state approved septic system. Nothing leaves my 75 acres. Well maybe with the exception of the fact that I need to more frequently use the rest stops on the freeway.

in contrast to my process, Seattle removes water from the Tolt and Cedar Rivers in the foothills of the state, runs it via pipes to Seattle and the surrounding urban areas and then discharges it (after treatment if you ignore the occasional treatment plant failures that dump raw sewage)into Puget Sound. Basically pull everything you need out of the salmon spawning rivers and dump it into the ocean 50 or so miles later.

Also, does anyone find it odd that there is one area not included in the draught conditions we are having? Kinda look suspicious to me. Only King County and parts of Snohomish County are not having a draught according to the state DOH...

 

[oosik]

Never had a bathroom in my shop. However - I've had a temporary shop in my living room. When we were building our house here. Big radial arm saw set up in our unfinished living room. For a month or so - we "slept" with sawdust. We tracked cedar sawdust to every room and every nook & cranny.

 

[riptides]

I have come to the conclusion that if I visit a building on the property more than twice a day, it needs a bathroom.

Recent events on my property now have me planning to add living space and garage space to the mix. Both will have full bathrooms.

This should aid in me not deterring ground hogs which was the excuse I have been using for years.

Never had a bathroom in my shop. However - I've had a temporary shop in my living room. When we were building our house here. Big radial arm saw set up in our unfinished living room. For a month or so - we "slept" with sawdust. We tracked cedar sawdust to every room and every nook & cranny.

 

[oosik]

While building our house and before the plumbing was finished - pocket gopher holes came in very handy. Didn't seem to discourage them much. However - an excellent method to "spread the wealth".