Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/20/2018 11 Bicycle Apartments - Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's DecicionITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT 1 Item No. 11. For Meeting of: February 20, 2018 Closed record hearing to consider an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision regarding a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community known as Bicycle Apartments LLC Joan Davenport, Al CP, Community Development Director Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager (509) 575-6042 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Before the Council is an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision affirming the SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance and Class (2) use permit for the proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community. Council was provided the full record for review (Council --please bring your binder to the meeting) ahead of the closed record hearing on February 20, 2018. The Council sits as the appellate body and this appeal review is limited to the evidence submitted to the Hearing Examiner as part of the original decision. No new evidence may be presented or evaluated during the appeal process. The Hearing Examiner's Decision was appealed on November 15, 2017 by Bicycle Apartments LLC, and on November 17, 2017 by James K. Adams. Pursuant to YMC 15.16.050, a Notice of Appeal was sent to the applicant, appellant, and parties of record on November 21, 2017. The 30 -day comment period for parties of record to submit written argument or memorandum ended on December 21, 2017. A 15 -day rebuttal period to respond to the written argument or memorandum began on December 22, 2017 and ended on January 5, 2018. See Chapter BB for the Appeal Applications, Chapter CC for responses and rebuttal, and Chapter H.12 for the Notice of Appeal. Council will have an opportunity to deliberate, in closed session if desired pursuant to RCW 42.30.140(2), after the closed record hearing. The Council must make its decision on the date the hearing is held, including making any modifications to the Hearing Examiner's decision. Council's decision must be rendered at the conclusion of the hearing. The complete record is available for review online at: https://www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning/next-step-housing/ ITEM BUDGETED: NA STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Neighborhood and Community Building APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This is an appeal. The Council sits as the appellate decision makers with the following four options: 1. Affirm and adopt the Hearing Examiner's Decision; 2. Remand the issue back to the Hearing Examiner with instructions; 3. Modify the Hearing Examiner's Decision with written findings and conclusions; or 4. Reverse the Hearing Examiner's Decision with written findings and conclusions. BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date 0 Vicinity Map 2%1212018 2 Type Backup Material VICINITY MAP File Number: CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Project Name: Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments LLC Site Address: 118 N 50th Ave 3 111 1111111.1. ArAft 111 VIA.. • 111 plbon YAKMA P1 tij • .4% SUE. L Proposal: Proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. Contact the City of Yakima Planning Division at (509) 575-6183 Map Disclaimer: Information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies, in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the user in reliance upon any maps or information provided herein. Date Cre.ated: 5/15/2017 Lr: • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) City Council Closed Record Appeal Public Hearing February 20, 2018 Appellants: File Numbers: Site Address: Staff Contact: CHAPTER AA CHAPTER BB CHAPTER CC CHAPTER A CHAPTER B CHAPTER C CHAPTER D CHAPTER E CHAPTER F CHAPTER G CHAPTER H CHAPTER I CHAPTER J CHAPTER K CHAPTER L EXHIBIT LIST Next Step Housing & James K. Adams APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#01 1-17, SEPA#014-17, & APP#003-17) 118 N 50th Ave Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager Table of Contents Hearing Examiner's Decision Appeal to City Council Applications Appeal Responses & Appellant Rebuttal Appeal Staff Report Vicinity Map Site Plan DST Review & Agency Comments SEPA Checklist Land Use Applications Public Comments Public Notices Supplemental Information Appeal to Hearing Examiner Application Exhibits Submitted at H.E. Appeal Hearing Exhibits Submitted After H.E. Appeal Hearing • • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER AA Hearing Examiner's Decision 1. E . • • ; , ' , .'4',,:°-t4, ' 4- . nke.4.!''.f. -:: 4 • . .** 4 4 '''' : ":1'4 ' '''. AA -1 Hearing Examiner's Decision 10/30/2017 RECEIVED OCT 3 0 2017 CITY QF YAKIMA City of Yakima, Washington Hearing Examiner's Decision October 30, 2017 In the Matter of Appeals of a SEPA ) Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) ) And a Class (2) Use Permit Issued to: ) APP#003-17 ) CL2#011-17 Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud ) SEPA#014-17 And Bicycle Apartments, LLC ) ) Challenging the Approval of an 80 -Unit ) Multifamily Residential Development ) To Be Located in the B-1 Professional ) Business Zone at 118 North 50th Avenue ) A. Introduction. The main procedural aspects of the open record public hearing conducted by the Hearing Examiner on September 25, 2017, may be summarized as follows: (1) The City Planning Division staff report which was presented .by Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun recommended affirming the SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) and the Class (2) use permit approval for this proposal. (2) Attorney James Adams of Wagner, Luloff and Adams testified in support of the stated grounds for the appeals he filed on behalf of the appellants Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses. (3) Attorney Glenn Amster testified in opposition to the stated grounds for the appeals on behalf of the respondent Next Step Housing and called three witnesses who Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 1 DOC. INDEX also testified in opposition to the stated grounds for the appeals. (4) Members of the public, including some of the appellants, testified in support of the grounds for the appeals. (5) Yakima City Attorney Jeff Cutter called three rebuttal witnesses who testified in opposition to the stated grounds for the appeals. (6) The record was held open until October 16, 2017, for submission by any interested party of evidence indicating how much traffic a Class (1) permitted use in the B-1 zone could generate as a matter of right on the parcel without the need for Type (2) or Type (3) Review. (7) This decision has been issued within ten business days of the date when the record was closed on October 16, 2017. B. Summary of Decision. The Hearing Examiner affirms the SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance for this proposal, affirms the Class (2) use permit for this proposal and adds a contingent condition pursuant to YMC §15.10.040 to further promote compatibility of the Class (2) use in the future that will only become effective if on -street parking on one or both sides of North 50`h Avenue is prohibited by the City and if the proposed apartment complex at that time has surplus parking spaces that may be utilized during weekday work hours by employees of nearby businesses for little or no charge without violating any of the terms of financing or other restrictions applicable to the proposed apartment complex and without adversely affecting the use of the proposed apartment complex by its residents. C. Basis for Decision. Based upon the Hearing Examiner's view of the site on September 23, 2017, and on several occasions thereafter with no one else present; his consideration of the staff report, exhibits, written comments, sworn testimony and other Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50'h Ave.; 4181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 2 RECEIVED OCT 307017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLP.:...... a DIV. DOC. INDEX # �a-i • evidence presented at the open record public hearing on September 25, 2017; his consideration of the traffic information submitted on October 16, 2017; and his consideration of applicable provisions of the Yakima Municipal Code; the Hearing Examiner makes the following: FINDINGS I. Background of Appeals. A SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) and a Class (2) use permit were approved on July 18, 2017, for a proposed 80 -unit Alcohol & Drug Free Apartment Complex at 118 North 50th Avenue. The facts leading up to these appeals of the SEPA DNS and the Class (2) use permit may be summarized as follows: (1) Applications for SEPA Environmental Review and Type (2) Review for a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of five 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the Professional Business (B-1) zoning district were received by the City of Yakima (City) on May 15, 2017. (2) The applications were determined to be incomplete due to missing or incomplete application requirements on May 24, 2017. (3) All requested information was submitted and the application was deemed complete for further processing as of May 31, 2017. (4) Table 4-1 in YMC § 15.04.030 entitled "Permitted Land Uses" provides that the proposed multifamily residential development consisting of 13+ dwelling units per net residential acre is designated as a Class (2) Use in the Professional Business (B-1) zoning district which requires Type (2) Review in accordance with YMC Chapter 15.14. (5) A Notice of Application and Environmental Review was sent to SEPA agencies, parties of record and adjoining property owners within 300 feet of the subject property pursuant to YMC §16.05.010 on June 6, 2017. The comment period ended on June 26, 2017. The City received more than 40 comments which are further discussed below in this decision. (6) The proposal was reviewed by the City's Development Services Team (DST) on June 6, 2017. Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC 41) At 118 North 50`h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 3 RECEIVED OCT 302017 CITU OF YAKIMA 5;� DIV. DOC. INDEX '� tiro l • (7) On July 18, 2017, a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance was issued and a Notice of Decision approving the application subject to 19 conditions was issued. (8) On August 1, 2017, a timely appeal was filed by attorney James Adams on behalf of Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses who are owners of nearby properties. (9) On August 24, 2017, a Notice of Appeal was sent to parties of record, the applicant and the appellants setting an appeal hearing on September 25, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. (10) YMC §6.88.170(F)(2)(a)(i)(d) provides that appellants bear the burden to establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules or the provisions of the chapter, and YMC §15.16.040(G) provides that the Hearing Examiner may affirm or reverse, wholly or in part, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination, and to that end shall have all the power of the officer from whom the appeal is taken. (Doc. Index #A-1, pages 1,2&5). II. Written Comments. There were many written comments submitted prior to the hearing relative to these appeals which have all been read and considered by the Hearing Examiner prior to the issuance of this decision. (1) The full text of the written comments submitted prior to the hearing appear in Chapter G of the record of this matter. They were filed on the following dates under the following Document Index numbers: Email comments from Tom Lovell (05/25/2017 — Doc. Index #G-1); Comment letter/petition from 35 property owners and/or residents (06/06/2017 — Doc. Index #G-2); Email comments from Bill Almon, Jr. (06/06/2017 — Doc. Index #G-3); Comment letter from Ron & Claudia Burkhardt (06/08/2017 — Doc. Index #G-4); Email comments from David & Gloria Tufts (06/08/2017 — Doc. Index #G- 5); Comment letter from Mike & Mary Lee Edgar (06/12/2017 — Doc. Index #G-6); Email comments from Tom Lovell (06/12/2017 — Doc. Index #G-7); Comment letter from Barbara Brantingham (06/12/2017 — Doc. Index #G-8); Comment letter & supporting attachments from David Mahoney (06/19/2017 — Doc. Index #G-9); Comment letter from Leslie Shaw (06/20/2017 — Doc. Index #G-10); Comment letter from Barbara Brantingham (06/21/2017 — Doc. Index #G-11); Comment letter from Christine Karau (06/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-12); Comment letter from Janice Lyon (06/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-13); Email comments from Leo & Shirley Holzer (06/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-14); Email comments from Jacalyn Holzer (06/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-15); Comment letter from David Robins on behalf of the Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP4003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 4 RECEIVED OCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIIVIA DIV. DOC. INDEX • Owners' Association (06/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-16); Email comments & letter from Connie Simon (06/23/2017 — Doc. Index #G-17); Email comments from Robin Gamache (06/23/2017 — Doc. Index #G-18); Email comments from Bill & Connie Conklin (06/23/2017 — Doc. Index #G-19); Email comments from Nancy Ramsey (06/25/2017 — Doc. Index #G-20); Comment letter from attorney James Adams on behalf of property owners (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-21); Email comments from Don & Debby Morgan (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-22); Comment letter from Janice Lyon (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-23); Email comments & letter from Clark Permann (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-24); Comment letter from Pete & Lynn Nathe (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-25); Email comments from Dave & Kathleen Belzer (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-26); Comment letter from David & Joanne Newman (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-27); Email comments & letter from Terry Kline on behalf of Roger & Dot Kline (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-28); 13 comment letters/petitions from property owners (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-29); Comment letter from Tom Lovell (06/26/2017 — Doc. Index #G-30); Comment letter from Adrienne Quinnell (06/27/2017 — Doc. Index #G-31); and Comment letter from Mina Worthington, President and CEO of Solarity Credit Union (09/22/2017 — Doc. Index #G-32). (2) Various concerns were expressed by the written comments relative to traffic that would be added to the intersection of Summitview and North 50th Avenues north of the proposal and additional traffic on North 50th Avenue that would pass through the residential area to or from Chestnut Avenue south of the proposal; relative to the additional traffic generated by the proposed development that would be wedged between a small group of businesses north and east of the proposed development and the Chestnut Grove 55+ retirement community consisting of 33 single -story units and one two-story unit south of the proposed development; relative to a substantial decrease in the value of nearby residences resulting from the proposed development which would make them difficult to sell; relative to increased crime, vandalism and trespassing resulting from the proposed apartment complex; relative to concerns about peace of mind, financial security and safety of nearby residents; relative to the loss of a pending sale of business property across the street from the proposal due to the buyer's concerns about the proposed project; relative to traffic problems that could be reduced by eliminating parking on the west side of North 50th Avenue and by gating North 50th Avenue south of the proposed development in order to prevent through traffic to or from Chestnut Avenue; relative to tax credits and other funding of the proposed development by state and city grants and/or loans; relative to the existing congestion on North 50th Avenue with cars parked on both sides of the street during work hours on Monday through Thursday; relative to the fact Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 5 RECEIVED OCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. DOC. • that there would be only one exit/entrance for the development which will increase by 278% the PM peak hour trips on North 50th Avenue from 18 vehicle trips to 68 vehicle trips; relative to the staff parking for adjacent businesses on both sides of the street which leaves only about 16 feet of roadway to accommodate two lanes of traffic rather than the 20 feet recommended as the minimum width for two lanes in the Yakima Bicycle Master Plan; relative to the need for vehicles to wait to pass each other in opposite directions on North 50th Avenue, particularly when large vehicles are parked on the street; relative to decreases in the property value, lost opportunity costs and holding and operating costs due to a lost sale of business property across the street from the proposed site estimated to total about $100,000.00; relative to traffic congestion on North 50t Avenue when traffic is often reduced to one lane during business hours due to a credit union, two dentist offices, an insurance office and a vacant financial business building using the portion of the street where there is parking on both sides; relative to the lack of compatibility in scale, style, density and aesthetic quality to the existing neighborhood of 3 -story buildings on a lot elevated 10-12 feet higher than adjacent single -story residences contrary to Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 and the need to limit the proposed buildings to 2 stories; relative to the need for an additional entrance/exit to and from the proposal and the need for restrictions as to on -street parking and installation of a series of speed bumps on North 5e Avenue; relative to the existing difficulty of turning left to proceed westbound on Summitview Avenue from North 50th Avenue; relative to privacy of residents of the residences adjacent to the proposed 3 -story buildings; relative to the safety of senior citizens crossing or otherwise using North 50th Avenue; relative to dust, noise and potential damages to irrigation pipelines and public infrastructure during construction; relative to the possibility of additional on -street parking if 120 parking spaces are insufficient for the number of residents; relative to the need to preserve on - street parking for employees of businesses located on North 50`h Avenue; relative to the need to leave the existing trees along the northwest side of the lot for sound control for the adjacent residences west of the site; and relative to a need for a left turn lane on Summitview Avenue at North 50th Avenue to reduce the number of accidents that result from stopped traffic and from lane changes due to stopped traffic on Summitview Avenue. (3) The Administrative Official's Class (2) use permit decision which is one of the decisions subject to this appeal contains responses to many of the concerns expressed by the written comments (Doc. Index #H-6, pages 11-13). The Administrative Official's Class (2) use permit decision also conditions the proposal to address many of the concerns expressed by the written comments (Doc. Index #H-6, pages 14-16). Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50'h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 6 RECEIVED OCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA Iy�'Z. wi •1. a4 yI 11. DOC. INDEX • 1 III. Testimony at the Hearing. The sworn testimony presented during the hearing which lasted more than three hours was televised and may currently be viewed on the City's website at www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning/next-step housing/. The points expressed in the testimony were in many respects similar to concerns expressed in written comments summarized above in Section II of this decision. Points expressed in the testimony that relate to any of the findings set forth in Sections IV through XII of this decision will be discussed in the context of those findings. The parties who presented sworn testimony at the hearing were Joseph Calhoun (including Planning Division staff report — Doc. Index #A-1); attorney for the appellants, James Adams (including 40 photographs of North 50th Avenue, a DVD video taken by a drone which begins by showing the time and date it was taken at 11:30 a.m. on Tuesday, August 15, 2017, and a 2017 Yakima County GIS Yakimap aerial photograph of North 50th Avenue and the area near the proposed site — Doc. Index #K-1.1 to K -I.40, #K-2 and #K-3 respectively); attorney for the respondent Next Step Housing, Glenn Amster (including copies of "About Us" and "Housing/Awards" webpages from the Next Step Housing website, a professional profile of Mark King of ZBA Architecture and of ZBA Architecture overall, renderings and site plans of the proposal and a professional profile of Michael Read, P.E., of Transportation Engineering Northwest — Doc. Index #K-4, #K-5, #K-6 and #K-7 respectively); John Mifsud; Mark King; Michael Read; Robert Vickers; Rex Siegmeth; David Robbins; Dorothy Edgerton; Michael Edgar; David Mahoney; Debby Morgan; David Belzer; Lynn Nathe; Steve Sevigny; Tom Lovell; Albert Lawrence; Robin Gamache; Jeff Cutter; Brett Sheffield; and Joe Rosenlund. IV. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "This appeal is based on two issues. First, and foremost, the Administrative Official failed to consider the actual nature of N. 50th Avenue as a neighborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector. Second, the Administrative Official failed to recognize and mitigate the effect the size and height of the project will have on the neighborhood. As a result, the Determination of Non -Significance under SEPA and Decision are in error and should be reversed. Traffic Concurrency The size and scope of the project poses negative impacts on the traffic on N. 50th Avenue. These impacts can only be mitigated by reducing the scope of the project or improving the infrastructure." (Doc. Index #J -I, Exhibit "A" page 1). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "The applicant submitted a traffic impact analysis conducted by Transportation Engineering Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 7 RECEIVED OCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMrA ©OC. INDEX # A9-1 Northwest that was reviewed and recommended for acceptance by the City of Yakima's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager. The analysis is based upon land use description and trip generation factors from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine vehicle trips and observations of traffic in the vicinity of the project as indicated in the analysis. The analysis concluded that the proposed 80 -unit apartment complex will not negatively impact traffic. City staff agrees with that conclusion. No contradictory traffic study or report has been provided by Appellants." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 2). (2) The staff responses are correct and are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings with one refinement as to the meaning of a negative impact on traffic. In the opinion of many property owners and/or residents who submitted written comments or testified at the hearing based on their personal observations, the existing traffic on North 50th Avenue already is such that a negative traffic impact would result from the addition of the 532 weekday daily trips and 50 weekday PM peak hour trips estimated by the traffic impact analysis. (Doc. Index #I-2, page 8 and Attachment B thereto). Mr. Adams indicated at the hearing that the traffic impact analysis conducted by Transportation Engineering Northwest does not rule out a negative impact on North 50th Avenue as a result of additional traffic generated by the proposed 80 -unit apartment complex. (3) The traffic impact analysis analyzed the Level of Service standard only for affected intersections and concluded that either with or without the project all affected intersections would operate at Level of Service (LOS) D or better during the PM peak hour which would meet the City's adopted minimum standard for traffic conditions at intersections. (Doc. Index #I-2, page 8). (4) Michael Read, P.E., the applicant's expert traffic engineer who prepared the traffic impact analysis, supplemented the conclusions set forth in his traffic impact analysis by testimony at the hearing. His testimony which is adopted as a Hearing Examiner finding was to the effect that his traffic estimates in that analysis are conservative and represent the worst case scenario during afternoon peak hour traffic conditions; that no reductions were made in the estimated traffic for the availability of transit service nearby or the fewer number of vehicles used by residents of similar types of apartment complexes; that the volume of traffic on North 50th Avenue is consistent with its local access street designation; and that North 50th Avenue is in his opinion sufficient to accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposal. (5) Mr. Read's expert opinion was supported at the hearing by the expert testimony of the City's Chief Engineer, Brett Sheffield, P.E., which is accepted as a Hearing Examiner finding to the effect that HUD Housing's March 2016 traffic count on Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50`h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 8 ;DECEIVED OCT 3e 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. D C. INDEX # F1R -I • North 50th Avenue showed a total of 1,056 average daily trips (ADT) which, when added to the estimated 532 average daily trips estimated to be generated by the proposal, would still be only slightly more than one-half of the 3,000 average daily trips which are allowed for local access streets with parking on one side by what he believed to be Table 5-1 in Chapter 5 of the City's 2025 Transportation Plan Update. His testimony did not address the standard for local access streets where parking is allowed on both sides of the street or the amount of additional traffic that has resulted from the additional school facility now located at the southeast comer of Chestnut Avenue and 56th Avenue. (6) Mr. Read's expert opinion was also supported at the hearing by the expert testimony of the City's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager, Joe Rosenlund, which is accepted as a Hearing Examiner finding to the effect that he felt he had all the information he needed to make a determination that, based upon the City's current street standards, North 50th Avenue in this area could handle the additional traffic of the proposed development. (7) Evidence presented by way of written comments, testimony and exhibits established that due to the existing street width of North 50th Avenue in the area of the proposed site, the addition of any traffic whatsoever to North 50th Avenue in this location would to some extent at some times negatively impact the flow of traffic while vehicles are parked on both sides of the street during weekday work hours. As to the amount or degree of negative traffic impact to be attributed to the proposal, the Hearing Examiner accepts the credible expert testimony of Mr. Read, Mr. Sheffield and Mr. Rosenlund to the effect that the proposal would not reduce the Level of Service (LOS) of affected intersections below the City's adopted minimum standard of LOS D; would not result in more than about one-half the volume of traffic on North 50th Avenue that is specified by the City's current standard for local access streets if parking were to be allowed only on one side of the street; and that, based upon the City's current street standards, North 50th Avenue has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposal. Any disagreement with these findings would in effect arise out of a disagreement as to the City's current designation of North 50th Avenue as a local access street or as to the City's current standard for the volume of traffic that a local access street is allowed to accommodate. (8) The other grounds for these appeals quoted above in the introductory section of the appeal statement are addressed below in other sections of this decision. Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50"' Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 9 RECEIVED OCT s 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX • V. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "North 50th Avenue is only thirty (30) feet wide in its paved portions. It is two-way and parking is allowed on the east and west sides. On -street parking is heavily utilized Monday - Friday." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" page 1). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "N. 50th Avenue is 32 -feet wide as measured from curb -face to curb -face. This width meets current standard. Additional street width is not required by the development standards of the City of Yakima." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 3). (2) The staff responses are correct and are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings since the width of the asphalt paved portion of North 50th Avenue is not the full width of the street if the City's method of measuring street widths is utilized. City of Yakima Chief Engineer Brett Sheffield testified that the actual width of City streets includes any concrete areas on both sides of the street between standard curb faces and the midpoint of rolled curbing in addition to the asphalt paved portion of the street, and that North 50th Avenue is 32 feet wide including those concrete areas of the street width in addition to the paved portion between them. The Hearing Examiner finds from Mr. Sheffield's credible testimony that North 50th Avenue in the area of the proposed site has concrete areas extending from standard curb faces on the east side and from the midpoint of rolled curbing on portions of the west side which qualify the street as a 32 -foot -wide local access street when measured in the manner he described. (3) North 50th Avenue is in fact a two-way street where parking is allowed on both the east and west sides of the street. (Doc. Index #K-1, #K-2 and #K-3). (4) A written comment states that employees of businesses in the vicinity of the proposed development park on North 50th Avenue during the work hours of Monday through Thursday, which is consistent with the Hearing Examiner's site visits. (Doc. Index #G-8). That is likely due to the nature of the businesses along North 50th Avenue at this time which could change to include work hours of Monday through Friday in the future. Photographs in evidence show that the number of parked vehicles along North 50th Avenue vary at different times during those weekday work hours between about 6 vehicles to about 17 vehicles, some of which may be UPS trucks or other large vehicles at times. (Doc. Index #K-1.1 to #K-1.40; Doc. Index #K-2; and Doc. Index K-3). VI. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "YMC 12.06.020 sets forth pavement width standards for streets in Yakima. Residential access Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 10 RECEIVE© GOT s 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIM>IItt PLt.'.:'Z DIV. DOC. !INDEX • streets are to be paved to a width of 32 feet. Neighborhood collectors are to be paved to a width of 40 feet. North 50th Avenue is actually a neighborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector despite its designation as a local access street. It is certainly more than [a] residential access street. Yet, it is only paved to 30 feet wide. This condition causes traffic congestion and safety problems. First, 50th Avenue collects traffic from several businesses on it[s] northern portion, including a credit union. Credit unions are obvious high traffic businesses. Located on the north portion of N. 50th Avenue, these businesses collect and deposit traffic onto arterials, primarily Summitview Avenue. Second, 50th Avenue collects traffic from three cul-de-sacs emptying their traffic onto 50th Avenue to use either W. Chestnut Avenue to the south and Summitview Avenue to the north. Each of the cul-de-sacs serves six residential buildings that do not front 50th Avenue. Third, it is obvious that N. 50th Avenue would collect traffic from Peachtree and Plum Lanes for traffic accessing Summitview Avenue. This is especially true of traffic traveling east to the downtown of Yakima. Because of the actual status as a neighborhood collector, N. 50th Avenue is insufficiently paved. It is paved ten feet less than its necessary width of 40 feet. It is even paved less than a residential access street. Traffic concurrency requires that N. 50th Avenue be improved to 40 feet in paved width. This is made necessary by the additional 80 residences for which N. 50th Avenue is their only access to the arterials of Summitview Avenue and West Chestnut Avenue." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" pages 1-2). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "N. 50th Avenue is not a neighborhood collector, nor is it a hybrid neighborhood collector (a category of street that does not exist in Yakima). YMC § 12.06.010 provides 'The Yakima urban area comprehensive plan...designates the functional classification of the principal arterial, minor arterial and collector streets and establishes their functional classification. All other streets are classified as local residential access.' N. 50th Avenue is not identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a principal arterial, minor arterial or collector, therefore it is a local access street. As a local access street it meets all development requirements regarding width and pavement." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 3). (2) The staff responses are correct and are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings. They are consistent with the uncontradicted testimony of the City of Yakima Streets and Traffic Operations Manager, Joe Rosenlund, which is also adopted as a Hearing Examiner finding to the effect that the City is required to classify the types of streets as part of the transportation element of the City's comprehensive plan; that the plan would have to be amended to designate North 5e Avenue as a collector street before it would no longer be considered a local access street; and that he does not have authority to Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50t Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 11 RECEIVED OCT 302017 CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INT • change the comprehensive plan designation of streets. Therefore, if the volume of traffic were such as to make North 50th Avenue a collector street, then in that event its comprehensive plan designation would have to be changed before 40 feet of width would be required. VII. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "Traffic using N. 50th Avenue as a result of this project will increase by 532 trips with 50 additional trips during peak hours. This is in addition to the traffic from seven businesses and 34 residential structures using N. 50`h Avenue directly. It is easy to conclude that traffic will nearly double on the inadequately paved N. 50th Avenue as a result of the proposed project. The Administrative Official failed to recognize the increased daily traffic as a result of the proposed 80 residences." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A " page 2). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "Traffic generated from this project is anticipated to be 532 trips per day with 50 pm peak hour trips. As documented in the traffic impact analysis, all streets in the vicinity of this project have sufficient capacity to handle the additional traffic. The project was approved by the City Engineer for Transportation Concurrency on June 27, 2017. The Admin- istrative Official recognized the additional trips generated from this project and concluded that there will be no negative impacts to surrounding streets." (Doc. Index #A- 1, page 3). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings with the qualifications that the traffic impact analysis analyzes the Level of Service of intersections (Doc. Index #I-2, page 8) and that Transportation Concurrency approval applies to arterial street segment capacity only and not to local access streets or to street intersections. (Doc. Index #H-5). (3) However, as previously noted, the expert testimony of the City's Chief Engineer, Brett Sheffield, P.E., is adopted as a Hearing Examiner finding to the effect that HUD Housing's March 2016 traffic count on North 50th Avenue showed a total of 1,056 average daily trips (ADT), which when added to the 532 daily trips estimated to be generated by the proposal, would still be considerably less than the 3,000 average daily trips allowed for local access streets if parking were to be allowed only on one side of the street. Also as previously noted, the expert testimony of the City's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager, Joe Rosenlund, is adopted as a Hearing Examiner finding to the effect that he felt he had all the information he needed to make a determination that, Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50`h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 12 RECEIVED GCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV DOC. INDEX . based upon the City's current street standards, North 50th Avenue in this area could handle the additional traffic of the proposed development. VIII. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "The on-site parking situation exacerbates the obvious inadequacy of N. 50th Avenue. By way of illustration, I have attached an aerial photograph to these comments. It has been previously provided by my client, David Mahoney. The aerial photograph illustrates the inadequacy of the paved portion of 50th Avenue. The photograph was likely taken on a weekend as can be seen by the lack of cars parked at the businesses. (It is likely a Saturday, given the parked cars at Solarity Credit Union). The picture depicts the obvious difficulties for two-way traffic to negotiate N. 50th Avenue with cars parked on the street. As I said, my clients report that there is substantial use of on -street parking on N. 50th Avenue. Doubling the traffic that will be using N. 50`h Avenue will create a dangerous and intolerable condition. The Administrative Official recognized that apartment complexes result in a higher demand for on -street parking. However, the Administrative Official chose to wait until after the project is occupied to determine the appropriate mitigation measures. The project will create a problem, yet the Administrative Official chose to ignore. Concurrence demands appropriate mitigation measures be required before construction and occupancy. It is obvious that N. 50th Avenue is inadequate for the traffic and parking it handles presently. A potential of the doubling of traffic as the result of the project creates an untenable situation." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" pages 2-3). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "As previously stated, N. 50th Ave. is not inadequately wide or inadequately paved. The development has the required number of on-site parking spaces for multi -family residential development. The analysis regarding on -street parking stated that apartment complexes often place additional demand for on -street parking and noted that any future issues would be addressed after development, if required. The Administrative Official did not choose to ignore the perceived problem. N. 50th Ave is a public street where on - street parking is allowed. If on -street parking becomes problematic after development, the issue will be addressed as -needed based on parking problems that actually occur." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 4). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings with the qualification that it would be preferable to attempt to ameliorate at this time, if possible, the effect of possible elimination of on -street parking on one or both sides of North 50th Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50'x' Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 13 DECEIVE© GCT 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKliu1A 11),!..:'.::. Div. DOC. INDEX 1 Avenue due to additional traffic in the future, rather than to require nearby businesses or the public to bear the cost or inconvenience that would result from the elimination of on - street parking if that should occur in the future. (Testimony of James Adams and Debby Morgan). Mr. Rosenlund's uncontradicted City Development Services Team comments (Doc. Index #D-8) and testimony were to the effect that solutions to traffic problems depend on the nature of the problems and that it is difficult to try to fix problems before they arise. Mr. Rosenlund also testified without contradiction that traffic problems are often initially addressed by signage and enforcement such as, in this situation, prohibiting parking on one or both sides of North 50th Avenue. On the other hand, Mr. Adams and others testified without contradiction that on -street parking by employees of the nearby businesses on North 50th Avenue during weekday work hours is very important, if not crucial, to the conduct of those businesses in order to provide a sufficient number of off- street parking spaces for use by customers and clients of the businesses. (3) The photographs and DVD video submitted by the appellants show that vehicles currently park along the frontage of the site where the entrance and exit for the proposed apartment complex would be located and that motor vehicles or bicycles exiting from that new driveway could have difficulty seeing traffic coming from either direction if vehicles, especially large vehicles, were to be parked on the west side of the street. If in the future this poses a problem or if traffic congestion from the added traffic of the proposed development poses a problem such that the City prohibits parking on the west side of North 50th Avenue in this location, or on both sides of the street, and if the apartment complex at that time has surplus parking spaces as is predicted in its traffic impact analysis which could be offered for use by employees of the nearby businesses during weekday work hours for little or no charge, a major concern of the appellants and others about adding traffic to North 50th Avenue with the consequent potential loss of existing on -street parking there could possibly be addressed without imposing an undue or impossible burden upon the applicant. The applicant's attorney Glenn Amster testified that Next Step Housing prides itself on integrating smoothly into the neighborhood and working with neighbors to address concerns that arise. He also testified that the tax credit financing provided by the Washington State Housing Trust Fund requires a- covenant to be recorded against the property which would require the apartments be utilized for affordable housing for at least 40 years. (4) The evidence establishes a foreseeable surplus of parking spaces for the proposed apartment complex for at least 40 years. By utilizing the ITE publication entitled Parking Generation, 4th Edition, 2010 for estimating peak parking demand for Low-Rise/Mid-Rise Apartments, the traffic impact analysis predicts that the estimated Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 14 ►ECEWED GCT 3C2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. DOC. peak parking demand of that type of apartments will be 76 parking stalls. The traffic impact analysis and Mr. Mifsud's testimony further indicated that, based upon a parking inventory of similar Next Step Housing affordable residential developments, the proposed 80 -unit apartment complex would actually only need 54-56 parking stalls because residents of only 67%-70% of similar Next Step Housing apartment units have vehicles. (Doc. Index #I-2, pages 12-13; Testimony of John Mifsud). (5) The issue of possible elimination of on -street parking on North 50th Avenue does not rise to the level of a compatibility consideration that would justify denial of the proposal for at least two reasons. First, this is merely a speculative possibility that may not occur in the future, especially in view of Mr. Rosenlund's Development Services Team comments to the effect that a benefit of higher parking densities is that they narrow the roadway thereby tending to keep vehicle speeds down. (Doc. Index #D-8). Second, the City has authority to regulate parking on City streets, and the fact that employees of nearby businesses currently park on the portion of North 50th Avenue near the proposed site during weekday work hours does not confer a continued right to do so in the future, even though such on -street parking may be considered very important for the conduct of their businesses for the foreseeable future. (6) In view of the fact that the elimination of parking on North 50`h Avenue in the future is speculative and that the City has a right to eliminate such parking regardless of the effect it would have on nearby businesses, a condition of the nature described in this section should only be imposed if it would not result in effectively denying the project either due to some financing or other requirement that would prohibit allowing use of surplus parking stalls of the proposed apartment complex by employees of nearby businesses during weekday work hours or due to lack of availability of any surplus parking stalls for that purpose. But if there would be no impediment to a use of surplus parking stalls for such a purpose in the event that the City eliminates parking on one or both sides of North 50`h Avenue in the area of the proposal in the future, a contingent condition of the Class (2) use permit to promote compatibility of the proposed apartment complex pursuant to YMC § 15.10.040 beyond that which is otherwise required for approval of the proposal would address some of the traffic and on -street parking concerns expressed by written comments and testimony without imposing an undue or impossible burden upon the applicant. (7) The legal or practical inability of the applicant to allow employees of nearby businesses to use surplus parking stalls during weekday work hours if nearby on -street parking is eliminated in the future will not affect the finding of compatibility from a Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC . At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 15 REC VED GCT S ( 2017 CITY OF YAK1E l i.�,::�•:; � 01V. DOC INDEX • • • traffic standpoint of the proposed apartment complex for the reasons detailed above and also for the reason that a denial of the proposal could result in the development of a Class (1) permitted use on the site that would generate more traffic than the proposed apartment complex. The traffic concerns of the nearby property owners and residents can be attributed to the fact that the site was zoned Professional Business (B-1) in the past which would have required a finding that the uses allowed in that zone would be suitable for that site. (8) The evidence submitted in response to the Hearing Examiner's request for additional information relative to the volume of additional traffic that could be generated by a Class (1) use permitted outright in the B-1 zone if this proposal were denied indicated that a 3 -story 46,800 -square -foot General or Medical/Dental Office Building could be constructed on the site as a Class (1) permitted use. (ZBA Architecture letter and site plan prepared by Mark King of ZBA Architecture — Doc. Index #L-1). The evidence further indicated that these Class (1) permitted uses, without the need for underground parking, would generate from 30% to 300% more weekday PM peak hour trips than the proposal. Specifically, a 46,800 -square -foot general or typical office building without underground parking would, per the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012, utilizing the General Office Building category, generate 65 weekday PM peak hour trips compared with the 50 weekday PM peak hour trips of the proposed use and would generate somewhat fewer weekday daily trips of 483 as compared with 532 weekday daily trips for the proposed use. However, if a medical/dental clinic office use were to be developed on the site similar to other nearby uses, the same building would, per the same manual utilizing the Medical -Dental Office Building category, generate 156 weekday PM peak hour trips compared to the 50 weekday PM peak hour trips of the proposed use and would generate 1,582 weekday daily trips as compared to 532 for the proposed use. (Memorandum with three attached comparative trip generation estimates prepared by Michael Read, P.E., of Transportation Engineering Northwest — Doc. Index #L-1). (9) A different type of comparison between the traffic generated by the "Offices and Clinics" use which is a Class (1) use permitted outright without Type (2) or Type (3) review in the B-1 zone and the traffic generated by the proposed apartment complex use was submitted by City Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun. By utilizing the actual building and lot sizes of two existing medical clinics in the City of Yakima, he determined that a 29,000 -square -foot general office use would generate 43 PM peak hour trips and 331 average daily trips (ADT) and that a 29,000 -square -foot medical/dental office building would generate 104 PM peak hour trips and 1,048 average daily trips Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 16 E ECEI°'1 GCT 5 f 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. DOC. INDEX � 1 compared with the 50 weekday PM peak hour trips and 532 weekday daily trips generated by the proposed use. (Letter of Joseph Calhoun — Doc. Index #L-2). (10) The Designated Broker for Almon Commercial Real Estate, Bill Almon, Jr., CCIM, submitted an email expressing his opinion based upon his experience, knowledge and discussion with others that one could reasonably assume a maximum office building size on the site of 20,000 square feet on two levels with 90 parking spaces. He further indicated that one might reasonably assume that 25% fewer parking spaces would result in about 25% less traffic than the proposed apartment complex. (Email of Bill Almon, Jr. — Doc. Index #L-3, page 2). This assumption does not take into account the fact that Mr. Read's traffic impact analysis predicts that between 54 and 76 of the 120 parking spaces would be actually utilized for the proposed apartment complex. This assumption might also be countered by other assumptions. For example, it might be assumed that a 20,000 - square -foot medical clinic which would have about 42.73% of the square footage of the 46,800 square -foot -medical clinic analyzed by Mr. King and by Mr. Read would generate about 676 weekday daily trips and about 66 weekday PM peak hour trips (42.73% of 1,582 and of 156 respectively). Similarly, it might be assumed that a 20,000 -square -foot medical clinic which would have about 69% of the square footage of the 29,000 -square - foot medical clinic analyzed by Mr. Calhoun would generate about 723 average daily trips and about 71 PM peak hour trips (69% of 1,048 and of 104 respectively). The Hearing Examiner is not aware whether any of these assumptions would be correct, but adopts as his findings the undisputed methodology used to predict the different amounts of traffic generated by different types of commercial office uses per the ITE Trip Generation Manual for a 46,800 -square -foot office building that could be placed on the site, without the need for underground parking, which is explained and utilized in the submittals of Mark King and Michael Read, P.E., and the undisputed methodology used to determine the amount of traffic that would be generated by a 29,000 -square -foot medical clinic based upon the size of two existing medical clinic buildings and the size of the lots where they are located which is explained and utilized in the submittal of Joseph Calhoun. (11) Attorney for appellants, James Adams, submitted a letter supportive of the email of Bill Almon, Jr. to the effect that the best and most realistic use of the site for offices would result in fewer parking spaces and fewer weekday trips than the proposal; that a 46,800 -square -foot medical/dental clinic would require a new traffic study; and that 1,582 additional daily trips would require a 40 -foot -wide neighborhood collector street to accommodate the traffic, plus possible improvements to intersections to meet their requisite Level of Service requirements and plus the need for a secondary access for fire Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 17 FiECEVED GCT 5C2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX response. (Letter of James Adams — Doc. Index #L-3, page 1). As previously noted, the expert testimony of the City's Chief Engineer, Brett Sheffield, P.E., was to the effect that HUD Housing's March 2016 traffic count on North 50th Avenue showed a total of 1,056 average daily trips (ADT), which when added to the estimated 532 average daily trips estimated to be generated by the proposal, would still be less than the 3,000 average daily trips allowed for local access streets if parking were to be allowed only on one side of the street. The same could be said if 1,582 additional average daily trips were added to the March 2016 traffic counts showing 1,056 average daily trips on North 50th Avenue because that too would be less than 3,000 average daily trips. (12) The Hearing Examiner agrees that possible issues could arise if North 50th Avenue traffic were to be increased to 2,638 daily trips by the development of a 46,800 - square -foot medical/dental office building on the proposed site, but the evidence submitted did establish that Class (1) permitted B-1 commercial uses could reasonably be expected to generate nearly as much or more traffic than the proposed residential use of the property. Moreover, the additional traffic that would be generated by a commercial office use of the property would occur during the same weekday work hours that traffic is generated by nearby businesses. Customers or clients of permitted commercial uses would generally lack the flexibility to adjust their trips to times other than weekday work hours which is a type of flexibility that would be available to some of the residents of the proposed apartment complex. In any event, it is the B-1 zoning of the proposed site that allows for the predicted increase in traffic on North 50th Avenue that would result from development of the site. The type of proposed residential use would generate less traffic than would be generated by some of the Class (1) permitted commercial uses that could be developed on the site in the event that the proposed residential use of the site were to be denied. And the proposed type of residential use would more effectively buffer residential uses south and west of the site from the types of commercial uses that could be developed on the site as a matter of right. IX. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "Finally, the traffic study did not appear to take into account the potential traffic of the nature of the residents. As the project will serve low income and homeless, it is likely that traffic in and out of the project will not be limited to just residents and employees. It is likely there will be service providers accessing the property." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A " page 3). Appeals of SBPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 18 RECEVED GCTC2017 CITY OF YAKIMA 1'i_�'..•:':�: D!V. DOC. INDEX • • • (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "The parking standard for multi -family residential development with more than 10 units is 1.5 spaces per unit. The proposed 80 apartment units require 120 parking spaces, which arc identified on the site plan. The nature of the future residents is not a factor in deter- mining the appropriate number of spaces for a multi -family residential development." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 4). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings regarding the adequate number of parking spaces. If these stated grounds for the appeals are directed at the likely amount of additional traffic on North 50th Avenue rather than the number of parking spaces on the site, it is possible that there will be more service providers accessing the proposed apartment complex than generally access other apartment complexes. But it is equally possible that there will be less traffic accessing the proposed apartment complex than access other apartment complexes due to factors that were not utilized in the traffic impact analysis to reduce the estimated number of trips that would be generated by the proposed development. Those factors include the proximity of transit service in both directions on Summitview Avenue within one block of the site (Doc. Index #E-1, page 14), the fewer number of vehicles that would be owned by the residents of this type of apartment complex (Doc. Index #I-2, pages 12-13; Testimony of John Mifsud) and the fact that the main office for Community Living, a service provider subcontracted by DSHS DDA to refer and provide services for 12 future high functioning DD residents of the apartment complex, is currently located across the street from the proposed site on North 50th Avenue. (Doc. Index #F-2, page 4). X. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "Site and Site Plan The site is approximately 10-15 feet above the street level of N. 50th Avenue. The site is consequently 10-15 feet above the properties to the east, south and west. The site plan shows five (5) buildings on the parameters of the property. The locations of the buildings, as proposed, are at or near the set back lines of the properties. The buildings are three (3) stories and will be 36 feet above grade. Consequently, the actual height of the buildings will be approximately 46 to 51 feet above the street level of 50th Avenue and neighboring properties." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" pages 3-4). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "The allowed building height in the B-1 zone is 35 -feet. The applicant is required to meet this standard. Building height is measured from a referenced datum which is the elevation of the highest adjoining sidewalk or finished ground surface within a five-foot horizontal distance. There are no standards in the YMC that require vacant properties to be at -grade Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50`h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 19 FiECE6VED GCT C 2017 CITY OF YAKIEIitA [LAM( C!VV . DOC. INDEX # -r with a public street or an adjacent property in order to allow development." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 4). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings. In addition, the elevation of the site would be lowered by grading by about 3 feet and the height of the buildings would be less than 35 feet with single -pitched roofs and some one and two story areas. (Doc. Index #K-6; Testimony of Mark King). The permissible 35 -foot height of all types of buildings in the B-1 zone constitutes a specific, objective development standard rather than a general, subjective criterion such as compatibility or Compre- hensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 relative to the scale of buildings. For several reasons explained below, it would not be proper in this situation for the Hearing Examiner to substitute his judgment for the legislative determinations of the Yakima City Council which established the permissible height of the proposed buildings in furtherance of the public health, safety and welfare. (YMC §15.05.010). Table 5-1 in YMC Chapter 15.05 specifies the maximum height for all buildings in the Single -Family Residential (R-1) zone, the Two - Family Residential (R-2) zone and the Professional Business (B-1) zone to be 35 feet. Table 5-1 specifies the maximum height for all buildings in the Multifamily Residential (R-3) zone to be 50 feet. The applicant is not requesting any administrative adjustment or variance to the 35 -foot maximum height limitation in the B-1 zone for the proposed apartment complex. (3) YMC §15.02.020 legislatively declares Class (2) uses to be "generally permitted throughout the district" as distinguished from Class (3) uses which are legislatively declared to be "generally incompatible with adjacent and abutting property because of their size, emissions, traffic generation, neighborhood character or for other reasons." (4) Where a standard for approval of a generally permitted use is general rather than specific as in the case of the compatibility criterion, the burden is upon the one seeking to deny such a use to show the use is inappropriate (Sunderland Family Treatment Services v. Pasco, 127 Wn.2d 783, 797, 903 P.2d 986 (1995)). This is the same result that flows from the fact that an ordinance declaring a Class (2) use to be generally permitted in a zoning district creates by its clear wording a presumption or inference to that effect which places the burden of proving otherwise on the one claiming otherwise. (5) YMC § 15.02.020 speaks in terms of regulating compatibility with the intent and character of the zoning district where the new use will be located rather than compatibility with uses in different adjacent zoning districts. This focus of the Class (2) Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 20 sa�ECEIVED GCT 502017 MY OF YAKffV ri.ta:Lz Dlv. DOC. INDEX • use definition is a tacit acknowledgment that uses in different zoning districts which are adjacent to each other are allowed to be different. The context of the compatibility determination is necessarily different when the existing and proposed uses are in different zoning districts which allow different uses. (6) This Hearing Examiner is of the opinion that applications should be denied on the basis of incompatibility only under limited circumstances. It is important that zoning ordinances specify as clearly as possible what uses will be allowed in the various zoning districts and what development standards will apply to them. The zoning classification of property creates expectations in owners and purchasers, and affects property values. Criteria which are at least in part subjective such as compatibility should be applied sparingly because reliance upon them impairs the predictability and consistency of land use decisions. (7) This application is not a request for a rezone that would allow additional uses not allowed in the current zone and not suitable for the property, or an application to develop Class (2) or Class (3) nonresidential commercial uses adjacent to residential uses, or an application for Class (2) or Class (3) uses that require administrative adjustments to the development standards for the zone where they would be located. For different Hearing Examiners to deny applications for proposed uses or recommend that they be denied solely based on their own different personal subjective views as to the compatibility of the uses without appropriate restraint would usurp the City Council's legislative prerogative to prescribe specific presumptions and specific development requirements to be applied to specific uses in specific zones. Such a practice would also create a slippery slope that would jeopardize the objectivity, predictability and uniformity sought to be achieved in land use decision making. That is why the burden of proof is upon a party seeking to have a proposed use denied on the basis of incompatibility. The fact that a proposed use is legislatively determined to be generally permitted in the zoning district where it would be located and that it would ,be developed in accordance with all applicable development standards without the need for any administrative adjustments makes the burden of proving that the use should be denied due to lack of its compatibility more difficult than if those circumstances were not present. XI. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "The size of the buildings and their locations on the set back lines of the property will impose significant barriers to sight and light. In addition, the close proximity of the buildings will negatively impact the privacy of the persons and property to the south and west. The EiECE VED Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 21 GCTC: 2017 CITY OF YAK MA DOC. INDEX obvious solution is to reduce the overall height of the project. The buildings should be reduced in height. This solution would reduce the negative impacts of the project on neighboring properties. The solution would protect the privacy of the neighbors and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. The project would not be so overbearing on the neighborhood." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" page 4). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "The buildings are required to meet all applicable setbacks, which include 0 -ft from the North, 20 -ft from the west and south, and 30 -ft from the centerline of N. 50th Ave. Per YMC § 15.05.020(D), `In the commercial districts, building setbacks provide visual clearance along streets and areas for sitescreening and landscaping.' The Administrative Officials decision requires Sitescreening Standard 'A' along all property lines and also requires an enhanced Standard 'C' along the West and South property lines. The purpose of sitescreening is to `provide a visual buffer between uses of different intensity, streets and structures; reduce erosion and stormwater runoff; protect property values; and eliminate potential land use conflicts by mitigating adverse impacts from dust, odor, litter, noise, glare, lights, signs, water runoff, buildings or parking areas. (YMC 15.07.010)' Standard 'A' includes a ten -foot wide landscaped planting strip with trees at twenty -foot to thirty- foot centers, which includes shrubs and groundcover; Standard 'C' includes a six -foot - high, view -obscuring fence made of wood, masonry block, concrete, or slatted chain link material (YMC § 15.07.040(A)). To further promote compatibility, the applicant provided in their written narrative 'The architects are promoting aesthetic considerations in building design, using varying siding patterns and masonry wainscoting. They are also keeping the end of buildings at one- or two- stories, where feasible, to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures." (Doc. Index A-1, pages 4-5). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings. In addition, a building setback of 20 feet is required on the west and south sides of the apartment complex and is also being proposed on the north side of the apartment complex even though no setback is required there next to the properties in the B-1 zone. (Doc. Index # K-6; Testimony of Mark King). The type of commercial buildings that would be Class (1) uses permitted outright on the site could have the same or similar height, sight, light, privacy and aesthetic features that the proposed apartment complex would have, but without the additional Standard "C" sitescreening along the south and west sides of the site which is not otherwise required and without the applicant's commitment to promote aesthetic considerations which are included in conditions of the decision, statements in the application and renderings submitted as evidence at the hearing. (Doc. Index #H-6, pages 14-15; Doc. Index #F-2, page 5; and Doc. Index #K-6). Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 22 RECEIVED (;CT t. 2017 CITY OF YAKIiMA L�.:aL1.i.Fet L1) DSC. INDEX (3) Although the City of Yakima Office of Neighborhood Development Services has awarded a grant of some amount that is not in evidence to support the need for the proposed type of affordable housing in the City, this is not a City project that can be changed by the City. Awards from the Washington State Housing Trust Fund and Washington State Housing Finance Commission were made on a competitive basis and require the funding be utilized for the 80 -unit apartment complex for which the funding was approved. (Testimony of Glenn Amster). Absent the applicant's willingness to voluntarily forfeit its approved financing for the proposal and instead apply for new financing for a two story apartment complex which might not be available or approved in the future, a mandated reduction of the apartment complex to two stories based upon a general compatibility criterion would be in violation of the specific legislative deter- minations as to the types of generally permitted Class (2) uses in the B-1 zone and as to the permissible height of all buildings in the B-1 zone. XII. Findings Relative to the Following Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "The height of the project relative to the surrounding properties also creates a lighting or light glare concern, specifically for the residential properties to the south and west. Parking and parameter lighting is designed to point down. With lighting as high as 50 feet, there will be no ability to deflect the light away from neighboring properties. In addition, there will be light generated from the interiors from two and three story buildings and directed out and over the neighboring properties. The impact of the size of the buildings and the light that will be generated by the project must be investigated. The aesthetics of the neighborhood, the privacy of neighbors and the night time glare of lights generated by the project, unless mitigated, will seriously and negatively impact the neighborhood." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A" page 4). (1) The staff responses to these grounds for the appeals were as follows: "The Administrative Official's decision requires a photometric lighting plan in accordance with YMC § 15.06.100. All lighting is required to be downward shielded so that no light spills onto neighboring properties, further see sitescreening information above." (Doc. Index #A-1, page 5). (2) The staff responses are adopted as Hearing Examiner findings. In addition, the architectural features of the lighting for the proposed apartment complex are specifically required to avoid the lighting concerns expressed by the neighbors. The second and third stories will require special attention to architectural features of the lighting in order to achieve the applicant's commitment and the City's requirement to the Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 23 RECEiVED C;CT C2017 OILY OF YAKIMA rL J -I G D"11. DOC INDEX effect that lighting will be minimized and shielded to avoid impacting off-site property and to avoid creating glare conditions and safety hazards (Doc. Index #E-1, page 13; Doc. Index #H-6, pages 13 & 15). The lighting will be strategically placed so that it does not bleed off the site, and there will be fencing and dense vegetation along the south and west property lines of the site. (Testimony of Mark King; Doc. Index #H-6, pages 14-15; Doc. Index #F-2. page 5; and Doc. Index #K-6). If some of the second and third stories of some of the units of the proposed apartment complex would have a view of the back yards of neighboring residences, privacy concerns of those residents as well as of the residents of the apartment complex will have to be addressed by window treatments, trees and other architectural features. Next Step Housing prides itself on integrating smoothly into the neighborhood and working with neighbors to address concerns that arise. (Testimony of Glenn Amster). XIII. Requested Conclusions Based on the Stated Grounds for the Appeals: "Conclusion The Decision and SEPA DNS should be reversed or modified to consider the effects of traffic and project height." (Doc. Index #J-1, Exhibit "A " page 4). (1) The staff responses to these requested conclusions based on the stated grounds for the appeals were as follows: "Environmental Review: This project was concurrently reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). In accordance with YMC § 16.07.010, the SEPA Threshold Determination of Nonsignificance was incorporated as part of this Notice of Decision. The Notice of Application and Environmental Review stated that a building permit, clearing/grading permit, dust control plan, NPDES construction stormwater Permit, Type 2 and Site Plan Review are required as part of the application. Furthermore, the Notice of Application included a Determination of Consistency per YMC § 16.06.020(A) and (B). WAC 197-11-660(1)(e) states `Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant impact.' The Administrative Official's decision includes 19 conditions, based upon local and state requirements, which mitigate potential adverse impact of the proposal. Per YMC § 6.88.170(F)(2)(a)(i)(d), 'The SEPA determination of the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight, and the appellant shall bear the burden to establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provisions of this chapter.' The appeal does not establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provision of YMC Ch. 6.88. Conclusions: Traffic/N. 50th Ave: As demonstrated by the Traffic Impact Analysis done by Transportation Engineering Northwest, which was reviewed and recommended for Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 24 FiECEIVED GU5C2017 (TY OF YAKIFMA 011t DOC. INDEX # acceptance by the City of Yakima's Traffic Operations Manager, the traffic generated from the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the arterial street system. Furthermore, N. 50th Ave. is a Local Access Street, is 32 -ft in width, and does not require additional street widening. Project Size and Height: The proposed project is required to meet all applicable development standards, including 35 -ft maximum building height and setbacks. The applicant is also required to submit a photometric lighting plan. The Administrative Official appropriately conditioned the application to mitigate specific or general negative impacts of the development and ensure compatibility with existing neighboring land uses. SEPA Environmental Review: SEPA Review was conducted concurrently with the Type (2) Review. A Determination of Nonsignificance was incorporated and attached to the decision. The appeal does not establish a violation under SEPA. Recommendation: Inasmuch as the proposed use is consistent with the B-1 zoning district, and based upon the above findings and conclusions, the City of Yakima recommends denial of the Appeal (APP#003-17) and retention of the Type (2) and SEPA applications (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17)." (Doc. Index #A-1, pages 5-6). (2) In addition to the provisions of YMC §6.88.170(F)(2)(a)(i)(d), RCW 43.21C.090 provides that "In any action involving an attack on a determination by a governmental agency relative to the requirement or the absence of a requirement, or the adequacy of a `detailed statement', the decision of the governmental agency shall be accorded substantial weight." (3) The Washington Supreme Court agreed with these principles in the case of PT Air Watchers v. Department of Ecology, 179 Wn.2d 919, 926, 319 P.2d 23 (2014) where it stated: "Ecology's threshold SEPA determinations are entitled to substantial weight. RCW 43.21C.090; Norway Hill Pres. & Prot. Ass'n v. King County Council, 87 Wn.2d 267, 275, 552 P.2d 674 (1976) (recognizing that the `clearly erroneous' standard of review is appropriate in this context). We must affirm unless we are `left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.' " (4) After giving substantial weight to the SEPA Responsible Official's Deter- mination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for SEPA#014-17 which was based upon the existence of numerous detailed local and state regulations that are applicable to, and conditions of, the proposed apartment complex, the Hearing Examiner concludes that the appellants have failed to satisfy the burden of proving a violation of SEPA, the SEPA Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50`h Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 2.5 RECEIVED Gut' 5C'2017 CITY OF YAKIsM elv. DOC. ONDEX • • rules or the provisions of Chapter 6.88 of the Yakima Municipal Code and that the SEPA DNS should be affirmed because it is not clearly erroneous. (5) YMC §15.14.070 provides that the decisions by the Administrative Official under Type (2) Review may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner in accordance with YMC Chapter 16.08. YMC §16.08.020(A) provides that the Hearing Examiner shall hear appeals de novo. Community displeasure relative to a proposal that complies with all requisite policies and standards cannot be the sole basis for denial of a proposal. (Maranatha Mining v. Pierce County, 59 Wn. App. 795, 801 P.2d 985 (1990)). For the reasons set forth above in the findings of this decision, the Hearing Examiner concludes that traffic and other impacts do not justify denying a Class (2) use permit for the proposed apartment complex. (6) A contingent condition relative to the use of surplus parking stalls at the proposed apartment complex during weekday work hours by employees of nearby businesses if nearby on -street parking is eliminated on one or both sides of North 50th Avenue is added to the Class (2) decision to further promote compatibility of the proposal pursuant to YMC §15.10.040 which shall become effective only if it is capable of being performed by the applicant. (7) YMC §16.08.020(C) provides that all decisions of the Hearing Examiner are subject to appeal to the City Council. However, a determination may have to be made pursuant to YMC §16.03.010 or otherwise in order to clarify whether or not the Hearing Examiner's SEPA DNS appeal decision is exempt from that Title 16 appeal provision in view of YMC §6.88.170(F)(2)(a)(i)(a) which provides instead that a Hearing Examiner's SEPA DNS appeal decision shall be final and not subject to further administrative appeal. That determination will be necessary to comply with one of the Notice of Decision requirements of YMC § 16.07.010. The Hearing Examiner's SEPA DNS appeal decision and Class (2) use permit appeal decision may both be further appealed within the respective timeframes and in accordance with the respective procedures prescribed by City ordinance provisions that are determined to be applicable thereto. DECISION Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the Hearing Examiner issues Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC • At 118 North 50th Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 26 RECEIVED GCT 502017 CITY OF YAKIMA KA!'MDIV. DOG. INDEX A--1 • • the following decision relative to these appeals: (1) The SEPA Responsible Official's Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the proposed 80 -unit apartment complex at 118 North 50th Avenue which is designated as SEPA#014-17 is affirmed. (2) The Administrative Official's Class (2) use permit for an 80 -unit apartment complex at 118 North 50th Avenue which is designated as CL2#011-17 is affirmed. (3) The appeals of said DNS and of said Class (2) use permit which are desig- nated as APP#003-17 are denied. (4) A contingent condition is added to the Class (2) use permit to further promote compatibility of the Class (2) use in the future which will only become effective if on - street parking on one or both sides of North 50th Avenue is prohibited by the City in the future and if the proposed apartment complex at that time has surplus parking spaces that may be utilized during weekday work hours by employees of nearby businesses at little or no charge without violating any of the terms of financing or other restrictions applicable to the proposed apartment complex and without adversely affecting the use of the proposed apartment complex by its residents. The applicant shall advise the City Planning Division in writing within ten (10) days of the date of mailing this decision as to whether or not this contingent condition is capable of being performed and, if so, the wording of a proposed covenant to be recorded against the development site that would ensure compliance with this condition, and, if not, the specific reasons why this contingent condition would violate the terms of financing or other restrictions applicable to the proposed apartment complex, would adversely affect the use of the proposed apartment complex by its residents or would otherwise be incapable of being performed by the applicant. DATED this 30th day of October, 2017. Appeals of SEPA DNS & Permit for an 80 -Unit Apartment Complex Issued to Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud And to Owner Bicycle Apartments, LLC At 118 North 50'x' Ave.; #181321-41425 APP#003-17; CL2#011-17; SEPA#014-17 27 •Gary M. Cuuiil er, Hearing Examiner RECEIVED Gt i 5C 2017 CiIITY OF YAKIiu1i* lt.r"Ni'A DIV DOC. INDEX a�� NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER BB Appeal to City Council Applications - A2- :{�AfNN. `ayi■�.�.4 ;f?�t �JY1y:YI,``Lt�.;^•y{ F15 'i', :iy. u -;CYC:l •• ,. Y hr�`fffi / . 1 il„ 5. j. ... ... '� ' 4.. BB -1 Appeal Application — Next Step Housing (APP#004-17) 11/14/2017 BB -2 Appeal Application — James K. Adams (APP#006-17) 11/17/2017 • RECEIVED Al II 5txx LAND USE APPLICATION NOV 1 7 201 CITY OF YAKIMA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF YAKINIA 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, YAKIMA, WA 98901 PVit; t i:,.1 DIV. VOICE: (509) 575-6183 FAX: (509) 575-6105 Pr % : : a n n I n INSTRUCTIONS - PLEASE READ FIRST Please type or print your answers clearly. Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this form or the application process, please ask a Planner. Remember to bring all necessary attachments and the required filing fee when the application is submitted. The Planning Division cannot accept an application unless it is complete and the filing fee paid. Filing fees are not refundable. This application consists of four parts. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV - CERTIFICATION arc on this page. PART I1 and 1II contain additional information specific tb your proposal and MUST be attached to this page to complete the application. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION I. Applicant's Information: Name: J,A0.t.tE_, 4, sS.-,,nti,cS. ZC71 C (ti, t..foT3 4-01-.4._ ,L 1_v SJrrE Z Mailing Address: City: �a. �r PG( ,s J,_0rxes @. wlalaty, St: 4 (e'ai Zip:' 9,690?— Phone: (509' ) Zlig • -.tiOl o E -Mail: 2. Applicant's interest in Property: Check One: ❑ Owner • Agent El Purchaser X ,Other .1"-( ov Y,B trb.�a 3. Property Owner's Information (I f other than Applicant): Name: T;,ICyLLC. APnx_-1 IU CIvt-rf. L_LG Mailing Address: Z9cx pou)Ec_AtouSE_ Ro.e i) 4i I2 City: / li.U4 St: OA Zip: 9690.1. Phone: ( ) iCKL.ke-r..ru.. E -Mail: u 0.1.41_0,./41.-- 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): (son - 4 I4IL5- 5. Legal Description of Property. (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) 6-trS-rN,JT E Cove 1: EveLcri'ML NT LoT,-S 6. Property Address: 116 Ill , —0 --rt... Avg-. Y, 1-144.4 , t,JA 96 90 2.� !' 7. Property's Existing Zoning: ■ SR ■ R-1 ❑ R-2 ❑ R-3 'B-1 ■ B-2 ❑ HB ■ SCC ■ LCC ■ CBD ❑ GC ■ AS ■ RD ■ M-1 ■ M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All That Apply) • Administrative Adjustment ❑ Environmental Checklist (SEPA Review) ❑ Easement Release • Type (1) Review ❑ Right -of -Way Vacation • Rezone • Type (2) Review ❑ Transportation Concurrency • Shoreline • Type (3) Review ■ Non -Conforming Use/Structure • Critical Areas Review • Preliminary Short Plat Appeal to HE / City Council • Variance • Final Short Plat ❑ Interpretation by Hearing Examiner • Temporary Use Permit ■ Short Plat Amendment • Modification ■ Overlay District • Preliminary Long Plat ■ Home Occupation • Binding Site Plan ■ Final Long Plat ■ Comprehensive Plan Text or Map Amendment • Planned Development ❑ Plat Alteration -Long Plat ■ Short Plat Exemption: • Other: PART II - SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION, PART III - REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS, & PART IV -NARRATIVE 9. SEE ATTACHED SHEETS PART V - CERTIFICATION 10. I certify that the information on this application and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Prop ./._...- Owner's 1,1g49.tire Date �<-w+.LS ct 7 6 GC 6t.tr I-tvE MF..,£C; I{, 2-4,174 Applica it's Signature Date FILE/APPLICATION(S)# Rp-PO(r ')-) DATE FEE PAID:. .� k\V f,/ f .. V,FI)'BY::. : ,,::: :4 e� ....-:.` At PA D:: ' b _ _ .. CEIPT NU:,', . . I. :‘oo \ . Revised 08/2015 Page 13 DOC. @NDEX f)?) -r2 DOC. INDEX • Supplemental Application for: # APP1co6 -17 APPEAL • Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15.16 RECEIVED NOV 1 7 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLAf.<<4 ! sU. DIV. ❑ Of Administrative Official's Decision [.c& Hearing Examiner's Decision ❑ Of Subdivision Administrator's Decision ❑ Of SEPA Determination ❑ Other Appeal of File Number: Date Action Taken: 1. Description of Action Being Appealed: .)46./4.A.1 f1 a" L. ,]7EG1_11 U yJ APP -1± Oo3 , 2_-41al1 -17 swa 5E -PA - 2. Reason for Appeal: Describe the specific error(s) or issues(s) upon which the appeal is based, including an explanation of why the decision is not consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Plan, The Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, or other provisions of law. (Reference the section, paragraph, and page of the provision(s) cited.) (Attach if lengthy) o E E- E/Ht / $ ,-r-- .4 - Revised 08/2015 Page 14 DOC. INDEX • • EXHIBIT A 1. The Administrative Official and Hearing Examiner failed to address and mitigate the negative impact on and overburdening of the infrastructure of N. 50th Avenue. 2. The traffic and on -street parking on N. 50th Avenue will be overburdening by the scope of the project rendering the project incompatible as designed. 3. The Administrative Official and Hearing Examiner failed to take into account current traffic on N. 50th Avenue, including that from a recently opened school. DOC. INDEX # ii-etW06.i 7 RECEIVED NOV 172017 CITY OF YAKIMA rttm:z elv. DOC. INDEX dna V\.10,_ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Arg 1 Planning Division Receipt Number: CR -17-006815 P anning 129 N 2nd St. (2nd floor) Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-6183 / www.buildingyakima.com / Payer/Payee: WAGNER, LULOFF & ADAMS, PLLC 2010 W NOB HILL BLVD SUITE 2 YAKIMA WA 98902 PLANNING :APPEAL TO..CIT' COUNCIL Fee Description Appeal to City Council Cashier: CARISSA DELLINGER Date: 11/17/2017 Payment Type: CHECK (002260) APP#006-17 TOTALS: TOTAL PAID: Fee Amount Amount Paid $340.00 $340.00 Fee Balance $0.00 $340.00 $340.00 $0.00 Transaction Summary Trans Code,'.BARS; 001 8954503 001.8954503 Amount Due; $340.00 $340.00 Printed 11/17/2017 11:37:00 by Carissa Dellinger $340.00 DCC. INDEX 'e-5-� Page 1 of 1 • Ree ®, PCIT pun nt& pp ® {4�,;. Of YAKIMA anning LAND USE APPLICATION NOV 1:4 20 CITY OF YAKIMA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEr Citi r 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, YAKIMA, WA 98901 i;y,lfA Roar VOICE: (509) 575-6183 FAX: (509) 575-6105 INSTRUCTIONS — PLEASE READ FIRST Please type or print your aziswers clearly. - Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this forret or the application process, please ask a Planner. Remember to bring all necessary attachments and the required filing fee when the application is submitted. The Planning Division cannot accept an application unless it is complete and the filing fee paid. Filing fees are not refundable. This application consists of four parts. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV — CERTIFICATION are on this page. PART II and III contain additional information specific to your proposal and MUST be attached to this page to complete the application. PART I — GENERAL INFORMATION .. ... 1. Applicant's Information: Name: Bicycle Apartments, LLC Mailing Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite City: Yakima St: WA Zip: 98902 Phone: (509 )249-0390 E -Mail: 2. Applicant's Interest in Pro er p ty: Check One: a Owner ❑ Agent • Purchaser ❑ Other 3. Property Owner's Information (If other than Applicant): Name: Mailing Address: City: St: Zip: Phone: ( ) E -Mail: 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 181321-41425 5. Legal Description of Property. (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) Lot 5, Chestnut Grove Development, Vol CC of Plats, page 27, Yakima County 6. Property Address:118 No. 50th Avenue 7. Property's Existing Zoning: • SR • R -I ■ R-2 ■ R-3 0 B-1 ■ B-2 ■ HB IN SCC ■ LCC ■ CBD 0 GC ■ AS • RD ■ M-1 ■ M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All That Apply) • Administrative Adjustment 0 Environmental Checklist (SEPA Review) 0 Easement Release • Type (1) Review ■ Right -of -Way Vacation ❑ Rezone ❑ Type (2) Review ■ Transportation Concurrency 0 Shoreline ❑ Type (3) Review • Non -Conforming Use/Structure • Critical Areas Review • Preliminary Short Plat >ls❑ Appeal to HE / City Council ❑ Variance • Final Short Plat • Interpretation by Hearing Examiner • Temporary Use Permit ❑ Short Plat Amendment • Modification 0 Overlay District • Preliminary Long Plat IN Home Occupation • Binding Site Plan • Final Long Plat 0 Comprehensive Plan Text or Map Amendment • Planned Development ■ Plat Alteration —Long Plat • Short Plat Exemption: ■ Other: PART II — SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION, PART III — REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS, & PART IV —NARRATIVE 9. SEE ATTACH t► SHEETS PART V R 1 (FICA ON 10. I ce at�r 1 /nation on is ap•licationand• the r uiri attach ents ar true and co rect to the best of my knowledge. Proper • ner's Signa re r Date '2 I�12.417—Applicant's Signature Date/ FILE/APPLICATION(S)# iteok 11UL'` FE AE D• ''RECEIVED. _• AyUTP iD:'u ODA' REGEI Revised 08/2015 page! 3 DOC' INDEX '�� • • Supplemental Application for: DOC. INDEX # itep or cog -J-1 APPEAL Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15.16 ❑ Of Administrative Official's Decision ❑ Of Subdivision Administrator's Decision ❑ Other Appeal of File Number: CL2#011 RECENED NOV 1 4 201? CITY 0'r YAKIMA MUWITY CIEVTLOPMENT Of Hearing Examiner's Decision ❑ Of SEPA Determination Date Action Taken: October 30, 2017 1. Description of Action Being Appealed: Bicycle Apartments, LLC, files this limited appeal of the "contingent condition", Condition (4) to the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated October 30, 2017. Due to the contingent nature of the condition, this appeal will be withdrawn if the condition is withdrawn or deemed satisfied by the Applicant's response, which was submitted to the Planning Division on November 7, 2017. 2. Reason for Appeal: Describe the specific error(s) or issues(s) upon which the appeal is based, including an explanation of why the decision is not consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Plan, The Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, or other provisions of law. (Reference the section, paragraph, and page of the provision(s) cited.) (Attach if lengthy) 1. The "contingent condition", No. 4, is arbitrary and capricious and unlawful because it is not supported by or warranted by any provision of the City's land use code, nor the Hearing Examiner's findings and conclusions or evidence in the record. 2. If left to stand, the "contingent condition" would adversely affect the Applicant's ability to finance the proposed development, would impede future operations of the proposed affordable housing community and. in any case, would constitute an unwarranted exaction of the applicant's property in violation of state law. See RCW 82.02.020. Revised 08/2015 Page I 4 DOC. INDEX COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division Receipt Number: CR -17-006772 129 N 2nd St. (2nd floor) Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-6183 / www.buildingyakima.com / Payer/Payee: KANTOR TAYLOR NELSON EVATT & DECINA • • Fee Description Appeal to City Council Cashier: ANALILIA MARTINEZ Date: 11/14/2017 Payment Type: CHECK (15138) Fee Amount Amount Paid Fee Balance $340.00 $340.00 $0.00 APP#004-17 TOTALS: $340.00 $340.00 $0.00 TOTAL PAID: Transaction Summary Trans Code BARS.# 001 8954503 001.8954503 Amount Due $340.00 $340.00 Printed 11/14/2017 15:42:00 by Julia Cruz $340.00 DOC. INDEX I Page 1 of 1 • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER CC Appeal Responses & Appellant Rebuttal :,,,, :i- ::.., ,flq t JINDEXi#n r:".' s, ..- '.:•:.: .:;'.'—, .-,:• — C:)MtN1... -. :::•;.;. '• i' ' '. '.,, '%:, 'If i.'...., f'''. ' . .:: •,, r2,,',i, '','''''' '. ;*'.: i•-• '',. !::7'.' i - ,,'s ."; ',.' )'. ' ' ',:. , ',.., -. ,,'. ' 1. .i..%!,:k? - ..:'''',. L. ,., '''''''.".,:i),,2'.21 ::'i : ',:, . , • , : .: C,_ ',:: ' ,;.:' ':.',i!..„.f,l.. , - , - ',,,a;',‘ , ' , :' .„. ,,.' ,t4. ',, CC -1 Response to Appeal - Next Step Housing 12/18/2017 CC -2 Response to Appeal - Robin Gamache 12/20/2017 CC -3 Response to Appeal - Tom Lovell 12/21/2017 CC -4 Appellant Rebuttal - Next Step Housing 01/05/2018 • <rKANTOR'f'AYLOR File Number: 656.3 January 5, 2018 Via U.S. Postal Service/Email Joseph Calhoun City of Yakima 129 North Second Street 2nd Floor Yakima, WA 89901 RE: Bicycle Apartments — App. #004-1 7 & #006-17 Dear Mr. Calhoun: Enclosed for filing, please find the Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum for the Bicycle Apartments matter. Very truly yours, KANTOR TAYLOR PC Tracey -Elliman Project Coordinator Enclosure Representing Leaders in Housing and Community Development. RECEIVED JAN 0 E 2018 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNIM DIV. Kantor Taylor PC 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4000 Seattle, WA 98164 206,625 9898 206 625 9951. DOC. INDEX # CC-�I • BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF YAKIMA IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY THE HEARING EXAMINER RE BICYCLE APARTMENTS fECEIV JAN 0 E 4018 CITY Of YAK NIA D V. APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL MEMORANDUM App. #004-17 & #006-17 A. Objection to Gamache and Lovell Emails Next Step Housing strenuously objects to the email memoranda submitted by Mr. Lovell and Ms. Gamache. First, only an appellant or a party of record may file a written memorandum of authority to the City Council. YMC 15.16.050(B)(2)(a). Neither Mr. Lovell nor Ms. Gamache is a party of record. Other than Bicycle Apartments' limited appeal, the only appeal of the Hearing Examiner Decision was filed on behalf of unnamed "Neighbors". Although one could read that term to include anyone within striking distance of the proposal site, in this case "neighbors" can only mean those persons who were aggrieved by the Hearing Examiner's decision, as those are the only persons who may file an appeal to the City Council. YMC 15.16.050(A). The tern "person aggrieved" is applied to a person who feels Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 1 Kan FOR, TAYLOR PC 901 FIEFI{ AVENUE SUITE4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625 9898 FAX'. 206 625.9951 DO NIDE; X 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 RECEIVED JAN Cf -Y, he has been treated wrongly in a court or administrative action ....l One cannot be treated wrongly (or rightly, for that matter) by an administrative or judicial decision unless he or she is named in the action that resulted in that decision. Here, aside from the applicant, Bicycle Apartments LLC, the only persons who appealed the Administrative Official's decision were those business owners identified in the Notice of Appeal to the Hearing Examiner. Thus, the only persons authorized by the Yakima Code to appeal the Hearing Examiner's Decision to the City Council, other than the applicant (and the Administrative Official), would be any one of those business owners/appellants who may have felt "aggrieved" or "treated wrongly". Neither Mr. Lovell nor Ms. Gamache was among them. Though one or both of them may have spoken at the hearing before the Examiner, they cannot be aggrieved by the Hearing Examiner decision affirming the Administrative Official's decision when they did not appeal the Administrative Official's decision in the first instance. To interpret the City's appeal procedures in a way that would allow anyone other than the business owners/appellants below to challenge the Hearing Examiner's decision would violate a well-established principle of administrative law, which states that "an agency action cannot be challenged on review until all rights of administrative appeal have been exhausted."2 Consequently, neither Mr. Lovell nor Ms. Gamache can be among the "neighbors" who appealed the Hearing Examiner's Decision, Since only an "appellant or party of record"3 may submit a memorandum to the City Council, the email/memoranda submitted by Mr. Lovell and Ms. Gamache must be disregarded. https://thelawdictionary.org/party-aggrieved/ 2S'ee. e.g., Spokane County Fire Protection District 9 v. Spokane County Boundaiy Review Bd., 97 Wn.2d 922, 928, 652 P.2d 1356 (1982). 3 YMC 15.16.050(B)(2)(a). Other parties of record would include the applicant and the Administrative Official. Applicant 's Rebuttal Memorandum - 2 K.. NTOR, TAYLOR PC. 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 Sl ATTI.E. WA 98164 206 625 9898 FAX 206 625 9951 2018 YAKIMA DIV. 1No EX # �— 1 1 2 3 4 5 9 10 11 12 13 1.4 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 RECEIVE© JAN 0 5 2018 CITY OF I AMNIA i'i.P,ri 'Lc: ( DIV. Second, even if Mr. Lovell and Ms. Gamache are permitted to present written argument to the City Council, the scope of that argument must be confined to the issues contained in the Notice of Appeal. In this case, neither email/memoranda appears to satisfy this requirement. As discussed in the Applicant's Hearing Memorandum, the only "reason" for the "Neighbors" appeal that even remotely relates to an adopted code standard and thus arguably constitutes a legitimate basis for an appeal to the City Council is the second "reason" set out in the Notice of Appeal (Exhibit "A"): 2. The traffic and on -street parking on N. 50th Avenue will be overburdening [sic] by the scope of the project rendering the project incompatible as designed. Any argument or memorandum must relate to this "reason" for the appeal. The arguments of both Mr. Lovell and Ms. Gamache go far beyond this rather limited scope and should be disregarded. B. Rebuttal to Lovell Email. Mr. Lovell's email provides his view of the traffic conditions on North 50th Avenue and suggests, without reference to any applicable City code standard or regulation, that the street should be widened and the third floor of the proposed affordable housing buildings should be eliminated. He does not point to any evidence in the record to support his opinion; to Mr. Lovell, at least, it would seem the hearing conducted by the Hearing Examiner never took place. He simply chooses to ignore the professional opinions of the City's Chief Engineer and Traffic Operations Manager, as well as the unchallenged traffic impact analysis, which all ' See Applicant's Hearing Memorandum at p. 6, and n. 13. 'Though not mentioned in the notice, only reason No. 2 in the appeal of the "Neighbors" relates in any way to a code standard or requirement, in this case "compatibility". But even if the other reasons stated in the Notice of Appeal are considered, there is little doubt the appeal is based solely on traffic considerations, nothing more. Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 3 KANTOR, TAvt.OR PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 D SEAT ILE, WA 98164 206 625 9898 FAX 206 625 9951 IND RECEIVED JAN C 201E CITY 1 ' YAKIMA conclude North 50th Avenue has ample capacity to accommodate the proposed Bicycle Apartments comtnunity.6 The purpose of the memorandum authorized by the Yakima Municipal Code must be to enable a proper appellant to elaborate upon or provide argument in support of an appeal based on the record. Yet Mr. Lovell's email does not mention a single provision of the Yakima City Code, nor explain how the proposed development is "incompatible", the only viable "reason" for the Neighbors' appeal. Without reference to any evidence in the record or citation to any applicable code standards or requirements, Mr. Lovell's email does not provide a legitimate challenge to the Hearing Examiner's careful analysis of the issues. C. Rebuttal to Gamache Email Ms. Gamache's email wanders even further astray. The focus of Ms. Gamache's email is the scale and aesthetic quality of the proposed community. These issues were not identified in the Neighbors' Notice of Appeal and, therefore, are not within the scope of the appeal before the City Council. Ms. Gamache's email begins with a passing reference to North 50th Avenue traffic conditions, but like Mr. Lovell simply ignores the uncontroverted evidence in the record. Instead of acknowledging the facts: (a) that the Bicycle Apartments' 120 parking spaces will more than adequately meet the demand of 80 affordable housing units;8 and (b) any shortage of on -street parking is due to the failure of the nearby businesses to provide adequate parking 6 See Finding IV(7): "[Biased upon the City's current street standards, North 50`n Avenue has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposal." ' "[Any] written argument or memorandum shall not include the presentation of new evidence and shall be based only upon the facts presented to the examiner." YMC 15.16.050(B)(I)(A). e See, e.g., Finding V111(4): "The evidence establishes a foreseeable surplus of parking spaces for the proposed apartment complex for at least 40 years.... [T]he proposed 80 -unit apartment complex would actually only need 54-56 parking stalls ...." Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 4 90L FIhrH AVENUE SUITE 400P®C• KANTOR, TAYLOR PC SEATTLE, WA 95164 206 625 9895 FAX 206 625 9951 I N DE # 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2 23 24 26 RECEIVED JAN 0 E 0i8 CITY OF YA HVtPt for their employees and customers/elients,9 Ms. Gamache refers to selective statements in the Wearing Examiner Decision10 to implicitly suggest the Bicycle Apartments should bear responsibility for widening North 50th Avenue to provide those businesses more on -street parking and mitigation of "bottlenecked traffic". These statements and suggestions are not supported by any facts in the record, nor reference to any applicable legal requirements whatsoever. The contention that North 501h Avenue traffic is congested or bottlenecked, repeatedly argued by those opposed to the Bicycle Apartments community, is simply unfounded. One need only refer to the exhibits presented to the Hearing Examiner by the appellant/business owners to see that conditions are not as "neighbors" claim.tt Ms. Gamache's call for Bicycle Apartments to mitigate impacts for the convenience of others is not unlike the situation addressed by the Washington Court of Appeals in Luxembourg Group, Inc., v. Snohomish County, 76 Wash. App. 502, 887 P.2d 446 (1995), in which it struck down a condition imposed by the County that would have required the property owner to dedicate right-of-way to accommodate a neighbor's landlocked parcel. Likewise, in Unlimited v. Kitsap County, 50 Wash. App. 723, 750 P. 2d 651 (1988), the Court of Appeals invalidated a condition requiring the developer of a small convenience store to dedicate an easement to a neighboring parcel that had limited access as a result of prior County action. 9 See, e.g., Finding V(4): "[E]mployees of businesses in the vicinity of the proposed development park on North 50th Avenue during the work hours .... That is likely due to the nature of the businesses along North 50th Avenue , ..." 1° The Hearing Examiner found the businesses may be "inconvenienced" by the City's elimination of on -street parking in the future and it would be preferable, if possible, to address the issue now, rather than later. See Finding VIII(2) and (4). According to the Hearing Examiner, however, this prospect "is merely a speculative possibility that may not occur ...." See Finding V1I1(5). See also Applicant's Hearing Memorandum: Letter from Applicant's attorney to Mr. Joseph Calhoun dated November 7, 2017. 11 See Exhibit K. Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 5 {CANTOR, rAY,OR Pl, 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE., WA 98164 206 625 9898 FAX 206 625 9951 DOC IND( 2 3 4 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1. 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RECEIVED JAN 0 T 20i8 CITYp OF AKutq �Lh..:ti,• , o iisv. The same conclusion pertains here: the Bicycle Apartments community is not responsible for the failure of neighboring businesses to provide adequate parking for their customers and employees. The Hearing Examiner correctly found, based on ample and unchallenged evidence in the record, that North 50th Avenue could accommodate the traffic to be generated by the proposed affordable housing community and that the proposal includes more than sufficient parking to meet the expected demand. Nothing more can be expected or required. The balance of Ms. Gamache's email attacks the aesthetic qualities of the proposed Bicycle Apartments Community, claiming that it must be incompatible if the buildings are taller and would accommodate more people than the development which currently exists in the neighborhood. As stated at the outset, the physical features of the proposal are not proper issues in this appeal because the notice of appeal did not mention, suggest or in any way allude to aesthetics as a reason for the appeal. That being said, there is not one shred of evidence to support Ms. Gamache's bold- faced allegations of incompatibility. As the Hearing Examiner correctly concluded, the burden was on the appellants to prove a violation of applicable standards, in this case, incompatibility.12 But instead of providing evidence of any kind, they simply asked the Examiner to see the world as they do. There is nothing inherently incompatible between a 2 - story home and a 3 -story residential building, yet Ms. Gamache insists there is. She ignores the fact that the Bicycle Apartments structures would be no taller than 35 feet, the same building height allowed in single-family and two-family residential zones.13 12 See Finding X(4) 13 See YMC 15.05.010, Table 5-1; see also Finding X(2) Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 6 KA1roI,TAYLOR PC 901 191'111 AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEAT ILE, WA 98164 206 625 9898 FAX 206 625 9951 DOC IND( • 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 20 21 22 2;1 RECE VED JAN 0 20i8 GiTY OF� Y' QlWA DIV. Testimony and evidence submitted to the Hearing Examiner by Bicycle Apartrnci.* directly contradicts Ms. Gamache's claims of incompatibility. The project architect, who has designed dozens of housing communities throughout the region, testified that various elements of the building design, including varying siding patterns and materials, would be used to soften building scale.14 He also demonstrated how building height would vary, in some locations kept at 1-2 stories, to create a transition to neighboring properties.15 Another feature of the Bicycle Apartments will be enhanced setbacks and screening, a condition required by the Administrative Official. 16 These enhancements will include widened planting strips, trees and shrubs, and a view -obscuring fence along those property lines abutting single-family honies.17 According to the City's land use code, the purpose of the sitescreening is to "provide a visual buffer between uses of different intensity, streets and structures ... protect property values; and eliminate land use conflicts by mitigating adverse impacts ...."ts In other words, the Administrative Official carefully considered the issue of physical compatibility and imposed conditions on the project to address the neighbors' concerns. The Hearing Examiner, based on the only evidence presented to him, affirmed the Administrative Official's determination that the proposed Bicycle Apartments design reflects ample respect for the neighborhood context. The Bicycle Apartments community will include open courtyards with playgrounds for children and continue Next Step Housing's commitment19 to buildings of sustainable design and operation, incorporating a wide range of green building features: 14 See Exhibit K-5; Finding XI( I). 13 See Finding XI(1) and Exhibits K-5 and K-6. 16 See Decision of the Administrative Official at Condition 2(a). p. 16; see also Finding X1(1). 17 See YMC 15.07.040(A); Finding XI(1). 1N YMC 15.07.010; see Finding X1(1), 19 Next Step Housing was the first commercial enterprise in Yakima County to build to sustainable standards. Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 7 KANTOR, TAV40R I' : 901 FIFTH AVENUE Skirl'. 4000 WA 95164 206 625 08Q;.; FAX. 206 625 995 i 00 2 3 4 5 s 7 8 9 10 11 17 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 FiECEIVE© JAN 0 E 2018 CITY OF AKllld, 11.V.;M:Z NV exceeding the Washington Evergreen Sustainable Development Standard threshold; meeting the Enterprise Green Communities Criteria for building sustainability; Exceeding the 2015 Washington State Energy Code requirements; and Exceeding the EPA's Energy Star Qualified Homes Standards. The Applicant has engaged the same design team that helped it successfully develop the three phases of Pear Tree Place, which has won numerous awards, including the National Affordable Housing Associations' 2014 Award for Exemplary Development for People Living with Special Needs.20 Finally, while Ms. Gamache may claim the Bicycle Apartments proposal is inconsistent with the City's planning policies, nothing could be further from the truth. By way of example only, the Yakima Consolidated Plan, 2015-2019, states: The City of Yakima recognizes the need for affordable housing and understands that homelessness is the most severe housing problem. The City will continue to support and encourage affordable housing and supportive housing services ....21 The City's Housing Authority participated in the Countywide 2015 Study on Impediments to Fair Housing, which includes specific recommendations that are fulfilled in part by the Bicycle Apartments: • Promote programs and activities that offer the opportunity to construct new affordable rental housing programs serving lower income populations. o Encourage consideration of inclusionary zoning and other actions which support affordable housing in the updating of local planning documents. • Encourage the development of affordable rental housing by housing developers and housing authorities, including housing which is suitable for the needs of large families. 20 See Exhibit K-4. 21 Needs Assessment Overview, p. 18. Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 8 KAN'rou, TAYL017 Pt: DOC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 psl®(E,'X 206 625 9590 FAX I 206 625 9951 9�f1 IE CC • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1.3 i4 15 16 1'7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 o Encourage the development of new housing resources in locations close to jobs, transportation and services, utilizing "in- fill" sites wherever feasible.2 REC IVSD JAN t E 20i8 CITY • YAKIMA PLAf.0? DIV. The City's Comprehensive Plan 2040 carries forward many of these principles. Among the Goals and Policies intended to implement the mandate of the Growth Management Act, RCW ch. 36.70A, are the following: The future demand for housing is a crucial element of this plan. There is need to accommodate current and future population demands in a variety of housing types and affordability levels.23 Affordable housing options are critical ....24 Encourage Diverse and Affordable Housing Choices.25 Encourage and incentivize affordable housing development.26 Support proposals for affordable assisted and market rate housing based on the following criteria: o Dispersion of affordable housing throughout the City o Convenient access to transit o A range of unit types o Long-term affordability27 Remove barriers to development of affordable and market rate housing. o Maintain a zoning system that allows a wide range of housing types and densities.28 Ensure an Adequate Supply of Housing for Persons with Special Needs.29 D. Conclusion. When all is said and done, it is plain a few "neighbors" simply do not like the proposed development. Their exaggerated complaints about traffic, parking and aesthetics are just that — complaints. They presented no evidence to sustain their claims; they have never come forward with anything more than personal opinion, unsubstantiated in any way, to challenge or 22 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing, Yakima County Home Consortium (February 2015) at pp. 53, 55. 23 City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 ("Plan") at p. H-1. 24 Plan at p. H-6. 25 Plan, Goal 5.1 at p. 11-1 1. 26 Plan, Policy 5.1.8 at p. H -ll. 27 Plan, Policy 5.1.9 at p. 11-11. The Bicycle Apartments will be funded in part by bonds authorized by the Washington State Housing Finance Commission, which will require the Applicant to covenant the community he utilized for affordable housing for at least 40 years. See Finding V111(3). 28 Plan, Policy 5.1.10 at p.1-1-12. 29 Plan, Goal 5.3 at p. H-12. Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 9 K.ANTOR. TAYLOR PC DOC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 IND SEATTLE, WA 98164 99��ii 206 625 9898 FAX 206 625 9951 #. RECEIVED JAN 0 ` 20i8 CITY ' YAKIMA PLAN' �,: t YiJ Z DIV. 1i . �YJ contradict the Administrative Official's approval or the Hearing Examiner's decision. As the Hearing Examiner correctly concluded, however, neighborhood displeasure is insufficient grounds on which to base a land use decision.30 The Bicycle Apartments is an exemplary proposal, consistent with all applicable rules, regulations and standards, and one that will make the City proud for years to come. The City Council should affirm the Hearing Examiner's Decision and deny the Neighbors' appeal. Respectfully submitted this 5th day of January, 2018. Kantor Taylor I By Glet . 1. Amster Alto s for the Applicant, Next Step Housing LLC 3° See Decision, Conclusion XIII(5), citing Maranatha Mining v. Pierce County, 59 Wash App. 795, 801 P.2d 985 (1990). Applicant's Rebuttal Memorandum - 10 !CANTOR, TAYLOR PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 $EX'I'LE, WA 98164 206 625 9898 FAX: 206 625 9951 D® IND"` X # CC- • • • Maxey, Lisa From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 9:50 PM To: Calhoun, Joseph; Maxey, Lisa; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Watkins, Sara Subject: Fwd: APP#006-17 BICYCLE APARTMENTS Please include in the public record for the appeal. Thank you!! Joan Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Tom Lovell <tomzluvz@hotrnail.com> Date: December 21, 2017 at 2:38:57 PM PST To: "joan.davenportgyakimawa.gov" <joan.davenportNyaki.'mawa.gov> Subject: APP#006-17 BICYCLE APARTMENTS The simple way to mitigate the on -street parking issue on North 50th Avenue is to tear out the parking strips on both sides of the street to the edge of the sidewalks in front of all B-1 zoned property, which will give an additional 7 feet of street width in that area, which is more than a width of an auto. The Chestnut Grove Condo area would remain unchanged, as there is little on -street parking in that area. I do not understand the reasoning of the City Engineering staff when they infer that more on - street parking is a good way to slow traffic, as it narrows the street. It also presents a safety hazard, resulting in side view mirrors and car doors being damaged! In addition, with the additional population of children added to the mix, the narrow street presents a hazard by reducing visibility for motorists and pedestrians (children) also. This is a poor location for a project of this size, particularly when you factor in school buses, Dial A Ride vehicles and emergency vehicles entering and leaving the site. Eliminate the third story to stay in scale with the rest of the buildings in the area and adjoining neighborhoods and widen the street at developer's expense and this will make the smaller project more compatible with the neighborhood. It is not the neighborhoods' fault that the developer secured the funding BEFORE he had a final approval of the site, nor should the city agreed to a $500,000 grant from taxpayer (federal) funds. There are better sites where ingress and egress will not lead to traffic congestion as this site will. Mitigation of traffic congestion and safety issues should take place concurrently with the development of the project, not sometime AFTER the project is competed. Any post -project mitigation expenses will then fall on the taxpayers of the city, which is not fair. 1 DOC. INDEX # CC • • • This project should be denied as proposed, or reduced in size and scope to be more consistent with the neighborhood and adjoining ones. Tom Lovell 116-2 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA 98908 2 ®®Ce oiDEX # C C • • • Maxey, Lisa From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 8:04 AM To: Calhoun, Joseph; Watkins, Sara; Maxey, Lisa Cc: Ibarra, Rosalinda Subject: FW: APP#006-17 filed by James K Adams regarding Parcel No 181321-41425 at 118 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA Fyi- not sure why this was sent specifically to selected persons instead of the public record. Joan Joan Davenport, AICP Director of Community Development City of Yakima 129 North 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Joan.davenport@yakimawa.gov (509)576-6417 From: robin [mailto:robing2@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 1:21 AM To: Davenport, Joan <Joan.Davenport@yakimawa.gov>; Coffey, Kathy <Kathy.Coffey@yakimawa.gov>; tom lovell <tomzluvz@hotmail.com>; lynnnathe@msn.com Subject: APP#006-17 filed by James K Adams regarding Parcel No 181321-41425 at 118 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA PURPOSE The following is submitted in reference to APP#006-17 filed by James K. Adams on November 17, 2017 for appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on APP#003-17/CL2#011-17/ SEPA#014-17 regarding the proposed development of the 2.98 acre parcel number 181321-41425 at 118 North 50th Avenue in Yakima, Washington as an 80 -unit housing community consisting of five (5) 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 on site parking spaces. The purpose is not to oppose the project but to demonstrate that the proposed high density residential development, as designed by Next Step Housing (NSH), is not in compliance with, and requires modification to satisfy, certain goals, policies and codes of the Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 and Yakima Municipal Code. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY The proposed 80 -unit apartment complex is a project of significant proportion with the massing of five (5 !!) 3 - story buildings on a 2.98 acre parcel on North 50th Avenue. The site is sandwiched between the business district to the north near Summitview and low density single family homes to the south. 1 DOC. INDEX cc - The City of Yakima, especially for large developments, routinely requires that infrastructure, including parking and traffic control, be in place prior to site development and occupancy. The Hearing Examiner agrees that mitigation should not wait until after the proposed project is complete. The 1 -Tearing Examiner recommends "that it would be preferable to attempt to ameliorate at this time the effect of elimination of on -street parking on North 50th Avenue due to additional traffic in the future, rather than to require nearby businesses or the public to bear the cost" of , for example, widening the street in the business district of North 50th Avenue to provide the businesses with much needed on -street parking strips, thereby, allowing routine traffic and emergency vehicles to move freely and safely without being reduced to a single lane. The commercial district on -street parking is important, even critical, for the efficient conduct of business and is often filled to capacity, routinely reducing traffic to a single lane. Traffic stops to allow passage of oncoming vehicles and also stops with long lines of vehicles attempting to access Summitview. The proposed development would include 120 on-site parking spaces with one ingress/egress in the North 50th Avenue B-1 zone, further exacerbating the already congested business district traffic. Widen North 50th Avenue in the commercial district, provide parking strips, and allow traffic to move freely and safely. Mitigation of the bottlenecked traffic is critical and must be achieved prior to site development. YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2040 LAND USE POLICY 2.3.2 AND 2.3.2(A) The proposed development requires mitigation of the negative impact of the imposing 3 -story buildings and the high density population and certain aesthetic characteristics of the project on the existing neighborhood of small, low density, 1- and 2 -story residential and commercial areas. The infill development, as designed, does not comply with Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.3.2 "Preserve and enhance established residential neighborhoods" and Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.3.2(A) "Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood." The proposed development is INCOMPATIBLE IN SCALE due to the massing of five (5 !!) large 3 -story buildings adjacent to the established neighborhood composed of small, 1- or 2 -story single family homes and f- or 2 -story small -footprint commercial buildings. The proposed development is INCOMPATIBLE IN STYLE since five (5 !!) large 3 -story single -pitched roof buildings are quite different from the established neighborhood composition of small, 1- or 2 -story double - pitched roof buildings. The proposed development is INCOMPATIBLE IN DENSITY. A complex with 80 apartments (40 one-, 30 two- and 10 three-bedroom apartments) will house a minimum of 130 people and has the potential to house 210+ people if some bedrooms are occupied by more than one person. The high density population of 130 to 200+ people sequestered in a relatively small area of 2.98 acres overwhelms the current low density residential population of about 47 people housed in 34 single family condominiums. The proposed high density residential complex will triple, or possibly quadruple, the population living on North 50th Avenue between Summitview and West Chestnut Avenues. The proposed five (5 !!) 3 -story buildings arranged around the perimeter of the 2.98 acre parcel are INCOMPATIBLE IN AESTHETIC QUALITY. All surrounding properties will experience significant reduction or total elimination of privacy, significant barriers to sight and sunlight, intrusion of.n. time light 2 INDEX # cc—� glare because the building site grade is 10 feet higher than the grade of neighboring properties, reduction in property value as evidenced by directly related loss of neighboring commercial building sales, noise generated by 130 to 200+ occupants sheltering in a small area, intrusion of five (5 !!) 3 -story single -pitched roof buildings into and entirely double -pitched roof, 1- to 2 -story neighborhood completely changing the character of the streetscape. Some buildings will have direct line -of -sight into the outdoor playground of the immediately adjacent KinderCare, a very large, long-established childcare/early childhood education center serving at least 150 children each day throughout the year. The site screening six-foot, view -obstructing fence required per YMC 15.10.040(A)(2) and (3) will be completely ineffective in screening a 35 foot tall building from KinderCare or any other nearby property. To maintain the safety of KinderCare children, and allow all properties to have some degree of privacy, the infill apartment building height must be limited to 2 -stories so site screening can be more effective. The proposed infill is not compatible infill, as designed. The Class(2) use permit must be modified to mandate a maximum building height of 2 -stories, to preserve and enhance the established neighborhood, to mitigate incompatibilities of scale, style, density and aesthetic quality, and to bring the development into compliance with Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.3.2 and Policy 2.3.2(A). YAKIMA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2040 - LAND USE POLICIES FOR B-1 ZONING DISTRICTS Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.2.3(A): "Purpose: This designation [B-1] is intended to allow for a mixture of NEIGHBORHOOD SCALED retail, commercial service, office and high density residential uses. Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.2.3(C): "Principle uses and density: A mixture of retail, commercial service, office and high density residential uses DEPENDING ON THE AREA'S CONTEXT. ... The permitted maximum residential density is up to or above 13 net dwelling units per acre, DEPENDING ON the underlying zoning and NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT. ... Specifying the maximum number of dwelling units in one building may be appropriate in some areas TO ENSURE A NEIGHBORHOOD -FRIENDLY SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT." Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.3.5: "Consider design standards for new multifamily development to PROMOTE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY ... EMPHASIZE FACADE ARTICULATION CONSISTENT WITH NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE." Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.3.6: "...locating and designing uses IN A MANNER THAT RESPECTS THE CHARACTER AND SCALE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD." The immediate neighborhood and the extended neighborhood for many blocks in the area of the proposed development site are entirely composed of small, double -pitched roof, 1- and 2 -story single family homes and small, double -pitched roof, 1- and 2 -story commercial buildings. New development must respect the scale and character of the existing and long-established neighborhood by ensuring a neighborhood -friendly scale of development (i.e. 1- or 2 -stories) and by promoting neighborhood compatibility of scale, style, density and aesthetic quality. The infill massing of five (5 !!) 3 -story buildings is not a neighborhood -friendly scale of development. To bring the proposed apartment buildings into compliance with Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policy 2.2.3(A), 2.2.3(C), 2.3.5.and 2.3.6, the proposed infill development MUST BE LIMITED TO A HEIGHT OF 2 STORIES. DOC. 3 INDEX * W- • YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE 15.04.020(B) REGARDING CLASS(2) USES The final statement in the Hearing Examiner's Findings Section XI reads: "...a mandated reduction of the apartment complex to two stories based upon general compatibility criterion would be in violation of the specific legislative determinations as to the types of generally permitted Class(2) uses in the B-1 zone and as to the permissible height of all buildings in the B-1 zone." The previous statement is not incorrect, but it is incomplete. Yakima Municipal Code 15.04.020(B): "Class(2) uses are generally permitted in the district. However, the compatibility between a Class(2) use and the surrounding environment cannot be determined in advance, and OCCASIONALLY A CLASS(2) USE MAY BE INCOMPATIBLE AT A PARTICULAR LOCATION." The location of five (5 !!) 3 -story buildings at 118 North 50th Avenue in a surrounding environment of only l- and 2 -story buildings is an infill development that is incompatible at that particular location. The project architects of the proposed development are "keeping the end of the buildings at one- or two -stories, where feasible" (i.e. ONLY the east end of the two buildings which are close to North 50th Avenue are one- or two -stories) "to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures." (Words of applicant Doc. Index A-1 pages 4-5.) This statement clearly indicates that the architects and the developer fully understand and ADMIT that ONLY 1- and 2 -story buildings are compatible with neighboring commercial and residential structures. 4111) The Class(2) use permit #011-17 must be modified to include a mandated building height limitation of no more than 2 -stories. • LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY The administrative official has the legislative authority to prescribe a specific development requirement to limit the five (5) buildings of the proposed infill complex to a maximum of 2 -stories to bring the new construction into scale with the neighboring commercial and residential development pattern and character. Yakima Municipal Code 15.10 does "specify and outline the authority of the administrative official to impose special conditions of approval on any permit or approval issued under the provisions of this title..." Yakima Municipal Code 15.10.040(A) provides that "the development standards and other conditions for approval specified in this title are not a limitation on the authority of a reviewing official to impose additional or greater requirements as conditions of approval on any use, development or modification being reviewed...any reviewing official may impose conditions to: b. Mitigate any identified specific or general negative impacts of the development whether environmental or otherwise; c. Ensure compatibility of the development with existing neighboring land uses; e. Achieve and further the expressed intent, goals, objectives and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and this title." Yakima Municipal Code 15.10.040(B) "extends the authority to impose special conditions, including but not limited to, the following: a. Increasing the minimum development standards of this title; 4 DOC. INDEX # C.C�" b. Limiting and controlling the dimensions, number, shape, and location of structures, including fences, signs, and buildings; f. Regulating the design, manner and timing of construction of any site improvements." The administrative official has the legislative authority and must mandate a modification of the Class(2) use permit designated CL2#011-17 regarding development of Parcel No. 181321-41425 to limit all infill structures to a maximum of 2 -stories. Otherwise, the Class(2) use permit must be denied due to noncompliance with the described goals, policies and codes of the Yakima Comprehensive Plan and Yakima Municipal Code. FINAL POINT Please consider one final point. A requirement to limit all proposed North 50th Avenue infill structures to 2 - stories would cause NSH to forfeit financing approved only for a three story apartment complex. The inconvenient need to apply for new Federal Tax Credit financing for a redesigned, two story apartment complex cannot be allowed to influence an administrative official's judgement that Class(2) use permit CL2#011-17 must be modified or denied. In any case, Next Step Housing is obligated to comply with the described land use goals, policies and codes of Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 and Yakima Municipal Code to produce an infill development that is neighborhood scaled. The provision of affordable housing is a local, state and federal priority. The availability of affordable housing Federal Tax Credits has not been affected by the recent Federal Tax Reform Bill. Federal Tax Credit awards from the Washington State Housing Fund and Washington State Housing Finance Commission are made on a competitive basis. However, NSII's long history of developing affordable housing would assure acquisition of Federal Tax Credit funding for a redesigned, two story apartment complex. CONCLUSION Compatibility implies a harmonious two-way relationship where two different types of land use are mutually beneficial and compliment each other. Compatible infill is development that makes a positive contribution to the scale and character of a neighborhood's streetscape. It is development that does not diminish the scale, character or privacy of neighboring residential and commercial. properties. The proposed infill is not compatible infill, as designed, because it does not compliment the existing environment. It overpowers the existing environment and completely changes the scale and character of the neighborhood streetscape. The five (5) 3 -story buildings would greatly diminish the scale, character and privacy of all neighboring properties. The Class(2) use permit CL2#011-17 must be modified to require neighborhood scaled 2 -story buildings and bring the development into compliance with Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040 Policies 2.3.2, 2.3.2(A), 2.2.3(A), 2.2.3(C), 2.3.5, 2.3.6, and Yakima Municipal Code 15.04.020(B). 5 DOC. INDEX c:J'� December 15, 2017 Joseph Calhoun City of Yakima 129 North Second Street 2nd Floor Yakima, WA 89901 <fKANT0R TAYLOR •A't C y D. -.Q• 8 20:17-: CITY;°.OwAKimA COMMI�FIit'Y'��.b�IQP�JP£i�JT' . RE: Bicycle Apartments - App. #004-17 & #006-17 Dear Mr. Calhoun: Enclosed for filing please find the Applicant's Hearing Memorandum for the Bicycle Apartments matter. Very truly yours, KANTOR TAYLOR NELSON EVATT & DECINA PC File Number: 656.3 via Federal Express Amster Enclosure Representing Leaders in Housing and Community Development. Kantor Taylor Nelson Evatt & Decina PC ,901.Fifth Avenue, Suite 4000 Seattle, WA 98164 ®OC. t 206.625,9898 1NDE)( f 206.625.9951 # ,C,C�` 4invw,KantorTaylor.com • • • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF YAKIMA IN THE MATTER OF APPEALS OF A DECISION BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER RE BICYCLE APARTMENTS ivot, 6-e017 APPLICANT'S HEARING MEMORANDUM App. # 004-17 & #006-17 BACKGROUND Next Step Housing seeks to develop an 80 unit affordable housing community, to be known as the Bicycle Apartments. The community would consist of five, 3 -story buildings on approximately 3 acres located on North 50th Avenue, immediately south of Summitview Avenue. The Bicycle Apartments will provide a mix of unit sizes, designed to house an equal number of small families with children and single adults, including both veterans and those with disabilities.' It will help to fulfill an explicit policy of the Growth Management Act, that 1 See Hearing Examiner's Decision ("Decision" herein"), Section F. at p. 3, for a more complete description of the proposed Bicycle Apartments Community. Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 1 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NF:LSON, EVATT & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206.625,9951 is to "[e]ncourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state ...", RCW 36.70A.020(4), as well as the Yakima Comprehensive Plan 2040, which seeks to "Encourage Diverse and Affordable Housing Choices" (Goal 5.1). On July 17, 2017, following thorough review of the Bicycle Apartments proposal by the City's Development Services Team, the Administrative Official approved the Type II land use application and issued a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW ch. 43.21C (SEPA).2 These decisions were appealed by several neighboring business owners, who claimed the proposed affordable housing community was not compatible with the neighborhood, supposedly because (a) it would cause traffic congestion and loss of parking spaces on North 50th Avenue; and (b) the 3 -story buildings would impose "significant barriers to sight and light". Following a public hearing, the Hearing Examiner rejected the business owners' appeals. In a lengthy and thoughtful review of the evidence and applicable legal standards, he affirmed the Administrative Official's decisions. Unfortunately, he went further, adding a "contingent condition" that was intended to address the business owners' concern that the residents of the Bicycle Apartments would use on -street parking that was important to their customers and employees. This "contingent condition", the Hearing Examiner stated, would "promote compatibility of the proposed apartment complex ... beyond that which is otherwise required for approval ...."3 The condition would have required the Applicant to record a covenant against its property offering the neighboring businesses the use of parking spaces on the Bicycle Apartments' property 2 See Decision, §§ 1 and 11, for a more complete description of the procedural steps preceding this appeal. 3 See Decision, §V11I(6), p. 15. Applicant 's Hearing Memorandum - 2 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATT & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206,625,9898 FAX: 206.6259951 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 12 13 14 1- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 [i]f on -street parking on one or both sides of North 50th Avenue is prohibited by the City in the future and If the proposed apartment complex at that time has surplus parking spaces that may be utilized during weekday work hours by employees of nearby business at little or no charge without violating any of the terms of financing or other restrictions applicable to the proposed apartment complex and without adversely affecting the use of the proposed apartment complex by its residents. Decision, Condition (4), p. 27. The condition went on to require the Applicant to advise the City whether or not this contingent condition was capable of being performed and, if not, why not. Id. In a letter dated November 7, 2017, the Applicant advised the City that the contingent condition could not be performed because it would adversely affect current and future financing, as well as future community operations. Applicant's counsel also pointed out that the contingent condition, if allowed to stand, would constitute an illegal taking of its property.4 Uncertain of the City's response to its positions and with the time for challenging the contingent condition about to expire, Bicycle Apartments LLC was compelled to file a limited appeal to the City Council.6 Tn the meantime, in an exchange of correspondence with the City's Planning Manager, the Hearing Examiner stated: Absent an appeal of the decision to the City Council by a party claiming that the contingent condition is factually and legally capable of being performed, the applicant's position ... would become final and the contingent condition should be stricken without the need for the City Council to decide that uncontested position. Letter from Hearing Examiner Gary M. Cuillier dated November 15, 2017. 4 See Memo from Applicant's Attorney dated November 7, 2017. 5 The City Planning Manager wrote to the Itearing Examiner on November 14, 2017, asking for guidance on how to respond to the Applicant's submission of November 7. The Hearing Examiner responded on November 15. 6 See Notice of Appeal of Bicycle Apartments LLC, date stamp received on November 14, 2017. Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 3 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATI' & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206,625,9898 FAX: 206.625,9951 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Two days later, on the last possible day, James Adams filed an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on behalf of unidentified "neighbors".7 The neighbors' appeal does not refer in any way to the contingent condition or claim it is capable of being performed. DISCUSSION 1. Argument in Support of Applicant's Appeal. In view of the Hearing Examiner's response to the City Manager, the Applicant's appeal may be considered moot. No party has alleged the contingent condition is capable of being performed and, therefore, the contingent condition "should be stricken without the need for the City Council to decide . . .."8 Given the ambiguity of the contingent condition, however, the Applicant asks the City Council to confirm the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of the contingent condition and formally strike it from the decision. This will clear up an otherwise awkward and ambiguous situation and enable the Applicant to satisfy often demanding lenders and investors as it moves forward. 2. Argument in Opposition to Neighbors' Appeal. The business owners/appellants state three reasons for their appeal or, rather, state the same reason in three different ways, namely that the proposed affordable housing community will overburden traffic and on -street parking on North 50th Avenue.9 They presented no evidence to the Hearing Examiner to support these claims other than a series of photos and a drone video, both of which they claimed depicted substantial traffic and extensive use of on- ' See Notice of Appeal filed by James Adams, date stamp received November 17, 2017. The City Council should not be misled by the notice identifying the filing on behalf of "neighbors" of the proposed affordable housing community. The appellants/"neighbors" are a few owners of businesses on North 50`h Avenue. Although several neighboring residents appeared and testified at the hearing, no residents appealed the Administrative Official's decision to the Hearing Examiner. Having failed to exhaust an available administrative remedy, resident neighbors are not authorized to appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. 8 See Letter from Gary M. Cuillier dated November 15, 2017. 9 See Notice of Appeal, App#006-17. Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 4 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVA'IT & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206.625.9951 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 street parking spaces on North 5011' Avenue. As the Council will surmise, Neighbors' interpretation of their own evidence is suspect, at best.10 Notwithstanding these shortcomings, the Hearing Examiner gave careful consideration to the Neighbors' arguments and, in a well -reasoned decision, denied the appeals. The Hearing Examiner's decision is well -supported by the evidence in the record and the applicable legal standards. The Council should affirm the Decision and dismiss the Neighbors' appeal. A. The Neighbors' Appeal Should be Dismissed Because it Fails to Comply with YMC 15.16.050(A). YMC 15.16.050(A) prescribes the requirements for appealing a Hearing Examiner decision to the City Council.11 In order to commence an appeal, 1. The appealing party must file a complete written notice of appeal with the planning division upon forms prescribed by the department .... 2. The notice of appeal shall specify the claimed error(s) and issue(s) that the legislative body is asked to consider on appeal and shall specifically state all grounds for such appeal. Issues or grounds of appeal that are not so identified need not be considered by the legislative body. (emphasis added). The form referred to in YMC 15.16.050(A)(1), which has been prescribed by the planning division, elaborates on these requirements: 2. Reason for Appeal: Describe the specific crror(s) or issue(s) upon which the appeal is based, including an explanation of why the decision is not consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Plan, The Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, or other provisions of law. (Reference the section, paragraph, and page of the provision(s) cited.)(Attach if lengthy).12 Neighbors' notice of appeal fails to comply with these requirements. Despite these very specific instructions, and a 27 -page, single-spaced Hearing Examiner decision, 10 See Exhibit K-1. None of the photos suggest heavy traffic on North 5011' Avenue and most depict near empty parking lots. ' 1 These same provisions are set forth in SMC ch. 1.43, which establishes the office of the Hearing Examiner and prescribes its administration and authority. See SMC 1.43.140. 12 See forms attached to Notice of Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision. Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 5 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EvA'rr & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206,625.9951 • Neighbors' notice includes three scant statements, all of which equate to the same claim: "traffic and on -street parking on N. 50th Avenue will be overburdening [sic]" by the Bicycle Apartments, "rendering the project incompatible as designed."13 The notice does not specify errors or issues,14 fails to explain why the decision is not compatible with the City's Plans or Ordinances or any other applicable law, nor does it refer to any factual or legal error in the Hearing Examiner's decision. The Council should not allow this vague, uninformative and non-compliant notice to delay the Bicycle Apartments for even one more day. The appeal should be dismissed. B. The Hearing Examiner's Decision Should Be Affirmed. 1. City Council Should Defer to the Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact. As a preliminary matter, the Council must defer to the Hearing Examiner on factual matters because the Hearing Examiner is charged with weighing the evidence and evaluating the credibility of witnesses. The Council conducts no independent fact-finding. Absent an appeal to the City Council, the decision of' the Hearing Examiner is final and conclusive. YMC § 15.16.050(A). In the event of an appeal, the Yakima Code requires the Council to consider the appeal on the record presented to the Hearing Examiner. YMC § 15.16.060(D). The Code authorizes the Hearing Examiner to make findings of fact and it is to those findings the Council must defer. See, e.g., State ex. rel. Lige & Dickson Co. v. Pierce County, 65 Wash. App. 614, 829 P. 2d 217, rev. denied, 120 Wn. 2d 1008 (1992). The Council's inquiry, therefore, is whether the Hearing Examiner's findings of fact are supported by evidence in the record. Id., at 622. Here, 13 See Notice of Appeal, APP#006-17, Exhibit A, No. 2. Appeal reasons Nos. 1 & 3 claim inadequate consideration of the "overburdening of the infrastructure of N. 50th Avenue" and "current traffic on N. 50th Avenue". These claims, however, would suggest error in the responsible official's SEPA Determination, issues that are not properly before the City Council. See SMC 16.07.010. 14 As noted previously, the Neighbors' notice does not even identify who the appellants are. Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 6 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATr & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206,625.9951 there is substantial, indeed unrebutted, evidence in the record to support the Hearing Examiner's findings, which inevitably lead to the conclusion that the Examiner committed no error in approving the Bicycle Apartments proposal. 2. The Hearing Examiner Correctly Concluded the Traffic and Parking Demand Generated by the Bicycle Apartments Will Not Overburden North 50th Avenue. Neighbors do not allege a violation of any applicable requirement of the City's zoning ordinance or any other plan or development standard. They allege, without evidentiary or legal support, that the traffic generated by the proposed affordable housing project would overburden North 50th Avenue. On the basis of testimony by Brett Sheffield, P.E., the City's Chief Engineer; Joe Rosenlund, the City's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager; Michael Read, P.E., the Applicant's Traffic Engineer; and the unrebutted traffic impact analysis, the Hearing Examiner concluded otherwise.15 The Hearing Examiner's conclusion is unassailable. Neighbors' complaint about the Bicycle Apartments' residents overwhelming the on - street parking on North 50th Avenue is even more tenuous. Although they submitted photos into evidence that reveal underutilized parking lots, the Neighbors contend their customers and employees use on -street parking to a great extent. They assert they are entitled to these on - street parking spaces to the exclusion of others, in particular the residents of the Bicycle Apartments. The response to this claim is several -fold: First, the Bicycle Apartments will provide 120 parking spaces for the 80 affordable residential units, or 1.5 spaces per unit, as required by the City's zoning ordinance.16 Second, Michael Read, P.E., the Applicant's traffic engineer, 15 See Decision, §IV, §VII, §XIII, Conclusion (1) at p. 24-25 ("[T]he traffic generated by the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the arterial street system."). t6 See Decision, §IX, Findings (I) and (2). Applicant 's Hearing Memorandum - 7 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, IsVA7T & DECINA PC. 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX. 206.625,9951 • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 • 26 testified that the parking demand is likely to be "substantially less" than the number of spaces to be provided because the code does not account for the nature of the resident population in an affordable, supportive housing community, nor the proximity of transit on Summitview Avenue. John Mifsud, Next Step Housing's Executive Director, confirmed Mr. Read's assessment, noting that in other communities developed and operated by Next Step Housing no more than 65-70% of the residents own vehicles. The Hearing Examiner adopted this testimony in his findings." Finally, as the Hearing Examiner correctly states, the City has the authority to regulate on -street parking, and the fact that nearby businesses rely on the use of on -street parking to compensate for their own parking shortfall does not confer a continued right to do so in the future.18 if the neighboring businesses have neglected to provide sufficient parking for their own use, it is not the fault of the Bicycle Apartments. In essence, Neighbors ask the City Council to adopt their view of the Bicycle Apartments community and their judgment as to how that community will fit their vision of compatibility. They cannot, however, point to any legal authority that would require the City to adopt their preferred standards of compatibility. Indeed, in every instance where project opponents have made similar claims, the Washington courts have soundly resisted the temptation to impose a particular standard. In Glasser v. City of Seattle, 139 Wn. App. 728, 162 P. 3d 1134 (2007), for example, plaintiff challenged the City's approval of a project because he felt the conditions attached to the permit approval would not effectively mitigate the project's impacts. Viewing the objection as essentially an argument that the law compels 17 See Decision, §VIII(4). 18 See Decision, §VIII(5). Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 8 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATT & DECLNA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625,9898 FAX: 206.625.9951 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 the City to view the world through plaintiff's lens, the court rejected the claim. Likewise, in Gebbers v. Okanogan County. PUD No. 1, 144 Wn. App. 371, 392, 183 P.3d 324 (2008), the court rejected a contention that a public utility district erred in approving a proposed project when alternatives were available that plaintiff felt were less harmful. As the Hearing Examiner correctly concludes, the Yakima Municipal Code explicitly authorizes multi -family development in the B-1 zone and prescribes standards that are intended to make this or any other type of development compatible with others in the area.19 In other words, despite Neighbors' protests, the same potential for "incompatibility" exists for any proposal for development on the subject property that is designed to meet the underlying zoning requirements. Thus, the mere fact that the Bicycle Apartments will generate traffic on North 50th Avenue does not end the inquiry. Cf. Kenart and Associates v. Skagit County, 37 Wash. App 295, 302, 680 P. 2d 439, rev. denied, 101 Wn. 2d 1021 (1984)(rejecting argument that impacts to schools justified denial of subdivision because any development meeting zoning standards would have the same impact). If this potential were sufficient to deny the Bicycle Apartments proposal, no development meeting the City's zoning standards could occur on the subject parcel and the City's zoning standards would be meaningless. The Hearing Examiner recognized that City planning policies and regulations necessarily contemplate some level of impact to City streets as a result of development on the subject property in accordance with the B-1 zoning designation.20 The Neighbors' appeal ignores this essential aspect of the City's zoning authorization. The Washington Supreme Court has rejected similar claims on several occasions. In Nagatani Bros., Inc., v. Skagit 19 See Decision §VII1(12); §X(4)(5). 20 See Decision, Sec. VIII (7) & (12). Applicant's Hearing Memorandum - 9 KANTOR, TAYLOR, NF.LSON, EVATT & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206.6259951 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 County, 108 Wn. 2d 477, 739 P.2d 696 (1987), for example, the Court rejected the County's attempt to deny a subdivision on the basis of impacts that were necessarily anticipated by the zoning of the development parcel. The owner proposed to subdivide 18.5 acres of prime agricultural land into 29 residential lots, as permitted by the applicable zoning regulations. The County denied the application in part because the proposed subdivision would remove prime agricultural land from production. The Court expressly rejected the County's decision because the loss of agricultural land resulted from the County's zoning decision, not from the proposed use by the owner in accordance with the zoning. Id., 108 Wn. 2d at 479, citing Kenart & Associates, supra, 37 Wash. App. at 302. The Neighbors' claims, which state in various ways the same proposition -- that the proposal should be denied or the number of units should be reduced because of impacts to North 50th Avenue -- warrant the same response. En zoning the subject parcel for the wide range of uses allowed in the B-1 zone, the City anticipated development at a level of density that necessarily would add traffic to North 50th Avenue, the only street providing access to the proposed development site. Thus, as in Nagatani Bros., the additional traffic on North 50`I' Avenue results from the City's zoning decisions, not from the Bicycle Apartments proposal, which complies in all respects with applicable regulations. Indeed, as the Hearing Examiner found, based on his post -hearing examination of supplemental evidence, the residential use represented by the Bicycle Apartments would generate less traffic than would be generated by some of the commercial uses permitted in the B-1 zone.21 n See Decision, Sec. VIII (12). Applicant 's Hearing Memorandum - 10 }CANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATP & DEC1NA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206.625.9951 • • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONCLUSION Both the Community Development Director and the Hearing Examiner have carefully investigated the Neighbors' complaints and correctly determined the proposed Bicycle Apartments Community complied with all applicable regulations. Neighboring business owners seek to undermine that determination by arguing the City "should have" or "could have" viewed the world as they do. These arguments are not persuasive. The Hearing Examiner's decision is supported by ample, indeed unrebutted, expert testimony in the record and a thoughtful analysis of the legal standards. The City Council should (a) confirm the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of the contingent condition and strike it from decision because the Applicant's response to the condition is unchallenged; and (b) affirm the Hearing Examiner's decision approving the Bicycle Apartments and deny the Neighbor's appeal. Respectfully submitted this 15th day of December 2017. Applicant 's Hearing Memorandum - 11 Kantor Ta or Nelson Evatt & Decina PC By . Amster • BA No. 8372 Attorneys for the Applicant, Next Step Housing LLC !CANTOR, TAYLOR, NELSON, EVATT & DECINA PC 901 FIFTH AVENUE SUITE 4000 SEATTLE, WA 98164 206.625.9898 FAX: 206.625.9951 NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER A Appeal Staff Report A-1 Appeal Staff Report 09/25/2017 ®o®�0®a PlannYing DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask. planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/seryices/planning CITY OF YAKIMA APPEAL OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL'S DECISION REQUEST FOR TYPE (2) AND SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE NO: APPLICANT: PROJECT LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: PARCEL NUMBER: DATE OF REQUEST: DATE OF COMPLETE APP: DATE OF DECISION: DATE OF APPEAL: STAFF CONTACT: APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC 118 N. 50th Ave., Yakima, WA Bicycle Apartments LLC 181321-41425 May 15, 2017 May 31, 2017 July 18, 2017 August 1, 2017 Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Type (2) and SEPA Environmental Review for a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of five (5) 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. II. FACTS: A. Processing: 1. The applications for a Type (2) and SEPA Review were received on May 15, 2017. 2. On May 24, 2017, the applications were determined to be incomplete due to missing or incomplete application requirements. 3. By May 31, 2017, all requested information was submitted and the application was deemed complete for further processing. 4. In accordance with YMC § 15.04.030 Table 4-1 Permitted Land Uses, the proposed multi -family residential development: 13+ dwelling units per net residential acre, is designated as a Class (2) Use in the B-1 zoning district which requires Type (2) Review in accordance with YMC Ch. 15.14. 5. Pursuant to YMC § 16.05.010, a Notice of Application and Environmental Review was sent to SEPA Agencies, parties of record, and adjoining property owners within 300 - feet of the subject property on June 6, 2017. The comment period ended June 26, 2017. The city received 42 comments which are further discussed herein. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 DOC. INDEX 6. The proposal was reviewed by the City's Development Services Team (DST) on June 6, 2017. 7. The Administrative Official issued a Notice of Decision on July 18, 2017, approving the request, including several conditions, and also including the SEPA Threshold Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS). 8. On August 1, 2017, a timely appeal was filed by James Adams, on behalf of Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses. 9. On August 24, 2017, a Notice of Appeal was sent to parties of record, the applicant, and the appellant that set the hearing date of September 25, 2017 at 2:OOpm. B. Hearing Examiner Authority: In accordance with YMC § 15.16.040, the Hearing Examiner may affirm or reverse, wholly or in part, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination, and to that end shall have all the power of the officer from whom the appeal is taken. III. FINDINGS: A. Appeal: The appeal provides the following statements: "The appeal is based on two issues. First, and foremost, the Administrative Official failed to consider the actual nature of N. 50th Avenue as a neighborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector. Second, the Administrative Official failed to recognize and mitigate the effect the size and height of the project will have on the neighborhood. As a result, the Determination of Non -Significance under SEPA and Decision are in error and should be reversed." Additional information from the appeal on the two points is summarized below (staff response in italics): 1. Traffic/N. 50th Avenue: a. Size and scope of project poses negative impacts on the traffic on N. 50th. Impacts can be mitigated by reducing the scope of the project or improving the infrastructure. The applicant submitted a traffic impact analysis conducted by Transportation Engineering Northwest that was reviewed and recommended for acceptance by the City of Yakima's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager. The analysis is based upon land use description and trip generation factors from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine vehicle trips and observations of traffic in the vicinity of the project as indicated in the analysis. The analysis concluded that the proposed 80 -unit apartment complex will not negatively impact traffic. City staff agrees with that conclusion. No contradictory traffic study or report has been provided by Appellants. b. N. 50th is a 30 -ft wide, two-way street with parking on both sides that is heavily used Monday -Friday. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 2 DOC. INDEX • • N. 50th Avenue is 32 -feet wide as measured from curb -face to curb -face. This width meets current standard. Additional street width is not required by the development standards of the City of Yakima. c. N. 50th Avenue is a neighborhood collector or hybrid neighborhood collector despite its designation as a local access street. It is paved 30 -ft wide. N. 50th collects traffic from businesses on its northern portion and from three cul-de-sacs and residential uses on its southern portion. It also collects traffic from Peachtree and Plum Lanes for traffic accessing Summitview. Because it is a neighborhood collector, N. 50th Ave is insufficiently paved. It is paved ten feet less than its necessary width of 40 -ft and is less than a residential access street of 32 -ft. N. 50th Avenue is not a neighborhood collector, nor is it a hybrid neighborhood collector (a category of street that does not exist in Yakima). YMC § 12.06.010 provides "The Yakima urban area comprehensive plan...designates the functional classification of the principal arterial, minor arterial and collector streets and establishes their functional classification. All other streets are classified as local residential access." N. 50th Avenue is not identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a principal arterial, minor arterial or collector, therefore it is a local access street. As a local access street it meets all development requirements regarding width and pavement. d. Traffic concurrency requires N. 50th to be improved to 40 -ft paved width. See above responses under subsections b and c. e. Traffic from the project will add 532 trips with 50 peak hour trips. This is in addition to traffic from existing businesses and residential structures. The Administrative Official failed to recognize the increased daily traffic as a result of the proposed 80 residences. Traffic generated from this project is anticipated to be 532 trips per day with 50 pm peak hour trips. As documented in the traffic impact analysis, all streets in the vicinity of this project have sufficient capacity to handle the additional traffic. The project was approved by the City Engineer for Transportation Concurrency on June 27, 2017. The Administrative Official recognized the additional trips generated from this project and concluded that there will be no negative impacts to surrounding streets. f. The on-site parking situation exacerbates the obvious inadequacy of N. 50th Ave. There is substantial use of on -street parking on N. 50th Ave. The Administrative Official recognized that apartment complexes result in a higher demand for on - street parking. The Administrative Official chose to wait until after the project is occupied to determine the appropriate mitigation measures. The project will create a problem, yet the Administrative Official chose to ignore. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 3 DOC. INDEX # A -I • g. As previously stated, N. 50th Ave. is not inadequately wide or inadequately paved. The development has the required number of on-site parking spaces for multi- family residential development. The analysis regarding on -street parking stated that apartment complexes often place additional demand for on -street parking and noted that any future issues would be addressed after development, if required. The Administrative Official did not choose to ignore the perceived problem. N. 50th Ave is a public street where on -street parking is allowed. If on -street parking becomes problematic after development, the issue will be addressed as -needed based on parking problems that actually occur. The traffic study did not appear to take into account the potential traffic of the nature of the residents. As the project will serve low income and homeless, it is likely that traffic in and out of the project will not be limited to just residents and employees. It is likely there will be service providers accessing the property. The parking standard for multi -family residential development with more than 10 units is 1.5 spaces per unit. The proposed 80 apartment units require 120 parking spaces, which are identified on the site plan. The nature of the future residents is not a factor in determining the appropriate number of spaces for a multi -family residential development. 2. Project size and height: a. The site is approximately 10-15 feet above the street level of N. 50th Ave. As a result of the building height and property, five buildings around the property will be 46-51 feet above street level of 50th and neighboring properties. The buildings should be reduced in height to reduce the negative impacts of the project on neighboring properties. The allowed building height in the 8-1 zone is 35 -feet. The applicant is required to meet this standard. Building height is measured from a referenced datum which is the elevation of the highest adjoining sidewalk or finished ground surface within a five-foot horizontal distance. There are no standards in the YMC that require vacant properties to be at -grade with a public street or an adjacent property in order to allow development. b. The size of the buildings and locations near property lines will impose significant barriers to sight and light, and negatively impact privacy. The buildings are required to meet all applicable setbacks, which include 0 -ft from the North, 20 -ft from the west and south, and 30 -ft from the centerline of N. 50th Ave. Per YMC § 15.05.020(D), "In the commercial districts, building setbacks provide visual clearance along streets and areas for sitescreening and landscaping." The Administrative Officials decision requires Sitescreening Standard "A" along all property lines and also requires an enhanced Standard "C" along the West and South property lines. The purpose of sitescreening is to "provide a visual buffer Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 4 13®C� INDEX • between uses of different intensity, streets and structures; reduce erosion and stormwater runoff,- protect property values; and eliminate potential land use conflicts by mitigating adverse impacts from dust, odor, litter, noise, glare, lights, signs, water runoff, buildings or parking areas. (YMC 15.07.010)" Standard "A" includes a ten -foot wide landscaped planting strip with trees at twenty -foot to thirty- foot centers, which includes shrubs and groundcover; Standard "C" includes a six- foot -high, view -obscuring fence made of wood, masonry block, concrete, or slatted chain link material (YMC § 15.07.040(A)). To further promote compatibility, the applicant provided in their written narrative "The architects are promoting aesthetic considerations in building design, using varying siding patterns and masonry wainscoting. They are also keeping the end of buildings at one- or two- stories, where feasible, to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures." c. The height of the project also creates a lighting or Tight glare concern. The Administrative Official's decision requires a photometric lighting plan in accordance with YMC § 15.06.100. All lighting is required to be downward shielded so that no light spills onto neighboring properties, further see sitescreening information above. B. Environmental Review: This project was concurrently reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). In accordance with YMC § 16.07.010, the SEPA Threshold Determination of Nonsignificance was incorporated as part of this Notice of Decision. The Notice of Application and Environmental Review stated that a building permit, clearing/grading permit, dust control plan, NPDES construction stormwater Permit, Type 2 and Site Plan Review are required as part of the application. Furthermore, the Notice of Application included a Determination of Consistency per YMC § 16.06.020(A) and (B). WAC 197-11-660(1)(e) states "Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federalrequirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant impact." The Administrative Official's decision includes 19 conditions, based upon local and state requirements, which mitigate potential adverse impact of the proposal. Per YMC § 6.88.170(F)(2)(a)(i)(d), "The SEPA determination of the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight, and the appellant shall bear the burden to establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provisions of this chapter." The appeal does not establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provision of YMC Ch. 6.88. IV. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Traffic/N. 50th Ave: As demonstrated by the Traffic Impact Analysis done by Transportation Engineering Northwest, which was reviewed and recommended for acceptance by the City of Yakima's Traffic Operations Manager, the traffic generated from the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the arterial street system. Furthermore, N. 50th Ave. is a Local Access Street, is 32 -ft in width, and does not require additional street widening. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 5 DOC. INDEX # ,I-) • • • 2. Project Size and Height: The proposed project is required to meet all applicable development standards, including 35 -ft maximum building height and setbacks. The applicant is also required to submit a photometric lighting plan. The Administrative Official appropriately conditioned the application to mitigate specific or general negative impacts of the development and ensure compatibility with existing neighboring land uses. 3. SEPA Environmental Review: SEPA Review was conducted concurrently with the Type (2) Review. A Determination of Nonsignificance was incorporated and attached to the decision. The appeal does not establish a violation under SEPA. V. RECOMMENDATION: Inasmuch as the proposed use is consistent with the B-1 zoning district, and based upon the above findings and conclusions, the City of Yakima recommends denial of the Appeal (APP#003- 17) and retention of the Type (2) and SEPA applications (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17). Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC APP#003-17, CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 6 DOC. INDEX �T_) • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#01.1-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER B Vicinity Map DOC MNIM�.� a Y fiID4CClMEN;T "' w?...k%;.m''s k. *" °A. }' .,'.. y yr A� }..a�;� ':Y 'S?w"d. l}� � 8, .3 ' '� � .. :.,s yF'r,' x• � �p V- El IR 4 ♦ 5+ B-1 Vicinity Map 05/15/2017 VICINITY MAP File Number: C128011-17 & SEPA801447 Project Name: Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments LLB Site Address: 118 N 508 Ave . , . . _ ......._ . . ,oirsin.iimorritiosiiiisitiiiiiiii...i,_,.i , SILL :" • Proposal: Pmposed 8ffunit affordable hciusing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. Contact the City of Yakima Planning Division at (509)575-6183 Map Disclaimer: Information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the user in reliance upon any maps or information provided herein, Date Created:5/15/2017 DOC. INDEX # 8-1 NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#00447 & A #... 47 L2 01147, S 1...41, APP#003-17 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER Site Plan NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER D DST Review & Agency Comments iN '��r�y �,,, \./ uu/ g,f J / / '.` � / , �V/ ` %��JM�J.•Tl? �y .5 5 �. /�.. .. � ryz�' y,�W ..,,rY`,�..,5 „//l`��""'%r ir t A Y; M / D-1 Comments from Carolyn Belles, Permit Project Coordinator 05/22/2017 D-2 DST Request for Comments 06/01/2017 D-3 Comments from Randy Meloy, Surface Water Engineer 06/01/2017 D-4 Comments from Dana Kallevig, Utility Project Manager 06/05/2017 D-5 Comments from Bob Desgrosellier, Senior Engineer 06/06/2017 D-6 Comments from Kirsten Ford, Nob Hill Water Assoc. 06/06/2017 D-7 Comments from Glenn Denman, Building Official 06/09/2017 D-8 Comments from Joe Rosenlund, Streets & Traffic Operations Manager 07/07/2017 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 2301 Fruitvale Blvd., Yakima, Washington 98902 Phone (509)575-6005 July 7, 2017 To: Joseph Calhoun, Supervising Planner From: Joe Rosenlund, Streets & Traffic Operations Manager Re: Bicycle Apartments Traffic Impact Study I have reviewed the traffic impact study for the Bicycle Apartments submitted by Traffic Engineering Northwest. The study used appropriate land use description and trip generation factors from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine the vehicle trips expected to be generated by this development. The expected 50 peak hour trips generated by the site should cause minimal impact to the existing developments abutting 50th Avenue. 40% of the projected traffic, 20 vehicles, are expected to use 50th Avenue to south of the development site past the residential development during peak traffic hours. The amount traffic to be generated by this development will not warrant the installation of a traffic signal at Summitview Avenue and 50th Avenue. A traffic signal is not desirable at 50th Avenue due to poor spacing from the more desirable location of Summitview Avenue and 48th Avenue and the lack of right-of-way to provide a left turn lane on Summitview Avenue. Although not addressed in the traffic impact study, speeding and parking have also been raised as issues related to the development. The mixed commercial/residential uses and the proximity to a fruit packing facility is the primary reason for the speeding issue on 50th Avenue. The Bicycle Apartment project may exasperate that problem but it would not be a primary contributor. Speed humps are already scheduled to be installed by the City this year along the residential portion of the roadway to help minimize the problem. Apartment complexes do often place additional demand for on -street parking. The problem is usually addressed after the development is occupied to determine the extent and possible mitigation measures if required. Any parking control measures introduced are likely to impact the existing adjacent land uses. All vehicle utilizing the available on - street parking would fall under the controls implemented. A benefit of higher parking densities is that it narrows the roadway thereby tending to keep vehicle speeds down. I recommend accepting the traffic impact study for the Bicycle Apartments as submitted. Administration 575-6005 • Equipment Rental 575-6005 • Parks & Recreation 575-6020 • Refuse 576§k , Streets 575-6005 • Traffic 575-6005 • Transit 575-6005 LIVo. INDEX # DJg COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Code Administration Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 Phone (509) 575-6126 • Fax (509) 576-6576 codes@yakimawa.gov • www. buildingyukima.com June 9, 2017 Joseph Calhoun City of Yakima Planning Division 129N2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Re: DST Comments: Bicycle Apartments CL2#011-17 Per Chapter 1 of the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), a licensed designer in responsible charge shall approve all submittals, including deferred submittals related to construction of this project. Per Chapter 4 of the IBC Washington State Amendments, infrastructure for vehicle charging stations is required to be installed for Group R-2 occupancies. Such infrastructure shall extend to parking spaces including accessible parking spaces as applicable, and shall be shown on the site plan prior to the issuance of building permits. Per Chapter 9 of the IBC, buildings will be required to be fire sprinklered in accordance with the applicable NFPA standard. Per Chapter 11 of the IBC, accessible parking shall be distributed among buildings evenly, and shall be located such that it is the closest available parking to building entrances. Accessible parking locations shall be approved prior to the issuance of building permits. Per Chapter 18 of the IBC, approved soil compaction reports will be required to be submitted prior to approval of footing inspections. Areas that will be receiving compacted fill will need to be shown on site plans provided by a geo-tech engineer prior to the issuance of building permits, and shall be approved by the designer in responsible charge. Fire flow for fire hydrant service is determined in accordance with the 2015 International Fire Code (IFC), Appendices B and C. For buildings constructed of V -B construction type, fire flow is 2000 gpm. Other construction types may reduce fire flow. Fire flow of 2000 gpm will require a minimum of (2) on-site fire hydrants. Additional fire hydrants may be required by the fire department depending on operational needs and site layout. Per Appendix D of the IFC, one fire department access is required to serve up to 100 units. Access and routing of access roads shall be approved by the fire code official prior to the issuance of building permits. Per chapter 5 of the IFC, the fire code official may require additional access, if needed. Appendix D aerial fire apparatus roads may also be required depending on roof heights. Yakima '11IU.` 2111S '0OC. I H Dia # n-7 • Per Chapter 9 of the IFC, the location of fire department connections (FDC) serving fire sprinkler systems shall be located within 50 feet of a fire hydrant. Per Title 10 of the Yakima Municipal Code (YMC), required hire hydrants shall be installed prior to the issuance of building permits. Civil designs for fire hydrant locations and onsite water mains will need to be approved by city engineering, fire, and codes departments/divisions prior to installation. Glenn Denman Building Official, City of Yakima i DOC. INDEX #_ NOB HILL WATER ASSOCIATION • 6111 Tieton Drive • Yakima, Washington 98908 June 6, 2017 City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N 2nd Street 2"d Floor — Planning Yakima, WA 98901 Re: 118 N 50th Avenue Phone: (509) 966-0272 FAX: (509) 966-0740 To Whom It May Concern, Nob Hill Water Association currently serves around this property. We have an 8 -inch PVC mainline that runs North and South on N 50th Avenue as well as an 8 -inch main stub out between 114 Plum Tree Lane and 121 Peach Tree Lane that is just South of this property that would be used to tie in a new mainline circuit. Nob Hill Water Association may require a higher level of backflow depending on new plumbing. We have not been notified at this time of any construction for this property. Nob Hill Water Association has the sufficient capacity and water rights to serve the property. Thank you, NOB HILL WATER ASSOCIATION Kirsten Ford GIS/ Engineering Technician DOC. INDEX • • DATE: June 6, 2017 TO: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager FROM: Bob Desgrosellier, Sr. Engineer; Acting Development Engineer RE: CL2#011-17 - 118 N 50th Ave Parcel #181321-41425 Next Step Housing - Bicycle Apartments LLC Project Description - Proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment building with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. This project requires Title 12 improvements, including but not limited to the following: Review of the site revealed physical problems with existing frontage features. YMC 8.64 - A new or modified commercial driveway approach, which meets the requirements of this chapter and standard detail R4. YMC 8.67 and 12.05 - Existing sidewalk along frontage that is unfit or unsafe shall also be repaired/replaced. New sidewalk shall be constructed per standard detail R5. (all sidewalk along 50th Avenue has been lifted by trees and must be replaced) New curbing shall be constructed per standard detail Rl. (all curbing along 50th Avenue has been lifted by trees and must be replaced) (all trees in "planting strip" must be removed as they have damaged sidewalk and curbing.) YMC8.72 - An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for all work within the public right of way. Prior to performing any work in City right-of-way under the excavation and street break permits the Developer and Contractor are required to meet on site to review and discuss the needs of the development with Engineering's Construction Supervisor and Inspector. Robert Desgrosellier - Senior Engineer (509) 728-3455 bob.desgrosel liergyakimawa.gov DOC. INDEX #D-3 • • • #7111 WitVta. 111 P IYOn YriS mo, n CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIVISION Project Name: Next Step Housing DST COMMENTS File Number: CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Note Type Note, Code Text CFe#teci, BY B99IP, DEcte DST COMMENTS Sewer is. ayailehte'0 50th /Aye'. Sewer for daPP•194evig@YO 0.0/P5/1?' proj5&edLdevelopketii1 wibein actiiiidance, klmewelgov with YMC. DOC. INDEX # D City of Yakima Engineering Memorandum Date: June 1, 2017 To: Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager From: Randy Meloy Surface Water Engineer Subject: CL2#011-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments 118 N. 50th Ave. Joseph, • As this project involves clearing or grading one acre or more, a SWPPP Permit shall be required from the applicant. The main submittals for a SWPPP Permit are: • Drainage plan(s) and calculations • Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control plan • Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan • Proof that the maintenance agreement was recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosivity Waiver (unless exempt). A copy of the SWPPP or Erosivity Waiver Certificate Statement shall be given to the Surface Water Engineer. The applicant is advised to read Chapter 7.83 of the Yakima Municipal Code to obtain all appropriate information concerning the Stormwater Site Plan and Chapter 7.82 for information concerning the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. DOC. INDEX UIC Registration - Stormwater In accordance with Chapter 2 Section 2.4 of the December 2006 edition of the Department of Ecology's Guidance for UIC Wells that Manage Stormwater Publication Number 05-10-067, Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells constructed on or after February 3, 2006 are considered new and must be registered with the Department of Ecology (DOE) prior to construction. A Construction Stormwater General Permit may be required from the Washington State Department of Ecology. The applicant should contact the Department of Ecology to determine if this permit is required. Due to recent changes by the Department of Ecology to the permit, Ecology will no longer accept paper copies of the "Notice of Intent for Construction Activity". Applicants should refer the Ecology construction stormwater web page at http'Wwww.ec"v..wa;.govlptogratiis/wqlstormwater/consfruction7enoi.Iitml. Randy Meloy Surface Water Engineer City of Yakima (509) 576-6606 • DOC. INDEX • • mom �oo� Planning City of Yakima Development Services Team Request For Comments June 1, 2017 To: City of Yakima Development Services Team From: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager Subject: Request for Comments Applicant: Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC File Numbers: CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 Location: 118 N 50th Ave Parcel Number(s): 1 81 321-41425 DST MEETING DATE: 6/6/2017 Proposal Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments is proposing an 80 -unit affordable housing community conisting of 5 3 -story aparment buildings and 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. Please review the attached application and site plan and prepare any written comments you might have regarding this proposal. This project will come up for discussion at the weekly DST meeting to be held•.June,Si 2017 at2:00,0:m: As always, should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend, please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My email address is joseph.calhoun@yakimawa.gov and the Planning Departments fax number is (509) 575-6105. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me at (509) 575-6042. Comments: Contact Person Department/Agency DOC. INDEX • • May 22, 2017 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Office of Code Administration 129 North Second Street, 2" Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 575-6126 Fax (509) 576-6576 codes@yakimawa.gov www.buildingyakima.com City of Yakima Planning Division 129N2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Re: DST Comments CL2#011-17 A City of Yakima General Business License must be obtained, prior to occupancy per YMC 5.52, if applicable. For first floor units, 100 series apartment numbers shall be used, 200 series apartment numbers for the second floor and 300 series apartment numbers shall be used for third floor units. Sincerely, Carolyn Belles Permit Project Coordinator DOC. INDEX • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER E SEPA Checklist E-1 SEPA Checklist 05/25/2017 • RECEIVED �,�®� ®�®® LAND USE APPLICATION MAY 1 5 2017 ("Tv OF VAKINIA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �/qt/e p� 129 i`ORTII SECOND STREP; f, 2ND I LOOR, VAKIMA, WA 98901 C`TY OF 1 �11�IlVla� Pt_a�;N::.,► DIV. PIIONE: (509) 575-6183 FAX: (509) 575-6105 t a 1 r'fiY Of Y4KtMA Panning INSTR(iCTIONS — PLEASE READ FIRST AND ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS COMPLETELY. If you have any questions about this form or the application process, please ask to speak with a planner. All necessary attachments and the tiling fee are required upon submittal. Filing tees arc not refundable. This application consists of several parts. PART 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION, PART I1—SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION, and PART III —CERTIFICATION are on this page. PART Il, Ill, and IV contain additional information specific to your proposal and MUST be attached to this page to complete the application. PART I — GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Applicant's Information: Name: Next Step Housing Mailing Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite 120 City: Yakima St: WA Zip: 98902 Phone: 1 ( 206 ) 850-1744 E -Mail: 2. Applicant's Interest in Property: Check One: E Owner 1 • Agent • Purchaser IIIOther 1 3. Property Owner's Information (If other than Applicant): Name: Bicycle Apartments, LLC c/o Next Step Housing Mailing Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite 120 City: Yakima 1St: tWA Zip:lg8902 Phone:: ( 206 )850-1744 E -Mail: 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 1 81 321-41 42 5 5. Legal Description of -Property. (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) Lot 5, Chestnut Grove Development, Section 21. Township 13N, Range 18E, W.M. City of Yakima, Yakima County 6. Property Address: 118 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA 7. Property's Existing Zoning: • SR • R-1 ❑ R-2 ■ R-3 0 B -I ■ B-2 ❑ RB • SCC 0 LCC ■ CBD 0 GC 0 AS ■ RD ❑ M -I • M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All That Apply) Ira Environmental Checklist (SEPA Review) ■ Administrative Adjustment • Type (1) Review O Type (2) Review ■ Type (3) Review 0 Binding Site Plan II Comprehensive Plan Text or Map • Critical Areas Review ■ Easement Release Amendment ■ Planned Development • Preliminary Short Plat ■ Preliminary Long Plat ■ Amended Long Plat • Rezone ■ Shoreline IJ Transportation Concurrency ❑ Other: ■ Other: PART II — SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION — SEPA CHECKLIST 9. Environmental Checklist (see attached forms) PART III —CERTIFICATION 10.1 cerci ly that t to inlur nation on this application and the required attachments are true and co No to 11 e best of my knowledge. As : ,41 i .51 dal. Prierty Own a ' )a lit /. (r Dale i9� it f - n e.®/lt „AI .4 Applieant'.t Signe re Date FILE/APPLICATION(S)# DATE FEE PAID: 5 1(51 c `--7 RECEIVED BY: �.,,, AMOUNT PAID: -Coe°° RECEIPT NO: C,/2-,(7-664 7)3'1 Revised 01/2017 Page 13 DOC. [INDEX • • DATE FEE PAID: RECEIVED BY: AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT NO: o m ti�� J,jt iN. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 6.88 P1 a n i hi A PURPOSE. OF CAECKLIST . ' " R... _ _ .. _ . _......_ - .• Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS. FOR APPLICANTS = = t :; _ --- _ This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it docs not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different answers to these questions often The checklist questions apply parcels of land. Attach any additional agency to which you submit related to determining if there information that will help you describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably may be significant adverse impact. USE00ECKLIST FOR- NONPROJE_CT PR_OPOSALS .: :.. _ . _ For non -project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B — Environmental Elements — that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. BACKGROUND NFORATIUNT.o;becmpletedUy ttie an.t) 1. Name Of Proposed Development (If Applicable): The Bicycle Apartments 2. Applicant's Name & Phone: Bicycle Apartments, LLC c/o Next Step Housing. 509.249.0390 3. Applicant's Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite 120 Yakima, WA 98902 4. Contact Person & Phone: John Mifsud, 206.850.1744 5. Agency Requesting Checklist: City of Yakima 6. Proposed Timing Or Schedule (Including Phasing, If Applicable): SEPA notification and building permits are expected to occur in May and June. Off-site improvements and phase 1 site work construction is expected to start in June of 2017 with building construction following. ��, 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected k Lbtlb htlaelf yes, explain: No. kilA r n-tL Revised 01/2017 J CITY OF Y AKIIVIA DIV. Page 14 DOC. INDEX • 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal: Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessment Report was prepared by BMEC, Aug. 2016. Geohazard Evaluation Report and Geotechnical Report was prepared by PLSA, April 2017. Traffic Study Report prepared by TENW, March 2017. Stormwater Drainage Report, SWPPP forthcoming during design and construction. A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION (To be, completed by the applicant.) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: The applicant is not aware of other such proposals. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known: City of Yakima infrastructure approvals for on -and off-site street improvements, building permits, and all ancillary approvals for multi -family residential occupancy. 11. Give a brief, but complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.): The proposal is for the construction of five (5) three-story, walk-up apartment buildings on a 2.98 acre parcel in Yakima, Washington. The buildings will include 10 three-, 29 two- , and 40 one -bedroom apartments, along with 1 four-bedroom Resident Manager's unit. Each building will have a laundry room attached. Building areas will total 81, 358 square feet with a total footprint area of 31,338 square feet. The site will have a 1,892 square foot community clubhouse incorporated into Building A that will include a meeting room, 4 offices and restrooms. These spaces will only be used by and for residents and staff. The site will include the required 120 parking spaces for the 80 total units, with actual resident parking expected to populate less than this required count. The site will also include a small playground with equipment for children, a 300 square foot Maintenance Storage Room, Trash Enclosure structures in three locations, and mail boxes for resident use. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist: 118 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA Parcel No. 18132141425 RECEIVE MAY 2 5 2C .,..4.11 LW` .. n . o Revised 01/2017 Pagel? 17 PLQN;'...i DIV. DOC. INDEX/ A B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS (To be completed by the applicant) Space"Reservedfor Agency Comments _ _ ., 1. Earth RECEIVE MI Y o 5 111' a. General description of the site (✓ one): flat ❑ rolling ❑ hilly ❑ steep slopes • mountainous ❑ other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 3%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The NRCS Soil Survey indicates silty loam soils. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no surface indications of unstable soils on the site or immediate vicinity. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 3 acres of site will be affected by earthwork and grading activities with an estimated 10,000 cubic yards of cut/fill. Imported fill is anticipated to consist of structural fill and crushed rock base course from local sources. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion, especially during construction, could occur on the site. Coffman Engineers will prepare an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan that will use Best Management Practices minimizing erosion potential according to the Yakima Regional Stormwater Manual. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious 'surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 60% of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During construction, erosion BMPs will include limiting disturbed areas on the site, stabilization measures such as hydros-eeding, mulching, and armoring where appropriate. Silt containment measures may include silt fencing, catch basin protections, interceptor swales, and rock construction entries per Yakima Regional Storm Water Manual requirements. Post construction erosion control will be provided by paving roads, pedestrian facilities, and driveways. Roadside swales will collect and control runoff from public streets. Parking areas will use a combination of sheet flow and catch basins directed to vegetated swales for treatment. Permanent landscaping and vegetation will also reduce erosion potential. Unsuitable and/or contaminated soils will be properly removed and disposed of according to Department of Ecology rules and guidelines. Revised 01/2017 7 Page J 6 TY OF YAKIMA ®v'ANNN) DIV. INDEX # E _t • • 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During construction, dust will come from clearing and grading of the site. Exhaust fumes will be generated by construction equipment. The necessary paving activities to complete new road and parking improvements will generate odors. The occupied building will increase local automobile emissions and HVAC operations normally associated with residential apartment complexes. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. The site is generally surrounded by single-family residential uses and offices. Off-site emissions or odors are not expected to have a significant impact on this development. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Vehicle emissions are regulated by a combination of Federal, State, and local regulations. All construction equipment and personal vehicles are required to maintain said regulations. During construction, the application will water the site and/or streets as necessary to control dust per Washington State Department of Ecology's Clean Air requirements. Residential activities such as bar-be-que and wood fires are also regulated by Ecology and will comply with such requirements. 3. Water a. Surface Water ENVIRONNTAL ELEMENTS (To be completed by'the applicant) "' `` : B. ME l' :Space Reserved for, .;'' `Agency Comments, 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including ycar- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. It appears that the current drainage patterns onsite consist of overland flow and some infiltration, with some water leaving the site along the west, south, and east borders. The proposed development's drainage design will comply with the Yakima Regional Stormwater Manual, consisting of infiltration facilities. FECEIV1 MAY 2 5 ; ,..-.r nv- .. ", 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredge material will be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands. Revised 01/2017 Page 17 D 017 1MA PLA"';N: au DIV. DOC. INDEX # • 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. FEMA Flood insurance Map (Panel No. 53077C1030D) indicates that the site is in the "Zone X" area and as such has been determined to have less than a 0.2% annual chance of flooding. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The development will not discharge waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn as a result of this proposal. Domestic sewer and water service will be provided by the City of Yakima. Some surface runoff may eventually infiltrate to groundwater after passing through treatment swales. 2. Describe wastc material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. The site will be served by public sewer. c. Water Runoff (including storm -water) ' B._ ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS (Tobe;;coinpleted tip the.applicant):' :. . " ; 1 _':`:• Space, Reserved,for. A:." • Agency •Comments I. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Generally, runoff from impervious surfaces will be conveyed to sub- surface infiltration galleries. The storage volume provided by the subsurface infiltration facilities will retain storm -water onsite. ������ MAY 2 5 20 CITY ROF YA nit 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Oils and other pollutants from vehicles could be introduced into the storm water runoff. Sediments, pesticides and fertilizers could also be introduced by runoff from impervious surfaces. As stated above, storm - water is treated by the bio -infiltration swales before entering the subsurface infiltration facilities. Revised 01/2017 Page 18 DOC INDEX 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site will be altered by this development. RECEIVE MAY 2 5 2(1 CITY OF VAGI d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: All storm drainage treatment will be designed to meet or exceed the requirements of the City of Yakima's adopted requirements. 4. Plants a. Check (✓) types of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous Tree: ❑ Alder ® Maple • Aspen ►1 Other Evergreen Green: • Fir ❑ Cedar ❑ Pine • Other ❑ Shrubs ® Grass • Pasture ['Crop Or Grain • Orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops Wet Soil Plants: ❑ Cattail ■Buttercup ❑ Bullrush ❑Skunk Cabbage ❑ Other Water Plants: ❑ Milfoil ❑ Eelgrass ❑ Water Lily ❑ Other ❑ Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The site has been previously developed and is now vacant. The majority of the site is covered in native and adapted dryland grasses, scrub brush, and weedy trees. The site will be cleared to prepare the site for construction operations. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, no threatened or endangered plant species are known to exist on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Proposed landscaping will utilize native and adapted species within the plant palette. Plantings will be drought tolerant and hardy to the region and will greatly enhance the appearance, biodiversity, and habitat qualities of the landscape. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, no noxious and invasive weed species are known to exist on the site. 5. Animals a. List any birds or other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Hawks and songbirds b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, no threatened or endangered animal species are known to exist on our near the project site. The site does not provide habitat conditions that would attract these animals. Revised 01/2017 Page 19 ©OC. INDEX # E-1 17 is ut • • B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS (To be completed by the. applicant) Space Reseived for Agency Comments c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yakima is considered to be part of a branch of the Pacific Migratory Flyway. This site does not offer significant habitat in the form of forage or cover to attract migratory birds. �/ E RECEIVE': MAY 2 5 201 CITY OF YAKIIiI P1 it,s ' 'i DIV d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Proposed landscaping is anticipated to provide better forage and cover that attracts birds. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. To our knowledge, no invasive animals are known to exist on the site. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed development's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be used for heating and/or cooling needs for future buildings. Electricity will support site lighting for safety. b. Would your development affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. e. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: At a minimum, buildings will comply with County, State, and Federal energy codes in effect at the time building permits are sought. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of Fre and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. There is the potential for construction equipment and personal vehicles to leak fuel, oil, or other fluids. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. There is no known contamination on the site. 2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. The applicant is unaware of hazardous chemicals or conditions that will affect development and design. Revised 01/2017 Page I10 DOC. INDr ' , • 3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Construction equipment will operate and be maintained so as to minimize the potential for leaks or spills. 4. Describe special emergency services that might be required. The applicant is unaware of specific special emergency services that will be required beyond those services typically provided for multi -family residential housing. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: No special measures, beyond those customary for this type of development, are proposed. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? There are no known types of noise in the area that could significantly affect the proposed development. It.'' ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS (To, be completed by'the applicant)'. -' ' ': :. ",Space Reserved for : Agency, Comments ,, • What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During construction activities, the use of equipment and construction activities will create temporary, short-term noise during regular business hours. The completed development will create additional sources of noise typical for apartment complexes. PiECEUVE MAY 2 ;� 20' CITY OF YAKIIV PLANN:':i3 DIV • Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction will be limited to normal construction hours during the. Noise impacts will be regulated by State noise ordinances. • Land and Shoreline Use o What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The site is currently vacant. Surrounding uses include single-family residential and offices. o Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? The site does not appear the site has been used for agricultural purposes in the recent past. Revised 01/2017 Pagel 11 7 DOC. INDEX # �-1 1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? No. o Describe any structures on the site. There are no existing structures on the site. o Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. o What is the current zoning classification of the site? B-1 (Professional Business) o What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? HD o If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A o Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? No. o Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed development? Assuming one person per bedroom, we estimate a population of roughly 130 people. o Approximately how many people would the completed development displace? None. B.' ENVIRONMENTAL EI:EMENTS(To-be comp , ' leted bg the applicant) Sae Reserved for...'.., ° Agency Comments o Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. N/A RECEIVED MAY 2 5 201 CITY OF YAK1M c,l . niv o Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed project will comply with the applicable provisions of the City of Yakima Comprehensive Plan, City Codes and Standards, agreements with the City, and applicable local, State, and Federal regulations. The applicant will coordinate with City staff to adopt specific design and development guidelines for site work, infrastructure, and buildings to implement applicable policies. o Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: N/A • Housing o Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 80 -units of low- and middle-income housing o Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. o Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A • Aesthetics Revised 01/2017 Pagc112 1 • o What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest building roof height is 36 feet above grade. Buildings will have cementitious lap and board and batten siding with some cast stone veneer. o What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No significant landmark views should be altered or obstructed from other surrounding properties. o Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The landscape of the space between the buildings will be designed to screen or block views as necessary. Street trees, frontage landscaping, and building landscaping will all have positive aesthetic impacts. • Light and Glare o What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The development will have site and building lighting that should not introduce glare due to luminaire and lighting layout design. o Could light or glare from the finished development be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Lighting will be minimized and shielded so avoid impacting off-site property or create glare conditions and safety hazards. o What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? The applicant is unaware of any off-site sources of lighting or glare that may have a significant impact on the site. o Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Street and pedestrian lights and building security lights will be shielded to reduce light trespass onto adjacent property and glare impacts. • Recreation ' B...ENVIRONMENTAL»ELEMENTS(To: be co`ii pleted'<by the applicant) ;'.:_ ` =°Space;Reseived for", 'Agency Comments. Amenity NameType Address Miles 1 Gilbert Park Park 5000 W. Lincoln Avenue 1.1 2 Randall Park Park 1399 S. 49th Avenue 1.4 3 Westwood Golf Course Golf 208 S. 72nd Avenue 1.1 4 Franklin Park Pool Park/Pool 2102 Tieton Drive 2.5 5 Yakima YMCA Gym/Pool 5 N. Naches Avenue 3.0 6 Lions Park Pool Pool 509 W. Pine Street 3.4 ;RECEIVE a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? See above. 2,52 Revised 01/2017 Page j 13 17 PLAN').:::.i nf�1 DOC. INDEX b. Would the proposed development displace any existing recreational uses? NO. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The site will feature outdoorpatios and pathways to serve residents and guests as well as a playground area with equipment suitable to school age children and toddlers. • Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. No known places or objects are listed on the National Historic Landmarks or Washington Information System for Architectural & Archaeological Records list on this site or adjacent properties. b. Arc there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. To the applicant's knowledge, no landmarks of evidence of significant historic archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance exist on or adjacent to the development site. c. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. If culturally or historically significant objects are found during site work, the Washington State Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation will be notified and appropriate measures taken. • Transportation a) Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will access 50th Avenue with one driveway access. Summitview Avenue to the north and W. Chestnut to the south serve as connecting arterials. b) Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Public transit is available on Summitview Avenue with bus stops in either direction within 1 block of the Bicycle site. c) How many parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? 120 spaces will serve residents and guests. No parking will be eliminated. Revised 01/2017 Page 114 MAY 25?Oil CITY OF YAKiE,-o PLA::; ; 0IV DOC,. INDEX d) Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Minor frontage improvements to the existing sidewalk will be necessary per City of Yakima requirements. c) Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No, the development will not use and is not located within the immediate vicinity of water, rail, or air transportation. B . ENVIRONMENTAL' ELEMENTS (To'be`completed by:the applicant) : ' ;` .. Space, Reserv. ..enc Comeents .': , Ag y merits f) How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Per the Traffic Study Report prepared by TENW, the development will generate 532 weekday trips, 50 during the Weekday PM Peak Hour. Please see the Traffic Study for additional information. ,,, ECEVVI MAY 2 5- 2 g) Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? No. h) Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: All parking will be designed to meet the City's standards. The applicant will pay taxes, transportation impact fees, and costs for road improvements normally associated with this type of development. - • Public Services a) Would the development result in an increased need for public services (i.e.: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: The project will increase demands for standard public services due to increased population. b) Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The increase in intensity of on-site development will see a proportional increase in fees and property taxes which will provide new sources of revenue for public services. • Utilities a) Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, b) Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity — Pacific Power Water and Sewer— City of Yakima Cable/Internet — Spectrum Refuse Service — Yakima Waste Systems Telephone/Internet — Century Link and/or Spectrum Revised 01/2017 Page j 15 D Oil Gfl"Y AKINIt. f LAN1?;'.vr" DIV DOC INDEX #�1 • • • C. SIGNATURE (Te be eo®peeted by the applicant) The above answers are true and cumplett to the beat (Amy knowledge. 1 understand that the lead agency is relYingon them to make Its decision. . 1..t41 5'21; 17 $. Property Owner or. "ent Signature Date Submitted John Mifsud Executive Director, Next Step Housing Name of Signee Position and Agency+Organization PLEASE COMPLIcIE SECTION "D" ON -THE Ne .PAGE- tE THERE IS NO PROJECT RELATED TO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL RI VI V Re‘iscd01 `fi+7 Page lh RECEIVED MAY 2 3 2017 CITY OF YAKIlvit, P'LA?N:t+G DIV DOC. INDEX • D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (To be completed by the applicant.) (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) __. Space Reserved For Agency Comments Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities that would likely result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish. or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Revised 01/2017 Pagel 14 ©®C. INDEX CITY OF YAKIMi # _ 1 PLANN: +i3 ens. ED MAY p 5 2017 • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER F Applications RDOGyys:,< .�/p"*'r='/ .'1�1`l'flti.',dr�sitG r ;;;may% •'$' F %� ./9�i �%N /'� ✓.l.�ir,.,ijr"Fi�Y j "..'«r'� i � :�,��`...� A, E ,5 a` 1 *'v +%yi':: F-1 Application for Transportation Capacity Analysis 05/15/2017 F-2 Land Use Application for Type 2 Review 05/30/2017 7`$m°`® LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF YAKIMA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTM.4Y 1 t- ll zn 17 — - 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, YAKIMA, WA 98901 CITY OF YAKIMA PRONE: (509) 575-6183 FAX: (509) 575-6105 PLA:WIING DIV. 1 s,,rY Of YAKIMA ng INSTRUCTIONS — PLEASE READ FIRST AND ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS COMPLETELY. If you have any questions about this form or the application process, please ask to speak with a planner. All necessary attachments and the filing fee are required upon submittal. Filing fees are not refundable. This application consists of four parts. PART 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART V — CERTIFICATION arc on this page. PART 11, 111, and IV contain additional information specific to your proposal and MIDST he attached to this page to complete the application. PART 1— GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Applicant's Information: Name: Next Step Housing Mailing Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite 120 City: Yakima St: WA Nip: 98902 Phone: ( 206 )850-1744 E-Mail: 2. Applicant's Interest in Pro ert p y: Cheek One: © Owner 0 Agent ❑ Other IIPurchaser 3. Property Owner's Information (If other than Applicant): Name: Bicycle Apartments, LLC c/o Next Step Housing Mailing Address: 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suite 120 City: Yakima St: WA 7..ip;198902 Phone: ( 206 ) 850-1744 E-Mail: 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 181321-41425 5. Legal Description of Properly. (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) Lot 5, Chestnut Grove Development, Section 21, Township 13N, Range 18E, W.M. City of Yakima, Yakima County 6. Property Address: 118 N. 50th Avenue, Yakima, WA 7. Property's Existing Zoning: SCC AS • SR • R-I ■ R-2 ■ R-3 0 B-I ■ B-2 ■ I-1B ■ ■ LCC ■ CBD • GC ■ ■ RD ■ M-1 ■ M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All two or Title That Apply) Administrative Adjustment Critical Areas Review Checklist (SEPA Review) 0 Type (2) Review 0 0 Environmental 0 Transportation Concurrency Master Application (select if submitting Q more applications under 15) 0 9 Other: 9. PART II — LAND USE DESIGNATION PART 111— ATTACHMENTS INFORMATION (See attached page) PART IV — WRITTEN NARRATIVE (See attached page) PART V — CERTIFICATION 10.. certify that the information on this application and t. i .1,_14 ' el 40 the required attachments are true ind correct to the best of my knowledge. 1519: Pro rhe Owner's Si},naturreedr le/1111 / , I' � � .' Date �/- j .'T' C/ / q ;%,'r:7.7..',4:' pplicant's Si�nati rc ...2--#. /, 1 Date FILE/APPLICATION(S)# 1 — DATE FEE PAID: RECEIVED BY AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT NO: Revised 03/2017 04 C. Parc 13 INDEX # FoZ . • 421, s ®®®" Supplemental Application For: Ate AI ZAN. TYPE (2) REVIEW «z YAKIMA URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 15.14 CITY OF YAKIMA Panning RPCIFIVFD PART Il — LAND USE DESIGNATION AS LISTED ON TABLE 4-1 PERMITTED LAND USES 1. PROPOSED LAND USE TYPE: (See YMC § 15.04.030) MAY 3 0 2017 Multifamily Dwelling (*): 13+ DU/NRA PART III - ATTACHMENTS INFORMATION CITY OF YARIWDi 2. SITE PLAN REQUIRED: (Please use the City of Yakima Site Plan Checklist, attached) Q�-a''' ` :t DIV. 3. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY: (if required, see YMC Ch. 12.08, Traffic Capacity Test) 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: (if required by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act) PART IV - WRITTEN NARRATIVE: (Please submit a written response to the following questions) A. Fully describe the proposed development, including number of dwelling units and parking spaces. If the proposal is for a business, describe hours of operation, days per week and all other relevant information related the business. The Bicycle Apartments LLC will be an 80 unit affordable housing community sustainably constructed on a 2.98 acre parcel. It will consist of five (5) 3 -story walk-up buildings with 120 parking spaces (1.5 per unit). The location is excellent for amenities with a major bus line just a half block away. Four schools are within 1.5 miles. Banking, medicaUdental, groceries, retaurants and retail options are within walking distance. There will be an On -Site Resident Manager and an On -Site Assistant Resident Manager who will live on the property and be available to residents 24/7. During business hours, there will be an additional 1.5 FTE's providing On -Site Case Management Services. All residents living with special needs will come fully service - enriched from local referring partner agencies. A community clubhouse is planned to provide a range of social, recreational and educational programming for residents including weekly support groups and monthly independent living skills trainings. A Community BlockWatch Program will be facilitated by the Yakima Police Department that will include residential and commercial neighbors. B. How is the proposal compatible to neighboring properties? The residential use in this proposed community is consistent with neighboring zoning (R-3 to the south and R-1 to the west). Because the Bicycle Apartments will have 10 three, 30 two, and 40 one -bedroom apartments, it will house an equal number of predominantly small families as well as 40 single adults. The Bicycle will have a 40 -unit mix of general purpose housing and another 40 -units of housing for families and individuals experiencing situational homelessness. It will not house the chronic homeless. The main office for Community Living is directly across the street. Community Living is a service provider subcontracted by DSHS DDA and they will be referring and providing services for 12 high functioning, DD individuals at the Bicycle. Services will be most convenient because of the proximity location. The Bicycle will also be an Alcohol & Drug Free Community (ADFC) confirmed by random UA and Breathalyzer testing. All applicants will have to demonstrate one year of contiguous sobriety verified by a third -party before moving in. Anyone who is involved with substance abuse of any kind is given just one right to remedy and then asked to relocate. Next Step Housing has 26 years of experience with ADFC's. Because over 60% of all violent crimes in Washington State are drug and/or alcohol related, The Bicycle Apartments will be safer than most communities where alcohol is allowed. There is a professional childcare center next door that will have increased customers. New customers will also come to the adjacent banks and medical/dental offices. Revised 03/2017 • • C. What mitigation measures are proposed to promote compatibility? The 10 large family units & a playground will be on the NW corner, near the adjacent childcare center. Most one -bedroom units will be next to existing single family and senior housing to the south and west to increase quiet. The architects are promoting aesthetic considerations in building design, using varying siding patterns and masonry wainscotting. They are also keeping the end of buildings at one- or two -stories, where feasible, to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures. The site will have attractive landscaping throughout and a fence along the south and west property lines is planned to increase security and establish boundaries with neighbors. The Neighborhood BlockWatch Program will also be a blessing to neighbors, both residential and commercial. D. How is your proposal consistent with current zoning of your property? Current zoning is B-1, allows Multi -Family Residential as a permitted land use with Administrative Review. Land to the south is currently zoned R-3, consistent with the use intended in the proposed community. E. How is your proposal consistent with uses and zoning of neighboring properties? Surrounding zones to the south and west are residential, with an R-3 zone located immediately south. The proposed community borders the B-1 zones to the north and across 50th Avenue to the east, providing a transition from residential to business uses. F. How is your proposal in the best interest of the community? The Bicycle will provide direly needed housing & amenities for a mix of special needs populations. It will relieve 10% of Yakima's homeless families with children problem. It addresses many identified needs in the Yakima Consolidated Plan 2015-2019; the Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan 2025; the Yakima 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness and the 2015 Yakima County HOME Consortium's Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Report. Note: if you have any questions about this process, please contact us City of Yakima, Planning Division — 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA or 509-575-6183 Revised 03/2017 RECEIVED MAY 3 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA.^'.::Hi 3 DIV. DOC. IND Page 15 RECEIVED MAY y 5 2017 SITE PLAN INSTRUCTIONS CITYOfYAKIMA In Order For Application To Be Determined Complete, A Site Plan Must Be Completed And Subrhtfhtt.1�''t OIV A Detailed Site Plan Is Required: On August 6, 1996, the City Council passed a resolution (No. R-96-91) adopting a requirement that all site plans submitted with any City of Yakima building permit application, land use application, and environmental application must contain the following information listed below and be acceptable by the appropriate division manager. All information that is applicable to your proposal shall be checked off and clearly displayed on the site plan. It is in the applicant's best interest to provide a carefully drawn and scaled site plan with all the required information. The decision on whether or not to grant approval of your development proposal is largely based on the information you provide. An application cannot be processed until an adequate site plan is submitted. Note: You may benefit from the aid of a professional in the preparation of a site plan. 1) Use ink: Use blue or black permanent ink. It may be helpful to draft the site plan in pencil then trace over in ink. Ink is necessary for adequate duplication. Computer drafted site plans are acceptable. 2) Size of Paper: The site plan shall be legibly drawn in ink on paper of sufficient size to contain the required information, but not less than 8.5" X I I" for Type (1) Review and 11" X 17" for Type (2) and Type (3) Reviews. 3) Use A Straight Edge: All lines must he straight and done with the aid of a ruler or other straight edge. Use a compass when delineating circular drawings such as cul-de-sacs. 4) Drawn to Scale: All site plans shall be drawn to a standard engineering scale and indicated on the site plan. The scale selected shall best fit the paper. The recommended scale shall be: 1 "=20'. For example, if the distance from a structure to a property line is 20 feet, then the distance on the site plan will be I inch. 5) Use Site Plan Checklist: Use the site plan checklist and provide all applicable information on the site plan. 6) Fill In Information On The Site Plan Template Available At The City Of Yakima Or Attach The Information Below To Your Site Plan: Complete all information requested on the bottom of the site plan template. if you use a different medium, provide the requested information on the alternative paper. DETAILED SITE PLAN CHECKLIST Please complete this checklist and include it with your site plan. The site plan must contain all pertinent information. items not applicable to the proposed project shall be noted. Check all boxes as: included or - Not Apulicable J Name, address, phone number, and signature of the owner or person responsible for the property. / Site address, parcel number(s), and zoning designation ✓ Property boundaries and dimensions 7 Names and dimensions of all existing streets bounding or touching the site Dimensions, location and use of proposed and existing structures ✓ Structure setbacks ✓ North Arrow 0 Lot coverage with calculations shown on site plan. (YMC § Ch. 15.05.020(C)) ILocation and size of any easements ✓ Location and type of existing and proposed landscaping including landscaping within the public right-of-way ✓ Location and size of existing and proposed side sewer and water service lines ✓ Adjacent land uses and zoning designations ✓ Location and size of all parking spaces with the parking calculations shown on the site plan 4 Location and dimensions of proposed or existing driveway approaches. ✓ Vision clearance triangles at street intersections and at driveways. Clearview Triangle — YMC § Ch. 15.05.040 ✓ Curb cuts intersecting with streets EJ Location and size of new or existing loading spaces and docks ✓ Location and size of proposed or existing signs (YMC § Ch. 15.08) ✓ Location, type, and description of required sitescreening (YMC j Ch. 15.07) J Location and size of required site drainage (facilities including on-site retention. / Location, size and surfacing of refuse container area / Location and size of existing or proposed public sidewalks that are within 200 -feet of the subject property. ✓ Proposed improvements located within the public right-of-way. ✓ Calculation of land use density Note: Planning Division or Reviewing Official may require additional information to clarify the proposal, assess its impacts, or determine compliance with the Yakima Municipal Code and other laws and regulations. Revised 03/2017 DOC' Page 15 ON©" # r4/'' • • City of Yakima, Washington TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY ANALYSIS The Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.70) requires all new development to be consistent with the existing or planned street system capacities. The City of Yakima adopted YMC Ch. 12.08 to implement this local requirement. The information you provide with this application will be used to estimate the impact of your development upon the PM Peak Hour traffic on the City of Yakima arterial streets. APPLICATION INFORMATION FEE: $250 (Receipt #,(', A"1'1)° 61 •) Project Address: 118 N. 50th Avenue Applicant Name: Bicycle Apartments, LLC Contact Person: John Mifsud Mailing Address: 2900 Powrhouse Rd., Suite 120 Yakima, WA 98902 Parcel No(s): Yakima, WA 181321-41425 RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL Housing Type' Multi -Family Apts. (Single -Family, Apartments. etc) Special Population' Low income (Nursing Homes. etc) Other' (Group Home, Daycare, Church, etc) Number of Units 80 "Uses musi match up ivtth YMC Ch. 15.04, Table 4-! Describe Use' Gross Floor Area Parking Spaces (Required/Provided) Number of Employees Describe Use' Gross Floor Area Parking Spaces (Required/Provided) Number of Employees Project Description: The proposed community with provide 80 -units of multi -family housing with a 40 -unit mix of general purpose affordable housing and another 40 -units of housing for families and individuals experiencing situational homelessness. It will be an Alcohol and Drug Free Community with on-site Case -Management services. Submit this form with a site plan, the application fee, and any attachments to the City of Yakima, Permit Center, Yakima City Hall, 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. You will receive a Notice of Decision explaining the Findings of the resulting analysis. Please review the Decision when it is sent to you, as you only have 14 days to file a Request for Reconsideration or an Appeal. Questions? Contact the City of Yakima, Planning Division, 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 - (509) 575-6183 Revised 01/2017 RECEIVED MAY 1 S 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLS:% DIV. Page 12 DOC. INDEX iomSt a i '%. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Ar o'�,M® Planning Division Receipt Number: CR -17-004339 P anning 129 N 2nd St. (2nd floor) Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-6183 / www.buildingyakima.com / Payer/Payee: NEXT STEP HOUSING 2900 POWERHOUSE RD #120 YAKIMA WA 98902 Cashier: JULIA CRUZ Payment Type: CREDIT CARD Date: 05/15/2017 CL2#011'17; ' • PLANNING:- CLASS 'r2 REVIEW. 118,N'50TH AVE Fee Description Class 2 Review CL2#011-17 TOTALS: Fee Amount Amount Paid Fee Balance $430.00 $430.00 $0.00 $430.00 $430.00 $0.00 SEPA#014-17 ;' . PLANNING - SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW •W . 1.181N.SOTH AVE. Fee Description SEPA Environmental Review TCO#008-17 SEPA#014-17 TOTALS: Fee Amount Amount Paid $265.00 $265.00 Fee Balance $0.00 • PLANNING TRAFFIC'CONCURRENCY 118' ;N50TH AVE REVIEW ...• .' Fee Description Traffic Concurrency Review TCO#008-17 TOTALS: TOTAL PAID: $265.00 $265.00 Fee Amount Amount Paid $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $0.00 Fee Balance $0.00 $0.00 Transaction Summary Trans:Code 001 8952217 001 8954503 141 8954506 'BARS#° 001.8952217 001.8954503 141.8954506 Amount: Due' $265.00 $430.00 $250.00 $945.00 Printed 05/15/2017 15:06:00 by Julia Cruz $945.00 DOC. INDEX Page 1 of 1 • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER G Public Comments o OCA u INDEbX # k" :° DO ®UMENT}` h Bid � i 4 1 � ��, �'. - w ATE G-1 Email Comments from Tom Lovell 05/25/2017 G-2 Comment Letter/Petition from Property Owners 06/06/2017 G-3 Email Comments from Bill Almon Jr. 06/06/2017 G-4 Ron & Claudia Burkhardt 06/08/2017 G-5 Email Comments from David & Gloria Tufts 06/08/2017 G-6 Comment Letter from Mike & Mary Lee Edgar 06/12/2017 G-7 Email Comments from Tom Lovell 06/12/2017 G-8 Comment Letter from Barbara Brantingham 06/12/2017 G-9 Comment Letter & Supporting Attachments from David Mahoney 06/19/2017 G-10 Comment Letter from Leslie Shaw 06/20/2017 G-11 2nd Comment Letter from Barbara Brantingham 06/21/2017 G-12 Comment Letter from Christine Karau 06/22/2017 G-13 Comment Letter from Janice Lyon 06/22/2017 G-14 Email Comments from Leo & Shirley Holzer 06/22/2017 C-15 Email Comments from Jacalyn Holzer 06/22/2017 G-16 Comment Letter from David Robins on Behalf of the Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners' Association 06/22/2017 G-17 Email Comments & Letter from Connie Simon 06/23/2017 G-18 Email Comments from Robin Gamache 06/23/2017 • G-19 Email Comments from Bill & Connie Conklin 06/23/2017 G-20 Email Comments from Nancy Ramsey 06/25/2017 G-21 Comment Letter from Attorney James Adams on Behalf of Property Owners 06/26/2017 G-22 Email Comments from Don & Debby Morgan 06/26/2017 G-23 2"d Comment Letter from Janice Lyon 06/26/2017 G-24 Email Comments & Letter from Clark Permann 06/26/2017 G-25 Comment Letter from Pete & Lynn Nathe 06/26/2017 G-26 Email Comments from Dave & Karen Belzer 06/26/2017 G-27 Comment Letter from David & Joanne Newman 06/26/2017 G-28 Email Comments & Letter from Terry Kline on Behalf of Roger & Dot Kline 06/26/2017 G-29 2"d Comment Letter/Petition from Property Owners 06/26/2017 G-30 Comment Letter from Tom Lovell 06/26/2017 G-31 Comment Letter from Adrienne Quinnell 06/27/2017 G-32 Comment Letter from Mina Worthington on Behalf of Solarity Credit Union 09/22/2017 • LAMV CREDIT UNION Gary Cuillier Hearing Examiner Board of Appeals of the City of Yakima 314 N. 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 RE: Bicycle Apartments Project - Support for Neighbor Appeal (City File No. APP#003-17) Dear Mr. Cuillier: Public Services (ts) SEP 202017 Vern_Cary Don ` Lynn Harold_`_Li saCarmen I am the President and CEO of Solarity Credit Union that operates a branch at the northeast corner of the proposed Bicycle Apartment project. Please consider this letter as Solarity's support for the appeal filed by Attorney James Adams on behalf of the neighbors. Solarity's principal concerns relating to this project are the impact on traffic, parking and • the neighborhood directly raised in the appeal. Specifically, Solarity is extremely concerned that the project's size will result in traffic and parking impacts limiting convenient access of our employees and customers to the Bank. The City did not appear to recommend any conditions which would improve traffic flow and parking along 50th Avenue (no street widening, no signals, no turn lanes, etc.). Other than a project denial, it appears the only condition that would help would be to reduce the size and scope of the project. While Solarity supports the applicant's goal of providing affordable housing to our community, as currently proposed and conditioned, Solarity is concerned that the adverse impacts on the neighborhood will outweigh the social benefits. Additional conditions to improve traffic flow and parking should be imposed. Mina Worthington President/CEO cc: Gary Kissling, Chairman of the Board of Directors •olaritYcu.org • 509.248.1720.800.347.9222 P.O. Box 2922, Yakima, WA 98907 RECEIVED SEP 2 2 2017 CITU OF YAKIMA PLkIN]: DIV. DOC. INDEX # • • • June 24, 2017 Joseph Calhoun, Manager City of Yakima Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Reference: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 Dear Mr. Calhoun, I am a neighbor in the Chestnut Grove senior community next to the proposed low housing/homeless housing project on North 50th Avenue. I am very troubled by some concerns about the location being INCOMPATIBLE to this neighborhood. How can FIVE 3 -STORY Buildings with 120 parking spaces fit in a neighborhood with small one level homes? How will the privacy of those located behind these apartments be protected? Should they have to suffer the loss of their privacy in backyards and homes to accommodate this project as they certainly will with the height of 3 -story apartments. How can the road, which is already used single -file by the businesses next to Summitview Ave, support all the extra car traffic? Also with only one entrance and exit to the proposed project, that will just cause more congestion and safety issues. This development is NOT COMPATIBLE with our neighborhood. Our tax dollars (city grant, state grant, and 12-14M of federal tax credits) should not be used to support this development, which is against city policy and ultimately devalues our property. Thank you for hearing my concerns. Sincerely, acif,cceL -vgz Adrienne Quinnell 104 North 50th Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 RECEIVED JUN 2 7 2017 CffY OF YAKIMA 11.e,,A;v DIV. DOC INDEX # G3? 1 Joan Davenport, AICP EICITY OF YAKIMA CODE !\,_-r✓11N.DIVISION Community Development Director 'V.JUN26201l City of Yakima ❑ RECD f AXED❑ PAID FYI ❑ • In a recent news article, you were quoted (on the Roy's Market development) "the neighbors certainly have the issues of compatibility and consistency with the zoning district. 1 too, have issues with the compatibility and consistency of the Bicycle Apartments with Goal 3.3 of the Yakima Area Comprehensive Plan: 1. Scale -This project will "tower" over the adjoining neighborhoods and the professional, almost all of which are single story.....The proposed lot is 6-8 feet higher than street level and will adversely impact properties to the west and south, making these structures almost as high as 4 - story structures. Plan indicates 1-2 feet of dirt removal 2. Density -27+ units per acre, with limited access and egress will only add to the bottleneck that already exists on N. 50`h Ave. Inadequate sight clearances will create hazardous conditions for motorists, pedestrians and children. This development has the potential to have 200+ residents, including children, and a potential to have 1-1 and a half cars per unit. With the bottlenecks occurring daily on N. 50`h Avenue, traffic from this proposed development will naturally flow south through our quiet, 55+ neighborhood to Chestnut. And, even though we disagree on the interpretation of high-density developments being sited so as to not create traffic issues in adjoining lower -density developments, this is exactly what will happen, whether it is zoned B'1 or not Mitigation issues that could be discussed - An offset cul-de-sac that would prevent traffic flow from encroaching on S. 50`h Ave. A gate at south end of property across 50`h Ave. Reduce size of project, so that 3 -story buildings are not an option. Bicycle Apartments will create traffic and safety issues, not only for their residents, but for the entire neighborhood...Mitigation issues may be costly and unachievable at this site (Ref. Chapter 6.88.160.c2,e.1c, f & 2) Therefore, I support denial of the application. I/g-2 AL SorNA) DOC. INDEX • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: C_La� I o1!-/7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. o Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their rd and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood Inas always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the `Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: L � 1 CL G- v =) Name: Address: t20 N 2nd Address: yO‘(w-CtkCi 0 e RECEIVED JIJN 2 F} 2017 CITY OF YAKII1A PLA: I-.1 , DIV. PLA!!!.:3 DOC. INDEX r "�q • • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: i i� CLa c�11�7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the" Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons... was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created... and have long maintained... a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • " Bicycle Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 3r1 story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the" BicydeApartments" as proposed. Name: "fes a"$. (1 — Name: Address: \ 0 ,�9 Address: RECEIVE® JUN 2 0 201? CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX June 21, 2017 )-(L cLa#1/-1? To Whom It May Concern: As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the" Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 506 Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex justoff Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homdessper sons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • " Bicycler Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 3'" story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the" BicydeApartments" as proposed. Name: f � ` /i% (v Name: Address: 1 ;, 'l 7/ c" Address: RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA FLASuN::110 DIV. DOC. INDEX # !7x2.°7 • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: CZa#011-1-7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the " Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homdesspersons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created... and have long maintained... a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • " Bicycler Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their god and 3"a story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the" BicydeApartments" as proposed. Name: v' """ v _ Name: Vox\ Address: l'?ri )" (Ave) Address: RECEIVED JUN 2 G 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA:� DIV. :�l L: 4� DOC. INDEX # G �q June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the" Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created... and have long maintained... a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • " Bicyder Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°" and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of orivacv! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the" BicydeApartments" asproposed. Name: Address: r km9 Name: S?arn 0j-112 Address: fECEVVED JUN 2C2017 CITY OF YAKI MA PLA:';:VoI3 DIV. DOC. INDEX G-o2q • • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the" Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units forty of than for homeless persons... was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created... and have long maintained... a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • " Bicycler Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 314 story roosts. We resent the less of orivacv! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial securitv! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the" BicydeApartments" as proposal. Name:2(/L4 M.ev'�cV `--- Address: 1/-3 Name:-,4von Address: //S A. Sd'`' — �-- RECEIVED JUN 32017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV, DOC. INDEX # • • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: aL,Q#011--7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the `Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50`h Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. o Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! O "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2"d and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! o Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! m Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the "Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: C✓ ., �.1 �� vi ; ., t Name: IivM, =_— Address: (Z 3 /U S Address: \ 1) . c )a P. RECEIVED JUN 2(32.01? CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX • • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50tb Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! o `Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2' and 3' story roosts. We resent the loss of orivacv! • Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well -beim;! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the `Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: (~� ce Name: Address: /2,,5 aV ,5 �i�• —ZAddress: A25.So24 Q s� RECEIVED JUN 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX #G -a1 • • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: CLa#Otl-l7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! o "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2nd and 3rd story roosts. We resent the Toss of privacy! O Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the "Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: crEA,v-Vasw/ Address: N .G2 ' \V Name: Address: RECEIVED JUN 2 13 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA":rZ°Cid DIV. DOC. INDEX # G-ao June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: C1_fO/1--17 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. O Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! O "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! o Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! O Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the `Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: Opo Address: 120 A% Si • Name: Address: RECEIVED JUN 2 32017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLVEDIV. DOC. II DEX # G a1 • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: CLQ O [/ -17 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 3rd story roosts. We resent the Toss of privacy! o Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! e Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the "Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name:5° .04010,,,A. Name: Address: II l.7 bD.k f sJ' . Address: l a ki v Cl" k Ceq°10 RECEIVED JUN 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLAP<ii, G OIV. DOC. INDEX June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: aLa#o/t-/7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 506 Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. O Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! O "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2"d and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! O Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! • Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the "Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: Address: 5/1/4.11- • ty-d-vw60-, 1� Name: JaePiy/t % I of Address: nECEIVED JUN 2 c; 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANN2e0 DLIV. DOC. INDEX # G-01 • June 21, 2017 To Whom It May Concern: CLaOt-1-/7 As adjacent homeowners, we are writing to express our explicit and deeply -felt OPPOSITION to the "Bicycle Apartments," proposed for development at 118 North 50th Avenue. The notion of adding a multi -story complex just off Summitview Avenue for eighty units...forty of them for homeless persons...was poorly conceived and is outrageously designed. This project will negatively impact the homeowners who created...and have long maintained...a friendly, serene community for decades. • Traffic problems related to this dwelling would turn the vicinity into an auto -clogged mess of congestion. We protest the inevitable chaos! • "Bicycle" Residents will be able to intrude upon our intended seclusion from their 2°d and 3rd story roosts. We resent the loss of privacy! O Allowing people with severe mental health and drug -addiction problems in this neighborhood will inevitably increase the rate of misconduct and lawbreaking. We fear for our safety and well-being! o Our pleasant neighborhood has always attracted prospective home owners in search of a secure home site for their families. This project will emphatically diminish the value of our most valuable asset: our home. We boldly resist this affront to our financial security! For these and other reasons, we oppose and will challenge future development of the "Bicycle Apartments" as proposed. Name: Address: /// /V So 44 ,9 Lt Name: ;44" Address: RECEIVED JUN 2 G 201? CITY OF YAKIMA PLANN:!'40 DIV. ©OC. IND # G a1 • • Maxey, Lisa From: Calhoun, Joseph Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 8:14 AM To: Maxey, Lisa Subject: FW: CL2#011-17 Attachments: letter to city.docx Joseph Calhoun From: Terry Kline [mailto:Terrykline@charter.net] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 7:49 PM To: Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Cc: 'Andy Kline' <andy@klinellc.com>; dotkline@gmail.com; dennisk@klinellc.com Subject: CL2#011-17 Mr. Calhoun, Please find letter attached on behalf of Roger and Dot Kline. They would appreciate and further information as it becomes available concerning setbacks and layout of buildings. Thank you, Terry Kline on behalf of Roger and Dot Kline 1 DOC. INDEX # C7 a8 • • City of Yakima Planning Division Re: CL2#011-17 Dear Mr. Calhoun, My name is Roger Kline and I live at 135 N.52nd Avenue, in the development called Cascade Vista. My property boarders the West side of the proposed new Bicycle Apartments where I have lived for 45 years. I have lived in the Yakima Valley since 1955 and was the owner of Kline Construction until my retirement in 1989. We gave our input when the property was rezoned for the Monahan family to build the condominium development that currently exists on the South end of 50th avenue and adjacent to the new proposed development. They were receptive to our wishes to leave the existing trees along the north edge of the property for "sound control" from Summitview avenue, Kinder Care child care center and the Credit Union that is between there. There are also many birds and wildlife that call those trees home, and I would think that they would enhance the area for any new residence as well. Looking at the rendering of the proposed complex, it appears that the trees are to be left in place and we hope that it is designed as so! Another concern would be not to create a traffic problem at the intersection of 50' and Summitview. On our major arterials in Yakima we have a serious lack of left turn lanes that have caused far too many accidents from stopped traffic and lane changes caused by the stopped traffic. A simple left turn lane added so as not to impede the traffic flow would most certainly be welcomed and justified when the plan is to add 100 or more new cars to the traffic load of that intersection. From the rendering and site plans provided so for, the project seems to lend itself well to the site, and softens the look verses 5 square block buildings. We welcome the powers that be to take a "weedy lot" and create living spaces that we will all be proud of. It seems that if this project is done well, it would be for the betterment of all concerned and our City of Yakima! Roger and Dot Kline RECEIVED JUN 2 $ 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLAN "":1 DIV, DOC. INDEX #G02g • ty 1/215. Jae - 4., RelitiktiNGA ,) L( (77 '.... f 1 ,t CC C (7 7 t f 0 rLJ 'I d —4 t 1,1 c r re / \ 0 HUMANE SOCIETY LEGISLATIVE POND* 1236 23rd strut. WW. Suite 459 Washington, DC 20032 www.heltdrg 4400 4 Pet from vour loca.fta ocavo rho eof a Comskess anima RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANN14!.1 DIV. DOC. INDEX #G-27 • • • Maxey, Lisa From: Dave/Karen Belzer <belzer3b@charter.net> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 10:50 AM To: Ask Planning Cc: belzer3b@charter.net Subject: Proposed housing development on 50th avenue and Summitview To: Joseph Calhoun, Yakima Planning From: Dave and Karen Belzer (4931 Apple Blossom Ct) My wife and I have owned a unit in the Chestnut Grove neighborhood for 16 years. We enjoy the peaceful environment and the ability to take walks on the available sidewalks. While traffic has increased over the years with the development of the businesses at the north end of the street (50th), it is still reasonably quiet for a residential street. We are concerned about the proposal to put very high density apartments in the large lot just south of Summitview. First, such housing in both scale and design will very likely be incompatible with the existing single story units to the south of this area. As such, it does not appear to comply with the Yakima Comprehensive Plan as cited in Section 3.3.2. Perhaps our larger concern is the increase in traffic and congestion this development likely to cause. The businesses at the north end of the street already generate more traffic than would a residential zone. The access from 50th onto Summitview is already problematic at some times during the day, as Summitview is a very main arterial in the city. The increased flow of vehicles in and out of this proposed development is likely to create marked congestion in this part of the street. We would expect to see a significant increase in traffic on the south end of the street, as drivers looked for an alternative route to avoid the congestion near Summitview. Please consider our concerns as this proposal is being evaluated. Our understanding is that this property has been slated for residential development for many years. Our concern is that density and style of this specific proposed development is incompatible with the current neighborhood and may significantly and adversely impact the residential environment that Chestnut Grove residents now enjoy. Thank you. Dave and Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct. 1 DOC. INDEX # Gac�_ • Yakima Smiles 119 North 50th Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 www.yakimasmiles.com 509-965-7909 June 26, 2017 Dear Mr. Calhoun, This letter is to address our deep concerns about the proposed Next Step Housing — Bicycle Apartments to be located @ 118 North 50th Avenue which is directly across the street from our dental practice. This development makes it extremely unlikely that we will be able to sell our office building at the appraised value (a real estate agent has informed us to expect a 40% or more decrease in property value) but more importantly will make it virtually impossible to sell our actual dental practice. This will have a devastating financial effect on us, since we are nearing retirement and had planned for the proceeds of these sales to fund our retirement. We totally understand that the property is zoned for this project and that the financial effects to the surrounding businesses and properties are not the direct concern of the planning department. We do, however, argue that the city MUST follow its own written policy (Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2) and in doing so, help mitigate the financial damages that this low income/homeless project will inflict. Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood The plans for this complex are NOT compatible with our neighborhood of small buildings in scale, size, density and aesthetic quality. While we recognize the need for low income housing and the city's extreme desire to approve this complex, we maintain that the city must also protect our property value by enforcing its OWN policy. RECEIVED JUN 2 ,� 2017 CITY OF YAKIM PLAN:i DIY. DOC. INDEX # G025..�. 411 Please establish strict conditions that must be met by Next Step Housing prior to issuing approval: • Limit the building to 2 stories (a 36 foot building on a 12 foot rise would be a monstrosity in our small neighborhood and is very unfair to the surrounding one- story home and business owners). • Require that the building be set further back off the property line to compensate for the height of building and rise of property (in addition to limiting complex to 2 stories). • Require mature landscaping to shield neighbors • Widen 50th Avenue — it currently does not have the capacity to handle the increased traffic. Even allowing 40 units will turn this into a collector type of street and necessitates widening the street. • Limit density to 15 units per acre due to the limited capacity of the neighborhood to absorb additional density. • Install a traffic light on 50th and Summitview Avenue for safety and flow. The difficulty of making a turn onto Summitview Avenue is already an issue and this development will dramatically compound the problem. • Before making any street parking determinations, note that businesses in the neighborhood require street parking to survive (number of parking spaces follow code but business models change over time). Please require that a portion of the federal, state and city funding amounting to more than 14 MILLION dollars be used to mitigate damages to the surrounding neighbors who supplied this funding with their tax dollars! Sincerely, Pete Nathe DDS Lynn Nathe RECEIVED JUN 202017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA; :>,f viu DIV. DOC. (NOV� '/T • Maxey, Lisa From: Permann, Clark <clp@fmiwealth.net> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 12:48 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Next Step/Bicycle Apartments - Public Feedback/Comments Attachments: calhounletter fmi.docx Mr. Calhoun, Please see the attached letter about the above proposed project on our street. We have many reservations and have spoken with many residents and business owners on the street. There is a great deal of concern. Thank you for reading the attached letter and I hope that you can see this from our perspectives and as if you were living or working on 50' Ave. Sincerely, Clark Permann President/Financial Management, Inc. 1 DOC. INDEX • Financial Management, Inc. 119 North 50th Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 www.fmiwealth.net 509-965-5654 June 25, 2017 Dear Mr. Calhoun, rECEIVEC JUN 2 , 2017 CITY OF YAKIM,' DIV We have been located on 50th Ave. for some time and have been the beneficiaries of all the downwind debris cleanup from the proposed lot of Next Step Housing — Bicycle Apartments to be located @ 118 North 50th Avenue which is across the street from our offices. While the $500 per year we pay to cleanup the leaves and tumbleweeds are a nuisance, that is minimal in comparison to the concern we have with the proposed rezoning and developing of this property with taxpayer funds into something that is completely different from the standards and expectations that the other property owners were held to in the past. Besides being taxpayers, property taxpayers, receiving no public assistance of any kind, and contributing heavily to the economic base of the community, we are now being asked to allow a development to come in and create an atmosphere that would make it very hard to sell our building for more than 60 cents on the dollar. 1 don't know any professionals that will want to locate across from the proposed development and I might have to walk away from the loan and loose it all together....that doesn't help anyone. I have spoken with the neighbors and seniors that live here and they are all opposed...with the exception of a few businesses that just don't care or will benefit from tax credits or increased business revenue. Our neighbor has lost two sales already on their building.... with one giving up the down payment after finding out about the project. Aren't there rules and regulations that apply to all? There is plenty of land around the county that would have very little immediate impact on neighbors and businesses like this would. Congdon's have tons of land near Walmart that would be fine. I understand that the regulations are to "ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood"....regardless of other tax benefits or perks that developers are trying to get and hand around to service organizations. DOC. INDEX # G o7q • Did you know about the soil testing issues and the railroad tracks there? Have they looked into the effect of small children right across the small fence at Kinder Care? Aren't we endangering the seniors that live next door to this project with potential criminal activity? The plans for this complex are NOT compatible with our neighborhood of small buildings in scale, size, density and aesthetic quality. While we recognize the need for low income housing and the city's extreme desire to approve this complex, we maintain that the city must also protect our property value by enforcing its OWN policy. Please establish strict conditions that must be met by Next Step Housing prior to issuing any type of decision: • Limit the building to 2 stories (a 36 foot building on a 12 foot rise would be a monstrosity in our small neighborhood and is very unfair to the surrounding one- story home and business owners). • Require that the building be further set back off the property line to compensate for the height of building and rise of property (in addition to limiting complex to 2 stories). • Require mature landscaping to shield neighbors • Widen 50th Avenue — it currently does not have the capacity to handle the increased traffic. Even allowing 40 units will turn this into a "collector" street and necessitates widening the street. • Limit density to 15 units per acre due to the limited capacity of the neighborhood to absorb additional density. • Install a traffic light on 50th and Summitview Avenue for safety and flow. The difficulty of making a turn onto Summitview Avenue is already an issue and this development will dramatically compound the problem. • Before making any street parking determinations, note that businesses in the neighborhood require street parking to survive (number of parking spaces follow code but business models change over time). Please require that a portion of the federal, state and city funding amounting to more than 14 MILLION dollars be used to mitigate damages and guarantee property values to the surrounding neighbors who supplied this funding with their tax dollars! Please don't let them completely change our neighborhood and livelihood....we would be willing to come together and buy the property just to save what we have already built and created in this area...and maintain the conditions and covenants that we have all adhered to and would expect enforced. Thank you, • RECEIVED JUN 2G2017 CITY OF VAKIIVIA PLAN;4,7eG Olv DOC. INDEX # G -/ • Clark Permann President/ Financial Management, Inc. qECEIVED JUN 202017 CITY OF YAK&,� {4LAi�Cik,�,3 CIV DOC, INDEX # • Date: May 27, 2017 To: Joan Davenport, Community Development Director Yakima Planning Commission 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Re: North 50th Avenue Housing Development Project RECE NEED JUN 2;2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA! As a member of the local community, living in the Chestnut Grove retirement condominiums, I am writing to express my substantial concern regarding the proposed construction of the 86 unit low-income housing development planned for North 50th Avenue, on the land across from Farmers Insurance. I feel strongly that this complex is a negative addition to the local community. While there are many countless reasons I believe this is a poor choice of location for this facility to be built, some of the most paramount reasons are: • Adverse impact due to length construction development • Substantial quality of life impacts on a quiet senior living community, due to large increase of children and youth • Decrease in local resale opportunities and property values • Significant concerns with local parking due to the increase in complex residents, visitors and unauthorized guests • Congestion, negative environmental impact and traffic problems off of 50th (including impacts to adjacent Chestnut and Summitview) • Increase in crime, vandalism, trespassing, and other safety-related issues • Poor access/egress for fire and law enforcement concerns (one entrance off 50th) This planned development is a detriment to the local community and I don't believe this will create a positive living and business environment. While there may be some moderate positive impacts, I feel strongly that these far outweigh the benefits of building a complex such as this in this area of Yakima. If you feel this housing complex is needed in Yakima, I hope you will seriously consider constructing it in an alternative location of Yakima, where it will have less of an undesirable community impact. Sincerely, {'Jan Lyon, Concerned ocal Resident DOC. INDEX # G� • Maxey, Lisa From: Don Morgan <casa5329@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 5:01 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Next step Don and Debby Morgan 81 Cake Box Lane Clc F,lum, Washington 98922 Junc 26, 2017 Dear Mr. Calhoun, We are writing to express some concerns regarding the Next Step Housing development proposed to be built at 118 North 50th Ave. We own a dental building across the street from the proposed facility and are concerned about the decreased value of our property and the difficulty of selling it. Additionally we are concerned about increased traffic on a narrow street, availability of street parking, interruptions to businesses during the construction phase, increased difficulty turning left off 50th Ave onto Summitview, and that by looking at the plans from Next Step the density appears to be quite high. It also appears that the plans do not meet the same standards that we were all required to meet. For example we were required to have tile roofs, no T-1 siding, a specific amount of green space and we were even required to plant flowering pear trees along the sidewalk. Our understanding is that the city of Yakima Policy 3.3.2 was enacted to ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood. We are hoping that this policy will be followed in determining the requirements for this development, particularly since a very large amount of public/taxpayer money will be used. It seems quite unfortunate and unfair to use taxpayer funding to help one segment of the population while jeopardizing another. It is our hope that comprises can be made to the plans to ensure a good outcome for both segments affected. We certainly are aware that there is a tremendous need to help families in need; however we are hoping that this can be done in a manner that does not negatively impact those of us who already own property in that neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Don and Debby Morgan 1 DOC. ® X #G-2. • GARY R. LULOFF, PC JAMES K. ADAMS PHILIP W. WAGNER, Retired WAGNER, LULOFF & ADAMS Attorneys at Law A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 2010 W. Nob I lilt Blvd., Suite 2 YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98902 June 26, 2017 Joan Davenport, AICP Community Development Director City of Yakima Department of Community Development 123 N. 2" " Street Yakima, WA 98901 RE: CL2#001-79 and SEPA#014-17 118 N. 50" Avenue Yakima County Assessor's Parcel No. 181321-41425 Dear Ms. Davenport: TELEPHONE (509) 248-5010 FACSIMILE (509) 248-4970 EMAIL WL.AmWLALAW.ORG Melia R. Franck, Legal Assistant CITY OF YAKIMA CODF ADMIN.DIVISION J I i N6;%i.! 1 i' D REC'VD FAXEDD PAID FYI D 1 represent Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses. They own land in the immediate vicinity of the project identified above. My clients have requested that I provide written comment on their behalf concerning the project proposed for the property identified above. My clients understand that a development of this nature is permitted in the zoning district in which it is proposed. My clients applaud the efforts of the developer, Next Step Housing, to serve the under served members of our community. However, they have deep and genuine concerns about the scope of the project and the obvious impacts on the neighborhood and neighboring properties. Their primary concerns are with the environmental, aesthetic and traffic impacts of the project. Site and Site Plan The site is approximately 10-15 feet above the street level of N. 50' Avenue. The site is consequently 10-15 feet above the properties to the east, south and west. The site plan shows five (5) buildings on the parameters of the property. The locations of the buildings, as proposed, are at or near the set back lines of the properties. The buildings are three (3) stories and will be 36 feet above grade. Consequently, the actual height of the buildings will be approximately 46 to 51 feet above the street level of 50" Avenue and neighboring properties. DOC. INDEX # Ga_ • The size of the buildings and their locations on the set back lines of the property will impose significant barriers to sight and light. In addition, the close proximity of the buildings will negatively impact the privacy of the persons and property to the south and west. The obvious solution is to reduce the overall height of the project. The buildings should be reduced in height and moved father from the actual property lines. These solutions would reduce the negative impacts of the project on neighboring properties. The solutions would protect the privacy of the neighbors and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. The project would not be so overbearing on the neighborhood. The height of the project relative to the surrounding properties also creates a lighting or light glare concern, specifically for the residential properties to the south and west. Parking and parameter lighting is designed to point down. With lighting as high as 50 feet, there will be no ability to deflect the light away from neighboring properties. In addition, there will be light generated from the interiors from two and three story buildings and directed out and over the neighboring properties. The impact of the size of the buildings and the light that will be generated by the project must be investigated. The aesthetics of the neighborhood, the privacy of neighbors and the night time glare of lights generated by the project, unless mitigated, will seriously and negatively impact the neighborhood. Traffic Concurrency The size and scope of the project also poses significant negative impacts on the traffic on N. 50' Avenue. These impacts can only be mitigated by reducing the scope of the project or improving the infrastructure. North 50`'' Avenue is only thirty (30) feet wide in its paved portions. It is two-way parking and is allowed on the east and west sides. My clients advise me that on -street parking is heavily utilized Monday -Friday. YMC 12.06.020 sets forth pavement width standards for streets in Yakima. Residential access streets are to be paved to a width of 32 feet. Neighborhood collectors are to be paved to a width of 40 feet. North 50" Avenue is a neighborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector. It is certainly more than residential access street. Yet, it is paved to 30 feet wide. This condition causes traffic congestion and safety problems. First, 50' Avenue collects traffic from several businesses on it northern portion, including a credit union. Credit unions are obvious high traffic businesses. Located on the north portion of N. 50th Avenue, these businesses collect and deposit traffic onto arterials, primarily Summitview Avenue. Second, 50' Avenue collects traffic from three cul-de-sacs emptying their traffic onto 50`'' RECEIVED DOC. INDEX JUN 2 J 2017 ` va` ,LITY OF YAKIM# • Avenue to use either W. Chestnut Avenue to the south and Summitview Avenue to the north. Each of the cul-de-sacs serves six residential buildings that do not front 50"' Avenue. Third, it is obvious that N. 50' Avenue would collect traffic from Peachtree and Plum Lanes for traffic accessing Summitview Avenue. This is especially true of traffic traveling east to the downtown of Yakima. Because of the status as a neighborhood collector, N. 50"' Avenue is insufficiently paved. It is paved ten feet less than its necessary width of 40 feet. It is even paved less than a residential access street. Traffic concurrency requires that N. 50" Avenue be improved to 40 feet in paved width. This is made necessary by the additional 80 residences for which N. 50''' Avenue is their only access to the arterials of Summitview Avenue and West Chestnut Avenue. Traffic using N. 50" Avenue as a result of this project will increase by 532 trips with 50 during peak hours. This is in addition to the traffic from seven (7) businesses and 34 residential structures using N. 50`'' Avenue directly. It is easy to conclude that traffic will nearly double on the inadequately paved N. 50"' Avenue as a result of the proposed project. The on-site parking situation exacerbates the obvious inadequacy of N. 50"' Avenue. By way o f illustration, I have attached an aerial photograph to these comments. It has been previously provided by my client, David Mahoney. The aerial photograph illustrates the inadequacy of the paved portion of N. 50"' Avenue. The photograph was likely taken on a weekend as can be seen by the lack of cars parked at the businesses. ( It is likely a Saturday, given the parked cars at Solarity Credit Union) The picture depicts the obvious difficulties for two-way traffic to negotiate N. 50"' Avenue with cars parked on the street. As I said, my clients report that there is substantial use of on -street parking on N. 50`' Avenue. Doubling the traffic that will be using N. 50th Avenue will create a dangerous and intolerable condition. It is obvious that N. 50th Avenue is inadequate for the traffic and parking it handles presently. A potential of the doubling of traffic as the result of the project creates an untenable situation. Finally, the traffic study did not appear to take into account the potential traffic of the nature of the residents. As the project will serve low income and homeless, it is likely that traffic in and out of the project will not be limited to just residents and employees. It is likely there will be service providers accessing the property. In conclusion, my clients are not opposed to the project. However, the impacts of the scope and nature of the project do not appear to have been considered nor have there been measures to mitigate these impacts. DECEIVED JUN 2 0 2017 ©OC, CITY OF YAKIIVIA INDEX ent # C7-,721 JUN 2 13 fl17 CITY OF VAICIWA 11A: LW DOC. INDEX • • • Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, please Peel free to call. JKA/rnrf Enc. cc: Clients Sincerely, WAGNER, LULOFF & ADAMS, P.L.L.C. Jai ies K. Adams RECEIVED JUN 2 6 2017 CITY OF YAKINIA PLANN::, 01V. DOC. INDEX # aI • • Maxey, Lisa From: Nancy Ramsey <nramsey1019@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:19 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Reference: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 Dear Mr. Calhoun, I am very concerned that the proposed development of low income/homeless housing on North 50th Avenue has several potential problems that make it NOT COMPATIBLE in this location. I am a senior citizen living in the Chestnut Grove Association right next to where this development would be built. First I worry that if there were a huge fire in that FIVE building 3 -STORY complex or any other catastrophe, with only one way in through a narrow driveway, could Fire Trucks and/or Ambulances safely enter to handle the situation. Also if said catastrophe were to occur, could 160+ residents safely and easily exit the enclosed complex? Also North 50th Ave between Summitview Ave and West Chestnut Ave already has a lot of traffic and is especially congested by the businesses (right where the complex exit would be). Right now it is single lane through that area because cars are currently parked on both sides of the street. Turning left on Summitview is nearly impossible most hours of the day. With 120 parking spots(cars?) shown in the developers plans and added traffic such as visitors and services, the street was not designed to handle that much traffic. How can a 3 -STORY with FIVE BUILDINGS be COMPATIBLE with small 1 -STORY condos? The privacy issue alone is huge. These buildings will overlook private residences that are located behind the apartments, looking right into their windows and backyards. Certainly those homeowners have a right to their private areas. According to the plans, the buildings appear to be very close to the property lines. With the type of housing and especially the added number of people living in that small area, I am concerned that crime will also increase. The development is simply NOT COMPATIBLE with our neighborhood of small, one story buildings. Our tax dollars (city grant, state grant AND 12-14M of federal tax credits) should not be used to support this development, which is against city policy and ultimately devalues our property. Thank you Mr. Calhoun, for taking my concerns into your consideration. Sincerely, Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct. Yakima, WA 98908 1 Doc. INDEX # �� • 1 • Maxey, Lisa From: Conklinconnie <conklinconnie@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 4:22 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Chestnut Grove over 55 Condominiums and the Next Step project 50th Ave. My husband and I, Bill and Connie Conklin (3948 Cherry Park Court) are requesting that you protect our property values and rights as tax payers by following he city's own policy, "Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood." The Next Step Bicycle Unit development plan is not compatible with our neighborhood . I have visited the Next Step housing and know that it does not meet the above requirements. Three story units on an already elevated piece of land and the dense population that will be there again does not meet the above policy. Sent from my iPad 1 DOC. !INDEX • s • Maxey, Lisa From: robin <robing2@charter.net> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 1:55 AM To: Calhoun, Joseph; Maxey, Lisa; Davenport, Joan; Adkison, Maureen; Coffey, Kathy Cc: Tom Lovell Subject: CL2#011-17,SEPA#014-17, Next Step Housing, Parcel 181321-41425, 118 N. 50th Ave., Yakima WA PURPOSE The following is in response to the May 30, 2017 application for Type (2) and Environmental Review filed by Next Step Housing regarding the proposed development of parcel number 181321-41425 at 118 North 50th Avenue in Yakima, Washington as an 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of five 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 on site parking spaces. CITY CODE Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 requires the developer to "ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE IN SCALE, STYLE, DENSITY, AND AESTHETIC QUALITY TO AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD". Numerous statements (described below) in the Type (2) Review and in the Environmental Review application file numbers CL2#011-17 and SEPA#014-17 show that the development, as proposed, does not meet the requirements of Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2. FAILURE TO MEET CITY CODE WITHOUT ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL IN REFERENCE TO TYPE (2) REVIEW PART IV -B, which asks, "How is the proposal compatible to neighboring properties?", the applicant states "this proposed community is consistent with neighboring zoning (R-3 to the south and R-1 to the west)". However, the CURRENT ZONING MAP CLASSIFIES PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE AS R-2 (NOT R-3). All properties to the south are occupied by 1 or 2 adults age 55+, and R-1 properties to the west are all small, single family homes. The entire established community has a very low population density. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO HOUSE 200+ RESIDENTS in five 3 -story buildings, a population density that is OVERWHELMING AND INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE LOW POPULATION DENSITY OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. For example, 2 adults per apartment in 80 apartments would be 160 adults with a conservative estimate of 50 children (in 10 3 -bedroom and 30 2 -bedroom apartments) yields a total of 210 persons (not the 130 person estimation of the applicant) housed in 27 units per acre on a relatively small 2.98 acre parcel. TO MEET THE ABOVE CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPATIBLE DENSITY, THE APPLICANT MUST PROVIDE MITIGATION OF THE EXTREME POPULATION DENSITY GRADIENT between the established low density R -1/R-2 neighborhood and the proposed 80 -unit high density housing community. Said mitigation can be provided by LIMITING THE ELEVATION OF ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES TO NO MORE THAN 2 -STORIES; thereby, reducing the population density to a more compatible level. IN REFERENCE TO TYPE (2) REVIEW PART IV -C, which asks, "What mitigation measures are proposed to promote compatibility?", the applicant states that the architects are "keeping the end of buildings at one- or two -stories, where feasible, to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures." So, THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS AND ADMITS THAT ONLY ONE- OR TWO-STORY BUILDINGS ARE SPATIALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE ESTABLISHED ©®C. INDEX #G -IS i NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL existing structures are one- or two-story small, single family homes or small footprint commercial buildings. It is incumbent upon the applicant TO MEET THE ABOVE CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPATIBLE SCALE AND PROVIDE MITIGATION OF INCOMPATIBLE BUILDING ELEVATION BY LIMITING ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES TO NO MORE THAN 2 -STORIES. Page 2 IN REFERENCE TO TYPE (2) REVIEW PART IV -E, which asks, "how is your proposal consistent with uses and zoning of neighboring properties?", the applicant again describes residential properties in "an R-3 zone located immediately south" of the proposed development site, but it has been established that current zoning to the south is R-2, not R-3. The high population density in five 3 - story buildings with 27 units per acre is NOT CONSISTENT WITH AND NOT COMPATIBLE WITH the small, low density single family homes located to the south and west of the proposed development site. TO PROVIDE MITIGATION OF THE EXTREME POPULATION DENSITY GRADIENT between the existing low density R -1/R-2 neighborhood and the proposed 80 unit high density community, and to MEET CITY CODE BY ENSURING "THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE IN ... DENSITY" , the applicant must LIMIT ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES TO NO MORE THAN 2 -STORIES; thereby, reducing the population density to a more compatible level. ADDITIONAL CONCERNS IN REFERENCE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST SECTION 6-B, which asks, "Would your development affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties?", the applicant denies any such affect on adjacent properties. However, the proposed, spatially incompatible, 3 -story buildings would shadow and overlook neighboring one- and two-story buildings PRECLUDING THE USE OF SOLAR ENERGY by many of the adjacent properties, as well as, PRESENTING AN UNACCEPTABLE INTRUSION ON PRIVACY throughout the established neighborhood. City code requires site screening which is difficult to accomplish for a 3 -story building. The reduction of proposed development building height to 2 -stories would make site screening more successful and reduce shadowing allowing the "use of solar energy by adjacent properties". On site parking could be insufficient. Many of today's low and middle income households have 2 cars. The 120 on site parking spaces must accommodate the potential 160 adult residents (see the above Part IV -B description) plus staff and visitors. AS MANY AS 40 OVERFLOW VEHICLES MAY BE PARKED ALONG NORTH 50TH AVENUE in addition to the on street parking that already occurs during business hours. This is another population density incompatibility, and traffic flow would be reduced to a single lane in some places. With the expected generation of an additional 532 weekday trips (see Environmental Checklist Transportation Section) and an increase in on street parking, it will not be possible for traffic to flow smoothly. The small neighborhood roads are not equipped to deal with the impact of this greatly increased, bottlenecked traffic. We will experience TRAFFIC SAFETY PROBLEMS, and potential dangers for the children in the proposed development. Although on site parking is described as 120 spaces, the site plan drawing seems to show about 100 parking spaces. A postcard from Next Step Housing with a detailed drawing of the completed housing project also seems to show only about 100 off street parking spaces. Hmmm. A ladder truck attempting to control a 3 -story building FIRE would encounter congested traffic, a single driveway access/egress, and tight quarters in the proposed development parking area. This safety issue would be mitigated by limiting the elevation of all new structures to 2 -stories or less. DOC. 2 INDEX � g • The YPD has provided requesteu statistical information on similar NsH projects in Yakima that indicate 3X the number of police calls as compared to the existing neighborhood on North 50th Avenue. Business property sales on North 50th Avenue have failed when buyers learned of the proposed development plans. Valued friends/neighbors have sold their homes and are leaving the neighborhood. All of these people know the in -fill development, as proposed, will present scale and density compatibility problems, and they have voiced concerns about other problems as well. Page 3 NEW NEIGHBORS WELCOME Despite how it may sound, I am not entirely opposed to the development of Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments. I believe that communication, cooperation and compromise can help us find ways to mitigate incompatibilities in population density and building scale and can address and remedy concerns about privacy, traffic volume, traffic flow, traffic safety, parking, fire safety, community safety, etc. I submit this letter hoping to foster communication, cooperation and compromise among all parties. May we all have the patience required to complete a successful project. Thanks for listening. •Robin Gamache Member/resident of Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owner's Association on North 50th Avenue 3 ©OC. INDEX # -g • • Maxey, Lisa From: Connie <cjsgrama@aol.com> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 7:01 AM To: Ask Planning; sjs57@hotmail.com Subject: N 50th Ave Proposed Development -Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 Attachments: N5OthAve Proposed Development JC.docx Joseph Please read attached letter. I personally ask you, the City of Yakima to protect my property value and rights as a tax payer by following your own policy as referenced above and stated in the Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2. Connie Simon 1 DOC. INDEX # &-17 June 23, 2017 Joseph Calhoun Yakima Planning 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 FIEC i If EV JUN 33201 CITY OF YAKIMA :.:. Reference: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 "Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood" I am writing as a concerned member of the local community, living in the Chestnut Grove retirement condominiums. I would like to express my significant discontent regarding the planning of the 86 unit housing development slated for North 50th Avenue, in the parcel of land adjacent to Farmers Insurance and Chestnut Grove retirement condominiums. I don't believe this is a positive addition to the already established neighborhood. • It is not compatible with neighborhood in scale, building 3 story buildings on a 10- 12 foot elevation would result in privacy and intrusion issues and all the problems that come from that. • It is not compatible with neighborhood in density and the neighborhood and roads are not equipped to handle the proposed increase in density of foot traffic and vehicle traffic. As it stands right now when cars are parked on N 50th by the proposed entrance of this 86 unit complex, it is basically a one lane road. People are stopping for cars to go and then they go, as the road is not wide enough. Large trucks are already prohibited on N 50th coming off of Summitview and Chestnut. • It is not compatible in style with the neighborhood, building right to the property line, the roof style and the siding is all a concern. The development is not compatible with the established neighborhood of small one story buildings. Our tax dollars (city grant, state grant and the 12-14 million of federal tax credits) should not be used to support this development which is against city policy and ultimately devalues our property. I personally ask you, the City of Yakima to protect my property value and rights as a tax payer by following your own policy as referenced above and stated in the Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2. Sincerely, • Connie Simon, Concerned Local Resident DOC. INDV #.111- • • CHESTNUT GROVE CONDOMINIUM UNIT OWNERS' ASSOCIATION Senior 55+ Residential Communities **** Washington State Registered Non -Profit Corp. Established 1987 *** UBI NUMBER: 603037117 *** Board of Directors By -Law / CC & R SUBJECT : Reply to SEPA Review of proposed development of what appears to be an extension of an established LLC Franchise — Commercial Development identified as NEXT STEP HOUSING and this time adding another facility called THE BICYCLE APPARTMENTS. For clarification of Application / PRPOSAL specifics : PROPSED LOCATION : TAX PARCEL : PROJECT APPLICANT : DATE OF APPLICATION : DATE OF COMPLETENESS : 118 North 50th Avenue—Yakima, Washington 180321 — 41425 Next Step Housing / The Bicycle Apartments LLC May 15th, 2017 May 31St, 2017 ****** IMPORTANT DOCUMENT ATTACHED ****** City of Yakima Planning Department of Community Development Attention : Joan Davenport, AICP, Director ( And ) Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 Submittal Date: June 22, 2017 By : David Robins Association President FOR YOUR INFORMATION AND OFFICIAL RECORDED FILE : Please accept this document as voicing of our valid concems regarding the proposed NEXT STEP HOUSING / THE BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC on property ( identified above ) that adjoins and borders CGCUOA's north west property line . By virtue of that contiguous property line, it is owned collectively by all thirty four (34) of our Unit Owners and is fully functional as "Common Space" per ownership and direction of well-established By -Laws and Community Covenants and Restrictions SINCE October 5th, 1987. ( On file in the Yakima County Courthouse and officially Zoned as R2 - Record File : 2812161 Volume 1221 1387) BELOW IS A COPY OF THE INTERNAL CHESTNUT GROVE CONDOMINIUM UNIT OWNERS' ASSOCIATION MEMORANDUM to all thirty (34) Unit Owners ( via electronic / personal phone calls / face to face notification / etc.) sent by Board of Directors President ( David Robins) on 06-24-2017 and now copied as record to your official file of this SEPA review. Page 1 of 1 Response to SEPA Review SEPA #01414-17 DOC. IND C.IT1', ? 'YAKItMA CODE ,ADIN.DIVISION IUN . Z017 JE C'�VD ■.PAID r AX D'[] FYI C3 • • MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING F,wn fou" Boani ofr Din+eetoers Attention all Unit Owners (34) June 22, 2017 Please regard this Memorandum as communication of importance concerning the proposed NEXT STEP HOUSING / THE BICYCLE APARTMENTS project on the north west end of our Association boundary on adjacent property located at 118 North 50th Avenue. CGCUOA Properties Committee has been hard at work advising the BOD of possible impact and ramifications that such a proposal will have on our community if it comes to fruition as reality. REMARKS : Thank you for your assistance in this matter that we feel we have already lost by sending our concerns through a flawed process at the City of Yakima Planning Department, with no decent accept to live with the reality and the ugly aftermath knowing our plea went unheard. We do expect and will continue to voice our opinion, and call into question any all false and miss leading / embellished statements identified on the official completed application that is now in their SEPA Review timed response. At the same time question the Cities interpretation of existing zoning and building codes that they seem to ignore and or bend for whatever reasons, yet to be dealt with. We've learned from our past experience (on record by respective City Traffic Division officials) that all of our former complaints regarding badly congested traffic flows / on street parking / pedestrian safety / etc., still remain a huge daily issue per the last 23+ years, especially on the north business end ( Including this property frontage now proposed ) on North 500 Avenue. All of these conditions described still remain unabated as per the date of this submittal. Our plea for law enforcement to do something about dangerous speed violators and distracted ( Cell Phones) drivers in an under posted 25mph speed zone have gone unabated. We have also asked their assistance in controlling large semi -trucks and trailers who continue to use North 50th Avenue and ignore posted signing on both ends that should eliminate their use. In all of my 23 years as a Unit Owner and resident directly facing North 50th Avenue, I have never seen law enforcement even attempt to control. In 2013 we conducted a traffic study in conjunction with the City Traffic Division that qualified us for the installation of Traffic Calmers through our residential community ( Speed Bumps ) and to date, only led to lip service through our continued request for time schedule of installation. Their promise to begin and complete the work now going on to 4 summers ? In saying all of this, identified additional traffic generated from said proposal of over 600+ car trips per day / unknown trips by guests to the facility / unknown number of services vehicles / unknown number of school bus trips / unknown number of emergency vehicles to service residence / etc., of this proposed project, traffic issues will only exacerbate to an unbelievable tolerance and lead to greater risk for safety and security on each and every day and our own use and enjoyment of CGCUOA's Common Space property. Virtually all of this additional traffic flow will be forced to the south on 50th Avenue ( to avoid the business end congestion and extreme difficulty to access Summitview Avenue for east - west travel ). Most all traffic will flow directly through the center of our community, including most all construction equipment / material deliveries / workers / vendors / etc. for almost two years throughout their building phase time frame and forever thereafter if approved. Page 1 of 2 • Response to SEPA Review SEPA #01414-17 RECEIVED JUN 2017 CITY OF YAKIiw, INDEX THEREFORE : I am voicing my opinion and personal concern regarding said developers proposal ( Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments ) by saying that : From published TYPE R3B Zone Review ... Supplemental Administrative Adjustment Documents, Etc., the City has allowed said developer to embellish application required submittal questioning as the Gospel by giving unsubstantiated / unknown / realistic values and does not accurately address said topical questioning in several sections. The City has allowed said developer to use the word "WILL" as if it is a proven fact. However; in allowing that to be infused by city officials, might be an open invitation to future litigation itself, facts that can be easily disputed as bogus and intentionally misleading. It appears to me, that the City of Yakima's Building Permit process does not even consider the fact that the overall impact of proposed design structures and their imposing looming physical size are even an issue to consider. (80 Apartments housing over 200+ people ) Such as over shadowing of surrounding buildings and properties ( both commercial and residential homes) by allowing five (5 ) 3 story buildings on the outer perimeters of the parcel / plus additional roof line height of 40' feet or higher per planned structures / in the middle of long established business center and residential communities where CGCUOA construction exists, current Zone of R-2 ( now and since 1987 ), this proposal is in violation and incompatible by code definition. All single ground level residential structures by design individually constructed, per R-2 Zoning Code. No reason has yet been voiced by city planners nor the developer that this proposal (as submitted and approved by city officials according to this SEPA Review) TATS IS A " MISFIT " and INCOMPATIBLE to Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners Associations' R — 2 Zone Single Family Condominium Complex and surrounding adjacent contiguous developed small business / single level properties. CC & R's override shifty rezoning ploy. Special Fact : Re -zoning is a form of discrimination to qualified structures and property owners who once fully complied and invested accordingly, thinking they were secure in that investment. ?? In this case, the root cause and forced degradation of well-established and functioning community in harmony with small business and residential single level retirement homes and established zone compliance. CHESTNUT GROVE CONDOMINIUM UNIT OWNERS' ASSOCIATION DYNAMICS : Established October 5'h, 1987 ( Yakima County Records No: 2812161 / Volume 1221 1387) as a Senior 55+ Residential Community ( Registered by the State of Washington as a Non -Profit Corporation - UBI Number 603037117 ) Average age is 78 years old ( ranging from 57 to 93 enjoying various stages of aging including failing health - 44 people ) 3 blocks of two and three bedroom units separately addressed completes (34) units in total. All units are Owner lived in / occupied and maintained to CC & R standards. Also includes our common open spaces of frontage including the facility maintenance center located in the north west corner of Association controlled property parcels. ( see attached map overview ). CGCOUA collectively represents and maintains a $ 9 million dollar investment and business each and every day. Governed by an elected Board of Directors / By -Laws / Covenants & Restrictions. Well maintained frontage on a collectively large daily expense and budget. VOICE CONCERNS : We are convinced and are backed by facts that NEXT STEP HOUSING / 1'HE BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC and the City of Yakima in this approval process, has ignored surrounding properties as being "compatible" (by definition) allowing unfair mixing of existing codes for zoning that should constitute flagrant and obvious violations. To be determined. We are also convinced that by the City of Yakima administering a $ 500,000.00 grant as contribution to NSH / TBA LLC funding base, constitutes a conflict of interest for determining approval of proposed development, possible litigation. We have already observed and are experiencing the decline in actual resale and marketability of CGCUOA properties. Factual loss of sale and continued devaluation has already occurred as disclosure of said proposal becomes known. CGCOUA will quite probably lose our long standing designated / Page 1 of 3 Response to SEPA Review SEPA #01414-17 Ra CE VE) DOC. ,JUN 2 2 2017 INDEX CITY OF YAKdt' A • • conceived / built out / appreciated / well maintained identity as a safe Senior Community. From said developers own application language of projected minimum car count and trips per day (approaching 600 per day) and by allowing the increased high volume of traffic, the safety of our Unit Owners "Will" be at much greater risk, reminding city approval staff that CGCUOA remains an R — 2 definition. We now have residents that do not go to their own mailboxes across the street from their unit due to fear of traffic volume and speed. Otherwise, they are quite mobile and active contented people living retirement years where that daily task should be normal. NSH / TBA LLC PROPOSAL TRAFFIC STUDY SUBMITTED : On that basis, the City has allowed said developer to submit a so —called traffic study that is greatly flawed / misleading / bogus / and not realistic, by so-called on site observation and bias results reporting. The study was conducted from the south end ( only) of 50th Avenue and West Chestnut Avenue during a restricted traffic control road construction zone by Nob Hill Water Association. ( Fact) The reason that it looks so innocent for traffic congestion from the south end is that CGCUOA covenant encourages no on street parking or in driveways. Definitely is not a true analysis of the north end onto Summitview Avenue. By proposal suggestion and yet another reason pointing to all additional traffic flow is being directed south through CGCUOA frontage. The study also reported that they had found reason not to close off North 50th, Avenue by constructing a cul-de-sac to serve the needs of all, but did not comment at all on how to mitigate through a variance request and design to the city as a means of abatement ? ASKING FOR YOUR CONSIDERTION OF THE FOLLOWING AS A MEANS OF TRAFFIC FLOW MIDIGATION 1 herby ask that you consider that : (1) that the road known as North / South 50th Avenue -( extending from the north end Summitview Avenue to south end at West Chestnut Avenue ) through condominium frontage and beginning at ( North end of said property line - mechanical two gated ethically pleasing / installation ( at the expense of NSH / TBA LLC - that will allow first Responder Vehicle) and NO THROUGH STREET SIGNAGE on the South end at West Chestnut Avenue - be closed off at the property line to through traffic for obvious / preservation / community protection / property value / peace and tranquility / etc. , as evidenced in the City's planning approval past practice of condominium developments ( ie: to our immediate west boundary - further west of North 56th Avenue - and to the East of North 48th Avenue ) (2) If that is not a bonafide / proven option by those other than "JUST SAYING NO" (By Whom with accountable authority ) than we are asking for a current traffic verification study for ADT"s prior to approval and construction for proof that the numbers given as narration by the developer and accepted by the so -called -approval process is / was / are indeed bogus ... and all outcome information be available sent to the Chestnut Grove Condominium Owner's Association list of contacts per this file. (3) That the Condo. Association be given a large and highly detailed Plan Print and narrative of exactly what is planned and will be constructed ( including construction process / materials description/method, etc. ) to protect/safeguard the "Common Area" ( know as the Condo Maintenance Center) as owned and maintained by the Condo. Assoc. at our Northwest corner property line ... NOTE: is immediate common property line of this proposed development on our extreme boundary ( see map for details ) (4) Also asking ... in the interest of the Condo Complex irrigation System that serves all thirty four ( 34 ) Units and Common Areas ( vital to the community during all seasons ) that the developer give the Condo. Assoc. a plot plan location on a large scale print ( well defined for alignment and elevations within newly granted ( by NSH / TBA LLC and filed utility easements ) complete protection and safeguard against Page 1 of 4 RECEWE • Response to SEPA Review SEPA #01414-17 DOC.nJUN 2 ��� 2oi7 • • any disruption or relocation/ replacement / flow interruption / line pollution , etc. / and -or immunity against any -all expense what -so -ever ... and ... whenever discovery occurs ( either prior to project startup / during construction phase / post through completion / and hereafter that may be evidenced by construction traffic, / inferior replacement materials and/or method / extent of repair ) the same shall apply ... and ... that the Condo. Assoc. be totally involved in all aspects of decision making / approvals of irrigation pipeline integrity and quality of service SPECIAL NOTE : at start of irrigation season - ( began : March 23, 2017 ) the Condo Assoc. conducted de -winterization / opening and experienced "NO ABNORMAL CHALLENGES OF THE DELIVERY SYSTEM FROM THE YAKIMA VALLEY CANAL COMPANY TO THE PUMP HOUSE LOCATED IN THE CONDO ASSOCIATION MAINTENANCE CENTER as described above. There are of course, a myriad of questions and further concerns regarding the City of Yakima's ability to enforce code requirements - both at approval / construction phase calamity / environmental dust / noise / weather related downwind contamination / construction damage to long standing public properties and Rights -Of -Way (including street pavements / curbs / gutters / sidewalks destroyed / contaminated by debris / earth / etc.... The CGCUOA geography is downhill and downwind of the proposed project that will impose unfair burden and expense on Senior Residence on fixed incomes, where any cleanup of any kind ( other than the exceptionally well -manicured and maintained properties that now exist) Condo Assoc. Member's personal fragile health conditions are paramount and extends the liability to both the City of Yakima and the developer that are now in bed together concerning and via this approval . We expect to be made aware of any and all meetings and will plan to be in attendance, however frustrating and wasteful it may be. INCONCLUSION Mere structure sizing / projected population and hyper activity that will be generated by this proposal is sure to create overwhelming stress and magnitude / would overburden the public infrastructure and would not promote harmonious and organized development consistent with adjacent / contiguous land use. Perhaps re - sizing might be an option by downscaling of all proposed aspect of the application. THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR PROPOSALS AND DEMANDS ! FOR THE RECORD and/or any legal action that may occur throughout your determination process, our confidence is lacking in and feel that you are more locked into a shortfall process than actually hearing the concerns of "We The People who will be forced to live and die with the outcome." Dated this 22n1 day of June 2017 Davi . obins Current CGCUOA BOD President Page 1 of 5 • Response to SEPA Review SEPA #01414-17 RECEIVED JUN`%2all (FY OF Y.4KIM e.:.. _ Digi DOC, 16V®��, #121L. Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners Association North & South 50th Avenue Pear Tree Court Apple Blossom Court Cherry Park Court 34 Units OF • INDEX Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners Association North & South 50th Avenue Pear Tree Court Apple Blossom Court Cherry Park Court 4 knits ry Da • Chestnut AN owe Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners Association North & South 506 Avenue Pear Tree Court Apple Blossom Court Cherry Park Court 34 Units ,t7iVET=1"'' ?ll ..n!!! DOC- 15 42489 I4 42468 42487 n 41869 42488a —'� ti 42465 ro 42484 a •.42483 4 42982 Chestnut Grove Condominium Unit Owners Association North & South 50th Avenue Pear Tree Court Apple Blossom Court Cherry Park Court 34 Units DOC. RE: Reply to the Proposed development of NEXT STEP HOUSING / THE BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC Application SEPA Review ** Site Location - 118 North 50th Avenue - Yakima, Washington 98908 0JPORTAt T E -'r AIL MESSAGE ATTACHED ! »»»»» Paid & oust --- For your information and for official recorded file concerning the proposal of Next Step Housing / The Bicycle Apartments LLC - 118 North 50th Avenue - Yakima, WA USA 98908.... below is a copy of the internal Chestnut Grove Condominium Owners Association memorandum to all thirty four (34) unit owners ( either by electronic / personal phone calls / face to face notification / etc., BOD President on Saturday - June 24th, 2017 ) ... Thank you for your assistance in this matter that we feel we have already lost and will be sent through a flawed process with no decent but a remaining aftermath that went unheard . We do expect to continue to voice our opinion, knowing by experience that all of our former complaints regarding badly congested traffic flow and on street parking that has been a huge issue over the last twenty ( 22 +) years on the north end ( including this property frontage now proposed ) of 50th Avenue ... to say nothing about speed violators in an under -posted 25MPH Zone that in my 22+ years as a resident and Unit Owner have never seen Law Enforcement Patrol even attempt to control ... THEREFORE : I am voicing my personal concern regarding your developers proposal by saying that : From published Type 3 Review ( Zoning ) ... Supplemental Administrative Adjustment Documents, etc. that you have allowed the developer to embellish your required submittal questioning as the Gospel and does not accurately address said topical questioning in several sections .. it appears to me that the City's process does not even consider this as a MIS -FIT to our R-2 Zoned " Single Family Condominium complex ... this application as proposed is not compatible, clearly, there is no Zone match there ... However in this proposal - you are allowing the full impact of all and continuing traffic issues to be centered to the south directly through and in the residential Senior 55+ Community, registered with the State of Washington as Non -Profit Business, with an average age of Approximately 78+ years ( Ranging from 57 to 94) being 34 Units in total) ... we collectively maintain an nine ( 9 ) million dollar investment and are convinced / sure that current resale marketability will be greatly de -valued and will lose our long standing designated / conceived / built out / appreciated / well maintained identity as a Safe Senior Community ... in saying this and proof of : we now have residents that do not go to their own mailboxes across the street from their unit due to their real fear of traffic as it is now ... other wise they are quite mobile ... I herby ask that you consider (1 ) that the road known as North / South 50th Avenue -( extending from the north end Summitview Avenue to south end at West Chestnut Avenue ) through condominium frontage and beginning at ( North end of said property line - mechanical two gated ethically pleasing / installation ) at the expense of NST / TBA LLC . - that will allow first Responder Vehicles ) and NO THROUGH STREET SIGNAGE on the South end at West Chestnut Avenue - be closed off at the North property line to through traffic for obvious / preservation / community protection / property value / peace and tranquility / etc. , as evidenced in the City's planning approval past practice of condominium developments ( ie: to our immediate west boundary - further west of North 56th Avenue - and to the East of North 48th Avenue ) ... ( 2 ) if that is not a bonafide / proven option by those other than "JUST SAYING NO" ( By Whom with accountable authority ) ... than we are asking for a current traffic verification study for ADT"s prior to approval and at post construction for proof that the numbers given as narration by the developer and accepted by the so- called -approval process is / was / are indeed bogus ... and all outcome information made available and sent to the Chestnut Grove Condominium Owner's Association list of contacts per this file. (3 ) that the Condo. Association be given a Targe and highly detailed Plan Print and narrative of exactly what is planned and will be constructed ( including construction process / materials description / method, etc. ) Doc. #IINPIK ®& l &7 1 • • • to protect / safeguard the "Common Area" ( know as the Condo Maintenance Center) as owned and maintained by the Condo. Assoc. at our Northwest corner property line ... NOTE: is immediate common property line of this proposed development on our extreme boundary ( see map for details ) .... (4 ) Also asking ... in the interest of the Condo Complex Irrigation System that serves all thirty four ( 34 ) Units and Common Areas ( vital to the community during season ) that the developer give the Condo. Assoc. a plot plan location on a Targe scale print ( well defined for alignment and elevations within existing / filed utility easements ) complete protection and safeguard against any disruption or relocation / replacement / flow interruption / line pollution , etc. / and -or immunity against any -all expense what -so -ever ... and ... whenever discovery occurs ( either prior to project startup / during construction phase / post through completion / and hereafter that may be evidenced by construction traffic, / inferior replacement materials and/or method / extent of repair ) the same shall apply ... and ... that the Condo. Assoc. be totally involved in all aspects of decision making / approvals of irrigation pipeline integrity and quality of service ... SPECIAL NOTE : at the start of irrigation season - ( Began : March 23rd 2017 ) the Condo Assoc. conducted dewinterization / opening and experienced "NO ABNORMAL CHALLENGES OF THE DELIVERY SYSTEM FROM THE YAKIMA VALLEY CANAL COMPANY TO THE PUMP HOUSE LOCATED IN THE CONDO ASSOCIATION MAINTENANCE CENTER as described above. There are of course, a myriad of questions and further concerns regarding the City of Yakima's ability to enforce code requirements - both at approval / construction phase calamity / environmental dust / noise / weather related downwind contamination / construction damage to long standing public properties and Rights -Of -Way ( Including street pavements / curbs / gutters / sidewalks destroyed / contaminated by debris / earth / etc. ... the Condo. Assoc. geography is downhill and downwind of the proposed project that will impose un -fair burden and expense on Senior Residence on fixed incomes, where any cleanup of any kind ( other than the exceptionally well manicured and maintained properties that now exist ) ... Condo Assoc. Member's personal fragile health conditions are paramount and extends the liability to both the City of Yakima and the developer that are now in bed together concerning and via this approval . We expect to be made aware of any and all meetings and will plan to be in attendance, however frustrating and wasteful it may be . THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF OUR PROPOSALS AND DEMANDS FOR THE RECORD and/or any legal action that may occur throughout your determination process ... our confidence is lacking and feel that you are more locked into a shortfall process than actually hearing the concerns of "We The People who will be forced to live and die with the outcome". For the record; David Robins, Current CGCUOA BOD President SUna a; 3UtJE 21, 2c)►7 CC: Tom Lovell / Jan Lyon / Bea Fischer / Connie Simon / Barbara Brantingham / Leslie Shaw / John Calhoun 2 CITY OF YAKIMA CODE ALMIN.DI`! SION JUN, 2 "4. 2017 ©OC. g� R�EC\/[) IBRD j]_PAID Maxey, Lisa From: jacalyn355@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 8:45 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 Dear Mr. Calhoun: I live at 112 N. 50th Ave. I am on the block that your are proposing to let the city build 5 three story buildings next to Farmers Insurance. According to you own policies your proposed buildings are NOT compatible with the neighborhood in scale (a 3 story building on a 10 to 12 foot elevation and the issues with privacy that come with that). The families living on 52nd Ave. have their back yards directly under these apartments. They can look directly into their homes and yards. This is not safe for children or vulnerable adults. The neighborhood is NOT compatible in density and the roads are not equipped to deal with the proposed increase in density of traffic. The cars will most likely are turn right out of the complex down 50th pas multiple senior citizens. This is not safe for them on foot or in their cars. The apartments are NOT compatible in style (roof type, built right up to property lines, siding). This development is simply NOT compatible with our neighborhood of small one story buildings. Out tax dollars (city grant, state grant and 12-14 million of federal tax credits) should not be used to support this development which is AGAINST city policy and ultimately devalues our property. Five of the Chestnut Grove businesses have created a legal fund and have hired an attorney to fight this through the following appeals: • City Planner • Hearing Examiner • City Council • Superior Court • Appeals Court Thank you. Jacalyn Holzer 1 DOC INDEX • Maxey, Lisa From: jacalyn355@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 9:05 PM To: Ask Planning Subject: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 Dear Mr. Calhoun: We live at 4932 Apple Blossom Ct in the Chestnut Grove Condominiums. We do not approve of the Bicycle Apartments being built on 50th Ave. it does not fit into our retirement complex, the buildings are too tall and will not look like the rest of the neighborhood. This also takes away the privacy of the surrounding homes as the height of these buildings allow the tenants to look down into neighboring windows and yards. Traffic will increase and it is bad all ready, cars going too fast for us seniors to tolerate. I am 88 and my husband is 93. Our property values will decrease after spending our life savings on this home. Please do not allow this to happen. Leo & Shirley Holzer 1 DOC. INDEX • Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 .6A0/ I am a resident of Chestnut Grove Condominium Association, living at 102 N. 50th Avenue. I am contacting you regarding my concerns about the above named Housing Project being planned for 118 N. 50th Avenue. 1 am concerned that the Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 to "Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood" is being disregarded in the above proposed project. This proposed project is definitely not compatible with our neighborhood (3 story building on a 10-12 foot elevation and all the issues with privacy and intrusion that come with that. It is not compatible with the neighborhood in density and the neighborhood and roads are not equipped to deal with the proposed increase in density such as foot traffic and car traffic. The neighborhood is already experiencing great difficulty turning west on Summitview from North 50th. Adding another potential 120 vehicles to the street would make it impossible and shift all the traffic south through our quiet, retirement community. The project is not compatible in style (roof type, built right to property line, siding) with the rest of the neighborhood. The proposed development is simply NOT COMPATIBLE with our neighborhood of small, one story buildings. Our tax dollars (city grant, state grant AND 12-14 million of federal tax credits should not be used to support this development which is against city policy and ultimately devalues our property. I trust that you in the Planning Division will take seriously the sincere concerns that we current residents on North 50th Avenue between Summitview and Chestnut have regarding this proposed project. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Janice Lyon 9ZC , ; r 4./V --f Cft� _ iVED 102 N. 50th Avenue JUN 3 t 2017 Yakima, WA 98908 CITY OF YAKIiWA DOC. INDEX • • City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N. 2nd St. (2nd Floor) Yakima, WA 98901 RECEIVED JUN 2 f) 2017 OITY OF YAKIMA it_ r " n•v Re: CL2#011-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC To Whom It May Concern: My husband and I reside at 4936 Pear Tree Court, just off N. 50th Ave. between Summitview Avenue and Chestnut Avenue, and very close to the proposed Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC project. We live in a senior (55+) community known as the Chestnut Grove condominiums. We have lived here since 2003. We are already concerned about the volume of traffic on N. 50th Ave., particularly on days when the various businesses located nearer to the intersection with Summitview Avenue are open (for example, Solarity Credit Union). Serious traffic congestion occurs there because of vehicles entering and exiting the businesses and because of cars parked on both sides of the street. Due to the parked cars, it is necessary that cars traveling in opposite directions on that stretch of N. 50th Ave. yield to one another because the street is too narrow for them to safely pass by each other. This problem will become that much more serious with additional traffic traveling into and out of the proposed apartment complex, particularly so since it appears there will be only one way into and out of the complex which will be located precisely in the area where the traffic congestion problem already exists. We encourage you to spend a weekday late morning/early afternoon observing the amount of traffic and parked cars in this area. Enclosed is a photograph showing what N. 50th Ave. (facing towards the intersection with Summitview Ave.) looks like on a typical weekday. The trees on the left are where the entrance/exit of the proposed apartment complex would be located. Another existing problem is cars traveling at an excessive rate of speed on N. 50th Ave. between Summitview and Chestnut Avenues, although the posted speed is only 25 miles per hour. This is of particular concern as most of the residents of ©OC. INDEX • • our community are elderly. It is reasonable to believe this problem too will become that much more serious with additional traffic coming out of and into the proposed apartment complex. Finally, there is the problem of the significant additional noise that would be created by this 80 unit apartment project. Ours is a quiet community, with many of the condominium units located in cul-de-sacs on the east side of N. 50th Ave. and bordered by an orchard. Our preference would be that this land use application be rejected altogether, but if that does not occur, certain conditions be met, including: 1) creating a route into and out of the complex other than the one currently proposed or in addition to the one currently proposed; 2) restrictions regarding on -street parking on N. 50`h Ave. in the area of the current proposed entrance/exit; and 3) installation of a series of speed bumps on N. 50`h Ave. Thank you for considering these comments. Sincerely, Christine Karau (509) 965-4126 RECEIIVED JUN 2 2017 • CITY OF YAKIj DOC. 4933 Pear Tree CT Yakima, WA 98908 katietisha@yahoo.com June 21, 2017 Mr. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager, City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N. 2nd St. (2nd Floor) Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Mr. Calhoun: I'm writing in reference to the proposed Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014- 17. Their planned location is 118 N. 50th Avenue. I live in the Chestnut Grove Condominiums adjacent to where the proposed project is planned to be developed. The Chestnut Grove Condominiums is a 55 and older community of thirty-three (33) units of single story dwellings plus one (1) two story unit. The condominiums have been in existence for at least twenty-nine years. Reference: Yakima Urban Comprehensive Plan Policy 3.3.2 "Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood" • Please protect our property values and rights as tax payers by following your own policy as listed above. I have several concerns about the Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments Project: • Not compatible with neighborhood in scale (3 story building on a 10-12 foot elevation and all the issues with privacy and intrusion that come with that) O Not compatible with neighborhood in density and the neighborhood and roads are not equipped to deal with the proposed increase in density (foot traffic, car traffic) • Not compatible in style (roof type, built right to property line, siding) The development is simply NOT COMPATIBLE with our neighborhood of small, one story buildings. Our tax dollars (city grant, state grant AND 12-14M of federal tax credits) should not be used to support this development which is against city policy and ultimately devalues our property. Yours truly, Barbara Brantingham • RECEIVED JUN 2 2017 CITY OF YAYliVie, I''_t.' _. DIV ©®C. INDEX • CONCERNING SECTION 8 BICYCLE APARTMENTS 118 N. 50th AVENUE NONCOMPATIBILITY OF A LARGE 3 STORY MULTI FAMILY RENTAL APARTMENT BUILDING CONTINGENT TO A SENIOR LIVING CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION OF SINGLE FAMILIY ONE STORY OWNER OCCUPIED NEIGHBORHOOD. TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON A 1 BLOCK STREET WHOSE NORTH END(SITE OF SECTION 8 APT BUILDING) IS OFTEN REDUCED TO ONE LANE TRAFFIC DURING BUSINESS HOURS. THIS END OF N. 50TH IS HOME TO 1 BANK, 2 DENTIST OFFICE BUILDINGS, 1 INSURANCE BUILDING, AND 1 VACANT FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. THE SOUTH END OF THE STREET (SITE OF CHESTNUT GROVE HOME OWNERS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION), LOW DENSITY TRAFFIC, WAS THE CORNER THE DEVELOPERS CHOSE FOR THE TRAFFIC STUDY (of course). AN INCREASE FLOW OF OVER 500 CARS PER WEEK GENERATED FROM BICYCLE APARTMENTS WILL CAUSE HAVOC ON OUR LITTLE END OF THE STREET NOT TO MENTION THE MESS AT • THE SUMIVIITVIEW AVE END. POLICE REPORTS OBTAINED FROM YAKIMA POLICE DEPARTMENT SHOW 3X POLICE INTERVENTION IN 2 OTHER SECTION 8 APARTMENTS BUILDINGS IN YAKIMA THAN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT 50TH AVENUE AND CHESTNUT AVE. (data available). CGHOA HAS MULTIPLE CONCERNS NOT MENTIONED HERE WHICH I AM SURE YOU HAVE RECEIVED FROM CONDO RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS GROUPS. LESLIE SHAW 4938 APPLE BLOSSOM CT YAKIMA, WA. 98909 • RECEIVED JUN 2 0 2017 CITY OF YAKIIVI DOC. IND�3t • • June 16, 2017 Joan Davenport, AICP Community Development Director 129 N 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Written Comments for CL2# 011-17 & SEPA# 014-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments Dear Ms. Davenport, I*41frea CUNj920i7 C*12/194/014F bj�4 The purpose of this letter is to provide my written comments to the 'Notice of Application and Environmental Review' relative to the above referenced Bicycle Apartments project to be located at 118 N 50th Ave. I'm writing this in my capacity as a property owner located at 117 N 50th Ave, which is directly across the street from this proposed project, and upon which my office building that's supported my business, IMEX Trading Company, has been located since I constructed it in 1993. In doing so, I'm compelled to preface my comments by sharing I have no objection to the intended use of the project nor to its overall compatibility within the neighborhood, and in fact I recognize the applicant has addressed a need in our community and has a reputation for running successful similar projects on other properties within our community. I also do not have objections to the overall design components of the project, which appear to me to be tastefully done, just as the applicant's other properties throughout our community are. That said, I do strongly object to the project on the following summarized grounds, greater detail for which is provided below: 1) Negative impact the sheer density of this project will have on the surrounding properties sharing N 50th Ave, which this project will use for its sole ingress/egress point, given the limitations that exist by the current design and engineering, plus limited ability to absorb traffic, that currently exists by N 50th Ave. 2) Quantifiable, factual damages already caused and incurred to both the fair market value and salability of my property. Negative Impact from Density of Project on Traffic and Engineering Components Related to N 50th Ave To my first concern, N 50th Ave is a lightly traveled connector arterial that is not engineered or designed to adequately handle the additional 532 trips per day estimated to occur as a result of this development. This is negatively compounded by the fact this project will have only a single curb cut onto N 50th Ave as its exclusive entrance and exit to an 80 -unit apartment project containing up to 120 vehicles on site. My specific concerns are as follows, provided in bullet -point format for ease of review: G As an indicator that N 50th Ave is a lightly traveled connector arterial, the City of Yakima does not measure its traffic counts or volume (as is done on traditional commercial arterials). I notice that with the exception of peak hour traffic volumes, the traffic study is totally silent to the daily traffic counts currently occurring on N 50th Ave. This seems a critical baseline to be able to appropriately quantify the impact of adding approximately 532 vehicle trips per day to this lightly traveled arterial. DOC. INDEX RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA That said, I notice on the provided 'HUD DNL Noise Report' supplied by the applicant that the average daily trips of cars, medium trucks and heavy trucks combine to total 1,056. As such I assume the new total of average daily vehicle trips will now total approximately 1,588. This is a 50.4% increase to the current number of vehicle trips along N 50th Ave this project will bring, which seems excessively high for a single parcel of land. • The traffic study indicates current peak hour traffic volumes on N 50th Ave total 18 vehicle trips per hour, yet this project is estimated by the same traffic study to add an additional 50 vehicle trips per day, bringing the total to 68. This is a 278% increase. Furthering that point, this single project on a relatively minor sized parcel (as compared to the overall size of all parcels fronting N 50th Ave) containing approximately 7% of the frontage along N 50th Ave as it lies between Summitview and Chestnut will account for approximately 74% of the peak hour traffic volumes. • N 50th Ave is approximately 30 feet wide from curb to curb, and it allows for parking on both sides of the street, which is currently heavily utilized along the northerly 1/2 of the arterial as it lies between Chestnut and Summitview (mostly to accommodate staff parking at the various businesses). If we assume 7 feet is appropriate as an allowance for those parallel parking widths, that leaves only 16 feet of roadway to accommodate two lanes of vehicle traffic, less than the approximately 20 feet the City of Yakima suggests as a minimum width for two lanes within its 'Yakima Bicycle Master Plan.' From a practical matter, there already exists a problem for unimpeded simultaneous north and south bound traffic on N 50th Ave, whereby at many times during the day one can observe vehicles having to stop or pull to the side to allow vehicles traveling in the opposite direction to pass, and the fact is adding approximately 532 vehicle trips per day will exponentially compound this problem that already exists. To partially illustrate this, I've included an aerial photograph taken midweek in the early afternoon, whereby I've circled opposing traffic flow and upon which visual evidence of a lack of suitable room for simultaneous opposite traffic flow can be viewed (the vehicle exiting a parking lot to head south must wait for the northerly oncoming vehicle to pass). One can also view the impact of a larger vehicle parallel parked along N 50th Ave encroaching upon traffic flow by way of the recreational vehicle that seemingly occupies approximately 1/3'd of the overall width of the arterial. Damages Caused to Fair Market Value of Immediately Adjacent Real Property To my second concern, I have factual evidence to support my claim that my property located across the street from this project (117 N 50th Ave) has already been damaged as a result of this planned project. I'm able to factually quantify an actual decrease in fair market value and an increase to the time required to sell my property, which I'll now elaborate on. On August 26, 2016, I listed my property for sale with Bill Almon, Jr., of Almon Commercial Real Estate (hereafter my 'Broker'), with an asking price suggested by my Broker as being appropriate to capture my property's fair market value in a typical amount of time. In December of 2016 I received offers from two separate prospective purchasers at the same time. In January of 2017 I formally executed a purchase and sale agreement for $615,000, inclusive of $5,000 for included personal property, with Cascadia DOC. INDEX RECEiVED JUN 1 9 2017 Development, LLC, a true copyof which is included. After that buyer had successfullyconcluded its CITY YAKIMA P Y PLal�'• OIV. inspections and procured financing, and only days before closing was scheduled to occur, the buyer informed me they were terminating the purchase without cause and forfeiting their earnest money specifically due to concerns they had with the Next Step Housing project, which had recently become public knowledge. While I can't speak for the buyer, it was my Broker's opinion they were specifically concerned with both the intended use and impact such a dense project would have on their ability to reasonable use and access my property. A copy of the termination agreement, executed March 7, 2017, is included. Next, we reentered into discussions with the other buyer, Aspen Tree, LLC, who'd previously been outbid. The last offer we had from that buyer (on January 5, 2017) was for approximately $606,000. On April 5, 2017, this buyer made a new offer of $550,000, which is included, accompanied by an email (also included) stating in part "our offer number is based on my clients concerns around the parcel located directly across the street. The unknowns of long-term property value and implications if a low income development actually goes in there.." After declining this lower offer, which was specifically suppressed due to actual and perceived concerns the buyer had with Next Step Housing's project, to date we've had no other materially interested buyers — and no offers — on my property. While we continue to actively market my property, my Broker feels the property is potentially unsalable until and if finality of the Next Step Housing project is clearly known, whereby if the project goes forward as planned, it's unlikely the property will sell before Next Step Housing's project is completed and a history of its operation can be demonstrated. If the project goes through as planned, my Broker feels my fair market value will decrease due to actual negative impacts that will arise from dramatically increased traffic along an arterial not adequately engineered to handle the same. Regardless of my or my Broker's respective opinions to this matter, the reality is this project has delayed my ability to timely sell my property and it has directly resulted in buyers either not being willing to close on the sale of my property or insisting on a $56,000 price decrease. In short and to summarize, the damage this potential project has already caused me can be partially quantified as a loss of $65,000 (calculated as the difference between the contracted $615,000 total purchase price I was in contract to sell for less the reduced purchase offer of $550,000 I've solicited from this alternate purchaser), less both the lost opportunity costs of reinvesting my net sales proceeds and the ongoing holding and operating costs I've incurred from the date my contract to sell was terminated, which, rounded to even numbers, is $31,000 and $3,000, respectively, as of the date I'm writing this letter. Both of these losses are factual and are documented from investment advisor, Charles Schwab, and personal accounting ledgers and are available upon written request. I submit and suggest my situation and the direct negative impact the Next Step Housing project has had on my property value and ability to timely sell is but a microcosm of the damage that will be seen to the neighboring properties. Q David L. Mahoney Owner of 117 N 50th Ave (509) 969-1243 dmahonevPimextrading.com DOC. BNDV ©oc. INDEX JUN 7017 TY OF YAKIMA • ALMON COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (WITH FORFEITURE OF EARNEST MONEY) David Mahoney to Cascadia Development, LLC 117 N 50'h Ave, Yakima, WA 98908 WHEREAS, David Mahoney ("Seller") and Cascadia Development, LLC ("Buyer"), entered into that certain Commercial Property Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Agreement") dated January 18, 2017, for real property located at 117 N 50'' Ave in Yakima, WA, as more specifically described by the Agreement, and which Agreement is incorporated herein by reference, and; WHEREAS, the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) was deposited by Buyer with Valley Title to represent the earnest money, and: WHEREAS, both Seller and Buyer (collectively the "Parties") have mutually agreed to terminate the Agreement in consideration of the conditions or covenants hereof, which shall serve to release one another From that Agreement subject to the following hereof; IT IS AGREED: Buyer forfeits the Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) representing the earnest money deposit, whereby upon execution (and subsequent deliver to Valley Title) of this Notice of Termination of Commercial Property Purchase and Sale Agreement, Valley Title is directed to release said earnest money deposit directly to Seller. Upon execution of this Notice of Tennination of Commercial Property Purchase and Sale Agreement, Seller shall release Buyer from all obligation under said Agreement, and, simultaneous to such, Buyer shall release Seller from all obligation thereunder. SELLER: D vid,Mahoney BUYER: Cascadia Development, LLC By: David Mahoney Date: e , 2017 Its aut representative Date: 7 Co , 2017 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. INDEX # C7-0 ISI ti} • • ALMON COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (WITH EARNEST MONEY RECEIPT PREVISIONS) akima, Washington Within three (3) days following the date of mutua acceptance of this Commercial Property Purchase and Sale Agreement (the "Agreement"), ascadia Development, LLC, and/or assigns (the "Buyer"), shall deliver earnest money totaling Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) to be paid in the form of check and made payable toffy -Title Company, which shall be deposited and shall represent (any earnest money check shall be deposited only after mutual acceptance) partial payment for the purchase price for the following real property located in the City of Yakima, County of Yakima, Washington, commonly known as 117 N 50th Ave, Yakima, WA and specifically being Yakima County Assessor's Parcel Number 181321-41515 (the "Property"). Seller, David L Mahoney (the "Seller"), agrees to sell and convey, and Buyer agrees to purchase according to this Agreement the Property legally described as follows: Lot 2 of that certain Short Plat as recorded in Book 91 of Short Plats, Page 23, under Auditor's File No. 2914960, records of Yakima County, Washington. (If the legal description of the Property is abbreviated, omitted, incomplete, or inaccurate at the time of signing, this Agreement shall not be invalidated. The Closing Agent (as defined below) is authorized to insert or attach the correct legal description.) 1. PURCHASE PRICE. 'lhe total purchase price shall be SIX HUNDRED TEN - THOUSAND DOLLARS ($610,000.00). 2. METHOD OF PAYMENT. The purchase price shall be paid as follows: Cash at Closing, including earnest money receipted for. If the earnest money is to be held by Selling Licensee and is over $10,000, it shall be deposited to a separate trust account established with the Closing Agent with the interest, if any, credited at Closing to Buyer. if this sale fails to close, whoever is entitd t. the ; arnest money is entitled to the interest earned on it. V,,aky 3. CONDITION OF TITLE. The status f Seller's title will be shown in a Preliminary Commitment for a _X_ Standard _ Extended wner's Coverage Title Insurance Policy (the "Preliminary Commitment") issued by-Fidetity itle Company (the "Closing Agent"), which Preliminary Commitment will be ordered by Seller, or Seller's Broker (as defined below) within five (5) days following the date of mutual acceptance of this Agreement. If Buyer chooses a Standard Owner's Coverage policy, Seller shall pay the cost. If Buyer chooses an Extended Owner's Coverage policy, Buyer shall pay the increased premium difference in cost between the Standard Owner's Coverage policy and the Extended Owner's Coverage policy. In addition, Buyer shall pay the estimated cost of any survey or other additional costs of vendors, services, PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney 117.N .50th Ave,.Yakima, :WA 98902 RECEIVED J U N t 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIiMA PLAN I tG DIV. • reports, etc., required for an Extended Owner's Coverage policy. Said Preliminary Commitment shall have included with delivery attached photocopies or other acceptably formatted instruments of all recorded documents shown as encumbrances to Seller's title. Title is to be free of all encumbrances or defects, except those approved by Buyer, as set forth herein, and the following shall not be deemed encumbrances or defects unless otherwise stated within this Agreement: tenants in possession pursuant to written leases; rights reserved in federal patents or state deeds; building or use restrictions general to the area other than government platting and subdivision requirements; easements not inconsistent with Buyer's intended use; and reserved oil and/or mining rights (the 'Permitted Exceptions"). Buyer shall be considered to have accepted the condition of title unless Buyer provides notice of specific written objections within ten (10) business days following Buyer's receipt of a Preliminary Title Commitment and/or its amendments. Encumbrances to be discharged by Seller shall be paid from Seller's funds at Closing, unless otherwise agreed to between the parties. If Seller is not able to provide insurable title in accordance with Buyer's written objections prior to Closing and Buyer does not waive any exceptions to coverage that are not part of the Permitted Exceptions, this Agreement shall terminate and the earnest money shall immediately be returned to Buyer. 4. TITLE INSURANCE. Promptly following Closing, Seller will provide to Buyer at Seller's expense a policy of Title Insurance pursuant to the Preliminary Commitment, insuring title to the Property subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. 5. CONTINGENCIES. Only the checked contingencies shall apply: _X_ Financing Contingency: Beginning the first day following mutual acceptance of this Agreement, Buyer shall have forty-five (45) days to obtain commercial financing to purchase the Property upon terms and conditions solely acceptable to Buyer. If Buyer fails to give written notice to Seller of Buyer's approval of this Financing Contingency by the end of the stated time period, this Agreement shall terminate and the earnest money shall immediately be returned to Buyer. _X_ Feasibility Study: Beginning the first day following mutual acceptance of this Agreement, Buyer shall have thirty (30) days to conduct a Feasibility Study on the Property. The Feasibility Study shall be at Buyer's sole expense and shall be acceptable to Buyer in Buyer's sole discretion. Buyer, or an authorized agent of Buyer, shall have the right, at reasonable times, to enter upon the Property for the purpose of conducting this Feasibility Study. The Feasibility Study may include, but shall not be limited to, any or all of the following, a: (i) review of books and records, if any, pertaining to any existing lease(s), and past expenses of maintenance and operation of the Property, (ii) inspection of the Property including a structural inspection, soils and geological study, and a hazardous waste inspection; (iii) verification of utilities; (iv) appraisal and a survey of the property; and (v) determination of the suitability of the Property for Buyer's intended use, including Buyer's ability to obtain municipal approval, occupancy permit, PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney 2 11.7 N50th Ave, Yakima, .WA 98902 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKINMA -LANNY DIV. S. etc. If Buyer fails to give written notice to Seller of Buyer's approval of this Feasibility Study by the end of the stated time period, this Agreement shall terminate and the earnest money shall immediately be returned to Buyer. 6. CONDITION OF PROPERTY. Buyer waives the right to receive a commercial seller disclosure statement or its equivalent (a common source for which form is sometimes known as 'Form 17 -Commercial' of the CBA Legal Library) if required by RCW 64.06. Unless otherwise specified herein to the contrary, then Buyer acknowledges that Buyer has satisfied itself as to the condition of the Property. Upon Closing, Buyer agrees to accept the Property in an "As -Is" condition. Seller acknowledges that Buyer's agreement to both waive the right to a commercial seller's disclosure and to accept the Property "As-ls" shall not excuse Seller from disclosing any defects that Seller is aware of or should reasonably have knowledge of concerning the condition of the Property. Buyer shall fully satisfy itself that the condition of the Property is suitable for Buyer's intended use. Buyer acknowledges that Seller and/or Seller's Broker have made no representations or warranties of any nature, express or implied, concerning any defects, conditions or circumstances that may exist on the Property or that may be discovered by Buyer. Buyer has knowledge of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and acknowledges that Buyer must satisfy itself as to the Property's compliance, if any, or to any local municipal accessibility laws or rules, if Buyer so desires. 7. CONVEYANCE BY STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED. At Closing, fee title to the Property shall be conveyed to Buyer by Statutory Warranty Deed, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. 8. SELLER'S WARRANTIES. Seller makes the following warranties and representations: (a) Seller has the right, power and authority to execute and enter into this Agreement and to perform its duties and obligations under this Agreement in accordance with its terms, conditions and provisions. Seller warrants and represents that its signatures as appearing in this Agreement and all related documents are those of the vested title holder for the Property. Seller's performance in this transaction shall not conflict with or constitute a default under the terms and conditions of any agreement to which Seller is bound or is a party, or any order or regulation of any governmental body having jurisdiction over Seller or the Property. (b) To Seller's knowledge, there is no legal action of any kind or nature affecting the Property that will in any way detrimentally affect Buyer completing the purchase. (c) To Seller's knowledge, there are no pending or contemplated assessments or similar charges that will in any way detrimentally affect the Property. (d) To Seller's knowledge, there are no hazardous or toxic materials stored or located on the Property. 9. ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS. Not applicable. PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney 3 117 N:.50th..Ave, Yakima, WA 98902 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANti!; c;G DIV. 10. PERSONAL PROPERTY. All fixtures and equipment in or attached to the real property are included in the sale of the Property including, but not limited to gas and electric light fixtures, heating and plumbing systems, air conditioning fixtures and units, bathroom and kitchen cabinets, window shades and screens, awnings and storm windows, storm doors and screen doors, window boxes, outdoor shrubbery and landscaping, exterior lighting now in place, and poles, pylons, supports and other implements related to current signage, etc. The fixtures and equipment included herein, if any, are warranted to be free from liens. Additionally, Buyer agrees to purchase — by separate bill of sale — those certain furnishings known or to be identified and agreed upon between Buyer and Seller, including, but not limited to all desks, chairs, conference table, storage shelving, metal file cabinet(s) and the like, at a cost of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00). 11. RISK OF LOSS. Risk of loss or damage by fire or other casualty to property or any part thereof prior to Closing shall be assumed by Seller. If such loss or damage occurs prior to Closing, Buyer may elect to continue with Closing and Seller shall assign to Buyer all rights under any insurance under any casualty policy, Seller shall grant permission to bring, :uch action in Seller's name or Buyer may terminate this Agreement, and in the event Buye e,,;:` is to terminate, the earnest money shall then immediately be returned to Buyer.3y 6d, V4kk 12. CLOSING AGENT. This transaction shall be closed by.Fiy Title C•mpany (the "Closing Agent"). 13. CLOSING COSTS AND PRORATIONS. Seller and Buyer shall each pay one-half (1/2) of the Closing Agent's escrow fees. Seller shall pay the real estate excise tax. Unpaid property taxes for the year of closing, assessments which are paid in installments, and utilities constituting liens against the Property shall be prorated as of the date of Closing. Buyer shall pay all recording fees. 14. CLOSING DATE - POSSESSION. This transaction shall be closed on or before five (5) days following the date Buyer successfitlly fulfills/waives its Financing Contingency described above by Section 5 (the "Closing"). Closing shall be the date on which all documents are recorded and funds are available for disbursement. Buyer shall be entitled to possession, subject to any permitted written leases, on Closing. 15. DEFAULT REMEDIES. In the event Seller defaults without legal excuse to complete the purchase of the Property under the terms of this Agreement, the earnest money shall be returned to Buyer immediately and Buyer may seek specific performance of this Agreement, damages or any other remedy available at law or equity. In the event Buyer defaults and fails, without legal excuse, to complete the purchase of the Property under the terms of this Agreement, the earnest money shall be forfeited to Seller as the sole and exclusive remedy available to Seller for such failure. PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney .117 N 50ti' Ave, .Yakima, WA 98902 4 RECEIVED * g JUN 1 9 2017 ► C� CITY OF YAKIP,G4 PLAron; DIV Any unpaid loan and sale costs, including the credit report, appraisal fee, and title report cancellation fees, if any, may be paid from the earnest money prior to disbursement to Seller, if Seller so elects and directs the Closing Agent holding the earnest money to do so. 16. UTILITY LIENS. Pursuant to RCW 60.80, Buyer and Seller do not request the Closing Agent to administer the disbursement of closing funds necessary to satisfy unpaid utility charges affecting the Property. Seller represents that, to the best of Seller's reasonable knowledge, the utility bills and accounts servicing the Property are or will be current at the time of Closing. 17. ATTORNEYS' FEES. If any suit or other proceeding is instituted by Seller, Buyer, Listing Broker or Selling Broker arising out of or pertaining to this Agreement or the Property, including, but not limited to, fling suit or requesting an arbitration, mediation or other alternative dispute resolution process (collectively, the "Proceedings") and appeals and collateral actions relative to such suit or Proceeding the substantially prevailing party as determined by the court or in the Proceeding shall be entitled to recover his reasonable attorneys' fees and all costs and expenses incurred relative to such suit or Proceeding from the substantially non -prevailing party, in addition to such other available relief 18. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. 19. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed according to the laws of the State of Washington. Jurisdiction and venue of any suits arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be exclusively in the state and federal courts of the county in which the Property, or some part of it, is located. 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. There are no verbal or other agreements which modify or affect this Agreement, and Buyer and Seller acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes the full and complete understanding between Buyer and Seller. 21. NON -MERGER. All warranties, representations, obligations contained in or arising out of this Agreement, as well as the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not merge in, but shall survive, the closing of the transaction. 22. WRITTEN NOTICES. All notices required by this Agreement shall be considered properly delivered (1) when personally delivered, or (2) when transmitted by facsimile showing date and time of transmittal, or (3) on the second (2nd) day following mailing postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested. Notices to Seller shall be sent either directly to Seller or Listing Broker. Notices to Buyer shall be sent either directly to Buyer or Selling Broker. The Listing and the Selling Brokers shall have delivered notice to the principal upon one phone call, email, facsimile or delivering to the principal's last known address. 23. AGENCY DISCLOSURE. At the signing of this Agreement, Almon Cornmercial Real Estate, by Bill Almon, Jr., represented Seller (the "Listing Broker"). Each party signing this PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney 5 117.N 50t1'. Ave, Yakima, 'WA 9.8902 RECEIVED JUN t 9 2017 CITY OF YAKlll A PI.V. !:N3 DIV • • • document confirms that prior oral and/or written disclosure of real estate agency was provided to them in this transaction. If Selling Broker and Listing Broker are the same person representing both parties, then both parties confirm their consent to that agent and his/her broker acting as a dual agent and acknowledge the terms of broker compensations are a set out in the section immediately below. Similarly, if the two brokers are affiliated with the same broker, the broker is a dual agent and both parties consent to Dual Agency and the said terms of broker compensation. Both parties acknowledge receipt of a copy of the pamphlet entitled "The Law of Real Estate Agency." 24. REAL ESTATE COMMISSION. Seller agrees to pay a commission according to the listing agreement between Seller and Listing Broker, which provides for a six percent (6%) commission payable to Listing Broker. Seller hereby irrevocably assigns to Listing Broker a portion of Seller's proceeds of sale equal to the commission and authorizes Closing Agent to disburse the full amount of commission due to Listing Broker under this Agreement at Closing from Seller's proceeds of sale. 25. ADDENDA. The following addenda are attached and incorporated by this reference: Not applicable. 26. FAXES AND COUNTERPARTS. Facsimile transmission of any signed original document and retransmission of any signed facsimile transmission shall be the same as delivery of an original. At the request of either party or the Closing Agent, the parties will confirm facsimile transmitted signatures by signing an original document. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts. 27. LIMITATION ON SELLER'S TIME FOR ACCEPTANCE. Seller shall have until 5:OOPM on Jam iary 19, 2017, to accept this Agreement by delivering a signed copy to Selling Broker. If Seller fails to deliver a signed copy then this Agreement shall lapse, and the earnest money deposit, if previously made or due, shall be immediately returned to Buyer. BUYER: Cascadia Development, LLC, and/or assigns Attn: Justin Younker and/or Doug Ellison 2520 W Washington Ave, Suite 1 Yakima, WA 98903 (509) 426-2756: office (509) 480-0642: cell (Justin Younker) (509) 426-2756: cell (Doug Ellison) Justin u),cascadiaseniorlivinE.com doug@cascadiaseniorliviug.com RECEIVED PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney 6 JUN 1 9 2017 117 N 50«'. Ave, Yakima, WA 98902 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA"tN:' G DIV. DOC. INDEX # G-6/ • By: • Justin Younker, ' authorized representative Date: January16, 2017 28. SELLER'S ACCEPTANCE. As evidenced by signature below, Seller hereby accepts and approves this Agreement. LISTING BROKER: Almon Commercial Real Estate Attn: Bill Almon, Jr. 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 966-3800: office (509) 965-5225: fax (509) 961-7575: cell wcalmon cr,ahnoncommercial.com By: Bill Almon, Jr. Date: January 17, 2017 PSA — Cascadia to Mahoney :1.17 N:-50►►' Ave;Yakima, WA 98902 7 SELLER: David L Mahoney 5303 Englewood Hill Yakima, WA 98908 (509) 969-1243: cell dImahonev@hotmail.com By: David L Mahoney Date: January ief, 2017 ‘„„ RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA!\N,:4DIV. DOC. • Si III Almon Jr From: Michelle Sevigny <michelle@heritagemoultray.com> Sent Wednesday, April 5, 2017 3:18 PM To: Bill Almon Jr Subject 117 N 50th Ave Attachments: Signed April 5.pdf H i Bill, As mentioned during our call, attached is our offer. Please feel free to give me a call with any questions or concerns. Our—offer; number is based on my clients concerns around the parcel Iodated -directly across thestreet. The unknowns ofl long-term property value and implications if a low income, development actually goes in there Tha nks, Michelle michelle Qbeviynp E-tentage-Moultray Real Estate Services 5625 Summitview Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Office: (509) 248-9400 CeII: (509) 426-1576 michelle@heritagemoultray.com 1 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. DOC. INDEX • • F ECEWED JUN 19?_017 CITY OF YAKIMA f'LANN,14G DIV. ® Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CBA Form PS 1A Purchase 8 Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 1 0113 COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT This has been prepared for submission to your attorney far review and approval prior to signing. No representation is made by licensee as to its sufficiency or fax consequences Aspen Tree LLC and/or assigns Reference Date: April 6, 2017 C&� ("Buyer") agrees to buy and David Mahoney ("Seller") agrees to sell, on the following terms, the commercial real estate and all improvements thereon (collectively, the "Property") commonly known as 117 N 50th Ave in the City of Yakima Yakima County, Washington, 98908-2862, legally described on attached Exhibit A. The Reference Date above is intended to be used to reference this Agreement, and is not the date of "Mutual Acceptance." Mutual Acceptance is defined in Section 23 below. 1. PURCHASE PRICE. The total purchase price is Five Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($560,000.00 ) payable as follows (check only one): X. All cash at closing with no financing contingency. All cash at closing contingent on new financing in accordance with the Financing Addendum (attach CBA Form PS_FIN). ❑ $ OR % of the purchase price in cash at closing with the balance of the purchase price paid as follows (check one or both, as applicable): ❑ Buyer's assumption of the outstanding principal balance as of the Closing Date of a first lien note and deed of trust (or mortgage), or real estate contract, in accordance with the Financing Addendum (attach CBA Form PS_FIN); ❑ Buyer's delivery at closing of a promissory note for the balance of the purchase price, secured by a deed of trust encumbering the Property, in accordance with the Financing Addendum (attach CBA Form PS_FIN). ❑ Other: 2. EARNEST MONEY. The earnest money in the amount of $6,000.00 shall be in the form of Cash Personal check ❑ Promissory note (attached CBA Form EMN) (J Other: The earnest money shall be held by ❑X Selling Firm ❑ Closing Agent. Selling Broker may, however, transfer the earnest money to Closing Agent. Buyer shall deliver the earnest money no later than: 3 days after Mutual Acceptance. On the last day of the Feasibility Period defined in Section 5 below. Other: X If the earnest money is to be held by Selling Firm and is over $10,000, it shall be deposited to: ❑ Selling Firm's pooled trust account (with interest paid to the State Treasurer) ❑ A separate interest bearing trust account in Selling Firm's name. The interest, if any, shall be credited at closing to Buyer. If this sale fails to close, whoever is entitled to the earnest money is entitled to interest. Selling Firm shall deposit any check to be held by Selling Firm within 3 days after receipt or Mutual Acceptance, whichever occurs later. Buyer agrees to pay financing and purchase costs incurred by Buyer. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the earnest money shall be applicable to the purchase price. 3. EXHIBITS AND ADDENDA. The following Exhibits and Addenda are made a part of this Agreement: Exhibit A - Legal Description Earnest MorpeyQromissory Note, CBA Form EMN INITIALS: BUYER BUYER DATE 4-6— DATE SELLER SELLER DATE DATE Heritage Maallray Reel Estate Services, 5625 Summitview Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Phone: (509)248.9400 Fax: (509)248-9400 Jennifer Cruikshank Produced with zipFormTh by zipLogix 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 w ow zlolggx-com 117 N 50th Are DOC. IdRi®/U V • • • X ® Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) Promissory Note, LPB Form No. 28A Short Form Deed of Trust, LPB Form No. 20 Deed of Trust Rider, CBA Form DTR Utility Charges Addendum, CBA Form UA FIRPTA Certification, CBA Form 22E Assignment and Assumption, CBA Form PS -AS Addendum/Amendment, CBA Form PSA Back -Up Addendum, CBA Form BUA Vacant Land Addendum, CBA Form VLA Financing Addendum, CBA Form PS_FIN Tenant Estoppel Certificate, CBA Form PS_TEC Defeasance Addendum, CBA Form PS_D Other CBA Form PS 1A Purchase B Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 2 of 13 CB/ RECEIVED JUN:A1 2017 C6FY 0F' Kt 104 PLANNING DIV 4. SELLER'S UNDERLYING FINANCING. Unless Buyer is assuming Seller's underlying financing, Seller shall be responsible for confirming the existing underlying financing is not subject to any "lock our or similar covenant which would prevent the lender's lien from being released at closing. In addition, Seller shall provide Buyer notice prior to the end of the Feasibility Period if Seller is required to substitute securities for the Property as collateral for the underlying financing (known as "defeasance"). If Seller provides this notice of defeasance to Buyer, then the parties shall close the transaction in accordance with the process described in CBA Form PS_D or any different process identified in Seller's defeasance notice to Buyer. 5. FEASIBILITY CONTINGENCY. Buyer's obligations under this Agreement are conditioned upon Buyer's satisfaction in Buyer's sole discretion, concerning all aspects of the Property, including its physical condition; the presence of or absence of any hazardous substances; the contracts and leases affecting the property; the potential financial performance of the Property; the availability of govemment permits and approvals; and the feasibility of the Property for Buyer's intended purpose. This Agreement shall terminate and Buyer shall receive a refund of the earnest money unless Buyer gives written notice to Seller within 0 days (30 days if not filled in) (the "Feasibility Period") of Mutual Acceptance stating that this condition is satisfied. If such notice is timely given, the feasibility contingency stated in this Section 5 shall be deemed to be satisfied. a. Books, Records, Leases, Agreements. Seller shall make available for inspection by Buyer and its agents within days (2 days if not filled in) after Mutual Acceptance all documents in Seller's possession or control relating to the ownership, operation, renovation or development of the Property, excluding appraisals or other statements of value, and including: statements for real estate taxes, assessments, and utilities for the last three years and year to date; property management agreements and any other agreements with professionals or consultants; leases or other agreements relating to occupancy of all or a portion of the Property and a suite -by -suite schedule of tenants, rents, prepaid rents, deposits and fees; plans, specifications, permits, applications, drawings, surveys, and studies; maintenance records, accounting records and audit reports for the last three years and year to date; and "Vendor Contracts" which shall include maintenance or service contracts, and installments purchase contracts or leases of personal property or fixtures used in connection with the Property. Buyer shall determine within the Feasibility Period: (i) whether Seller will agree to terminate any objectionable Vendor Contracts; and (ii) whether Seller will agree to pay any damages or penalties resulting from the termination of objectionable Vendor Contracts. Buyer's waiver of the Feasibility Contingency shall be deemed Buyer's acceptance of all Vendor Contracts which Seller has not agreed in writing to terminate. Buyer shall be solely responsible for obtaining any required consents to such assumption INITIALS: BUYER DATE 4-5 \T1. SELLER DATE BUYER DATE SELLER DATE 117 N SeIh Ave Produced with zipForm® by zlpLogie 18070 Fifteen Mlle Road, Fraser, Michigan 48026 w w net oro. DOC. INDEX RECEIVED JUN a 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANN1:4G 01N. 0 Commercial Brokers Association ` , 2011 CW lll�'Aio' ALL RIGHTS RESERVED C8A Form PS_1A Purchase 8, Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 3 of 13 COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) and the payment of any assumption fees. Seller shall cooperate with Buyer's efforts to receive any such consents but shall not be required to incur any out-of-pocket expenses or liability in doing so. Seller shall transfer the Vendor Contracts as provided in Section 17. b. Access. Seller shall permit Buyer and its agents, at Buyer's sole expense and risk to enter the Property at reasonable times subject to the rights of and after legal notice to tenants, to conduct inspections concerning the Property and improvements, including without limitation, the structural condition of improvements, hazardous materials, pest infestation, soils conditions, sensitive areas, wetlands, or other matters affecting the feasibility of the Property for Buyer's intended use. Buyer shall schedule any entry onto the Property with Seller in advance and shall comply with Seller's reasonable requirements including those relating to security, confidentiality, and disruption of Seller's tenants. Buyer shall not perform any invasive testing including environmental inspections beyond a phase I assessment or contact the tenants or property management personnel without obtaining the Seller's prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Buyer shall restore the Property and improvements to the same condition they were in prior to inspection. Buyer shall be solely responsible for all costs of its inspections and feasibility analysis and has no authority to bind the Property for purposes of statutory liens. Buyer agrees to indemnify and defend Seller from all liens, costs, claims, and expenses, including attorneys' and experts' fees, arising from or relating to entry onto or inspection of the Property by Buyer and its agents. This agreement to indemnify and defend Seller shall survive closing. Buyer may continue to enter the Property in accordance with the foregoing terms and conditions after removal or satisfaction of the feasibility contingency only for the purpose of leasing or to satisfy conditions of financing. c, Buyer waives the right to receive a seller disclosure statement ("Form 17 -Commercial") if required by RCW 64.06. However, if Seller would otherwise be required to provide Buyer with a Form 17 -Commercial, and if the answer to any of the questions in the section of the Form 17 -Commercial entitled "Environmental" would be "yes," then Buyer does not waive the receipt of the "Environmental" section of the Form 17 - Commercial which shall be provided by Seller. 6. TITLE INSURANCE. a. Title Report. Seller authorizes Buyer, its Lender, ListinBroker, Selling Broker or Closing Agent, at Seller's expense, to apply for and deliver to Buyer a �X standard ❑ extended (standard, if not completed) coverage owners policy of title insurance. Buyer shall pay the increased costs associated with an extended policy including the excess premium over that charged for a standard coverage policy, and the cost of any survey required by the title insurer. The title report shall be issued by Valley Title (a title company of Seller's choice, if not completed). If Seller previously received a preliminary commitment from a title insurer that Buyer declines to use, Buyer shall pay any cancellation fee owing to the original title insurer. Otherwise, the party applying for title insurance shall pay any title cancellation fee, in the event such a fee is assessed. b. Permitted Exceptions. Buyer shall notify Seller of any objectionable matters in the title report or any supplemental report within the earlier of: (1) twenty (20) days after Mutual Acceptance of this Agreement; or (2) the expiration of the Feasibility Period. This Agreement shall terminate and Buyer shall receive a refund of the earnest money, less any costs advanced or committed for Buyer, unless within five (5) days of Buyer's notice of such objections (1) Seller agrees, in writing, to remove all objectionable provisions or (2) Buyer notifies Seller that Buyer waives any objections which Seller does not agree to remove. If any new title matters are disclosed in a supplemental title report, then the preceding termination, objection and waiver provisions shall apply to the new title matters except that Buyer's notice of objections must be delivered within five (5) days of delivery of the supplemental report and Seller's response or Buyer's waiver must be delivered within two (2) days of Buyer's notice of objections. The closing date shall be extended to the extent necessary to INITIALS: BUYER DATE(4'3 \-1 SELLER DATE BUYER DATE SELLER DATE Produced with zipFonr S by zipLogix 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 www_xmt.oaix c n 117 N 501h Ave DOC. INDEX RECEIVED JUN 192017 CITY OF YAKI iA PLANM:4G DIV. © Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CBA Form PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev, 1/2011 Page 4ot13 COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) CBk permit time for these notices. Buyer shall not be required to object to any mortgage or deed of trust liens, or the statutory lien for real property taxes, and the same shall not be deemed to be Permitted Exceptions; provided, however, that the lien securing any financing which Buyer has agreed to assume shall be a Permitted Exception. Except for the foregoing, those provisions not objected to or for which Buyer waived its objections shall be referred to collectively as the "Permitted Exceptions.' Seller shall cooperate with Buyer and the title company to clear objectionable title matters but shall not be required to incur any out-of-pocket expenses or liability other than payment of monetary encumbrances not assumed by Buyer and proration of real property taxes, and Seller shall provide an owner's affidavit containing the information and reasonable covenants requested by the title company. The title policy shall contain no exceptions other than the General Exclusions and Exceptions common to such form of policy and the Permitted Exceptions. 7. CLOSING OF SALE. This sale shall be closed on May 5, 2017 ("Closing") by Valley Title ("Closing Agenr) (Seller shall select the Closing Agent, if not completed). Buyer and Seller shall deposit with Closing Agent by 12:00 p.m. on the scheduled Closing date all instruments and monies required to complete the purchase in accordance with this Agreement. "Closing" shall be deemed to have occurred when the deed is recorded and the sale proceeds are available to Seller. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. Sale proceeds shall be considered available to Seller, even though they cannot be disbursed to Seller until the next business day after Closing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Seller informed Buyer during the Feasibility Period that Seller's underlying financing requires that it be defeased and may not be paid off, then Closing shall be conducted in accordance with the three-day closing process described in CBA Form PS_D. This Agreement is intended to constitute escrow instructions to Closing Agent. Buyer and Seller will provide any supplemental instructions requested by Closing Agent provided the same are consistent with this Agreement. 8. CLOSING COSTS AND PRORATIONS. Seller shall deliver an updated rent roll to Closing Agent not later than two (2) days before the scheduled Closing date in the form required by Section 5(a) and any other information reasonably requested by Closing Agent to allow Closing Agent to prepare a settlement statement for Closing. Seller certifies that the information contained in the rent roll is correct as of the date submitted. Seller shall pay the premium for the owner's standard coverage title policy. Buyer shall pay the excess premium attributable to any extended coverage or endorsements requested by. Buyer, and the cost of any survey required in connection with the same. Seller and Buyer shall each pay one-half of the escrow fees. Any real estate excise taxes shall be paid by the party who bears primary responsibility for payment under the applicable statute or code. Real and personal property taxes and assessments payable in the year of closing; collected rents on any existing tenancies; interest; utilities; and other operating expenses shall be pro -rated as of Closing. If tenants pay any of the foregoing expenses directly, then Closing Agent shall only pro rate those expenses paid by Seller. Buyer shall pay to Seller at Closing an additional sum equal to any utility deposits or mortgage reserves for assumed financing for which Buyer receives the benefit after Closing. Buyer shall pay all costs of financing including the premium for the lender's title policy. If the Property was taxed under a deferred classification prior to Closing, then Seller shall pay all taxes, interest, penalties, deferred taxes or similar items which result from removal of the Property from the deferred classification. At Closing, all refundable deposits on tenancies shall be credited to Buyer or delivered to Buyer for deposit in a trust account if required by state or local law. Buyer shall pay any sales or use tax applicable to the transfer of personal property included in the sale. a. Unpaid Utility Charges. Buyer and Seller Q WAIVE ❑ DO NOT WAIVE (do not waive if neither box checked) the right to have the Closing Agent disburse closing funds necessary to satisfy unpaid utility charges affecting the Property pursuant to RCW 60.80. If "do not waive" is checked, then attach CBA Form UA ("Utility Charges" Addendum) to this Agreement. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 71 Seth Ave DATE SELLER DATE DATE SELLER DATE Produced with zipForm® by ziplogix 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 wyoujid eolx`rom DOC. INDEX • F ECE OED JUN o92.017 ® Commercial Brokers Association CITY OF YAKINMA PLA [ , 4G DIV. COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CBA Form PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 5 of 13 9. POST -CLOSING ADJUSTMENTS, COLLECTIONS, AND PAYMENTS. After Closing, Buyer and Seller shall reconcile the actual amount of revenues or liabilities upon receipt or payment thereof to the extent those items were prorated or credited at Closing based upon estimates. Any bills or invoices received by Buyer after Closing which relate to services rendered or goods delivered to the Seller or the Property prior to Closing shall be paid by Seller upon presentation of such bill or invoice. At Buyer's option, Buyer may pay such bill or invoice and be reimbursed the amount paid plus interest at the rate of 12% per annum beginning fifteen (15) days from the date of Buyer's written demand to Seller for reimbursement until such reimbursement is made. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if tenants pay certain expenses based on estimates subject to a post -closing reconciliation to the actual amount of those expenses, then Buyer shall be entitled to any surplus and shall be liable for any credit resulting from the reconciliation. Rents collected from each tenant after Closing shall be applied first to rentals due most recently from such tenant for the period after closing, and the balance shall be applied for the benefit of Seller for delinquent rentals owed for a period prior to closing. The amounts applied for the benefit of Seller shall be tumed aver by Buyer to Seller promptly after receipt. Seller shall be entitled to pursue any lawful methods of collection of delinquent rents but shall have no right to evict tenants after Closing. 10. OPERATIONS PRIOR TO CLOSING. Prior to Closing, Seller shall continue to operate the Property in the ordinary course of its business and maintain the Property in the same or better condition than as existing on the date of Mutual Acceptance but shall not be required to repair material damage from casualty except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. After the Feasibility Period, Seller shall not enter into or modify existing rental agreements or leases (except that Seller may enter into, modify, extend, renew or terminate residential rental agreements or residential leases in the ordinary course of its business), service contracts, or other agreements affecting the Property which have terms extending beyond Closing without first obtaining Buyer's consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. 11. POSSESSION. Buyer shall be entitled to possession 0 on closing ❑ (on closing, if not completed). Buyer shall accept possession subject to all tenancies disclosed to Buyer during the Feasibility Period. 12. SELLER'S REPRESENTATIONS. Except as disclosed to or known by Buyer prior to the satisfaction or waiver of the feasibility contingency stated in Section 5 above, including in the books, records and documents made available to Buyer, or in the title report or any supplemental report or documents referenced therein, Seller represents to Buyer that, to the best of Seller's actual knowledge, each of the following is true as of the date hereof: (a) Seller is authorized to enter into the Agreement, to sell the Property, and to perform its obligations under the Agreement; (b) The books, records, leases, agreements and other items delivered to Buyer pursuant to this Agreement comprise all material documents in Seller's possession or control regarding the operation and condition of the Property; (c) Seller has not received any written notices that the Property or the business conducted thereon violate any applicable laws, regulations, codes and ordinances; (d) Seller has all certificates of occupancy, permits, and other governmental consents necessary to own and operate the Property for its current use; (e) There is no pending or threatened litigation which would adversely affect the Property or Buyer's ownership thereof after Closing; (f) There is no pending or threatened condemnation or similar proceedings affecting the Property, and the Property is not within the boundaries of any planned or authorized local improvement district; (g) Seller has paid (except to the extent prorated at Closing) all local, state and federal taxes (other than real and personal property taxes and assessments described in Section 8 above) attributable to the period prior to closing which, if not paid, could constitute a lien on Property (including any personal property), or for which Buyer may be held liable after Closing; (h) Seller is not aware of any concealed material defects in the Property except as disclosed to Buyer in writing during the Feasibility Period; (i) There are no Hazardous Substances (as defined below) currently located in, on, or under the Property in a manner or quantity that presently violates any Environmental Law (as defined below); there are no underground storage tanks located on the Property; and there is no pending or threatened investigation or INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 N 50th Ave DATE' -5 - SELLER DATE SELLER DATE DATE Produced with zipFonn® by npLagix 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 46026 www algia cgm DOC. 'RECEIVED JUN ro 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIM M PLANCK:, DW 13 Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) CBA Form PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev, 1/2011 Page 6 of 13 CIA' remedial action by any governmental agency regarding the release of Hazardous Substances or the violation of Environmental Law at the Property. As used herein, the term "Hazardous Substances" shall mean any substance or material now or hereafter defined or regulated as a hazardous substance, hazardous waste, toxic substance, pollutant, or contaminant under any federal, state, or local law, regulation, or ordinance governing any substance that could cause actual or suspected harm to human health or the environment ("Environmental Law"). The term "Hazardous Substances" specifically includes, but is not limited to, petroleum, petroleum by-products, and asbestos. If prior to Closing Seller or Buyer discovers any information which would cause any of the representations above to be false if the same were deemed made as of the date of such discovery, then the party discovering the same shall promptly notify the other party in writing. If the newly -discovered information will result in costs or liability to Buyer in excess of the lesser of $100,000 or five percent (5%) of the purchase price stated in this Agreement, or will materially adversely affect Buyer's intended use of the Property, then Buyer shall have the right to terminate the Agreement and receive a refund of its earnest money. Buyer shall give notice of termination within five (5) days of discovering or receiving written notice of the new information. Nothing in this paragraph shall prevent Buyer from pursuing its remedies against Seller if Seller had actual knowledge of the newly -discovered information such that a representation provided for above was false. 13. AS -IS. Except for those representations and warranties specifically included in this Agreement: (i) Seller makes no representations or warranties regarding the Property; (ii) Seller hereby disclaims, and Buyer hereby waives, any and all representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, concerning the Property or any portion thereof, as to its condition, value, compliance with laws, status of permits or approvals, existence or absence of hazardous material on site, occupancy rate or any other matter of similar or dissimilar, nature relating in any way to the Property, including the warranties of fitness for a particular purpose, tenantability, habitability and use; (iii) Buyer otherwise takes the Property "AS IS;" and (iv) Buyer represents and warrants to Seller that Buyer has sufficient experience and expertise such that it is reasonable for Buyer to rely on its own pre-closing inspections and investigations. 14. PERSONAL PROPERTY. a. This sale includes all right, title and interest of Seller to the following tangible personal property: X❑ None ❑ That portion of the personal property located on and used in connection with the Property, which Seller will itemize in an Exhibit to be attached to this Agreement within ten (10) days of Mutual Acceptance (None, if not completed). The value assigned to the personal property shall be $ (if not completed, the County -assessed value if available, and if not available, the fair market value determined by an appraiser selected by the Listing Broker and Selling Broker). Seller warrants title to, but not the condition of, the personal property and shall convey it by bill of sale. b. In addition to the leases and Vendor Contracts assumed by Buyer pursuant to Section 5(a) above, this sale includes all right, title and interest of Seller to the following intangible property now or hereafter existing with respect to the Property including without limitation: all rights-of-way, rights of ingress or egress or other interests in, on, or to, any land, highway, street, road, or avenue, open or proposed, in, on, or across, in front of, abutting or adjoining the Property; all rights to utilities serving the Property; all drawings, plans, specifications and other architectural or engineering work product; all governmental permits, certificates, licenses, authorizations and approvals; all rights, claims, causes of action, and warranties under contracts with contractors, engineers, architects, consultants or other parties associated with the Property; all utility, security and other deposits and reserve accounts made as security for the fulfillment of any of Seller's obligations; any name of or telephone numbers for the Property and related trademarks, service marks or trade dress; and guaranties, warranties or other assurances of performance received. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 111 N 50111 Ave DATEU� —C \ DATE SELLER DATE SELLER DATE Produced with vpFornILO by 2ipLagix 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48026 tozyjugisixsgm DOC. INDEX • • RECEIVED JUN i 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLAMIG CIV m Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CBA Form PS_1A Purchase 8 Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 7 of 13 CB' COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) 15. CONDEMNATION AND CASUALTY. Seller bears all risk of loss until Closing, and thereafter Buyer shall bear the risk of loss. Buyer may terminate this Agreement and obtain a refund of the earnest money if improvements on the Property are destroyed or materially damaged by casualty before Closing, or if condemnation proceedings are commenced against all or a portion of the Property before Closing. Damage will be considered material if the cost of repair exceeds the lesser of $100,000 or five percent (5%) of the purchase price stated in this Agreement. Alternatively, Buyer may elect to proceed with closing, in which case, at Closing, Seller shall assign to Buyer alt claims and right to proceeds under any property insurance policy and shall credit to Buyer at Closing the amount of any deductible provided for in the policy. 16. FIRPTA - TAX WITHHOLDING AT CLOSING. Closing Agent is instructed to prepare a certification (CBA or NWMLS Form 22E, or equivalent) that Seller is not a "foreign person" within the meaning of the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act, and Seller shall sign it on or before Closing. If Seller is a foreign person, and this transaction is riot otherwise exempt from FIRPTA, Closing Agent is instructed to withhold and pay the required amount to the Internal Revenue Service. 17. CONVEYANCE. Title shall be conveyed by a Statutory Warranty Deed subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. If this Agreement is for conveyance of Seller's vendee's interest in a Real Estate Contract, the Statutory Warranty Deed shall include a contract vendee's assignment sufficient to convey after acquired title. At Closing, Seller and Buyer shall execute and deliver to Closing Agent CBA Form No. PS -AS Assignment and Assumption Agreement transferring all leases and Vendor Contracts assumed by Buyer pursuant to Section 5(a) and all intangible property transferred pursuant to Section 14(b). 18. NOTICES AND COMPUTATION OF TIME. Unless otherwise specified, any notice required or permitted in, or related to, this Agreement (including revocations of offers and counteroffers) must be in writing. Notices to Seller must be signed by at least one Buyer and must be delivered to Seller and Listing Broker with a courtesy copy to any other party identified as a recipient of notices in Section 28. A notice to Seller shall be deemed delivered only when received by Seller, Listing Broker, or the licensed office of Listing Broker. Notices to Buyer must be signed by at least one Seller and must be delivered to Buyer, with a copy to Selling Broker and with a courtesy copy to any other party identified as a recipient of notices in Section 28. A notice to Buyer shall be deemed delivered only when received by Buyer, Selling Broker, or the licensed office of Selling Broker. Selling Broker and Listing Broker have no responsibility to advise of receipt of a notice beyond either phoning the represented party or causing a copy of the notice to be delivered to the party's address provided in this Agreement. Buyer and Seller shall keep Selling Broker and Listing Broker advised of their whereabouts in order to receive prompt notification of receipt of a notice. If any party is not represented by a licensee, then notices must be delivered to and shall be effective when received by that party at the address, fax number, or email indicated in Section 28. Unless otherwise specified in this Agreement, any period of time in this Agreement shall mean Pacific Time and shall begin the day after the event starting the period and shall expire at 5:00 p.m. of the last calendar day of the specified period of time, unless the last day is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday as defined in RCW 1.16.050, in which case the specified period of time shall expire on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. Any specified period of five (5) days or less shall not include Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays. Notwithstanding the foregoing, references to specific dates or times or number of hours shall mean those dates, times or number of hours; provided, however, that if the Closing Date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday as defined in RCW 1.16.050, or a date when the county recording office is closed, then the Closing Date shall be the next regular business day. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 1.17 N Serh Ave DATE Lt."5'1 l DATE SELLER SELLER DATE DATE Produced with zipFarm® by zipLogiz 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 lyyw AOLnelx DOC. INDEX • RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. ® Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CBA Form PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 8of13 COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE 'PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) 19. AGENCY DISCLOSURE. At the signing of this Agreement, Selling Broker Michelle Sevigny, Heritage Moultray Real Estate Represented Buyer and the Listing Broker Bill Almon Jr., Almon Commercial represented Seller Selling Firm, Selling Firm's Designated Broker, Selling Broker's Branch Manager (if any) and Selling Broker's Managing Broker (if any) represent the same party that Selling Broker represents. Listing Firm, Listing Firm's Designated Broker, Listing Broker's Branch Manager (it any), and Listing Broker's Managing Broker (if any) represent the same party that the Listing Broker represents. If Selling Broker and Listing Broker are different persons affiliated with the same Firm, then both Buyer and Seller confirm their consent to the Brokers' Designated Broker, Branch Manager (if any), and Managing Broker (if any) representing both parties as a dual agent. If Selling Broker and Listing Broker are the same person representing both parties, then both Buyer and Seller confirm their consent to that person and his/her Designated Broker, Branch Manager (if any), and Managing Broker (if any) representing both parties as dual agents. All parties acknowledge receipt of the pamphlet entitled "The Law of Real Estate Agency." 20. ASSIGNMENT. Buyer ❑X may ❑ may not (may not, if not completed) assign this Agreement, or Buyer's rights hereunder, without Seller's prior written consent, unless provided otherwise herein. If the "may not" option is selected and the words "and/or assigns" or similar words are used to identify the Buyer, then this Agreement may be assigned with notice to Seller but without Seller's consent only to an entity which is controlled by or under common control with the Buyer identified in this Agreement. Any other assignment requires Seller's consent. The party identified as the initial Buyer shall remain responsible for those obligations of Buyer stated in this Agreement notwithstanding any assignment and, if this Agreement provides for Seller to finance a portion of the purchase price, then the party identified as the initial Buyer shall guarantee payment of the Seller financing. 21. DEFAULT AND ATTORNEY'S FEE. (a) Buyer's default. In the event Buyer fails, without legal excuse, to complete the purchase of the Property, then (check one): X❑ Seller may terminate this Agreement and keep the earnest money as liquidated damages as the sole and exclusive remedy available to Seller for such failure; or ❑ Seller may, at its option, (a) terminate this Agreement and keep as liquidated damages the eamest money as the sole and exclusive remedy available to Seller for such failure, (b) bring suit against Buyer for Seller's actual damages, (c) bring suit to specifically enforce this Agreement and recover any incidental damages, or (d) pursue any other rights or remedies available at law or equity. (b) Seller's default. In the event Seller fails, without legal excuse, to complete the sale of the Property, then (check one): X❑ As Buyer's sole remedy, Buyer may either (a) terminate this Agreement and recover all eamest money or fees paid by Buyer whether or not the same are identified as refundable or applicable to the purchase price; or (b) bring suit to specifically enforce this Agreement and recover incidental damages, provided, however, Buyer must file suit within sixty (60) days from the scheduled date of closing or from the date Seller has informed Buyer in writing that Seller will not proceed with closing, whichever is earlier; or ❑ Buyer may, at its option, (a) bring suit against Seller for Buyer's actual damages, (b) bring suit to specifically enforce this Agreement and recover any incidental damages, or (c) pursue any other rights or remedies available at law or equity. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 N 50th Aye DATE L "5- (1 DATE SELLER SELLER DATE DATE Produced with zipForma9 by zipLogiz 18070 FiReen Mlle Road, Fraser, Mlrhigan 48026 y,w, Int oe,x corn DOC. INDEX # -q RECEIVED JUN 192017 CITY OFYAKIMA P1' ANNI i DIV. e Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) CM Form PS_1A Purchase 8 Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 9of13 ave Neither Buyer nor Seller may recover consequential damages such as lost profits. If Buyer or Seller institutes suit against the other concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses. In the event of trial, the amount of the attorney's fee shall be fixed by the court. The venue of any suit shall be the county in which the Property is located, and this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state where the Property is located. 22. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. a. Complete Agreement. This Agreement and any addenda and exhibits thereto state the entire understanding of Buyer and Seller regarding the sale of the Property. There are no verbal or other written agreements which modify or affect the Agreement. b. Counterpart Signatures. This Agreement may be signed in counterpart, each signed counterpart shall be deemed an original, and all counterparts together shall constitute one and the same agreement. c. Electronic Delivery. Electronic delivery of documents (e.g., transmission by facsimile or email) including signed offers or counteroffers and notices shall be legally sufficient to bind the party the same as delivery of an original. At the request of either party, or the Closing Agent, the parties will replace electronically delivered offers or counteroffers with original documents. d. Section 1031 Like -Kind Exchange. If either Buyer or Seller intends for this transaction to be a part of a Section 1031 like -kind exchange, then the other party agrees to cooperate in the completion of the like -kind exchange so long as the cooperating party incurs no additional liability in doing so, and so long as any expenses (including attorneys fees and costs) incurred by the cooperating party that are related only to the exchange are paid or reimbursed to the cooperating party at or prior to Closing. Notwithstanding Section 20 above, any party completing a Section 1031 like -kind exchange may assign this Agreement to its qualified intermediary or any entity set up for the purposes of completing a reverse exchange. 23. ACCEPTANCE; COUNTEROFFERS. Seller has until midnight of April 7, 2017 (if not filled in, the third business day) following the day Buyer delivers the offer to accept this offer, unless sooner withdrawn. If this offer is not timely accepted, it shall lapse and the earnest money shall be refunded to Buyer. If either party makes a future counteroffer, the other party shall have until 5:00 p.m. on the business day (if not filled in, the second business day) following receipt to accept the counteroffer, unless sooner withdrawn. If the counteroffer is not timely accepted or countered, this Agreement shall lapse and the earnest money shall be refunded to the Buyer. No acceptance, offer or counteroffer from the Buyer is effective until a signed copy is received by the Seller, the Listing Broker or the licensed office of the Listing Broker. No acceptance, offer or counteroffer from the Seller is effective until a signed copy is received by the Buyer, the Selling Broker or the licensed office of the Selling Broker. "Mutual Acceptance" shall occur when the last counteroffer is signed by the offeree, and the fully -signed counteroffer has been received by the offeror, his or her broker, or the licensed office of the broker. If any party is not represented by a broker, then notices must be delivered to and shall be effective when received by that party. 24. INFORMATION TRANSFER. In the event this Agreement is terminated, Buyer agrees to deliver to Seller within ten (10) days of Seller's written request copies of all materials received from Seller and any non - privileged plans, studies, reports, inspections, appraisals, surveys, drawings, permits, applications or other development work product relating to the Property in Buyer's possession or control as of the date this Agreement is terminated. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 1171,1soth Ave DATE l —5-41 SELLER DATE DATE SELLER DATE Produced with zipFormW by zIplogix 18070 Fifteen Mlle Road, Fraser, Michigan 48026 ygyy.riolaonrc:m DOC. INDEX a ECE 0 VED JUN 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANPLANNEG DIV. ® Commercial Broken Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) CBA Form PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 10 of 13 CB 25. CONFIDENTIALITY. Until and unless closing has been consummated, Buyer and Seller shall follow reasonable measures to prevent unnecessary disclosure of information obtained in connection with the negotiation and performance of this Agreement. Neither party shall use or knowingly permit the use of any such information in any manner detrimental to the other party. 26. SELLER'S ACCEPTANCE AND BROKERAGE AGREEMENT. Seller agrees to sell the Property on the terms and conditions herein, and further agrees to pay a commission in a total amount computed in accordance with the listing or commission agreement. If there is no written listing or commission agreement, Seller agrees to pay a commission of 7.000 % of the sales price or $ . The commission shall be apportioned between Listing Firm and Selling Firm as specified in the listing or any co -brokerage agreement. If there is no listing or written co -brokerage agreement, then Listing Firm shall pay to Selling Firm a commission of % of the sales price or $ . Seller assigns to Listing Firm and Selling Firm a portion of the sales proceeds equal to the commission. If the eamest money is retained as liquidated damages, any costs advanced or committed by Listing Firm or Selling Firm for Buyer or Seller shall be reimbursed or paid therefrom, and the balance shall be paid one-half to Seller and one-half to Listing Firm and Selling Firm according to the listing agreement and any co -brokerage agreement. In any action by Listing Firm or Selling Firm to enforce this Section, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses. Neither Listing Firm nor Selling Firm are receiving compensation from more than one party to this transaction unless disclosed on an attached addendum, in which case Buyer and Seller consent to such compensation. The, Property described in attached Exhibit A is commercial real estate. Notwithstanding Section 25 above, the pages containing this Section, the parties' signatures and an attachment describing the Property may be recorded. 27. LISTING BROKER AND SELLING BROKER DISCLOSURE. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE DISCLOSED IN WRITING TO BUYER OR SELLER, THE SELLING BROKER, LISTING BROKER, AND FIRMS HAVE NOT MADE ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OR CONDUCTED ANY INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION CONCERNING THE LEGAL EFFECT OF THIS AGREEMENT, BUYER'S OR SELLERS FINANCIAL STRENGTH, BOOKS, RECORDS, REPORTS, STUDIES, OR OPERATING STATEMENTS; THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY OR ITS IMPROVEMENTS; THE FITNESS OF THE PROPERTY FOR BUYER'S INTENDED USE; OR OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO THE PROPERTY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE PROPERTY'S ZONING, BOUNDARIES, AREA, COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS (INCLUDING LAWS REGARDING ACCESSIBILITY FOR DISABLED PERSONS), OR HAZARDOUS OR TOXIC MATERIALS INCLUDING MOLD OR OTHER ALLERGENS. SELLER AND BUYER ARE EACH ADVISED TO ENGAGE QUALIFIED EXPERTS TO ASSIST WITH THESE DUE DILIGENCE AND FEASIBILITY MATTERS, AND ARE FURTHER ADVISED TO SEEK INDEPENDENT LEGAL AND TAX ADVICE RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 N 8011. Are DATE (4". '1'7 DATE SELLER SELLER DATE DATE Produced with zlpForm® by zipLogix 18070 Fifteen Mlle Road, Fraser, Michigan 48026 mnv.rMLoaSr.eem 00c8 INDEX • • RECEIVED JUN 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING' DIV. ® Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT CBA Form PS_1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 11 of 13 CBIS 28. IDENTIFICATION OF THE PARTIES. The following is the contact information for the parties involved in this Agreement: Buyer Seller Contact: Aspen Tree LLC Contact: Address: Address: Business Phone: Business Phone: Mobile Phone: Mobile Phone: Fax: Fax: Email: Email: Selling Firm Name: Heritage Moultray Real Estate Assumed Name (if applicable): Selling Broker: Michelle Sevigny Address: 5625 Summitview Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Business Phone: (509)248-9400 Mobile Phone: (509)426-1576 . Email: michelle@heritagemoultray.com Fax: (509)965-9282 CBA Office No.: Listing- Finn Name: Assumed Name (If applicable): Listing Broker: Address: Business Phone: Mobile Phone: Email: Fax: CBA Office No.: )..icensed Office of Selling Broker Licensed Office of Listing Broker Address: 5625 Summitview Ave Address: Yakima, WA 98908 Business Phone:(509)248-9400 Fax: (509)965-9282 Emall:Info@heritagemoultray.com CBA Office No.: Business Phone: Fax: Email: CBA Office No.: Courtesy Copy of Notices to Buyer to: Courtesy Copy of Notices to Seller to: Name: Name: Address: Address: Business Phone: Mobile Phone: Fax: Email: INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 N 501h Ave DATE 11-6-t-7 Business Phone: Mobile Phone: Fax: Email: SELLER DATE DATE SELLER DATE Produced with zipFomt® by zIpLoglx 18070 Fifteen Mile Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 yeadiguszyggim DOC. INDEX RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNI:i3 DIV C Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) CBA Farm PS 1A Purchase & Sale Agreement Rei. 112011 Page 12 of 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have signed this Agreement intending to be bound. Buyer Buyer flsiv vx Tres. LLQ. Printed name and type of entity ature and title Date signed -11 Seller Seller Buyer Printed name and type of entity lays ✓ Buyer Printed name and type of entity Date signed Signature and title INITIALS: BUYER BUYER DATE 4 - DATE Date signed Seller Seller Signature and title Printed name and type of entity Date signed SELLER SELLER Signature and title DATE DATE Produced with zipFornete by zipLoglx 18070 Fifteen Mlle Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 tone zigt.ggksyra 117N 50th Ave DOC. INDEX 'RECEIVED JUN92017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANN:ta;, DIV ® Commercial Brokers Association 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COMMERCIAL & INVESTMENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE & SALE AGREEMENT (CONTINUED) EXHIBIT A* [Legal Description] To Be Attached by Sellers Broker CBA Form PS 1A Purchase 8 Safe Agreement Rev. 1/2011 Page 13 of 13 To ensure accuracy in the legal description, consider substituting the legal description contained in the preliminary commitment for title insurance or a copy of the Property's last vesting deed for this page. Do not neglect to label the substitution "Exhibit A." You should avoid transcribing the legal description because any error in transcription may render the legal description inaccurate and this Agreement void and unenforceable. INITIALS: BUYER BUYER 117 N 50th Ave DATE l ( 7 SELLER DATE SELLER Produced with zipFonne by zipl.ogis 18070 Fifteen Mlle Road, Fraser, Michigan 48028 DATE DATE 1a101f.410LtmiLran Doc, • ADDENDUM PROPERTY: 117 N 50th Ave, Yakima, 98908-2862 RECEIVED JUN 1 9 2017 Hary OF YAKIII/IA PLANNING DIV. 1. Seller Disclosure to be provided to Buyers within 3 days of offer acceptance. Date: L(' 5- i Date: � c a ture Signature Date: Date: Signature Signature Addendum Heritage Monitrar Reel Eelme Servicer, 5625 Summilv4a Ave Vakime, WA 98908 Phone: (509348-9400 Jennifer Cndkahank Produced wah zipForrne by zipLogix 18070 Fifteen Mile Roed, Fraser, Michigan 48026 )yww aoLewx corn Fax: (509)248-9400 117 P4 501h Are DOC. INDEX • Bill Almon Jr From: Michelle Sevigny <michelle@heritagemoultray.com> Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 2:26 PM To: BiII Almon Jr Subject: RE: Counteroffer (draft) - 117 N 50th Ave Importance: High Hi Bill, After speaking with my client the terms of our counter are provided below.. I didn't update your doc due to the number of changes we have made. This offer will expire tomorrow at 5pm. - $600,000, All Cash - Close in 45 -days -14-day Feasibility Contingency - $10k Earnest Money / Valley Title Escrow (EM check to be provided by 1/18/17. Both my client and I will be out of town until that date.) -Offer Includes All Office Furniture and lobby pictures as mentioned in initial offer. - 6% realtor Commission Feel free to give me a call to further discuss, if needed. Hopefully we can make this deal work! • Thanks, Michelle From: Bill Almon Jr[mailto:wcalmon@almoncommercial.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 5:10 PM To: Michelle Sevigny <michelle@heritagemoultray.com> Subject: Re: Counteroffer (draft) - 117 N 50th Ave Brutal stuff! Who knew it could burst an eardrum?I? Ear has been draining blood for 4 -straight days. Just an excuse to play a little hooky, though... Bill Almon, Jr., CCIM Almon Commercial Real Estate 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 509.966.3800: 0 509.965.5225: F 509.961.7575: C wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Sent from my iPhone On Jan 4, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Michelle Sevigny<michelleCaiheritagemoultrav.com> wrote: • Bill, 1 RECEIVED JUN ! 9 2017 CITY OF YAKiMA PLANNI:liG oiV ®®Cie INDEX • • Thank you for sending this over.. reviewing with my client and will let you know how we would like to proceed tomorrow. Sorry you are sick.. I feel a bit guilty! 0 Both my husband and I have the cold/sinus infection and are now on antibiotics. Oh and for bonus points, my 3yr old and 10 mth old girls had the cold which turned into both of them getting double ear infections. Can't make this stuff up.. LOL Feel better! Michelle From: Bill Almon Jr [mailto:wcalmon"@alMoricomrriercial.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 2:41 PM To: Michelle Sevigny<michelle@heritagemoultray:com> Subject: Counteroffer (draft) - 117 N 50th Ave Michelle, Attached is a draft form of counteroffer I've whipped up, which the seller hasn't yet reviewed (they're now back on the road and won't be available to sign before tomorrow), but which I'm sending along for your client's review beforehand. Of course if it's acceptable, your client is welcome to sign ahead of the seller, or if changes are desired you're welcome to directly make them as a form of 'counter -counter,' etc. Be aware a second offer ended up coming in that was substantially higher in terms of offered price than your client's offer, but which included a financing contingency, thus this counteroffer is reflective of recognizing the advantage of your client's ability to close without such while attempting to equalize the opportunities available to the seller. At this time the seller is only countering your client's offer. In summary, the seller's countered with a higher price ($625,000) and excluding the furniture, which he'll make available outside of closing at a price to be negotiated between the parties, for which he anticipates retaining one of the office supply shops to independently assess the value of such as a baseline to work from. Note I recognize the counter may put this one out of reach in terms of its desirability for your client, in which case the seller will understand, which is in party why the short time frame to accept has been provided. Feel free to call if you want to chat about any of it, but I should point out I managed to rupture an eardrum (from a sinus infection of all things), thus I'm a little hard of hearing and probably sound like I'm yelling... Bill Almon, Jr., CCIM Designated Broker Almon Commercial Real Estate 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 509.966.3800: 0 509.961.7575: C 509.965.5225: F wcalmon@almoncommercial.com 2 RECEIvED JUN ! 9 2017 OFY P6G4� Alif� A0l1/ A ®CC. INDEX • Calhoun, Joseph From: Calhoun, Joseph Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 8:06 AM To: 'Bill Almon Jr' Subject: RE: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2# 011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Good Morning Bill, Please excuse my late reply to your questions. I am meeting with the City Engineer and Traffic Engineer this afternoon specifically to discuss the Traffic Study. 1 want to assure you that there is nothing we are not concerned about — as with any other land use application we are going through the appropriate process to accept and review public comment and also draft a decision based upon how a proposal does or does not meet applicable codes. Part of the review process will include stringent review and analysis of the traffic study. As you know, the comment period ends on June 26. We will assess all comments received and the decision will be made available to all parties of record. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any additional questions. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager • City of Yakima 509-575-6042 joseph.calhoun@yakirimawa.gov. iii„ KI= Panni"ng • From: Bill Almon Jr[mailto:wcalmon@almoncommercial.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 4:53 PM To: Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Subject: FW: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Hi Joe, The SEPA notice for the Next Step Housing project was forwarded to me, which I took a peak at and then pulled the traffic impact study off the city's website (I represent the Mahoney's who own the office building across the street from this project at 117 N 50th Ave who, unfortunately, have experienced two separate pending sales on their building fall apart due to concerns those buyers had with the project). I should preface this by sharing that I don't have a proverbial dog in the fight and am purely trying to provide feedback to the Mahoney's. That said, the reason for my email is simply to ask if I'm correctly interpreting that the city is not concerned with the projected 532 daily traffic trips onto 50th Ave that this project will create, or perhaps better stated, that the city is not concerned enough by those projections to add conditions of approval or require additional traffic studies, etc? I bring DOC. INDEX • this up because I've suggested to the Mahoney's that I thought the traffic impact study would demonstrate that 50th Ave would be overwhelmed by such a project. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Bill Almon, Jr., CCIM Designated Broker Almon Commercial Real Estate 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 509.966.3800: 0 509.961.7575: C 509.965.5225: F wcalmon@alm'oiicommerciaLcom From: mahonevhelen66@gmail.com[mailto:mahonevhelen66@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 3:17 PM To: Bill Almon Jr<wcalmon@almoncomrner..cial:'com>; dmahonev@irnextrading.corn; David Mahoney <dlmahonev@hotmail.com> Subject: FW: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Lynn Nathe Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 3:09 PM To: kackerman@klcorp.com; Lynrr'Nathe;,Pete,Nathe;.bradlev.tew@kmail.com; tmartinez2Ofarmersagent:com; casa5329@gmail.com; ma.honeyhelen66@j mail:com; clp@fmiwealth.net, robert:vickersn.lpl:com; aciapton@solaritvcu.org; rcumbee@solarltvcu.org; mrusseuitcwKc-eaucation.com Subject: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 From: Maxey, Lisa <Lisa.Maxey@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 11:21 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Social & Health Services - Jeanne Rodriguez; Dept Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Nob Hill Water- Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - Deborah J Knaub; West Valley School District - Angela Watts; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - Rick Holmstrom; WSDOT - Rob Hodgman; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Cialita Keys; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Ya fev: my 2 INDEX • Commissioners; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Al Brown; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Shawn Conrad; Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attached is a Notice of Application and Environmental Review (SEPA) regarding the above - entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575-6042 or email to: Joseph:calhouri@yak ni°awa.gov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 - 'Lisa.Maxey@yakLmpawa.aov 129 N 2°d Street, Yakima, WA 98901 • ,7J; &w\ 11101116. P arming • 3INDEX DOC. Mr. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager, City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N. 2nd R. (2nd Floor) "Yakima. WA 98901 Dear Mr. Joseph Calhoun: 4933 Pear Tree CT Yakima, WA 98908 katietisha@yahoo.com June 12, 2017 RECEIVED JUN 1 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA fi•`; ne . I'm writing in reference to the proposed Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014- 17. Their planned location is 118 N. 50Th Avenue. I live in the Chestnut Grove Condominiums adjacent to where the proposed project is planned to be developed. The Chestnut Grove Condominiums is a 55 and older community of thirty-three (33) units of single story dwellings plus one (1) two story unit. The condominiums have been in existence for at least twenty-nine years. I have several concerns about the Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments Project: 1. 118 N. 50th Avenue is an area a little less than a 3 -acre plot of land and the proposed Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments Project is proposing to build a housing community of 80 units with 120 parking spaces in that space. I do not believe that the plot of land is adequately large enough for the amount of people and parking spaces they are proposing to house. 2. The Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments Proposal estimates a population of roughly 130 people, assuming one person per bedroom will be residing at the site. I don't believe that you can assume only one person per bedroom. Often there are more than one person per bedroom, sometimes two and even three people. I believe the actual number of residents will be more than 130 people. 3. Several businesses are located in the near vicinity of the one, and only 50th Avenue driveway access in and out of the proposed Bicycle site. That Summitview/50th Avenue area is already congested with cars parked on both sides of the street during the work hours of Monday through Thursday. Drivers already drive that area of 50th Avenue as if it's a maze, during those hours. With the proposed 80 units being built at the Bicycle site the traffic congestion that is already there will increase. I also do not believe that one driveway access into the Bicycle site is adequate for the amount of traffic that will be generated by the residents that will reside there. 4. In the Notice of Application and Environmental Review it referenced the Traffic Study Report prepared by TENW. I believe that traffic study was done at the West Chestnut connecting arterial rather than the Summitview Avenue arterial. The proposed Bicycle Apartments, 118 N. 50th Avenue, would be located right off Summitview Avenue, where there is much more traffic than the Chestnut arterial. 5. The five, 3 -story apartment buildings of the proposed Bicycle site seem to be not compatible to its surrounding neighbors which are for the most part, single story residences. 6. I'm concerned for the safety of the residents of the Chestnut Grove Condominiums as they cross the street to their mailboxes, or just walk the area sidewalks due to the increase in street traffic that will occur with the building of the proposed Bicycle site. The 55 and older condominium residents have been accustomed to a DOC. INDEX # �j $ • • quiet, residential area for twenty-nine years. Many residents are elderly and some use walkers and even wheelchairs. • 1, myself, have lived in Yakima, since 1972. I sold my home and bought my condominium in the Chestnut Grove Condominiums in September, 201 4, because I'm aging d.0 Vd_tCU to live :_ d quiet, VCInI maintained, , residential area, and that's what 1 found here, at Chestnut Grove. I fear that the increased number of residents and traffic congestion will change the atmosphere and tranquility of our neighborhood. I believe that there are better suited Yakima properties for the proposed Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments. I hope that you will reconsider. Yours truly, Barbara Brantingham1 Doc. INDEX # -g _ • Calhoun, Joseph From: Tom Lovell <tomzluvz@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 5:52 PM To: Davenport, Joan Cc: Calhoun, Joseph; Dave Robins Subject: CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 Bicycle Apartments I sincerely hope that you can ignore some of the applicant's unfounded promises and misstatements and address this proposal as you would any other multifamily project....I will be commenting on some of the issues with this development in letter form at a later date, after I have reviewed the file at your office. But one such misstatement occurs on page 4 and again on page 5. The proponent states the neighborhood directly to the south is R-3. Our development, Chestnut Grove is an R -2 -zoned development, according to the current zoning map. The YMC, 15.03.D.4 states that the multifamily district is intended to: "locate high- density development so that traffic generated by the development does not pass through lower -density residential areas." Even though this project is located in a B-1 zone, it still is a high-density residential project Does the YMC apply in this case? Tom Lovell 116-2 N. 50th Ave. Yakima, WA98908 1 ®©C. INDEX 1/4) )04 42 —47''ic)‘4 ‘F-4 ;'t19D -1,10 ‘tk, 3 ' 5-0 act Artie- rv:.>1 - -751129 v-sA .—s: 1.1 • .4;-5-14 TZ *GI Ne‘l C4" roauC:-\) 724c 1-,-VAJIV..1 c.d. cD-43s, 4-) utto-s,:ktvf "--2 04 '99 k\ '`'‘ 3 ° ti SC 479 5 vv) k. 5. -------tip:kik 04,4bJ'<a v. -s s-voi "17 WO kvf:KI 000 0-0 5 cl tro—crb\ 50-1,..0.,,\ LA -,Akk. t.‘ NNe3 wokg raA Nod tic="I' 1- ki) C_. 4-3-41-^0-3 I ;) 1-.17)k *.‘J\A-. *k:7 '41' )10 '417V -Pc ."St Cf-vo.-wmc) Si 3.jc' ag , (ad- 4- WW1 L -C3 4-tPdc:04-,11Jki • Ck% e` 0 tA )('-;)1\1 _lio V-15-1\ VHDA-;" A 30 Alt) I: I Nnr • • t �,{ ram/En- 7 JUN 1 :2 2017 CITY h OF YAKIMA L G 1 to mis . f e m eA t yy`` R-' . \- ; C Vb e. w\C$ •12. +v T, �_. ',. n h : C...e., f 2-i2, w-e__..- �' S f / is n t%-0-=- 1'1P e- 0+ -0Net, r s n., n c.1 __- p ?1e_ a\\ 0,,� ,, at. w« �-- _.._9 � c;.A. ,r,.r,n , f 1.c>ti s e.. r _. 'f" _.. l- '.1 e M e A .._..__-tom -_ 7. { (e. c..,:,'n5'.\c--C es. ,A_ V q Xt?n c�1._ �_ - `3 . e..c e_._ f .S_ ._0 A_N._.._-l-V,'.5 CLLRon C,Jn.” . ..,t- ReSf't.t fi',)111 Int.. p....1 DOC. • Maxey, Lisa From: davidgloria@charter.net Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 3:19 PM To: joseph.calhoun@yakima.gov'; Ask Planning Subject: public notice CL2#011-17 Dear Sir - We are requesting receiving additional notices concerning: Public Notice CL2#011-17 Project Name - Next Step Housing Project Address - 118 N. 50th Ave Thank You, David and Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave, Unit 23 Yakima, WA 98908 E-mail - davidgloria@charter.net 1 DOC. INDEX # ',. JLJN �; 2(]17 Cr ry of YA9G1tp A _ 5.a1.'t- -,_.._. cepta, -41- _ ... Ego5 DOS. INDEX • 1 • Maxey, Lisa From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Calhoun, Joseph Thursday, June 15, 2017 8:07 AM Maxey, Lisa FW: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2# 011-17 & SEPA#014-17 NOTICE OF APPLICATION & SEPA - Next Step Housing - CL2 SEPA.PDF Please add Bill Almon Jr. as a party of record to the Bicycle Apartments project. Joseph Calhoun From: Bill Almon Jr [mailto:wcalmon@almoncommercial.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 4:53 PM To: Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Subject: FW: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Hi Joe, The SEPA notice for the Next Step Housing project was forwarded to me, which 1 took a peak at and then pulled the traffic impact study off the city's website (I represent the Mahoney's who own the office building across the street from this project at 117 N 50th Ave who, unfortunately, have experienced two separate pending sales on their building fall apart due to concerns those buyers had with the project). I should preface this by sharing that I don't have a proverbial dog in the fight and am purely trying to provide feedback to the Mahoney's. That said, the reason for my email is simply to ask if I'm correctly interpreting that the city is not concerned with the projected 532 daily traffic trips onto 50th Ave that this project will create, or perhaps better stated, that the city is not concerned enough by those projections to add conditions of approval or require additional traffic studies, etc? I bring this up because I've suggested to the Mahoney's that I thought the traffic impact study would demonstrate that 50th Ave would be overwhelmed by such a project. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Bill Almon, Jr., CCIM Designated Broker Almon Commercial Real Estate 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 509.966.3800: 0 509.961.7575: C 509.965.5225: F wealmon@almoncommercial.com From: mahonevhelen66@gmaiLcorn[mdilto:mahoheyhelen66@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 3:17 PM To: Bill Almon Jr<wcalmon@almoncornmercial.com>;.dmahonev@imextrading:com; David Mahoney <dlmahoney@hotmail.com> Subject: FW: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 1 DOC. INDEX # G3 • Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Lynn Nathe Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 3:09 PM To:.kackerrnen@klcorp.cbm;lynn Nathe; Pete Nathe; bradley.tew@gmail.comatmartinez2@fa'rmersagent:com; casa5329@gmail.com; mahoneyhelen66@gmail.com; clp@fmiwealth.net; robert:vickers*ipl:com; aclapton@solaritycu.org; rcumbee@solaritvcu.org; mrussell@kc-education.com Subject: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle ApartmentsLLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 From: Maxey, Lisa <Lisa:Maxey@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 11:21 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Social & Health Services - Jeanne Rodriguez; Dept Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - Deborah J Knaub; West Valley School District - Angela Watts; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - Rick Holmstrom; WSDOT - Rob Hodgman; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Cialita Keys; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Yakima County Commissioners; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan lbach; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Al Brown; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Shawn Conrad; Yakima Valley Museum -John A. Baule; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SE PA#014-17 Attached is a Notice of Application and Environmental Review (SEPA) regarding the above - entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575-6042 or email to: joseph.calhoun(r. yakimawa.gov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 — Lisa.Maxey@yakimawa.gov 2 DOC. IND, G-3 129 N 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 . /NA l'tx'',N. i isAi' Ponning 3 DOC. INDEX • "NO" to L income/Homeless Housing on NE ;^ Avenue We, the homeowners and residents of the 55+ retirement community known as Chestnut Grove located on NE 50°1 Avenue, hereby petition that the City of Yakima DENY approval for a proposed 86 unit low-income/homeless apartment complex in our neighborhood. This neighborhood was not designed for a complex of this nature. The proposed low income/homeless housing development would be wedged between a small group of businesses and our 55+ community with all traffic entering and exiting off of 50th Avenue. This street cannot safely accommodate the traffic of 100-200 additional cars. We are concerned that this complex would substantially decrease the value of our property and make our homes difficult to sell. Traffic and parking will become an even more serious issue. We are worried about increased crime, vandalism and trespassing. As a retirement community, we are very concerned that this complex will not only jeopardize our peace of mind and financial security but our safety as well. This is the wrong location for this development. We demand that the Yakima Planning Commission/Yakima Planning Division deny approval for this low income/homeless development. Name Address Phone # Signature Ci;Ve 4.-tiAiiiA.a.,./.j�f //(� I ) 3� A�' fp, 1✓/0 wDt1 (:1. 41 �e �i %y.c r� 41?* q ,, 1 g oQv --- tRe-ASor 041k/ cge(e-44t1 t . 0— l6 --p ' .0Ug4-‘-. E6-2 O' 966,36/7 ow.s 6 ...., -,,e,„..... 11:),„edt-- e',L-- IF 6-5—S-10 fl -e-4 >d---e-e'C. / l i . ,. <,p , -„,, /24Z-- iLLL/w,&'T�1 473zgAikku 't 4o7 6x1`7 4,0 �� 07 E,�C'rocw� `�13�' - 1 ►� � �r�� C -t- 6 - v - 9 G 9�, j '� 6,; /U t - Ed�c pr /At Ai . c o -"A- v e. 7S o ./ ofec;6-41,, e (\ActLc e I I `I M c o -r" ,, ., e 96 7- /fri. I�' v�'� �,(), c-� .`i r kg 3G 1efkria GI— `ME—tit z6 J � 4 li�l U V'1 2I J-193(14grp EC.�r qc i ti12G pinlyiroc/i;Oh,v (� h, / 37 4 zES/Dsroii( 61 6-31x60.0 9)0.1401W OstirMitit0hCi 1h cn Q-earrtr..e e..T 'moi '4/1 -( ri) &. ►+�-� r i‘dig.e/fr tr?Ecielv,0 JUN 0 .J 2017 Doc. CITY OF INDEX PL.r • .. yA�iii�i,� # G a �11f "NO" to i 'v Income/Homeless Housing on NE.gAth Avenue We, the homeowners and residents of the 55+ retirement community known as Chestnut Grove located on NE 50th Avenue, hereby petition that the City of Yakima DENY approval for a proposed 86 unit low-income/homeless apartment complex in our neighborhood. This neighborhood was not designed for a complex of this nature. The proposed low income/homeless housing development would be wedged between a small group of businesses and our 55+ community with all traffic entering and exiting off of 50th Avenue. This street cannot safely accommodate the traffic of 100-200 additional cars. We are concerned that this complex would substantially decrease the value of our property and make our homes difficult to sell. Traffic and parking will become an even more serious issue. We are worried about increased crime, vandalism and trespassing. As a retirement community, we are very concerned that this complex will not only jeopardize our peace of mind and financial security but our safety as well. This is the wrong location for this development. We demand that the Yakima Planning Commission/Yakima Planning Division deny approval for this low income/homeless development. Name Address Phone # Si • nature A"4"--ig--/' "4,0 i2:- se9-5,/, .d.."-__ .. 4/14<_A.„, ..)oA- A) SOX 0.00 . /5-7/0 .c ietke4 /�6J/kg /..0 4/ 52 71W `----" �. 1 8. Oki �y53 RPP/t?. aSOIY) c. "237 a.g_t^_ 7 cv .2..Bali ate.) (ee4' 4�g L��E 3 033 4�- . C cu)j. )9 eprUr7\ 1193/.camii 946-y09a_HL— (fc - r ,-,--‹. )-?-10<'iN, Y93 /? Gl'O-,"Yy7 r ,I(a- Lri L 1/6/ 31 CJI-ri—tdffi --oyPV e,/,./.4„, //jazz; Kdi1 A Maly q-(4,1- ,Qhh ?& way E(WL. 0. Lt virALT-Err Himo 36,0172 R E f- 94,4r- ‘ 4.3Y Liiaitiknaitui /2(7 IRgtris ” -rCieo- hYk el- 96-5j7 0, , i I t it s 06 Y,,1 < <v ` l) , .-ice b<X4/-- 0/iMA,A4,cnuy,me,,--. c/ 9) 3 ti Ade. hi C, 1 �6t0 - � 3 7 a fr,, J` 5)1 DECEIVED JUN 0 i; 2017 DOC. cry OF YIIKijUt�v INDEX civ. #0-62. "NO" to L Income/Homeless Housing on NE r -'h Avenue We, the homeowners and residents of the 55+ retirement community known as Chestnut Grove • located on NE 50°i Avenue, hereby petition that the City of Yakima DENY approval for a proposed 86 unit low-income/homeless apartment complex in our neighborhood. This neighborhood was not designed for a complex of this nature. The proposed low income/homeless housing development would be wedged between a small group of businesses and our 55+ community with all traffic entering and exiting off of 50th Avenue. This street cannot safely accommodate the traffic of 100-200 additional cars. We are concerned that this complex would substantially decrease the value of our property and make our homes difficult to sell. Traffic and parking will become an even more serious issue. We are worried about increased crime, vandalism and trespassing. As a retirement community, we are very concerned that this complex will not only jeopardize our peace of mind and financial security but our safety as well. This is the wrong location for this development. We demand that the Yakima Planning Commission/Yakima Planning Division deny approval for this low income/homeless development. Name Address Phone # Signature ti .'/49 ., t(z 77, ✓CD 6-0? M1a-iffo:11-r " , P.4u,,..."tom Px part c7 -n°111711115‘ t, ,(ta ., I) d elk TOCc.tisk 5(0q -g 2K)%2 * t 10 SZA Y► - 03 Ycha4,44, Gt 509 -764 _ow y...j�'" `y\ f2,444,......J4 k)*/..4.4.4...e> ie).41.3., c ile--:•5-',-,9--q,.-o-khrielz...,.___., q)-04 Y 4' ? 3 7 f'' 6 r'/f30/ IA Al r 4 .+.nff' J U It 0 M 5(�° �veNUE C$091946- 009 . '.O'� ',;;.9, * =.‘ Dore, 'A �1)111j. Ito N SCS V 569 •- 5[ab" l9Lcctt,Gt 'k. --e '` a, it RECEIVED JUN 0 :J 2017 DOC. CITYt.W Yf Ki MA INDEX fi',.... � 0Iv # '02 • Calhoun, Joseph From: Tom Lovell <tomzluvz@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:07 PM To: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Re: Bicycle Apartments/Next Step Housing SEPA#014-17. dated 5-15-17 Thanks for keeping me posted, and thanks for the Email correction. Tom From: Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 12:41:11 PM To: 'Tom Lovell'; Davenport, Joan; Sheffield, Brett; Moore, Cliff; Matthews, Archie Subject: RE: Bicycle Apartments/Next Step Housing SEPA#014-17. dated 5-15-17 Tom, We are currently in the completeness review period for the application. We issued a Notice of Incomplete Application on 5/24 and are awaiting receipt of the requested materials, one of which is the traffic study. Once the application is determined to be complete for processing we will schedule the Notice of Application and Environmental Review. You will receive a postcard notice that includes the comment period beginning and end date, how to provide comment(s), and also contains a link to access all application materials. • Also — I noticed in your email addresses that Archie's email was incorrect. I've added his correct address to the thread. Thanks, Joseph Calhoun • From: Tom Lovell [mailto:tomzluvz@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 10:30 AM To: Davenport, Joan; Calhoun, Joseph; archie.mattews@yakimawa.gov; Sheffield, Brett; Moore, Cliff Subject: Bicycle Apartments/Next Step Housing SEPA#014-17. dated 5-15-17 As the traffic study apparently has been completed, could you ceck to see if it was done from the Chestnut Ave. or Summitview Ave. end of 50th Ave? As the proposed development, with 120 new parking spaces is located closer to Summitview, and the majority of the current vehicle traffic occurs from this area of N. 50th Ave. by the patrons of the businesses in this area, the issues of increased traffic flow (and bottlenecks) will occur from traffic entering and exiting the intersection of Summitview and 50th Ayes. If the study was completed near the intersection of 50th and Chestnut, I don't think you will get the full picture of the access issues already present from Monday through Friday at the Summitview intersection. Could you please confirm that the study was done correctly, with the emphasis upon traffic conditions at the Summitview intersection? 1 Doc. INDEX Also, when can I get copies of the proposed site plan and grading plans, as I am one of the properties closest to Unit A of the proposed development, so I can determine how building heights will affect our privacy.. iThanks for your help in this matter.... Tom Lovell Sent from Mail for Windows 10 • 2 DOC. INDEX • NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER H Notices DOC • o EXE 0Ciip s'" .' .:t"�` l } r t < z _._. DA __ H-1 Notice of Incomplete Application 05/24/2017 H-2 Notice of Complete Application 05/31/2017 H-3 Land Use Action Installation Certificate 06/02/2017 H-4 Notice of Application & Environmental Review H -4a Postcard Notice H -4b: Parties and Agencies Notified H -4c: Affidavit of Mailing 06/06/2017 H-5 Notice of Decision for Transportation Concurrency Analysis 06/07/2017 H-6 Notice of Decision & Determination of Non -Significance H -6a: Parties and Agencies Notified H -6b: Affidavit of Mailing 07/18/2017 H-7 Notice of Appeal of Administrative Official's Decision & Public Hearing H -7a: Legal Notice H -7b: Parties and Agencies Notified 11-7c: Affidavit of Mailing 08/24/2017 H-8 HE Agenda and Packet Distribution List 09/18/2017 H-9 HE Agenda & Sign -In Sheet 09/25/2017 H-10 Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision (See DOC INDEX#AA-1 for H.E. Decision) H -10a: Parties and Agencies Notified H -10b: Affidavit of Mailing 11/01/2017 H-11 Revised Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision (See DOC INDEX#AA-1 for H.E. Decision) H -11a: Parties and Agencies Notified 11-1lb: Affidavit of Mailing 11/03/2017 11-12 Notice of Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision H -12a: Parties and Agencies Notified H -12b: Affidavit of Mailing 11/21/2017 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 Next Step Housing/ Bicycle Apts / James K. Adams 118 N 50th Ave I, Rosalinda Ibarra, as an employee of the City of Yakima, Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the appellant and all parties of record and that said notices were mailed by me on the 21st day of November, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Rosalinda Ibarra, Administrative Assistant Community Development • ONDEX 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC 3083 POINT WHITE DR ' BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 18132141417 A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141547 ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE S SEATTLE, WA 98118 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 :132141529 JOH = FAMILY CENTURY ORCHARDS, 4906 S % • •• I , • eVE ,• IMA, WA 98908 18132141530 • NSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCH • • :. LLC 4906 SUMMI v.•=•• , • VE YAJS % • , , I f A 98908 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 18132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 '18132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 18132141550 R : 'OWELL FAMILY T' 2160 GRE %,,. • - " , OR 9740 • 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN-JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING 4937 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER W25NS2NDAVE AKIMA, WA 98908 18132142497 CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140N52NDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142468 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON POBOX171 COWICHE, WA 98923 DOC. I DE X 7 /! /2C 125131141561 CYNDI MULLENHOFF 1053 N PIONEER WAY ' YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142496 DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIA J TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA S BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W 111 & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 490972ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 18132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112N50THAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123N52NDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 '18132141552 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 K • C & MARY C H 4171 M 6- i' H RD • ' IMA, WA 9: ' • 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 8674 CHALMERS DR APT 1 LOS ANGELES, CA 90035 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 -,--" MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 S 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N 50TH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT 137 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 RICHARD J WEAVER 0203 IVY AVE AKIMA, WA 98908 18132141496 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142498 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 DOC. INJ[ X 1513L1414V1 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT 4931 PEAR TREE CT ilYAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142470 RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUELJ & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 SEAN WIEK 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON 4904 SPRING CREEK RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 '18132141425 "_'' ' TIMOTHY ,& BERNICE MONAHAN ° .304 S49TH,AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ;. 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CTBicycle YAKIMA, WA 98908 70I Total Parcels - Next Step Housing / Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing ,. Qti'cf o John Mifsud . . 2900 Powerhouse Rd#120 Yakima, WA 98902 : 'Bicycle„Apartments LLC „Nie c/o Next Step.Housing:,, 2900 Powerhouse Rd'#<120 i Yakima; WA,98902°, '' < (if' titE Appeal,. App#0-1-17 ck1r#-00Ce -17' Sent” U1 /a/17 Debby& Don Morgan 81 Cake Box L'n Cle Elum, WA 98902 casaS329@gmail.com Oivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 dbspeerll@gmail.com Pat Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 mpspeer72@gmail.com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima, WA 98908 rob@fmiwealth.net Robin Gamache 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 robing2@charter.net Bradley Tew 121 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 bradley.tew@gmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 nramsey1019@gmaii.com Pete Nathe DDS & Lynn Nathe 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 lynnnathe@msn.com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 rsherih@gmail.com Sheri Haertsch rsherih@gmail.com Jacalyn Holzer 112 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 jacalyn355@yahoo.com Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Presitge Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Tom Lovell .16-2 N 50th Ave akima, WA 98908 tomluvz@hotmail.com Alfredo Llamedo alfredo@nwfairhouse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima mike@homesourceyakima.com Dave &Joanne Newman 4934 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 newmandandj@yahoo.com Sharon Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Bea Fischer 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Gabe Fischer 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Shirley Rogstad 4932 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Velma Crawford 4938 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Mike & Mary Lee Edgar 114 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Albert & Christine Karau 4936 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Barbara Brantingham 4933 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 katietisha@yahoo.com Leslie Shaw 4938 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Dayle Hudson 4936 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Connie Conklin 4938 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Walter & Edith Mabry 4933 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Marlene Froula 4935 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Janice Lyon 102 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 DOC. INDEX # �� Connie Simon 4932 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 cjsgrama@aol.com • Adrienne Quinnell 104 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Shawna Spradlin 504 Clark St Moxee, WA 98936 Lynne Maher 4934 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Carolyn Corning 4937 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 David & Dora Robins 110 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 David & Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave Unit 23 Yakima, WA 98908 davidgloria@charter.net Ron & Claudia Burkhardt 4931 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Bill Almon Jr 218 Staff Sgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Steve Sevigny 5701 W Chestnut Ave #1 Yakima, WA 98908 ssj5022@aol.com David Mahoney 117 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 dmahoney@imextrading.com Llesenia Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Heather Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Ryan Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Anson Morgan 118 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Roger & Dot Kline iotkline@gmail.com rrykline@charter.net andy@klinellc.com dennisk@ktinellc.com Dave & Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 belzer3b@charter.net James K Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd Ste 2 Yakima, WA 98902 wla@wlalaw.org james@wlalaw.legal Golda Cockrum 129 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Financial Management Inc c/o Clark Permann 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 clokafmiweatth:net Chelsea & Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Darlene & Sam Fogler 122 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Jim & Carmen Emerick 113 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Jason & Tami Scrivner 123 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Charley & Ruth Scrivner 125 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Resident 127 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Timothy & Bernice Monahan 304 S 49th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Jim Rocha 4911 Prestige Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Helen(?) Mahoney No Address or Email Listed Steve Sevigny 108 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 David & Dorothy Edgerton 2207 S 88th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Steven Gangwish DOC. 1608 W King St INDEX Yakima, WA 98902 #c —/ 2 Bridgett Boyd • 5110.Summitview Ave Yakima, WA 98908 ZBA Architecture c/o Mark King 421 W Riverside Ave Ste 860 Spokane, WA 99201 Rene Hayden 5101 Summitview Ave #4 Yakima, WA 98908 Skip & Suzanne Lawrence 5101 Summitview Ave #2 Yakima, WA 98908 Dorothy Siegmeth 4934 Pear Tree Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Karen Allan kallan@solaritycu.org Robin Hutton No Address or Email Listed Anthony Martinez 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Jenna Landers 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Janice Blanshan 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Amanda Walker 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Penney Childers 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Clark Permann 115 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Solarity Credit Union PO Box 2922 Yakima, WA 98907 Glenn Amster 901 5th Ave Ste 4000 Seattle, WA 98164 gamster@kantortaylor.com Next Step Housing R900 Powerhouse Rd, Ste 120 akima, WA 98902 John Mifsud 138 30th Ave #4 Seattle, WA 98122 PARTIES OF RECORD Notice of Appeal to City Council APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, APP#003-17) Date of Notice: 11/21/2017 DOC. INDEX • • In -House Distribution E-mail List Name Division E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administration Carolvn.Belles@yakimawa.gov Glenn Denman Code Administration Glenn:Dcriman@yakirdawa.gov Joe Caruso Code Administration Joe:Caruso(2 yakimawa:gov Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration Suzanne.Debusscherer7a,yakimawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development Joan.Davenport@yakimawagov Dan Riddle Engineering Dan:Riddle@yakimawa.gov Mike Shane Engineering Mike.Shane@yakimawa.gov Mark Soptich Fire Dept Mark.Sbptich@,yakimawa.gov Jeff Cutter Legal Dept Jeff.Cutter@yakiiriawa.gov _ Sara Watkins Legal Dept Sara: Watkins ti,yakimawa gov. Archie Matthews ONDS Archie.Matthews@yakimawa.gov Joseph Calhoun Planning Division Joseph.Calhouri@�y.'akimawa.gov- Chief Rizzi Police Department Domtntc:Rizzi@�yakti awa_gov Scott Schafer Public Works Dept Scott;Schafer@yakimawa:go Loretta Zammarchi Refuse Division Loretta.Zammarchi@,saki nawa:gov Randy Layman Refuse Division Randy.Layman(a,yakimawa:gov Naeem Kara - Transit Division Haeem:Kara@yakimwa gov James Dean Utilities JainesrDean@yakimawa.gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Dana:Kallevig@'yakirriawa:gov Randy Meloy Wastewater Randy.Meloy@yakiinawa.gov For the Record/File Binder Copy Revised 04/20I7 Type of Notice: File Number(s): Date of Mailing: ilk Appea I Io Cir tj(?;�ra.civ� r` APP- oU i,j -i-1 (ik‘00:6--J 1 DOC. INDEX Ibarra,' Rosalinda From: Ibarra, Rosalinda Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 3:12 PM fb: casa5329@gmail.com'; 'dbspeerll@gmail.com; 'mpspeer72@gmail.com'; 'rob@fmiwealth.net'; 'robing2@charter.net'; 'bradley. tew@gmail.com'; 'nramsey1019@gmail.com; 'lynnnathe@msn.com'; 'rsherih@gmail. com'; 'rsherih@gmail.com'; 'jaca1yn355 @yahoo.com'; 'tomluvz@hotmail.com'; 'alfredo@nwfairhouse.org'; 'mike@homesourceyakima.com'; 'newmandandj@yahoo.com'; 'katietisha@yahoo.com'; 'cjsgrama@aol.com; 'davidgloria@charter.net'; ' wcalmon@almoncommercial.com'; 'ssj5022@aol.com'; 'dmahoney@imextrading.com'; 'dotkline@gmail.com'; 'terrykline@chartcr.net'; 'andy@klincllc.com'; 'dennisk@klinellc.com'; 'belzer3b@charter.net'; 'clp@fmiwealth.net'; Gary Luloff; 'james@wialaw.legal'; 'kallan@solaritycu.org'; 'gamster@kantortaylor.com'; 'john@nextstephousing.com' Cc: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta Subject: Notice of Appeal to City Council - Next Step Housing - APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF HE APPEAL_Next Step Housing.pdf Good afternoon — attached is a Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions regarding this notice please contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042 or by email at: joseph.calhoun@yakimawa.gav; Thank you! Rosalinda Ibarra Community Development Administrative Assistant City:of Yakima l.Planning Division. 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima WA 98901 p: (509) 575-6183 0 f: (509) 575-6105 • P This email is a public record of the City of Yakima and is subject to public disclosure unless exempt under the W shington Public Records Act. This email is subject to the State Retention Schedule. • 1 DOC. IND -faces Ibarra,Rosalinda - From:tCalhoun;,Joso alv Sent: Tile"sday, November 21, 2017 2:22 PM Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta;'Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte'; Cawley, Marc; 'Chamber of Commerce'; 'Department of Agriculture'; 'Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team'; 'Department of Ecology'; 'Department of Ecology - Lori White'; 'Department of Ecology - SEPA Register'; 'Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes'; 'Department of Natural Resources'; 'Department of Social & Health Services'; 'Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review'; 'Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner'; 'Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving'; 'Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; 'Scott Izutsu - Yakima School District'; 'US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore'; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission'; 'West Valley School District - Angela Watts'; 'WSDOT - Paul Gonseth'; 'WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office'; 'WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright'; 'Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark;'Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey'; 'Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin'; 'Yakima County Commissioners'; 'Yakima County Health District'; 'Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach'; 'Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick'; 'Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer'; 'Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton'; 'Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat'; 'Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth'; 'Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule'; 'Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko';'Glenn Amster'; John Mifsud; James Adams Cc: Maxey, Lisa; Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Appeal to City Council - Next Step Housing - APP#004-17, APP#006-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF HE APPEAL_Next Step Housing.pdf Attached is a Notice of Appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please feel free to contact me. Thank you! Joseph Calhoun lanning Manager City of Yakima 509-575-6042 joseph.calhouu©yakimawa.gov 47IIVE a 1®W P brnn"ing 1 ®OC. D •- - • gni k EmW it CITY OF YAKIMA Panning DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/seryices/planning NOTIFICATION OF APPEAL HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION November 21, 2017 City File APP#004-17 and APP#006-17 This notice is being provided to parties of record and the appellant that a timely appeal was filed by Bicycle Apartments LLC on November 15, 2017 and by James K. Adams on November 17, 2107 for the Hearing Examiner's Decision on APP#003-17/CL2#011-17. Copies of the Notice of Appeal and any written argument or memorandum of authorities accompanying the Notice of Appeal may be obtained from the Planning Division. In accordance with YMC § 15.16.050(B), "All parties of record wishing to respond to the appeal may submit a written argument or memorandum to the legislative body within thirty days from the date that the notice is mailed; and any written argument or memorandum shall not include the presentation of new evidence and shall be based only upon the facts presented to the examiner." Please submit written argument or memorandum of authority to: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N. 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98901 Upon completion of the thirty -day submittal period for submission of any written argument or memorandum, the appellant at their expense may obtain copies of any such submissions, and shall be provided a fifteen -day rebuttal period, starting on the thirty-first day from the date of mailing. Please be certain to reference the file number or appellant's name in your correspondence. (APP#004-17 — Bicycle Apartments, LLC and APP#006-17 — James K. Adams) Public Notice Meeting on Appeal: Subsequent to the submission and rebuttal periods discussed above and outlined below, the record will be transferred to the Legislative Body. A separate notice to identify the date and time of the City Council's public meeting to consider the appeal will be sent to the appellant and parties of record. DOC. INDEX # ri-�a • • For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042, or email joseph.calhoun(a�yakimaviia.gov Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Applicable Dates: Date of Mailing: November 21, 2017 30 day submittal for written argument or memorandum ends: December 21, 2017 at 5:00 pm 15 day rebuttal period begins: December 22, 2017 15 day rebuttal period ends: January 5, 2018 at 5:00 pm Enclosures: Notice of Appeal Yaklma DOC. INDEX 1994 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: APP#003-17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing 118 N 50th Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the City of Yakima Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a REVISED Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant and parties of record; that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing List retained by the Planning Division; and that said notices were mailed by me on the 3rd day of November, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. (6-0(-4 Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist DOC. IN r -EX ++_ 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC 3083 POINT WHITE DR BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 18132141417 A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141547 ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE 5 SEATTLE, WA 98118 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA,WA98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 :132141529 JOH = FAMILY CENTURY ORCHARDS, 49065 ,''• I ,. 4VE , IMA, WA 98908 18132141530 • NSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 - ORCHA^ = LLC 4906 SUMMI r..,,. VE Ya. 1, -, !!A98908 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 18132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 8132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 18132141550 R i •OWELL FAMILY T' 2160 GRE ,..- • ' - - + , OR 9740 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN-JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING 4937 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER 125 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142497 CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142468 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON PO BOX 171 COWICHE, WA 9z .' RAMEY— 18132141561 CYNDI MULLENHOFF 1053 N PIONEER WAY 0 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142496 _ DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIA J TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA S BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W III & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 4909 72ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 18132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 018132141552 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 KA ' • C & MARY C HS ' , 4171 MC6- : 0 H RD • 'IMA, WA 9:' e3 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 8674 CHALMERS DR APT 1 LOS ANGELES, CA 90035 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 S 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N 50TH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT 137 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 RICHARD J WEAVER 16203 IVY AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141496 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142498 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 9890b0C tune v +.0 # E -I -f l OL 18132141491 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT 4931 PEAR TREE CT 'YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142470 RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUELJ & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 SEAN WIEK 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON 4904 SPRING CREEK RD, YAKIMA, WA 98903 4p 3 ;� tS; • Tl:ii<1OTHV' 'cd'6.EPNICEfltt'NhHAtN 201 & 9!T14,'A /E a r. $r {KIN\;;:v"�:t'9E' 'fJ'8_ 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 70 Total Parcels - Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 `NIxit"Stc'p Housing cf0,4004,i44 :29.00ryPow7kl,i'6ate,Rci'f#1r20 :4OPa, i!.1: SCI: Bii',4q/A.p :0000041:1"c 290Ob'V ibl ouse;hcit; t;3 2'®; . r ii lfili?'�'i;lf1'r,.'gS4$;gQ" devised NkOF fi Decd ivs?too3�-/f}Vl(�t aa-toi 1 - "7 S1 Sal- *--1 17 50‘,4- 11/3fi7 II DOC. INDEX Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State Zip Code Email Address Debby & Don Morgan 81 Cake Box Ln Cle Elum WA 98902 casa5329@gmail.com Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dbspeerll@gmail.com Vivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Pat Speer 108 N SOth Ave Yakima WA 98908 mospeer72@gmail.com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima WA 98908 rob@fmiwealth.net Robin:Gamache , `- -" j '7-7:7? 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 robing2@charter.net Bradley Tew 121 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 bradlev.tew@gmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 nramsev1019@gmail.com Pete Nathe DDS'&Lynn:Natlie:. ; _ _; �`._ .. __._. 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 lvnnnathe@msn.com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 rsherih(cagmail.corn Sheri Haertsch rsherih@smail.com Jacalyn,Holzer: -_ :: ;• '',:., r _ .: 112 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 iacalyn355@yahoo.com Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Presitge Ct Yakima WA 98908 Tom Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 tomluvz@hotmail.com Alfredo Llamedo alfredo@nwfairhouse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima mike@homesourcevakima.com Dave & Joanne Newman 4934 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 newmandandi@vahoo.com Sharen,Lov61', '; 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Bea'Fiscfier ;` w=:_.;,. ' w 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Gabe -Fischer,': . `-� __: _ °': j_ _�z: 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 ShirleRogstad '--= ,".' ``` ` , , p" . ', y 4932 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Velma`Crawford-.u.:w .a,`:°° ' '. 4938 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Mike Mar, ee Edgar,. , _..,., _"'_ 114 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Albert & Christine.Karau::A' : ;:_:�: -:_w. 4936 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Barbara_Brantingham.:". _. '.,_`; F_; 'w. 4933 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 katietisha • ahoo.com Leslie Shaw 4938 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Dayle Hudson 4936 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Connie Conklin 4938 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Walter & Edith Mabry 4933 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Marlene Froula 4935 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Janice Lyon 102 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Connie Simon 4932 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 cissrama@aol.com Shawna Spradlin 504 Clark St Moxee WA 98936 Lynne Maher 4934 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Adrienne Quinnell 104 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Carolyn horning" " .- e :_ Y ;=_, y_`;: 4937 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 David & Dora Robins 110 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave Unit 23 Yakima WA 98908 davidgloria@charter.net 1 • Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State Zip Code Email Address Ron.& Claudia Burkhardt.,''mow`` ,: - : : `--- 4931 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Bill Almon Jr 218 Staff Sgt Pendleton Way Yakima WA 98901 wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Steve Sevigny 5701 W Chestnut Ave #1 Yakima WA 98908 ss15022@aol.com David Mahoney 117 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dmahoney@imextrading.com Llesenia Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Heather Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Ryan Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Anson Morgan 118 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Roger & Dot Kline dotkline@gmail.com terrvklineCaicharter.net andv@klinellc.com dennisk@klinellc.com Dave & Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 belzer3b@charter.net Financial Management Inc c/o Clark Permann 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 clp@fmiwealth.net James K Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd Ste 2 Yakima WA 98902 wla@wlalaw.org Golda Cockrum 129 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Chelsea & Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Darlene & Sam Fogler 122 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim & Carmen Emerick 113 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jason & Tami Scrivner 123 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Charley & Ruth Scrivner 125 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Resident 127 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Timothy & Bernice Monahan 304 S 49th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim Rocha 4911 Prestige Ct Yakima WA 98908 Helen(?) Mahoney No Address or Email Listed Steve Sevigny 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Dorothy Edgerton 2207 S 88th Ave Yakima WA 98908 2 • • Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 10705-B Gilbert Road 10 Yakima, WA 98903-9203 bethb@ahtanum.net Chamber of Commerce 10 North 9th Street Yakima, WA 98901 chamber@yakima:org Department of Agriculture Kelly McLain PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 kmclain@agr.wa.gov Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Greg Griffith or Gretchen Koehler, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Se a@dahp.wa. ov P g Department of Commerce Growth Management Services P.O. Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov Department of Ecology Annie Szvetecz, SEPA Policy Lead P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 separegtster@ecv.wa:gov sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov lori.white@ecy.Wa.Rov Department of Ecology Gwen Clear, Regional Coordinator 1250 West Alder Street Union Gap, WA 98903 crosepacoordinator@ecy,wa.gov Department of Fish and Wildlife Eric Bartrand 1701 South 24th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Eric.Bartrand@dfw.wa.gov Department of Fish and Wildlife SEPA Desk PO Box 43200 Olympia, WA 98504 SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov Scott.Downes@dfw: wa.gov Department of Health Kelly Cooper PO Box 47820 Olympia, WA 98504 Kellylcooper@dbh.wa.gov Kellv.cooper@doh.wa.gov Department of Natural Resources SEPA Center PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504 sepacenter@dncwa.gav Department of Social & Health Services Terri Sinclair -Olson Operations Support and Services Division P.O. Box 45848 Olympia, WA 98504 TerrLSinCiai'r-dison@ds'hs.wa.gov )dshs.wa.gov Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council -EFSEC Stephen Posner, SEPA Officer PO Box 43172 Olympia, WA 98504-3172 sposner@utc.wa.gov Engineering Division Bob Degrosellier and Brett Sheffield, City Engineer 129 N 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 dana.kallevist@yakimawa.gov Nob Hill Water Association Bob Irving, Engineering Technician 6111 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98908 bob@nofihiilivater.org Office of Rural and Farm Worker Housing 1111 Marty Miller 1400 Summitview Ave, Steil 203 Yakima, WA 98902 Martym2@orfh:org Parks & Recreation Commission Jessica Logan PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Jessica:logan@parks.wa.gov U.S. Army Corps of Engineers a Regulatory Branch „p 8 BeberoMKfleub, Project Manager Cr ZP.O. Box 3755 ..�'i 1 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 .dos es t� Beirereirfafv+eeb@usace:armv.mit Wastewater Division Marc Cawley or Dana Kallevig 2220 East Viola Ave Yakima, WA 98901 marc.cawley@yakimawa:gov West Valley School District Angela Watts, -Asst. Supt. Of Business & Operations 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908-9299 wattsa@wvsd208:org WSDOT Paul Gonseth, Planning Engineer 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap, WA 98903 gonsetp@wsdotgov dana.kallevig@yakimawa:gov WSDOT South Central Region! Planning Office SCplanning@wsdot.wa.gov WSDOT, Aviation Division Patrick Wright 7702 Terminal St SW Tumwater, WA 98501 WrightP'@wsdot.wa.gov Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Rocco Clark, Environmental Coordinator P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Rocco.clark@bia.gov Yakama Nation Environmental Mgmt Program Elizabeth Sanchey, Environmental Review Coordinator P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 esanchev@vakama.com Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries Project John Marvin 760 Pence Road Yakima, WA 98909 jmarvin@yakama.com Yakima Air Terminal Robert Peterson, Airport Asst Manager 2400 West Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 robert.peterson@yakimawa.Kov Yakima Count Commissioners y Commissioners.web@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Health District Ryan Ibach, Director of Environmental Health 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Dr Ste#200 Union Gap, WA 98903 yhd@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Public Services Lynn Deitrick, Planning Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Lynn. Deitrick@co.vakima.wa:us ryan. ibach @co.yakima.wa. us ,Yakima County Public Services Vern Redifer, Public Services Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Vern.redifer@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima Greenway Foundation Kellie Connaughton, Executive Director 111 South 18th Street Yakima, WA 98901 kellie@yakimagreenway.org Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency Hasan Tahat, Engineering & Planning Supervisor 329 North 1st Street Yakima, WA 98901 ®®C• hasan@yrcaa.org # I - I I CL Yakima School District Scott lzutsu , Associate Superintendent 104 N 4'" Ave tYakima, WA 98902 izutsu.scott@vakimaschools.org Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Mike Shuttleworth, Planning Manager 311 North 4th Street, Ste# 202 Yakima, WA 98901 Mike.shuttlewor•th(alyvcog.org Yakima Valley Museum John A. Baule, Director 2105 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98902 john@yakimavallevmuseum.org- Yakima Waste Systems Keith Kovalenko, District Manager 2812 1/2 Terrace Heights Dr. Yakima, WA 98901 keithktwastecon nectio ns.com 0 0 lr511rtrb v.9 13 0 Century Link Manager 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications Kevin Chilcote 1005 North 16th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 City of Union Gap Dennis Henne, Development Director P.O. Box 3008 Union Gap, WA 98903 Department of Agriculture Kelly McLain P.O. Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Environmental Protection Agency NEPA Review Unit 1200 6th Ave. MS 623 Seattle, WA 98101 Federal Aviation Administration 2200 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 Federal Aviation Administration, Seattle Airports District Office Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner 1601 Lind Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-4056 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs PO Box 40909 Olympia, WA 98504 Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 North Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Soil Conservation District Ray Wondercheck 1606 Perry Street, Ste. F Yakima, WA 98902 Trolleys Paul Edmondson 313 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 United States Postal Service Maintenance Deptartment 205 W Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 WA State Attorney General's Office 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 Yakima, WA 98902 11° Eastern Drinking water Operations River View Corporate Center 16201 E Indiana Ave, Ste# 1500 Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Superintendent P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Program P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima School District Dr. Jack Irion, Superintendent 104 North 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Valley Canal Co Robert Smoot 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Sandra Hull 470 Camp 4 Rd Yakima, WA 98908 Cascade Natural Gas 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Kennewick, WA 99336 Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 10705-B Gilbert Road Yakima, WA 98903 \\Apollo\ Shared \ Planning \Assignments-Planning\LABELS and FORMS\SEPA REVIEWING AGENCIES updated 09.27.17 - Form Llst.docx Type of Notice: fR,ij i 6 Nita- V Ito f He aecisim File Number: POF 003-/7, [.` Cl Ol'f -%7 Qt-` �r� it -Pie -v-7 Date of Mailing: 113/1 7 • Maxey, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 11:31 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; 'Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte'; Cawley, Marc; 'Chamber of Commerce'; 'Department of Agriculture'; 'Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team'; 'Department of Ecology'; 'Department of Ecology - Lori White'; 'Department of Ecology - SEPA Register'; 'Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes'; 'Department of Natural Resources'; 'Department of Social & Health Services; 'Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review'; 'Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; 'Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving'; 'Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller'; Peterson, Robert; 'Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; 'US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore'; 'WA State Parks & Recreation Commission'; West Valley School District - Angela Watts'; 'WSDOT - Paul Gonseth'; 'WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office; 'WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright; 'Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; 'Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey'; 'Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin'; 'Yakima County Commissioners'; 'Yakima County Health District; 'Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach'; 'Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick'; 'Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer'; 'Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton'; 'Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat'; 'Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth'; 'Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule'; 'Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko'; 'Glenn Amster' Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: RE: Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17, CL2# 011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attachments: REVISED NOTICE OF HE DECISION - Next Step Housing - APP CL2 SEPA.PDF Please see the attached Revised Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist I City of Yakima Planning Division (509) 576-6669 - lisa.Maxey(a'lyakimawa.gov From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 9:21 AM To: Belles, Carolyn <Carolyn.Belles@yakimawa.gov>; Brown, David <David.Brown@yakimawa.gov>; Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Caruso, Joe <Joe.Caruso@yakimawa.gov>; Cutter, Jeff <Jeff.Cutter@yakimawa.gov>; Davenport, Joan <Joan.Davenport@yakimawa.gov>; Dean, James <James.Dean@yakimawa.gov>; DeBusschere, Suzanne<suzanne.debusschere@yakimawa.gov>; Denman, Glenn <Glenn.Denman@yakimawa.gov>; Desgrosellier, Bob <Bob.Desgrosellier@yakimawa.gov>; lbarra, Rosalinda <Rosalinda.lbarra@yakimawa.gov>; Kallevig, Dana <Dana.Kallevig@yakimawa.gov>; Kara, Naeem <Naeem.Kara@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Layman, Randy <Randy.Layman@yakimawa.gov>; Matthews, Archie <Archie.Matthews@yakimawa.gov>; Maxey, Lisa <Lisa.Maxey@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Meloy, Randy <Randy.Meloy@yakimawa.gov>; Riddle, Dan <Dan.Riddle@yakimawa.gov>; Rizzi, Dominic ®oc 1 IPS® X H-llCL <dominic.rizzi@yakimawa.gov>; Schater, Scott <Scott.Schafer@yakimawa.gov>; Shane, Mike <Mike.Shane@yakimawa.gov>; Soptich, Mark <Mark.Soptich@yakimawa.gov>; Watkins, Sara <Sara.Watkins@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Zammarchi, Loretta <Loretta.Zammarchi@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte <bethb@ahtanum.net>; Cawley, Marc <Marc.Cawley@yakimawa.gov>; Chamber of Commerce <chamber@yakima.org>; Department of Agriculture <kmclain@agr.wa.gov>; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team <reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology <sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology - Lori White <lori.white@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register <separegister@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator <crosepacoordinator@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife <SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand <Eric.Bartrand@dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes <Scott.Downes@dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Natural Resources <sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov>; Department of Social & Health Services <Terri.Sinclair-Olson@dshs.wa.gov>; Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner <sposner@utc.wa.gov>; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving <bob@nobhillwater.org>; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller <martym@orfh.org>; Peterson, Robert <Rob.Peterson@yakimaairterminal.com>; Scott Izutsu - Yakima School District <izutsu.scott@yakimaschools.org>; US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore <david.j.moore@usace.army.mil>; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission <jessica.logan@parks.wa.gov>; West Valley School District - Angela Watts <wattsa@wvsd208.org>; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth <Gonsetp@wsdot.wa.gov>; WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office <SCplanning@wsdot.wa.gov>; WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright <wrightp@wsdot.wa.gov>; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark <rocco.clark@bia.gov>; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey <esanchey@yakama.com>; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin <jmarvin@yakama.com>; Yakima County Commissioners <commissioners.web@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Health District <yhd@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach <ryan.ibach@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick <Lynn.Deitrick@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer <vern.redifer@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton <Kellie@yakimagreenway.org>; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat <hasan@yrcaa.org>; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth <mike.shuttleworth@yvcog.org>; Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule <john@yakimavalleymuseum.org>; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko <keithk@wasteconnections.com> Cc: Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Subject: Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attached is a Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575- 6042 or email to: joseph.call oun c(�r yakirnawa. ov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 — Lisa.M axevAvaklmaw a.gov 129 N 2"d Street, Yakima, WA 98901 4,7!; Wes it'n. Pcirinisi ' 2 DOC. INDEX • • ANY QUAL.\ ®®®�B®®® Panning DEPAKTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOrMENT Planning Division Joan Davenport, AICP, Director 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning REVISED NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION November 3, 2017 On October 30, 2017 the City of Yakima Hearing Examiner rendered his decision on APP#003- 17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17. The appeal submitted by Attorney James Adams on behalf of appellants Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Tew, Tina Martinez, and their spouses is an appeal of the Administrative Official's decision for CL2#011-17 and threshold determination for SEPA#014-17, approving a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. The Hearing Examiner's Findings and Decision is available upon request and can be viewed online at: www.yakirnawa.gov/public-notice. Select APP#003-17 from the list to view the document. The Hearing Examiner's decision upholding the Administrative Official's Class (2) permit (CL2#0l 1-17) may be appealed to the Yakima City Council. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen (14) days following the date of mailing of this notice and shall be in writing on forms provided by the Planning Division. The appeal fee of $340 must accompany the appeal application. In accordance with YMC § 16.07.010, a Hearing Examiner's decision affirming the SEPA Responsible Offical's Determination of Nonsignficance (DNS) for City File Number SEPA#014- 17 is final and not subject to further administrative appeal. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042 or e-mail: ioseph:calhoun®yakimawa.gov. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Date of Mailing: November 3, 2017 teg '1111' DOC. 2015 INDEX 1994 # 0-11 7a 10PAa III CITY OF AAKIMA P arming DEP. TMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVEL VIENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning REVISED NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION November 3, 2017 On October 30, 2017 the City of Yakima Hearing Examiner rendered his decision on APP#003- 17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17. The appeal submitted by Attorney James Adams on behalf of appellants Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Tew, Tina Martinez, and their spouses is an appeal of the Administrative Official's decision for CL2#011-17 and threshold determination for SEPA#014-17, approving a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. Enclosed is a copy of the Hearing Examiner's Decision. The Hearing Examiner's decision upholding the Administrative Official's Class (2) permit (CL2#011-17) may be appealed to the Yakima City Council. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen (14) days following the date of mailing of this notice and shall be in writing on forms provided by the Planning Division. The appeal fee of $340 must accompany the appeal application. In accordance with YMC § 16.07.010, a Hearing Examiner's decision affirming the SEPA Responsible Offical's Determination of Nonsignficance (DNS) for City File Number SEPA#014- 17 is final and not subject to further administrative appeal. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-(x@42 or e-mail: iosephr.ca(fioun@yakimawa.gov. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Date of Mailing: November 3, 2017 Enclosures: Hearing Examiner's Decision • Yakima i121„1! O. "DEX l t 1994 .f1. • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: APP#003-17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing 118 N 50th Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the City of Yakima Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant and parties of record; that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division; and that said notices were mailed by me on the 1st day of November, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist DOC. INDEX # -lob .4 4 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC 3083 POINT WHITE DR 'BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 .1.013L141,41/ A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 1813L14134/ ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE S SEATTLE WA 98118 � I u1831 44t'442�S'': r ,..' �� PWit*: � ..f CECT' `\PARTNiE;h 5; t ,�4`=;,<`"':><M',::' ;,.",,, LLC44. .:,,: �;t;. I.;2A9' 9$RO :;Nf RIUSE4,R„A'S;TE= 1,20” ; ?:,. ; : 1 A;�I +i'14 WA, 5,0901'4 �tq `' � rw�rc, +r �J ,zr�r dir 1 �t �4 "� r 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA WA 98902 i 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141529 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 OR - LLC 4906 SU I4 , ,—.,!I W AVE MA, WA 98908 18132141530 OHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHA C 490 • - - ,, 1 TVI ►? 1 ' j ' A, WA 98908 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 8132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 18132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 18132141550 RUD •OWELL FAMILY T! 2160 GRE , EU , OR 9740 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN-JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING P937 PEAR TREE CT AKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER 125 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 CHELSEA BROWNLEE 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ‘ )0Cie * (--10c 1013414L47/ CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140 N 52ND AVE ,YAKIMA, WA 98908 1013L14L408 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON PO BOX 171 COWICHE, WA 98923 1813L141571 CYNDI MULLENHOFF 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142496 DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIA J TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA S BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W III & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 4909 72ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 101.8132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141552 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 4. ' C & MARY C HOVSEPIA► 4171 MCC o . - ' % YAKIM ' 8903 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 80 BUCHANAN RD SELAH, WA 98942 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 S 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N 50TH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111N53RDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117N52NDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT I37 N 52ND AVE AKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 RICHARD J WEAVER 6203 IVY AVE YAKIMA, WA 98960e, Hurling IPli@P 18132141496 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT •YAKMA, WA 98908 18132142498 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141491 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT 4931 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142470 RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUEL) & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 70 Total Parcels - Next Step Housing - Bicycle Apartments LLC - APP#003-17 (CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17) John t l,i-scud rbg - v''` Ave- # Sea4-1e,, WA- G1 a P NA -c, of 1E Dead o v ft -PP 3 -►1, CL *OI t -1-7 1- 3ev+- It I 117 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON 4904 SPRING CREEK RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 DOC. 9 D X Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State • Zip Code Email Address Debby & Don Morgan 81 Cake Box Ln Cle Elum WA 98902 casa5329@gmail.com Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N SOth Ave Yakima WA 98908 dbspeerll@gmail.com Vivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Pat Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 mpspeer72@gmail.com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima WA 98908 rob@fmiwealth.net Robin'_Gamache;_ �__ 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 robing2@charter.net Bradley Tew ' 121 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 bradley.tew@gmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 nramsey1019@gmail.com Pete=NatheDDS &_LyWNathe,=`� - -":. _ " `'' 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Ivnnnathe@msn:com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 rsherih@gmail.com Sheri Haertsch rsherih@gmail.com Jacalyn Holies: ,: -- . 112 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 jacalvn355@yahoo.com Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Presitge Ct Yakima WA 98908 Tom Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 tomluvz@hotmail.com Alfredo Llamedo alfredo@nwfairhouse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima mike@homesourceyakima.com Dave & Joanne Newman 4934 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 newmandandl@vahoo.com Sharon;Lovell . - __-.. , , ;, 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Bea Fischer : ; , ' 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Gabe Fischer _ - , _ -__ ___ 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Shirley Rogstad, ` . ._ __'_.. 4932 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Velma Crawford , o " , _ _ _ 4938 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Mike`& Mary Lee Edgar-,_ : =- , 114 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Albert&Christine_Karau___`_ _ . __,; ; .... 4936 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Barbara Braritingham y s.` -a'' -7,—;----- `° a'`�; _ r 4933 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 katietisha@vahoo.com Leslie Shaw 4938 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Dayle Hudson 4936 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Connie Conklin 4938 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Walter & Edith Mabry 4933 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Marlene Froula 4935 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Janice Lyon 102 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Connie Simon 4932 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 cisgrama@aol.com Shawna Spradlin 504 Clark St Moxee WA 98936 Lynne Maher 4934 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Adrienne Quinnell 104 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 ol "n orn Cary C.ing.. 4937 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 David & Dora Robins 110 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave Unit 23 Yakima WA 98908 davidgloria@charter.net 1 Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State _ Zip Code Email Address Ron & Claudia Burkhardt;:_ .: _ _ : _-. _ - _.._ ; ,_: ; 4931 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Bill Almon Jr 218 Staff Sgt Pendleton Way Yakima WA 98901 wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Steve Sevigny 5701 W Chestnut Ave #t1 Yakima WA 98908 ssi5022@aol.com David Mahoney 117 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dmahonev@imextrading.com Llesenia Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Heather Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Ryan Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Anson Morgan 118 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Roger & Dot Kline dotkline@email.com terrykline@charter.net andv@klinellc.com dennisk@klinellc.com Dave & Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 belzer3b@charter.net Financial Management Inc c/o Clark Permann 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 clp@fmiwealth.net James K Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd Ste 2 Yakima WA 98902 wla@wlalaw.org. Golda Cockrum 129 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Chelsea & Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Darlene & Sam Fogler 122 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim & Carmen Emerick 113 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jason & Tami Scrivner 123 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Charley & Ruth Scrivner 125 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Resident 127 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Timothy & Bernice Monahan 304 S 49th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim Rocha 4911 Prestige Ct Yakima WA 98908 Helen(?) Mahoney No Address or Email Listed Steve Sevigny 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Dorothy Edgerton 2207 S 88th Ave Yakima WA 98908 2 • • • In -House Distribution E-mail List Name Division E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administration Carolvn.Belles@yakimawa.gov Glenn Denman Code Administration G1enn:Denman@yakimawa.gov Joe Caruso Code Administration .'Joe.Caruso@yakiinawa.gov Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration Suzanne.Debusschere(ckyakimawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development Joari.Davenpart@yakimawagov Dan Riddle Engineering 'Dan.Rid'dle@yakimawa.gov Mike Shane Engineering Mike.Shane@yakimawa.gov Mark Soptich Fire Dept Mark.Soptieh@yakim'awa.gov Jeff Cutter Legal Dept Jeff.Cutter@yakimawa:gov Sara Watkins Legal Dept Sara. Watkiris®yakiiiiawa..gov. Archie Matthews ONDS Archie.Matthews@,yakimawa.gov Joseph Calhoun Planning Division Joseph.Calhoun@yakirnawa:gov Chief Rizzi Police Department ;Dominic.Rizzi@yakimawa.gov. Scott Schafer Public Works Dept Scott Sehafer(a?yakimawa:gov Loretta Zammarchi Refuse Division Loretta.Zammarchi@yakimawa.gov. Randy Layman Refuse Division Randy.Laytnan@yakimawa.gov Naeem Kara Transit Division Naeem.Kara�ayakiriiawa:gov James Dean Utilities James.Dean@yakimawa:gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Dana.Kallevig@,yakimawa:gov Randy Meloy Wastewater Randy.Meloy@yakimawa:gov For the Record/File Binder Copy Revised 04/2017 Type of Notice: Ni-c,O 46 Dei S t 0'2 File Number(s): PPP 4003-(7 (1,2* 011-17 S372/9 /1"QHL-1-17 Date of Mailing: IA 1 / 17 DOC. INDEX # (-IQ a • Maxey, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 9:21 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich; Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Department of Agriculture; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology; Department of Ecology - Lori White; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Social & Health Services; Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission; West Valley School District - Angela Watts; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office; WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey; Yakama- Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Yakima County Commissioners; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan lbach; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth; Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF HE DECISION - Next Step Housing - APP CL2 SEPA.PDF Attached is a Notice of Hearing Examiner's Decision regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575- 6042 or email to: joseph.calhoun(riyakimawa:gov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 - Lisa.Maxey a@.vakimawa.gov 129 N 2^' Street, Yakima, WA 98901 ,,,1 UM. • P annl"ng 1 DOC. INDEX ®on muNN 1 IL• • PlannYing DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Division Joan Davenport, AICP, Director 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION November 1, 2017 On October 30, 2017 the City of Yakima Hearing Examiner rendered his decision on APP#003- 17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17. The appeal submitted by Attorney James Adams on behalf of appellants Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez, and their spouses is an appeal of the Administrative Official's decision for CL2#011-17 and threshold determination for SEPA#014-17, approving a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. The Hearing Examiner's Findings and Decision is available upon request and can be viewed online at: www.yakimawa.gov/public-notice. Select APP#003-17 from the list to view the document. Any part of the Hearing Examiner's decision may be appealed to the Yakima City Council. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen (14) days following the date of mailing of this notice and shall be in writing on forms provided by the Planning Division. The appeal fee of $340 must accompany the appeal application. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042 or e-mail: joseph.cal.houn@,yakimawa.gov. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Date of Mailing: November 1, 2017 e®a DOC. 'IIID' INDEX 1994 # -I {� CITY OF YAKIMA arming DEP/ FMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELC ✓LENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning NOTIFICATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION November 1, 2017 On October 30, 2017 the City of Yakima Hearing Examiner rendered his decision on APP#003- 17, CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17. The appeal submitted by Attorney James Adams on behalf of appellants Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez, and their spouses is an appeal of the Administrative Official's decision for CL2#011-17 and threshold determination for SEPA#014-17, approving a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. Enclosed is a copy of the Hearing Examiner's Decision. Any part of the Hearing Examiner's decision may be appealed to the Yakima City Council. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen (14) days following the date of mailing of this notice and shall be in writing on forms provided by the Planning Division. The appeal fee of $340 must accompany the appeal application. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042 or e-mail: joseph.ca[houn@yakimawa.gov. Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Date of Mailing: November 1, 2017 Enclosures: Hearing Examiner's Decision DOC. ONDEX '111r 2015 1994 • ## IIVA Plafrining g A. APP#003-17 (CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 SIGN -IN SHEET City of Yakima HEARING EXAMINER City Hall Council Chambers Monday September 25, 2017 Beginning at 200 p.m. Public Hearin tBLICANN NEXT STEP HOUSING s CITY .QEMIM® Panning 16 118 N 50T" AVE PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY Page 1 112/ 1'/) r g,`0' 4'29725/2017 HE Hearine DOC. INDEX It L_n • mit& ParinYina • SIGN -Illi SHEET .evsm ■MN ParinYina Indicate agenda item of interest NAME ' ' MAILING ADDRESS or E-MAIL - , : ZIP CODE /41111 -441 ' . 14 I 1 / , Ao _'7 ASi'floni af ad- 1 - 4 771 AYY ,EAG'-0,Lvlo- Y1bZra• 41t,jtv_4_6, 570 i G,c m ui) AL oL C}6g06 c,,eli )3 - T ..i i c, ,el 0,,p A R g u liq 3 G`7go ,,Ti .e.. (i,,,-, C— '/ S q u . t( V o20 Y 5i« ';..- 2 PTt c pg e ;, an / /2 e/ � :.:� 712 / �� l., .// p.,-, gc0r6 F hoof\ 4R3PeArTr-e, Cf cma.z. cfia iiik) fit IF D Jahn e n of s- ' a s ch -11 1)4{, 6\ kijk\v\UIarc1� r IA.C�%Y(, I `iUy t `� � - i J 15101 -144- 0 eysaw cc:164 6,32-ete.6.\ •, qg4 Z Z C 11 'i 2 Z c2._.X..--,.--- 24,0 w - o.L.titt-13( ---e ,A,96 -z___ n 1\q \ R l' .-n • c0 * L tic_- 7 ct 0X c( kv,t,-,ttc/ ,) Sot,/Lit 9bid`// (17.r -0,`z /2 ),u 52 gyve 1 g9eiZ JUt\& Ly a! - ,i9 N sv /v6.- 98 90 7 Ivi i c'ePa$191144., 1(0, AI, s-� jxf . Trc); Mit i 1 1 i V ( c-i'll \ 4 -e 5 (-2-? oq t . ugAr-> .4 >tei v,. � - •4,,. t( ditite, L( 7 31 e` c— C ?- Ter08 Page 2 09/25/2017 HE Hearing DOC. INDEX .!sea t%*. tit • P aYrininc SIGN -IN SHEET #71 11 I I&e 0a� PannYi4nc Indicate; agenda : item' of'interest , :' � :.., = . NAME . MAILING ADDRESS or .E-MAIL - . _ ... =ZIP CODE / 'vim /(CIV ` ' 61/r,i Cerql c ° mac c .S--6(. UA -1 ` t0 1. 4/9Se 4 / cep CC aktrfz 9 e90 /az-44i //1- ,/4S 7/i frww7 4f-- r ct�' - 11)1231,17) e / :126 7 . T(2 Al, 7____ i' i gYOS i-Di,r ;2 ir( Page 3 09/25/2017 HE Hearine DOC. INDEX •Dia aea� iso ■ ®®a Mak Planning • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, A1CP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER AGENDA Monday September 25, 2017 Yakima City Hall Council Chambers Beginning at 2:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. INTRODUCTION III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. NEXT STEP HOUSING (08/01/2017) APP#003-17 (CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17) Planner: Joseph Calhoun Address: 118 N 50th Ave Request: Appeal of Administrative Official's decision for CL2#011-17 and threshold determination for SEPA#014-17, approving a proposed 80 - unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. V. ADJOURNMENT If you are unable to attend the hearing, you may submit your comments in writing prior to the hearing. You may also submit written testimony at the hearing. Yakima • DOC. MIDEX # 2015 1994 Hearing Examiner AGENDA ONLY Distribution List 07/20/2017 Phil Lamb 3 1 1 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 K[T KATS Radio 4010 Summitview, Suite 200 Yakima, WA 98908 111 All YPAC randy.beehlerayakimawa.gov Yakima Assoc. of Realtors Gov. Affairs Committee 2707 River Road Yakima, WA 98902-1165 KARY Radio 17 N 3rd St Ste 103 Yakima, WA 98901 mike:brown@vakimawa.ao:v bonnieaozano@yakimawa.gov john.fannin®yakimawa.gov Dominic Rizzi Police Chief dominic.rrizi(ttlyakirnawa.gov KCYU-FOX 68 David Okowski 1205 West Lincoln Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 KIMA TV 2801 Terrace Heights Drive Yakima, WA 98901 Bob Stewart Fire Chief bob.stewart tryakimawa.gov Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 N. Keys Rd. Yakima, WA 98901 KNDO TV 216 West Yakima Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 Sonya Claar-Tee City Clerk s'onya:claartee@yakimwa.gov Office of Rural FWH Marty Miller 1400 Summitview #203 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Herald -Republic P.O. Box 9668 Yakima, WA 98909 Cliff Moore City Manager 111 Cliff mooreQyakimawa.gov Yakima School Dist. #7 Superintendent 104 North 4th Street Yakima, WA 98902 VIVA P.O. Box 511 Toppenish, WA 98948 eally:price akimawa.gov Jeff Cutter City Attorney Jeff cutter c®yakintawa.gov Radio KDNA P.O. Box 800 Granger, WA 98932 Business Times Bruce Smith P.O. Box 2052 Yakima, WA 98907 Patrick D. Spurgin 411 N. 2"d St. Yakima, WA 98901 KAPP TV Attn: Newsroom PO Box 1749 Yakima, WA 98907-1749 Yakima Valley C.O.G. 311 N. 4th Street #204 Yakima, WA 98901 Gary Cuillier 314 N. 2"d Street Yakima, WA 98901 Reed C. Pell 31 Chicago Avenue #4 Yakima, WA 98902 reed a reedcpell•.net Maud Scott 307 Union Street Yakima, WA 98901 • DOC. #x_15_ Hearing Examiner Packet AGENDA, STAFF REPORT, SITE PLAN AND MAPS......... 01/05/2017 Sara Watkins City Legal Department Sara.watkins@yakimawa.gov Yakima County Planning County Courthouse jefferson.spencer@co.yakima.,wa.us ' Archie Matthews ONDS Archie.nlatthews@yakirnawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development (oan:davenport@yakimawa.gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Division Dana.kallevig@yakimawa.gov Brett Sheffield Engineering Division Brett.sheffield@yakimawa.gov Yakima County Planning Public Services Vern Redifer Vern.redifer©co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Commissioners Comrnissioners.web@co.yakima.wa .us DON'T FORGET TO SEND ONE TO THE APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER........... Binder Copy For the Record/File Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud 2900 Powerhouse Rd #120 Yakima, WA 98902 John Mifsud •38— 30`" Ave #4 Seattle, WA 98122 Bicycle Apartments LLC c/o Next Step Housing 2900 Powerhouse Rd #120 Yakima, WA 98902 iohn@nextstephousing.com James K. Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd #2 Yakima, WA 98902 wick, cawlo,(AA) .ovc3 DOC. • s AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: APP#003-17 Next Step Housing 118 N 50th Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the City of Yakima, Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Appeal of Administrative Official's Decision. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the appellant and all parties of record and that said notices were mailed by me on the 24th day of August, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. 4,-;,,,79// aclfr Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist DOC. INDEX # A -1c 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC 3083 POINT WHITE DR BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 1613L14141/ A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 1.015L14134/ ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE S SEATTLE WA 98118 :18301741"4115' •` BGC !C'LC PABTM{E,NkTiS' LC 19Q0.P'C lt[R`H',®USE R`DDS11 " E ., �¢ ,.. '^Y(l�i�tpJ�,!1Asi"9E9'C�`L�r' 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141529 JOH II FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, — 4906 SU i' ,•. IE a + Y ' '' MA, WA 98908 18132141530 J0FtN ON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARD , 4906 SU a ' 'IE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 OL8132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 18132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 18132141550 RU D ' • • WELL FAMILY : - 2160 GREE • EUG ' , •R 9740 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN—JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING I937 PEAR TREE CT AKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER 125 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 CHELSEA BROWNLEE 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908_ DOC. ... n Ra. can-z______..... nuellL�I� 12513L14L4y/ CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140 N 52ND AVE ,(AKIMA, WA 98908 12513L14L4b25 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON PO BOX 171 COWICHE, WA 98923 12513L141S01 CYNDI MULLENHOFF 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142496 DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIA J TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA S BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W III & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 4909 72ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 8132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141552 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 K• • • C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MC . • UGH R II YAKIMA, WA •"• 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 80 BUCHANAN RD SELAH, WA 98942 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 S 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 5 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N 50TH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111N53RDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117N52NDAVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT I37 N 52ND AVE AKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 RICHARD J WEAVER 6203 IVY AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 DOC. INDEX =ILL.) 10134141470 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT ,YAKIMA, WA 98908 18134144475 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141491 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT 4931 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142470 RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUEL J & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON 4904 SPRING CREEK RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA,WA 98908 70 Total Parcels - Next Step Housing - Bicycle Apartments LLC - APP#003-17 (CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17)Ya :-..r•, .,.;°5.,.,':`�—..� r.._.. Jan es K ams s ,ti 20ala`,ilPf3d dte2. ,,. U�+A�9Q�xA,, li;ia,.2ti�,:"� f exlS ep'HIolus,,g 4� *2.930 Pg*W'r ci "se g cl Ste'•2 4 Ya,kOma ; 98902 " ' , J0 SLt 'f'`- III nne�nn Nc chp* APP *003-47 Sent 6/21-/// 7 10 DOC. #-7b • • • Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#03-17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State Zip Code Email Address Debby & Don Morgan 81 Cake Box Ln de Elum WA 98902 casa5329@Pmail.com Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dbspeerll@gmail.com Vivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Pat Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 mpspeer72@gmail.com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima WA 98908 rob@fmiwealth.net Robin Gamaehe `._''';. _'_ . = . ,_ - a ; 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 robing2@charter.net Bradley Tew 121 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 bradley.tew@gmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 nramsey1019@gmail.com Pete,Nathe,DDS:&Lynn:NatFie::..:;' . ,. .,v.-":: 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 lynnnathe@msn.com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 rsherih@gmail.com Sheri Haertsch rsherih@gmail.com JacalynHolier":`=•; ` _a f ____ _" :.;:_ �__,� ' 112 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 jacalyn355@yahoo:com Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Presitge Ct Yakima WA 98908 Tom Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 tomluvz@hotmail.com Alfredo Llamedo alfredo@nwfairhouse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima mike@homesourceyakima.com Dave & Joanne Newman 4934 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 newmandandj@yahoo.com Sh_aron:L'ovelll _' =F ,_w ,,:_ -•;: :' , :` r; m,_? 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Bea.Fisehe'r` __. .__ .': 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Gabe Fischer: , '. -. ;' ;.. - : '- 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 ShirleyyRogstad: '__ _- :. '..__: �.,- : } ': - 4932 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Velma Crawford ° _., .:_ - __"�-_. _';.; 4938 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Mike_&:Mary,Lee,:Edgar' ..�; :----77-7:-.- -.1. :l: _.:_I 114 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Albert & ahrls-tine Kafau--:"`s .. - — ._;-; - -'" ` --"; 4936 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Barbara Brantingharri".: _ , 4933 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 katietisha@yahoo.com Leslie Shaw 4938 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Dayle Hudson 4936 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Connie Conklin 4938 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Walter & Edith Mabry 4933 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Marlene Froula 4935 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Janice Lyon 102 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Connie Simon 4932 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 cjsgrama@aol.com Shawna Spradlin 504 Clark St Moxee WA 98936 ,Lynne Maher 4934 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 ! drienne Quinnell 104 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 farolyn Corning;, • ,•.:" _-. ; ; 4937 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 David & Dora Robins 110 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave Unit 23 Yakima WA 98908 davidgloria@charter.net 1 • • Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - APP#0 -17 - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 • Name Address City State ' Zip Code Email Address Roh;& Claudia Burkhardt=':'- " -_ = 4931 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Bill Almon Jr 218 Staff Sgt Pendleton Way Yakima WA 98901 wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Steve Sevigny 5701 W Chestnut Ave #1 Yakima WA 98908 ssi5022@aol.com David Mahoney 117 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dmahoney@imextrading.com Llesenia Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Heather Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Ryan Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Anson Morgan 118 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Roger & Dot Kline dotkline@gmail.com terrykline@charter.net andy@klinellc.com dennisk@klinellc.com Dave & Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 belzer3b@charter.net Financial Management Inc c/o Clark Permann 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 clp@fmiwealth.net James K Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd Ste 2 Yakima WA 98902 wla@wlalaw.org Golda Cockrum 129 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Chelsea & Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Darlene & Sam Fogler 122 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim & Carmen Emerick 113 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jason & Tami Scrivner 123 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Charley & Ruth Scrivner 125 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Resident 127 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Timothy & Bernice Monahan 304 S 49th Ave Yakima WA 98908 :PARTIES WITHIN THE 300 FOOT BUFFER ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN 2 • i1 In -House Distribution E-mail List Name Division E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administration Carolyn.Belles a yakimawa_gov Glenn Denman Code Administration G1enn.Denman(a�yakimawa.gov Joe Caruso Code Administration Joe.Caruso@yakimawa:gov Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration yakimawa.gov. Suzanne.Debusschere@yakimawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development Joan.Davenpott@yakimawa:gov Dan Riddle Engineering Dan.Riddle(a�yakimawa.gov Mike Shane Engineering Mike:Shane@yakimawa.gov Mark Soptich Fire Dept Mark.Soptich�?a yakiinawa:gov Jeff Cutter Legal Dept Jeff.Cutter@yakimawa.gov Sara Watkins Legal Dept Sara.Watkins@yakimawa.gov. Archie Matthews ONDS Arcliie.Matthe.ws@yakimawa.gov. Joseph Calhoun Planning Division Joseph:Calhoun,yakimawa:gov Chief Rizzi Police Department Dominic.Rizzi@yakimawa.gov. Scott Schafer Public Works Dept Scott.Schafer:@yakimawa.gov Loretta Zammarchi Refuse Division Loretta.Zarrrmarch.i@yakimawa.gov Randy Layman Refuse Division Randy:Laytnan@yakimawa.gov Naeem Kara Transit Division Naeem.Kara@yakimawa.gov James Dean Utilities James:Dean@yakimawa.gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Dana.Kallevi'g@yakimawa.gov Randy Meloy Wastewater Randy.Meloy@yakirnawa.gov For the Record/File Binder Copy Revised 04/2017 Type of Notice: Aik of ilipp oL File Number(s): PP #a23—/7 Date of Mailing: DOC. INDEX #-7b • Maxey, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 10:10 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Appeal - Next Step Housing - APP#003-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF APPEAL - Next Step Housing - APP.PDF Attached is a Notice of Appeal regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575-6042 or email to: joseph.ealhoun@yakima.gay. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 - Lisa.Maxey@vakiina'wa.gov 129 N 2"" Street, Yakima, WA 98901 111:1L PEi Thil 1 DOC. INDEX # N -gib A daily part of your life yakima-herald.com -Ad Proof - This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please confirm placement prior to deadline, by contacting your account rep at (509) 577-7740. Date: 08/22/17 Account #: Company Name: 110358 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING Contact: ROSALINDA IBARRA,AP Address: 129 N 2ND STREET YAKIMA, WA 98901-2720 Telephone: (509) 575-6164 Fax: Ad ID: 755859 Start: 08/24/17 Stop: 08/24/17 Total Cost: $120.45 # of Inserts: 2 Lines: 65.0 Ad Class: 6021 Ad Class Name: Public Legal Notices Account Rep: Simon Sizer Phone # (509) 577-7740 Email: ssizer@yakimaherald.com Run Dates: Yakima Herald -Republic 08/24/17 YakimaHerald.com 08/24/I7 Ad Proof CITY OF YAKIMA NOTIFICATION OF APPEAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL'S DECISION August 24, 2017 City File APP#003-17. This notice is being provided to par- ties of record, the applicant, and the appellant that a timely appeal was filed by James Adams, on behalf of Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses, on August 1, 2017 for the Admin- istrative Official's Decision on CL2#011-17 and SEPA#014- 17. The decision approved a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment build- ings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district, subject to conditions. In accordance with YMC § 15.16.040(D), "The [Planning] division shall: Set a reasonable time and place for the hearing of the appeal; and, Provide a notice of appeal and public hearing to the offi- cial whose decision is being appealed and parties entitled to notice of the decision, including posting of property and published notice at least ten days prior to the hearing." Appeal Hearing: The Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on September 25, 2017 at 2:00 pm in the City Council Chambers at 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA, 98901. In accordance with YMC 15.16.040(G), 'Testi- many given during the appeal shall be limited to those points cited in the appeal applica- tion. "At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue his written decision within ten working days unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the examiner. The deci- sion of the examiner will be final unless appealed to the legislative body. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042, or email josenh. calhoun9vakimawa gov (755859) August 24, 2017 DOC. INDEX • • .CITY;OF:YAKIMA NOTIFICATION OF:APPEAL • k'-.ADMINISTRATI,VE .:OFFICIAL'S; DECISION. August^24;12017:4' ';, Cit File'APP#003=17:�This;',; not ceiis tieing;provided'to par= tiesiof`.record the;applicant,'` ,and:the,appellant thatsa?ttimely; appeal; was filed'* Ja Adams, on;beha(fiof,Lynn INathe (David Mahoney 'Robert. .Vicker`s`, Bradley F ' 'r' LL'° wMay tinez and t ielr spous9s, on • August;1 2017'.fpr,'theAdmin- istrative Official's DecA#014isionon'.' `CL2#o1.1-17�and'SEP- ';17711he:decisionsapp Dyed+a.:; proposed!80;=unit; affordable=E ,housingcernmuny con itsisting? of;5:3 story;apartmeritbullcJ-. =' Ing"s�with 120 parking spaces`int. the B-1 zoningsdistrictsubjectt • ;to conditl'ons. In accordance ': , with�YMC§ 15.16.040(D),'The,< [Flanningj;division "shall :Set;„s ;a 'reasonable time and!plece' `.' farttie;hearingaof;,theappeall '• `` ro” and,;Pvide,a?noticce btYappeal:; .. and'publlc hearing10 thenoffi'-• cialwhoseadecision,is beingz:'' ,'a eaied and arrties entities Ap te:notice offhe decision ` .,.. including postiig ofiproperty,,..}x; and published.notice av,te,0t `•: :ten:daysprior toithe,heariing ,' jAppeal Hearing: The,H`'earingr tExaminer,wwillholda public ';` 2017F4 -2 0 mein herCIty Council" Chamb'e s at.1`29 N. 2riap eat Yakima, WA, 98901. In; accordancewirith t' >YrnMCyi1g5i1ve6n0;d4uor(inGg,'fheTeapti- 'shatbef /tedo dio?po,=en as; ` ;ced1n'Iherappalapplica. -, tion Atthe Conclusion?of ther;.y hearing,the"Hearing1Exami,ner. will,,ssue:his:w�itten decision, within,ten workingfdaysun less' a longer; period' is mutually agreed to;bythe appiicantzc and.ihe exarriirier'Ttietdeci , sion of the ezarninerwlllber,: fmiaay unless tappealed10140 leglativebody:Fopfurher informationoasstancy u"contacosephCitioun;;PlanngManaer,'at(509j?575,-6042or email(josepti;." calk_ �un@yakimaw "• r .� i'., r:: c 1,�'! ..ate,:.; 'i'. ;.•. r�'" " (755859): August ®©C. INDEX / a- .I2 Btu\\ 171®®t :% ®II Panning DEPT. . fMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELC. .vIENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning NOTIFICATION OF APPEAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL'S DECISION August 24, 2017 City File APP#003-17 This notice is being provided to parties of record, the applicant, and the appellant that a timely appeal was filed by James Adams, on behalf of Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Martinez and their spouses, on August 1, 2017 for the Administrative Official's Decision on CL2#011-17 and SEPA#014-17. The decision approved a proposed 80 - unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district, subject to conditions. In accordance with YMC § 15.16.040(D), "The [Planning] division shall: 1. Set a reasonable time and place for the hearing of the appeal; and, 2. Provide a notice of appeal and public hearing to the official whose decision is being appealed and parties entitled to notice of the decision, including posting of property and published notice at least ten days prior to the hearing." Appeal Hearing: The Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing on September 25, 2017 at 2:00 pm in the City Council Chambers at 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA, 98901. In accordance with YMC 15.16.040(G), "Testimony given during the appeal shall be limited to those points cited in the appeal application."At the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Examiner will issue his written decision within ten working days unless a longer period is mutually agreed to by the applicant and the examiner. The decision of the examiner will be final unless appealed to the legislative body. For further information or assistance you may contact Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575-6042, or email joseph.calhounCa�vakimawa.gov Jp Bse h Calhoun Planning Manager Enclosures: Appeal Application DOC. INDEX • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step HousingBicycle Apartments 118 N 50th Ave 1, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the City of Yakima Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Decision (Administrative Official) & Determination of Non -Significance. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant and all parties of record, that are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on this 18th day of July, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist DOC. 9NDEX 14-I b Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 0 10705-B Gilbert Road Yakima, WA 98903-9203 bethb@ahtanum.net Chamber of Commerce 10 North 9th Street Yakima, WA 98901 chamber@Yakima:org Department of Agriculture Kelly McLain PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 kmclain@agr.wa.gov Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Greg Griffith or Gretchen Koehler, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Sepa@dahp.wa.gov Department of Commerce Growth Management Services P.O. Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 reviewtea m @comme rce.wa.gov Department of Ecology Annie Szvetecz, SEPA Policy Lead P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 sepaiegister@ecv.wa.gov sepaunit@ecy.wa:gov_ - — -- -- Department of Ecology Gwen Clear, Regional Coordinator 1250 West Alder Street Union Gap, WA 98903 P croseoacoordinat r@ecv.wa.gov Department of Fish and Wildlife Eric Bartrand 1701 South 24th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Eric:Bartrand@dfw:wa.gov Department of Fish and Wildlife SEPA Desk PO Box 43200 Olympia, WA 98504 SEPAdesk@dfw.wagov Scott.Dawnes@dfw.wa.gov Department of Health Cooper PO Box 47820 Olympia, WA 98504 Keily.cooper@doh.wa:gov Department of Natural Resources SEPA Center PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504 sepacenter@dnr,wa.gov Department of Social & Health Services Terri Sinclair-Olson Operations Support and Services Division P.O. Box 45848 Olympia, WA 98504 'Te'rri.Sinclair=Olson@dshs.wa.gov - - Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council -EFSEC Stephen Posner, SEPA Officer P PO Box 43172 Olympia, WA 98504-3172 Sposner@utc,wa.gov Engineering Division Bob Degrosellier and Brett Sheffield, City Engineer 129 N 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 dana.kallevig@yakimawa:gov Nob Hill Water Association Bob Irving, Engineering Technician 6111 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98908 bob@riobhiltwater.org Office of Rural and Farm Worker Housing ik Marty Miller 1400 Summitview Ave, Ste# 203 Yakima, WA 98902 MartYm2@orfh.org Parks & Recreation Commission Jessica Logan PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Jessica.logan@parks:wa,gov U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch Deborah Knaub, Project Manager P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 .Deborah.J.Knaub@usIce.army.mil Wastewater Division Marc Cawley or Dana Kallevig 2220 East Viola Ave Yakima, WA 98901 marc.cawley@vakimawa.gov West Valley School District Angela Watts, Asst. Supt. Of Business & Operations 8902 Tier Road Yakima, WA 98908-9299 wattsa@wvsd208.org WSDOT Paul Gonseth, Planning Engineer 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap, WA 98903 gonsetp@wsdot:gov dana:kallevig@vakimawa:gov WSDOT South Central Region) Planning Office SCplanning@wsdot.wa.gov WSDOT, Aviation Division Patrick Wright 7702 Terminal St SW Tumwater, WA 98501 WrightP@wsdot.wg.gov Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Rocco Clark, Environmental Coordinator P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Rocco.clark@bia.gov Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program Cialita Keys, Environmental Review Coordinator P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 ckevs@vakama,4om Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries Project John Marvin 760 Pence Road Yakima, WA 98909 imarvin@vakama.com Yakima Air Terminal Robert Peterson, Airport Asst Manager 2400 West Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 robert.peterson@vakimawa.gov Yakima County Commissioners Commissioners.web@co.vakima.wa.us Yakima County Health District Ryan Ibach, Director of Environmental Health 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Dr Ste#200 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yhd@co.vakima.wa.us Yakima County Public Services Lynn Deitrick, Planning Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Lvnn:Deitrick@co:vakima.wa.us rvan:ibach@co.Yakima.wa.us it, County Public Services Vern Redifer, Public Services Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Vern:redifer@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima Greenway Foundation Kellie Connaughton, Executive Director 111 South 18th Street Yakima, WA 98901 kellie@vakimagreenway.org Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency Hasan Tahat, Engineering & Planning Supervisor 329 North 1st Street ®®V. Yakima, WA 98901 hasan@vrcaaiorg INDEX # Yakima School District Scott Izutsu , Associate Superintendent '104 N 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 izutsu.scott@yakimaschools.org Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Shawn Conrad, Planner 311 North 4th Street, Ste# 202 Yakima, WA 98901 conrads@WcoR org Yakima Valley Museum John A. Baule, Director 2105 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98902 john(a vakimavallevmuseum.org Yakima Waste Systems Keith Kovalenko, District Manager 2812 1/2 Terrace Heights Dr. Yakima, WA 98901 keithk@wasteconnections.com 1 DOC. INDIA 'Century Link Manager 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications Kevin Chilcote 1005 North 16th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 City of Union Gap David Spurlock, Development Director P.O. Box 3008 Union Gap, WA 98903 Department of Agriculture Kelly McLain P.O. Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Environmental Protection Agency NEPA Review Unit 1200 6th Ave. MS 623 Seattle, WA 98101 Federal Aviation Administration 2200 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 Federal Aviation Administration, Seattle Airports District Office Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner 1601 Lind Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-4056 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs PO Box 40909 Olympia, WA 98504 Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 North Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Soil Conservation District Ray Wondercheck 1606 Perry Street, Ste. F Yakima, WA 98902 Trolleys Paul Edmondson 313 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 United States Postal Service Maintenance Deptartment 205 W Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 WA State Attorney General's Office 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 Yakima, WA 98902 'Yakama Eastern Drinking Water Operations Riverview Corporate Center 16201 E Indiana Ave, Ste# 1500 Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Superintendent P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Indian Nation Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Program P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima School District Dr. Jack Irion, Superintendent 104 North 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Valley Canal Co Robert Smoot 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Sandra Hull 470 Camp 4 Rd Yakima, WA 98908 Cascade Natural Gas 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Kennewick, WA 99336 Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 10705-B Gilbert Road Yakima, WA 98903 \\Apollo\ Shared \Nanning \Assignments-Planning\LABELS and FORMS\SEPA REVIEWING AGENCIES updated 06.23.17 - Form List.docx I Y Type of Notice: Q, of 7Q,f,15(O✓Lt ",' DNS File Number: C,{ 2 1-D(1-17 SO!' -I-/7 Date of Mailing: 7 / 1g '7 llt l1 DOC. INDEX #.-- 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC 083 POINT WHITE DR BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 18132141417 A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141547 ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE 5 SEATTLE, WA 98118 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 1:132141529 JOH ` \ FAMILY CENTURY 2 ORCHARDS, 4906. ,,. f ITVIE Y ' IMA, WA 98908 8132141530 JOH ' FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARD , 491- • c MINI T' . YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 18132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 1;8132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 132141550 RUD ' • • WELL FAMILY TR 2160 GREEN' ,-. " EU , • R 97401 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN-JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING 4937 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER i.25 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142497 CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142468 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON PO BOX 171 COWICHE, WA 98923 DOC. # /-1-6) a, 18132141561 CYNDI MULLENHOFF '1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142496 DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIAJ TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA S BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W III & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 4909 72ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 18132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141552 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 KA ' : C & MARY C HOVSEPI , ► 4171 MCC , - ' % YAKI a ', ,, ' 9890 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 8674 CHALMERS DR APT 1 LOS ANGELES, CA 90035 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 5 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 S 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N 50TH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT 137 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 RICHARD J WEAVER 1203 IVY AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141496 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142498 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908®®`+ fl1Mfll # 4-(40 cU 15131141491 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT '4931 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142470 RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUEL1 & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 SEAN WIEK 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON} 4904 SPRING CREEK RD YAKIMA, WA 98903YAKIt.1YAI;A'''/ -Mirg-t'1;.5 OVUITH`it'&s+13EF{!I0E I<:1:OK1 49TH'•AVE ,,909`08 ffi 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 70 Total Parcels - Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 �V:e ,tfiStt0,+?HNoeising i , % ?:.1Qh:91;04:4 r29t3:a-:Pott''e hth1s'e;;RtIWtl12`Q &4� krtl , : i ' '§',§10 ' 'i`cyc leek pa'rr:'rrm;e.c 0.) aLC Zirc :6)° r :te64,1ouriig 'asr et l o.ilisg*ef;*.3. 1 'Y 'ki;i, ia;s}q49;890 Jbhn W3Fad 13'8-��30+"Ave, #�i ` etAe (moi 981, 2, IUtcOf eC13I0'Z TANS CLa. 1 H- 7 4 S PR- 0/V /7 Ser -flap 1 DOC. INDEX • Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State Zip Code Email Address Debby & Don Morgan 81 Cake Box Ln Cle Elum WA 98902 casa5329@gmail.com Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dbspeerll@gmail.com Vivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Pat Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 mpspeer72@gmail.com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima WA 98908 rob@fmiwealth.net Robin Gamache.: `. ' a{ 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 robing2@charter.net Bradley Tew 121 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 bradley.tew@gmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 nramsev1019@gmail.com PeteNathe.DDS,& Lynn Nathe'. : , 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 lynnnathe@msn.com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 rsherih@gmail.com Sheri Haertsch rsherih@gmail.com JacalynHolzer_ : _ ___. _: ` 112 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 jacalyn355@yahoo.com Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Presitge Ct Yakima WA 98908 Tom Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 tomluvz@hotmail.com Alfredo Llamedo alfredo@nwfairhouse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima mike@homesourceyakima.com Dave & Joanne Newman 4934 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 newmandandi@yahoo.com Sharon•Lovell f _"r . ; :: : :•,' •.` , a ; 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Bea Fischer:: _ _ _ y _ _ _ : .. 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Gabe Fischer- - ` ` ' 4935 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Shirl_ey-Rogstad .- . • _ - �� 4932 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Velma Crawford "':: -..: .. y : ni 4938 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Mike & Mary Lee Edgarb., ., ' _ _° ) 114 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Albert &_Ch'riistine_Karau.. ;:` te _' _.. _"__,._: 4936 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Barbara Brantingha., m . :• •-` : _ ` - j 4933 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 katietisha@yahoo.com Leslie Shaw 4938 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 Dayle Hudson 4936 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Connie Conklin 4938 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Walter & Edith Mabry 4933 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Marlene Froula 4935 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Janice Lyon 102 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Connie Simon 4932 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 cisgrama@aol.com (Shawna Spradlin 504 Clark St Moxee WA 98936 +Lynne Maher 4934 Cherry Park Ct Yakima WA 98908 Adrienne Quinnell 104 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 Carolyn'Corning., . -:. : ' - r A ' : 4937 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 David & Dora Robins 110 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 David & Gloria Tufts 5101 Summitview Ave Unit 23 Yakima WA 98908 davidgloria@charter.net 1 • • Parties of Record - Next Step Housing - CL2#011-17 SEPA#014-17 Name Address City State Zip Code Email Address Ron & Claudia.BurkFia`rdt,'=, =`f' .. ;--T Y- ` r 4931 Pear Tree Ct Yakima WA 98908 Bill Almon Jr 218 Staff Sgt Pendleton Way Yakima WA 98901 wcalmon@almoncommercial.com Steve Sevigny 5701 W Chestnut Ave #1 Yakima WA 98908 ssi5022@aol.com David Mahoney 117 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 dmahoney@imextrading.com Llesenia Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Heather Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Ryan Massey 120 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Anson Morgan 118 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Roger & Dot Kline dotkline@gmail.com terrykline@charter.net andv@klinellc.com dennisk@klinellc.com Dave & Karen Belzer 4931 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima WA 98908 belzer3b@charter.net Financial Management Inc c/o Clark Permann 119 N 50th Ave Yakima WA 98908 cip@fmiwealth.net James K Adams 2010 W Nob Hill Blvd Ste 2 Yakima WA 98902 wla@wlalaw.org Golda Cockrum 129 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Chelsea & Sean Wiek 121 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Darlene & Sam Fogier 122 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jim & Carmen Emerick 113 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Jason & Tami Scrivner 123 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Charley & Ruth Scrivner 125 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 Resident 127 N 52nd Ave Yakima WA 98908 PARTIESTWITHIN;THEb300:EQ0 ,BUFF,ERjAREJ,HIGHLiGHTEDIINi,GREEN, 0 2 • • • • In -House Distribution E-mail List Name Division E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administration Carolyn.Bellesgyakimawa.gov Glenn Denman Code Administration G1enn.Denman@yakimawa.gov Joe Caruso Code Administration Joe.Caruso@yakimawa.gov Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration Suzanne.Debusschere@yakimawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development Joan.Daveriport cr yakimawa.go,v, Dan Riddle Engineering Dan.Riddle@yakimawa.gov. Mike Shane Engineering Mike.Shanenayakimawa.gov Mark Soptich Fire Dept Mark.Soptich@yakimawa.gov Jeff Cutter Legal Dept Jeff Cutter a yakirnawagov Sara Watkins Legal Dept Sara. Watkins@yakimawa.gov. Archie Matthews ONDS Archie.Matthews@yakimawa:gov Joseph Calhoun Planning Division Joseph.Calhoun@yakimawa.gov Chief Rizzi Police Department Dominic.Rizzi@yakimawa.gov Scott Schafer Public Works Dept Scott:Schafere,yakimawa.gov Loretta Zammarchi Refuse Division Loretta:Zariirriarchi@vakirnavva.gov Randy Layman Refuse Division Randy.Lavmana,yakimawa.gov Naeem Kara Transit Division Naeem.Kara@yakimawa.gov James Dean Utilities James.Dean(aiyakirnawa.gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Dana.Kallevig@ayakimawa.gov Randy Meloy Wastewater Randy.Meloy@yakimawa.gov For the Record/File Binder Copy Revised 04/2017 Type of Notice: ARC t(, Q f Dtej5109LQ41 D/5 File Number(s): C -v� ) l _/ 7 ` ' S x(17 #0111-17 Date of Mailing: /i/ 7 DOC. INDigx • Maxey, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 10:47 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Department of Agriculture; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Social & Health Services; Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller, Peterson, Robert; Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - Deborah J Knaub; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission; West Valley School District - Angela Watts; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office; WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Cialita Keys; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Yakima County Commissioners; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Shawn Conrad; Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Decision & DNS - Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF DECISION & DNS - Next Step Housing - CL2 SEPA.PDF Attached is a Notice of Decision and Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) regarding the above - entitled project. If you have any questions regarding this notice, please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575-6042 or email to: loseph.calhoun(yakimawa::gov: Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 576-6669 — Lisa.Maxey@yakimawa.gov 129 N 2"" Street, Yakima, WA 98901 iraaraa� ��® P ann'Ing DOC. INDEX # #,I1 ®® Planning DEP/ IMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELL -TIENT Joan Davenport, MCP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF DECISION AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION FOR REQUEST FOR TYPE (2) AND SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE NO: APPLICANT: PROJECT LOCATION: PROPERTY OWNER: PARCEL NUMBER: DATE OF REQUEST: DATE OF COMPLETE APP: DATE OF DECISION: STAFF CONTACT: I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC 118 N. 50th Ave., Yakima, WA Bicycle Apartments LLC 181321-41425 May 15, 2017 May 31, 2017 July 18, 2017 Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager Type (2) and SEPA Environmental Review for a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of five (5) 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Administrative Official approval of the requested Type (2) application and SEPA Environmental Review, subject to conditions. I1. FACTS: A. Location, Zoning of Subject Property and Surrounding Properties: 1. Location: The subject property is located at 118 N 50th Ave., Yakima, WA. 2. Zoning of Subject Property: The property's zoning is designated as Professional Business District (B-1). Per YMC § 15.03.0020(E), this zone is intended to: a. Establish and preserve areas for professional offices; b. Provide a buffer between commercial clusters and residential neighborhoods; and, c. Locate professional offices in areas receiving a full range of urban services. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 • Professional offices and, in some areas, a mix of professional offices and multifamily dwellings are the primary uses in the district. Generally, the professional business district contains smaller lot or parcel sizes. Residential densities are generally greater than twelve dwelling units per net residential acre. Building coverage may be as high as eighty percent of the site. Sitescreening requirements have been established to soften the visual impact of Targe buildings and parking lots to minimize potential nuisances from light, noise and glare. Development standards are intended to accommodate a mixture of high-density residential development and office uses. 3. Zoning and Uses of Surrounding Properties: The surrounding properties have the following zoning and uses: Zoning: Use: North: B-1 Professional and Financial Offices/Daycare East: B-1 Professional Offices South: R-3 and R-2 Single -Family and Duplex dwelling units West: R-1 Single Family dwelling units B. The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025 Future Land Use Map 111-3: The subject property is designated as High -Density Residential, which is characterized by "multi -family residential development [that] may include apartments, condominiums and townhouses, containing 12 or more dwelling units per acre. A limited range of other mixed land uses may be permitted, such as some professional offices and community services." (YUACP page III -14) C. Processing: 1. The applications for a Type (2) and SEPA Review were received on May 15, 2017. 2. On May 24, 2017, the applications were determined to be incomplete due to missing or incomplete application requirements. 3. By May 31, 2017, all requested information was submitted and the application was deemed complete for further processing. 4. In accordance with YMC § 15.04.030 Table 4-1 Permitted Land Uses, the proposed multi -family residential development: 13+ dwelling units per net residential acre, is designated as a Class (2) Use in the B-1 zoning district which requires Type (2) Review in accordance with YMC Ch. 15.14. 5. Pursuant to YMC § 16.05.010, a Notice of Application and Environmental Review was sent to SEPA Agencies, parties of record, and adjoining property owners within 300 - feet of the subject property on June 6, 2017. The comment period ended June 26, 2017. The city received 42 comments which are further discussed herein. 6. The proposal was reviewed by the City's Development Services Team (DST) on June 6, 2017. Final comments of the DST may be viewed at the City of Yakima Planning Division, and are integrated into this decision. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC 2 CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 DOC. ON X • D. Environmental Review: This project was concurrently reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). In accordance with YMC § 16.07.010, the SEPA Threshold Determination of Nonsignificance is incorporated as part of this Notice of Decision, and is attached to the decision. E. Transportation Concurrency: On June 7, 2017, the application was reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance. The development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review does not include any site development or safety issues, which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. The review does not address intersection level of service. F. Statement of Cause: Class 2 Use: Pursuant to YMC § 15.14.030, the applicant has provided in the application the following statements explaining the compatibility of the proposed Class (2) Use (see Class (2) Narrative): 1. Fully describe the proposed development, including the number of dwelling units and parking spaces. If the proposal is for a business, describe hours of operation, days per week and all other relevant information related to the business. "The Bicycle Apartments LLC will be an 80 unit affordable housing community sustainably constructed on a 2.98 acre parcel. It will consist of five (5) 3 -story walk-up building with 120 parking spaces (1.5 per unit). The location is excellent for amenities with a major bus line just a half block away. Four schools are within 1.5 miles. Banking, medical/dental, groceries, restaurants and retail options are within walking distance. There will be an On -Site Resident manager and an On -Site Assistant Resident Manager who will live on the property and be available to residents 24/7. During business hours, there will be an additional 1.5 FTE's providing On -Site Case Management Services. All residents living with special needs will come fully service -enriched from local referring partner agencies. A community clubhouse is planned to provide a range of social, recreational and educational programming for residents including weekly support groups and monthly independent living skills trainings. A Community BlockWatch Program will be facilitated by the Yakima Police Department that will include residential and commercial neighbors." 2. How is the proposal compatible to neighboring properties? "The residential use in this proposed community is consistent with neighboring zoning (R-3 to the south and R-1 to the west). Because the Bicycle Apartments will have 10 three, 30 two, and 40 one -bedroom apartments, it will house an equal number of predominantly small families as well as 40 single adults. The Bicycle will have a 40 -unit mix of general purpose housing and another 40 -units of housing for families and individuals experiencing situational homelessness. It will not house the chronic homeless. The main office for Community Living is directly across the street. Community Living is a service provider subcontracted by DSHS DDA and they will be referring and Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 3 DOC. # INDEX • • providing services for 12 high functioning, DD individuals at the Bicycle. Services will be most convenient because of the proximity location. The Bicycle will also be an Alcohol & Drug Free Community (ADFC) confirmed by random UA and Breathalyzer testing. All applicants will have to demonstrate one year of continuous sobriety verified by a third - party before moving in. Anyone who is involved with substance abuse of any kind is given just one right to remedy and then asked to relocate. Next Step Housing has 26 years of experience with ADFC's. Because over 60% of all violent crimes in Washington State are drug and/or alcohol related, the Bicycle Apartments will be safer than most communities where alcohol is allowed. There is a professional childcare center next door that will have increased customers. New customers will also come to the adjacent banks and medical/dental offices." 3. What mitigation measures are proposed to promote compatibility? "The 10 large family units & a playground will be on the NW corner, near the adjacent childcare center. Most one -bedroom units will be next to the existing single family and senior housing to the south and west to increase quiet. The architects are promoting aesthetic considerations in building design, using varying siding patterns and masonry wainscoting. They are also keeping the end of buildings at one- or two -stories, where feasible, to maintain a building scale compatible with neighboring structures. The site will have attractive landscaping throughout and a fence along the south and west property lines is planned to increase security and establish boundaries with neighbors. The Neighborhood BlockWatch Program will also be a blessing to neighbors, both residential and commercial." 4. How is your proposal consistent with current zoning of your property? "Current zoning of 8-1, allows Multi -Family Residential as a permitted land use with Administrative Review. Land to the south is currently zoned R-3* consistent with the use intended in the proposed community." *Staff note — the applicant submitted a revised site plan on May 25, 2017 that correctly identifies the parcel of R-2 zoned property at the SE corner of the subject property. 5. How is your proposal consistent with uses and zoning of neighboring properties? "Surrounding zones to the south and west are residential, with an R-3 zone located immediately south. The proposed community borders the B-1 zones to the north and across 50t`' Avenue to the east, providing a transition from residential to business uses. 6. How is your proposal in the best interest of the community? "The Bicycle will provide direly needed housing & amenities for a mix of special needs populations. It will relieve 10% of Yakima's homeless families with children problem. It addresses many identified needs in the Yakima Consolidated Plan 2015-2019; the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan 2025; the Yakima 10 Year Plan to End Homelessness and the 2015 Yakima County HOME Consortium's Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Report. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 4 DOC. INDN-la • III. FINDINGS: 1. Zoning & Future Land Use Designation: The subject property is zoned Professional Business District (B-1), with an underlying Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Designation of High Density Residential. 2. Proposed Class 2 Use: The proposed Class 2 Use for "Multi -Family Dwelling Units: 13+ DU/NRA" includes a total of 80 units in 5 separate buildings. 3. Site Design and Improvement Standards: a. Lot Coverage: Lot coverage in the B-1 zoning district in accordance with YMC Ch.15.05 Table 5-1 is limited to 80%. The subject site is currently vacant. The applicant's site plan dated May 25, 2017, identifies that upon completion of site renovation and landscaping the subject property will have 67% lot coverage. b. Structure Setbacks: YMC Ch. 15.05 Table 5-1 identifies structure setbacks of O- ft. from property line, 30 -ft. from the centerline of N. 50th Ave., and 20 -ft. from residential districts. The existing building and applicants' May 25, 2017, site plan meets or exceeds these standards on the east and north property lines. The structures adjacent to the west and south property lines do not meet the 20 - foot building setback from a residential zoning district. No Adjustment is requested. A revised site plan will be required that demonstrates compliance with this standard. c. Maximum Building Height: Maximum building height in the B-1 zoning district per YMC CH. 15.05 Table 5-1 is 35 -feet. Ail proposed buildings shall adhere to this standard. - d. Access: In accordance with YMC § 15.05.020(H) all new development shall have a minimum of twenty feet of lot frontage upon a public road or be served by a twenty foot access easement. The proposed development meets this standard with at least twenty feet of frontage and access onto N. 50th Ave. e. Sidewalks: In accordance with YMC § 15.05.020(J), sidewalks are required with new construction if one exists within two -hundred feet of the development on the same side of the street. As sidewalk exists along both streets, the applicant will be required to repair the existing sidewalk in accordance with YMC § 12.05.010 and the requirements of the City Engineer. f. Minimum Lot Size: There is no minimum lot size for multi -family residential in the B-1 zone. Rather, Table 5-2 states "Density may not exceed maximum number of dwelling units permitted per net residential acre." The proposed land use of multi- family residential development: 13+ dwelling units per net residential acre (du/nra) is being used. 80 proposed units on 2.98 acres yields approximately 27 du/nra. When considering multi -family development 13+, the maximum number of units is determined by how many units can be provided on a given site while still maintaining all other development standards (parking, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.) Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 5 DOC. . The proposed 80 units at 27 du/nra, as conditioned, has demonstrated compliance with the maximum number of du/nra calculation. g. Driveway Vision Clearance: All proposed driveways shown on the applicant's February 17, 2017, site plan meet the provisions of YMC § 15.05.040(B) for a minimum 15-ftX15-ft clearview triangle on each side of the driveway. h. Dedication of Street right-of-way: The existing right-of-way along both public streets are adequate and no dedication of right-of-way is required. 4. Off -Street Parking and Loading: a. Parking Circulation Plan: The applicant's site plan dated May 25, 2017, shows sufficient detail to meet the provisions of YMC § 15.06.030 (E), and shall be considered the parking circulation plan for this application. Furthermore, the City of Yakima Traffic Engineer and City Engineer reviewed the subject site plan and did not identify any parking circulation issues during the City of Yakima's Development Service Team meeting for this application. b. Proposed Use Parking: The parking standard for Multifamily dwellings with more than 10 units is 1.5 spaces per dwelling. The proposed 80 units will require 120 parking spaces. The applicant's site plan dated May 25, 2017 complies with this standard. c. Driveway Locations: The proposed driveway meets the provisions of YMC § 15.06.065 for two-way travel. d. Lighting of Parking Lots: The SEPA Checklist identifies parking and site lighting as part of the application. Per YMC § 15.06.100, all lighting shall be directed to reflect away from adjacent and abutting properties. Furthermore, the applicant shall be required to submit a photometric lighting plan that shows no Tight pollution upon abutting properties. 5. Site Screening: In accordance with YMC § 15.07.050 Table 7-1, and 15.07.060, Site screening standard "A" is required along all property lines. Site screening standard "A" is "A ten -foot -wide landscaped planting strip with trees at twenty -foot to thirty-foot centers, which includes shrubs and groundcover." The purpose of site screening is "to provide a visual buffer between uses of different intensity, streets and structures; reduce erosion and stormwater runoff; protect property values; and eliminate potential land use conflicts by mitigating adverse impacts from dust, odor, litter, noise, glare, lights, signs, water runoff, buildings or parking areas." (YMC § 15.07.010) The developer may substitute a higher sitescreening standard, with standard C being higher than B, and B being higher than A. 6. Signs: The applicant's site plan identifies a project sign near the entrance to the subject property. The proposed sign shall adhere to all standards for size, height, and location as required by YMC Ch. 15.08 and 11.08. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17. SEPA#014-17 6 DOC. INDEX # H --(o 1 • 7. Development Service Team Comments: a. Engineering: This project requires Title 12 improvements, including but not limited to the following: Review of the site revealed physical problems with existing frontage features. 1. YMC 8.64 — A new or modified commercial driveway approach is required, which meets the requirements of this chapter and standard detail R4. 2. YMC 8.67 and YMC 12.05 —Existing sidewalk along frontage that is unfit or unsafe shall also be repaired/replaced. New sidewalk shall be constructed per standard detail R5 (all sidewalk along 50th Avenue has been lifted by trees and must be replaced). New curbing shall be constructed per standard detail R1 (all curbing along 50th Avenue has been lifted by trees and must be replaced, all trees in "planting strip" must be removed as they have damaged sidewalk and curbing). 3. YMC 8.72 — An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for all work within the public right of way. Prior to performing any work in City right-of-way under the excavation and street break permits the Developer and Contractor are required to meet on site to review and discuss the needs of the development with Engineering's Construction Supervisor and Inspector. b. Traffic Engineering: The City of Yakima Street and Traffic Operations Manager reviewed the traffic impact study for the Bicycle Apartments submitted by Traffic Engineering Northwest. The study used appropriate land use description and trip generation factors from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine the vehicle trips expected to be generated by this development. The expected 50 peak hour trips generated by the site should cause minimal impact to the existing developments abutting 50th Avenue. 40% of the projected traffic, 20 vehicles, are expected to use 50th Avenue to south of the development site past the residential development during peak traffic hours. The amount traffic to be generated by this development will not warrant the installation of a traffic signal at Summitview Avenue and 50th Avenue. A traffic signal is not desirable at 50th Avenue due to poor spacing from the more desirable location of Summitview Avenue and 48th Avenue and the lack of right-of-way to provide a left turn lane on Summitview Avenue. Although not addressed in the traffic impact study, speeding and parking have also been raised as issues related to the development. The mixed commercial/residential uses and the proximity to a fruit packing facility is the primary reason for the speeding issue on 50th Avenue. The Bicycle Apartment project may exasperate that problem but it would not be a primary contributor. Speed humps are already scheduled to be installed by the City this year along the residential portion of the roadway to help minimize the problem. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 7 DOC. INDEX • Apartment complexes do often place additional demand for on -street parking. The problem is usually addressed after the development is occupied to determine the extent and possible mitigation measures if required. Any parking control measures introduced are likely to impact the existing adjacent land uses. All vehicle utilizing the available on -street parking would fall under the controls implemented. A benefit of higher parking densities is that it narrows the roadway thereby tending to keep vehicle speeds down. I recommend accepting the traffic impact study for the Bicycle Apartments as submitted. c. Code Administration: • Per Chapter 1 of the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), a licensed designer in responsible charge shall approve all submittals, including deferred submittals related to construction of this project. • Per Chapter 4 of the IBC Washington State Amendments, infrastructure for vehicle charging stations is required to be installed for Group R-2 occupancies. Such infrastructure shall extend to parking spaces including accessible parking spaces as applicable, and shall be shown on the site plan prior to the issuance of building permits. • Per Chapter 9 of the IBC, buildings will be required to be fire sprinklered in accordance with the NFPA standard. • Per Chapter 11 of the IBC, accessible parking shall be distributed among buildings evenly, and shall be located such that it is the closest available parking to building entrances. Accessible parking locations shall be approved prior to the issuance of building permits. • Per Chapter 18 of the IBC, approved soil compaction reports will be required to be submitted prior to approval of footing inspections. Areas that will be receiving compacted fill will need to be shown on site plans provided by a geo-tech engineer prior to the issuance of building permits, and shall be approved by the designer in responsible charge. • Fire flow for fire hydrant service is determined in accordance with the 2015 International Fire Code (IFC), Appendices B and C. For buildings constructed of V -B construction type, fire flow is 2000 gpm. Other construction types may reduce fire flow. Fire flow of 2000 gpm will require a minimum of (2) on-site fire hydrants. Additional fire hydrants may be required by the fire department depending on operational needs and site layout. • Per Appendix D of the IFC, one fire department access is required to serve up to 100 units. Access and routing of access roads shall be approved by the fire code official prior to the issuance of building permits. Per chapter 5 of the IFC, the fire code official may require additional access, if needed. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 8 DOC. INDEX # 4-10 • Appendix D aerial fire apparatus roads may also be required depending on rood heights. • Per Chapter 9 of the IFC, the location of fire department connections (FDC) serving fire sprinkler systems shall be located within 50 feet of a fire hydrant. • Per Title 10 of the Yakima Municipal Code (YMC), required fire hydrants shall be installed prior to the issuance of building permits. Civil designs for fire hydrant locations and onsite water mains will need to be approved by city engineering, fire, and codes departments/divisions prior to installation. d. Nob Hill Water Association: Nob Hill Water Association currently serves the area around this property. It has an 8 -inch PVC mainline that runs North and South on N 50th Avenue as well as an 8 -inch main stub out between 114 Plum Tree Lane and 121 Peach Tree Lane that is just South of this property that would be used to tie in a new mainline circuit. Nob Hill Water Association may require a higher level of backflow depending on new plumbing. Nob Hill Water Association had not been notified at the time of this application of any construction for this property. Nob Hill Water Association has the sufficient capacity and water rights to serve the property. e. Stormwater: As this project involves clearing and grading of one acre or more, a SWPPP Permit shall be required from the applicant. The main submittals for a SWPPP Permit are: • Drainage plan(s) and calculations • Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan • Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan • Proof that the maintenance agreement was recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office • Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosivity Waiver (unless exempt). A copy of the SWPPP or Erosivity Waiver Certificate Statement shall be given to the Surface Water Engineer. The applicant is advised to read Chapter 7.83 of the Yakima Municipal Code to obtain all appropriate information concerning the Stormwater Site Plan and Chapter 7.82 for information concerning the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 9 DOC. INDEX # 14-L9 • • reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. UIC Registration — Stormwater. In accordance with Chapter 2 Section 2.4 of the December 2006 edition of the Department of Ecology's Guidance for UIC Wells that Manage Stormwater Publication Number 05-10-067, Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells constructed on or after February 3, 2006 are considered new and must be registered with the Department of Ecology (DOE) prior to construction. A Construction Stormwater General Permit may be required from the Washington State Department of Ecology. The applicant should contact the DOE to determine if this permit is required. Due to recent changes by the DOE to the permit, Ecology will no longer accept paper copies of the "Notice of Intent for Construction Activity." Applicants should refer to the Ecology construction stormwater web page at http://www.ecy.wa. qov/programs/wq/stormwater/construction/enoi. html f. Wastewater: Sewer is available in 50th Ave. Sewer for proposed development shall be in accordance with YMC. g. Yakima Transit: No comments submitted. It is noted that Summitview Avenue is an existing transit route. h. Department of Ecology: Based upon the historical agricultural use of this land, there is a possibility the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. 8. Comprehensive Plan: Goals and Policies will serve two principal purposes: to guide development decisions in the UGA, such as rezone requests, development reviews, etc. or to outline specific actions or programs that implement the Plan (YUACP p. III -20). The following Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan apply to this project: a. Goal 3.1: Provide for a broad distribution of housing in Yakima that meets the affordability and neighborhood design needs of the public b. Policy 3.1.1.1: Development shall be at an overall density of 12 dwelling units per acre or more. Recommended zones: Two -Family Residential (R-2) and Multi - Family Residential (R-3), Professional Business District (B-1), and Central Business District (CBD). c. Policy 3.1.1.3: Provide high-density residential as a transitional use between commercial/office and medium density residential areas. d. Goal 3.3: Preserve existing neighborhoods. e. Policy 3.3.2: Ensure that new development is compatible in scale, style, density, Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 10 DOC. INDEX • . and aesthetic quality to an established neighborhood. 9. Public Comments and Potential Mitigation: The twenty -day public comment period for this application occurred from June 6, 2017, to June 26, 2017. At the conclusion of the public comment period, the City of Yakima received a 42 public comments addressing the environmental impacts and compatibility of the proposed use. In addition, a petition containing 35 signatures to deny approval was submitted by homeowners of Chestnut Grove that identified the following issues: • Neighborhood is not designed for a complex of this nature. • The street cannot safely accommodate the traffic of 100-200 additional cars. • The complex would decrease property values and make homes difficult to sell. • Traffic and parking will become an even more serious issue. • Increased crime, vandalism and trespassing. • This is the wrong location for this development. • Deny approval for this low income/homeless development. Public Comments Analysis (staff response in italics): The list identifies the nature of the comments received from parties of record, based on frequency: a. Traffic Congestion/Parking (36): The applicant submitted a traffic impact study that was reviewed and recommended for acceptance by the City of Yakima's Streets and Traffic Operations Manager. The study is based upon land use description and trip generation factors from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine vehicle trips. The applicant is providing on-site parking consistent with YMC Ch. 15.06. On -street parking tends to reduce vehicle speeds. b. Building height/privacy/scale (30): The maximum building height in the 8-1 zone is 35 -feet. The applicant noted in their written narrative that the buildings will include aesthetic considerations in building design, using varying siding patterns and masonry wainscoting. The ends of buildings are proposed at one or two stories to maintain a compatible building scale with neighboring structures. c. Decrease property value (23): The property is zoned B-1, which allows Multi - Family Residential as a Type (2) permitted use. d. Increased police reports/crime (19): Any future issues can be directed to the Yakima Police Department. The applicant indicated in their written narrative that a community block watch program will be facilitated through YPD. e. Quality of life impacts to Sr. Community (19): This application is being conditioned to alleviate concerns of the neighbors. f. Compatibility (16): This application is being conditioned to promote compatibility with the neighborhood. Overall Density (13): The overall density of the proposed development is consistent with YMC Ch. 15.05 — Site Design and Improvement Standards, and YMC Ch. 15.06 — Off -Street Parking and Loading. g. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 11 • h. Use of Tax money (10): This Type (2) Review is an examination of the proposal and its adherence to the Yakima Municipal Code. The availability of funding sources, whether public or private, is not a consideration of this decision. i. Accuracy of Traffic Study (6): City of Yakima Traffic Engineering reviewed the Traffic Study. It is consistent with the ITE Trip Generation Manual and recommended for acceptance. j. Poor ingress/egress (6): The International Fire Code (IFC) requires one Fire Department access to serve up to 100 units. The proposal meets this requirement. k. Roof style (6): The City of Yakima does not enforce private development standards that may dictate roof style. I. Additional setback (3): Per YMC § 15.05020, the setback from Residential zones of 20 -feet will be enforced on the south and west property lines m. Gate on 50th (3): A gate across 50th Avenue is not warranted and there is not sufficient area for vehicles to turn around. n. Noise increase (3): Any new development will provide short-term noise during construction. One of the purposes of the sitescreening is to help with noise issues. o. Request additional notice (3): The requestors were added as parties of record. p. Widen 50th (3): Widening 50th Avenue is not warranted. q. If done well can be a betterment to the community (2): As conditioned, this project will implement the zoning ordinance which purpose is to "promote the general health, safety, and welfare of present and future inhabitants of the Yakima Urban Growth Area." (YMC § 15.01.030 r. Interruptions during construction (2): Construction activities will be required to adhere to timing and signage requirements. s. Mature landscaping (2): Sitescreening Standard A is required along the all property lines which consists of "a ten -foot -wide landscaped planting strip with trees at twenty -foot to thirty-foot centers, which includes shrubs and groundcover. t. N. 50th is a Neighborhood Collector (2): North 50th Avenue is designated a local Access Street. u. Install speed bumps on 50th (2): The City of Yakima is installing speed bumps on the residential portion of North 50th Ave. v. Install traffic light at Summitview and 50th (2): A street light is not warranted at the intersection of Summitview and North 50th Ave due to poor spacing from the more desirable location of Summitview and 48th Avenue, and the lack of right-of-way to provide a left turn land on Summitview. w. Zone to south is R-2 not R-3 (2): Approximately 76% of the properties adjacent to the south property line are zoned R-3. There is one parcel zoned R-2, which is directly adjacent at the southeast corner of the property. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 12 ©®Co INDEX • x. Cul-de-sac on 50th (1): A Cul-de-sac on 50th is not warranted and there would not be sufficient rights-of-way to construct cul-de-sacs (two would be necessary, one north and one south) unless several existing structures along 50th were to be removed. y. Deny project approval (1): YMC § 15.14.040(G) requires Findings and Conclusions that support the decision of the Administrative Official. The Findings and Conclusions of this Decision do not support denial of the project. z. Light/glare concerns (1): Per YMC § 15.06.100, all lighting for parking spaces is required to be down -shielded so that no light pollution spills upon adjacent properties. Furthermore, a photometric lighting plan will be required to be submitted that demonstrates no light spillage onto adjacent properties. aa. Rezoning is a form of discrimination (1): This application is not a rezone. The B-1 zoning district allows, as a Class (2) Use, all three tiers of Multifamily dwelling unit densities: 0-7, 8-12, and 13+ DU/NRA. bb. Soil testing issues (1): The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report that includes considerations for: Seismic considerations, liquefaction potential, excavation logs, estimated frost penetration, structural fill recommendations, recommended minimum footing depth and width, recommended footing trench preparation, soil bearing recommendations, lateral earth pressure, stormwater recommendations, slab on grade support recommendations, and parking lot site preparation for paving recommendations. All grading and building permits shall demonstrate compliance with these recommendations, or to the satisfaction of the Code Administration Manager. Furthermore, in accordance with the Washington State Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), the soils shall be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If contaminants are found at concentrations above MTCA cleanup levels, potentia! buyers will be notified of their occurrence. 10. Conditions of Approval/Administrative Adjustment of Standards: The purpose of YMC Ch. 15.10 is to "...specify and outline the authority of the administrative official to impose special conditions of approval on any permit or approval issued under the provisions of this title..." Furthermore, YMC § 15.10.040(A) provides the following: "The development standards and other conditions for approval specified in this title are not a limitation on the authority of a reviewing official to impose additional or greater requirements as conditions of approval on any use, development, or modification being reviewed... any reviewing official may impose conditions to: a. Accomplish the objective and intent of any development standards or criteria for approval set forth in this title; b. Mitigate any identified specific or general negative impacts of the development, whether environmental or otherwise; c. Ensure compatibility of the development with existing neighboring land uses; Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 13 DOC. INDEX I^ d. Assure consistency with the intent and character of the zoning district involved; or e. Achieve and further the expressed intent, goals, objectives, and policies of the Yakima urban area comprehensive plan and this title. In order to achieve the objectives listed above, YMC § 15.10.040(B) extends the authority to impose special conditions, including but not limited to, the following: a. Increasing the minimum development standards of this title; b. Limiting and controlling the dimensions, number, shape, and location of structures, including fences, signs, and buildings; c. Regulating the number and location of vehicular access points; d. Requiring the dedication of additional rights-of-way for public streets; e. Requiring the dedication of public use easements and the recording of the same; f. Regulating the design, manner, and timing of construction of any site improvements; g. Regulating the hours of operation of any commercial or industrial use; h. Providing for the maintenance or retention of any regulated site improvement; i. Requiring and designating the location and size of open space; and j. Reclamation of any site after discontinuance of use or expiration or revocation of a permit. Based upon the above listed objectives and authority to impose special conditions, the following standards will be modified as part of this decision: 1. Sitescreeninq: The issue of privacy was mentioned in several comments received. Per YMC § 15.10.040(A)(2) and (3), in order to mitigate potential negative impacts of this development and promote compatibility with the adjacent residential uses, in addition to the required Sitescreening Standard A, the developer shall also install Sitescreening Standard C (A six -foot -high, view -obscuring fence, made of wood, masonry block, concrete, or slatted chain link material) along the South and West property lines. 11. Class (2) Use - Compatibility of Proposed Use & Surroundings: The Yakima Municipal Code Ch. 15.02 defines Compatibility as "the characteristics of different uses or developments that permit them to be located near each other in harmony with or without special mitigation measures." IV. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Class (2) Use: As conditioned, the proposed multi -family residential development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the B-1 zoning district and compatible with the adjacent land uses and immediate neighborhood. 2. Comprehensive Plan: As conditioned, the proposed development is in compliance with the above identified Goals and Policies of the City of Yakima's 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 14 DOC. • 3. Development Standards Compliance: As conditioned, the proposed development can be considered to be in conformance with all Urban Area Zoning Ordinance development standards. 4. Public Infrastructure: The subject property is able to be served by all necessary public utilities and will construct or replace all frontage improvements consistent with, and required by, YMC Titles 8 and 12. 5. SEPA Environmental Review: SEPA Review was conducted concurrently with the Type (2) Review. A Determination of Nonsignificance is incorporated and attached to this decision. V. DECISION: Inasmuch as the proposed use is consistent with the B-1 zoning district, and based upon the above findings and conclusions, the City of Yakima hereby approves the proposed Type (2) application (CL2#011-17), subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of building permits or grading permits: a. A licensed designer in responsible charge shall approve all submittals, including deferred submittals, related to construction of this project. b. The applicant shall submit a photometric lighting plan in accordance with YMC § 15.06.100. c. The applicant shall provide an updated site plan showing: i. Sitescreening standard A along all property lines and standard and C along the South and West property lines. ii. Minimum 20 -foot setback from the South and West property lines. iii. Infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations. iv. Accessible parking locations evenly distributed among buildings and located such that it is the closest available parking to building entrances. v. Location of all required fire hydrants. d. The applicant shall test the soil for lead and arsenic, and organochlorine pesticides. If contaminants are found at concentrations above the MTCA cleanup levels, potential buyers shall be notified of their occurrence. The City of Yakima shall be provided with a copy of the test results. e. Approved soil compaction reports shall be submitted prior to the approval of footing inspections. Areas that will be receiving compacted fill shall be shown on site plans provided by a geo-tech engineer and shall be approved by the designer in responsible charge. f. Fire department apparatus access and routing shall be approved by the fire code official. g. A minimum of 2 on-site fire hydrants shall be installed. Additional hydrants may be required by the fire department depending on operational needs and site layout. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 15 Doc. IND{=. ✓ • h. The applicant shall submit a SWPPP permit to the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer, including" i. Drainage plans and calculations. ii. Temporary erosion and sediment control plan iii. Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan, recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office. iv. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan or Erosivity Waiver. i. The project site shall pass an erosion control inspection. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications, and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. k. If UIC wells are used, they must be registered with the Department of Ecology prior to construction. I. Sewer for the proposed development shall be designed in accordance with the Yakima Municipal Code. 2. Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy: a. The applicant shall install Sitescreening standard A along all property lines and standard C along the South and West property lines. b. Infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations shall be required in accordance with Chapter 4 of the IBC WA State Amendments. c. Buildings are required to be fire sprinklered in accordance with the applicable NFPA standard and Chapter 9 of the IBC. d. A new or modified commercial driveway approach shall be installed which meets the requirements of YMC Ch. 8 and standard detail R4. e. All sidewalk along the 50th Avenue frontage shall be replaced and constructed per standard detail R5. f. All curbing along the 50th Avenue frontage shall be replaced and constructed per standard detail R1. g. An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for work within the public right-of-way. Prior to performing any work, the Developer and Contractor shall meet on-site to review and discuss the needs of the development with Engineering's Construction Supervisor and Inspector. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17. SEPA#014-17 16 DOC. INDEX Entered this 18th day of July, 2017, pursuant to the authority granted under YMC Ch. 15.14. This decision constitutes the final zoning review and decision and is hereby granted and forwarded to the Building Official. The zoning decision is valid for one year from this date unless appealed under YMC 15.16.040. The zoning decision may be extended one time up to one additional year prior to the expiration date, as set forth in YMC 15.12.060. This zoning decision is not a construction permit and does not in and of itself authorize any use to be established, constructed, made or implemented without a construction permit issued by the Building Official and the conditions pending have been completed. This zoning decision shall expire if: a) a construction permit for the approved project is required but not issued within one year from the date of issuance of this final decision; b) the construction permit is issued but allowed to expire; or c) the project is modified and a new zoning decision is issued. r Jos" Calhoun, Planning Manager for Jo-- Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director APPEAL Pursuant to YMC § 15.14.070 and YMC Ch. 16.08, any person aggrieved by this decision may appeal to the Hearing Examiner. All appeals shall be filed within fourteen days following the mailing of the final decision by the Administrative Official or designee. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the City of Yakima, Community Development Department; 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA 98901. If a final decision does not require mailing, the appeal shall be filed within fourteen days following the issuance of the final decision. Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 17 DOC. INDEX # 4 -lo s � � m®® ®.ms671 ®�®® w1 Planning DEPT-. fMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVEL(. AENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2' Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON July 18, 2017 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Type 2 and Environmental Review for a proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 Zoning District. LOCATION: PARCEL NUMBER: PROPONENT: PROPERTY OWNER: LEAD AGENCY: 118 N. 50th Ave., Yakima WA 181321-41425 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC Bicycle Apartments LLC City of Yakima FILE NUMBERS: SEPA #014-17 DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. ® This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. Responsible Official: Position/Title: Phone Address: Joan Davenport SEPA Responsible Official (509) 575-6183 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 -AXP-1/,// Date: July 18, 2017 Signature ® You may appeal this determination to: Joan Davenport, AICP, Director of Community Development, at 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. No later than: August 1, 2017 By method: Complete appeal application form and payment of $580.00 appeal fee. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the City of Yakima Planning Division to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. DOC. INDEX DEl ARTMENT OF PUBLIC WOR..S Scott Schafer, Director Engineering Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 575-6111 * Fax (509) 576-6305 June 7,2017 John Mifsud 2900 Powerhouse Road, Suitel 20 Yakima, WA 98902 Subject: Notice of Decision for Transportation Concurrency Apartment Complex Dear Applicant, Enclosed is the Decision for the Transportation Concurrency Analysis of the construction of an 80 -unit Mid -Rise Apartment Complex at 118 N. 50°i Avenue, within the City of Yakima, Washington. This development has been APPROVED for Concurrency Analysis. Concurrency review determined that reserve capacity is available on all impacted arterial streets. Concurrency review docs not evaluate impact to local access streets or street intersections. This review does not include safety or site design issues which will be addressed at the project review level of zoning and SEPA. This review concluded that the proposed development will not exceed the capacity of the arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted arterial streets. Please review the enclosed report. You may appeal the Findings of this report or request Administrative Reconsideration within fifteen (15) days from the date of mailing of this Notice. Appeal forms and procedures are available at the Department of Community and Economic Development. If you have any questions, please call me at (509) 576- 6797. Sincerely, Brett H. Sheffield, PE Chief Engineer Enclosure cc: Lisa Maxey ECEWED JUN 0 7 2017 CITY OF YAKIM DOC. INDEX • Date of Review: Review Prepared by: Proposed Development: Subject Address: ITE Land Use: City of Yakima, Washington Engineering Division Transportation Concurrency Analysis June 7, 2017 Brett H. Sheffield, Chief Engineer, (509) 576-6797 Apartment Complex 118 N. 50' Avenue 222 — Mid -Rise Apartment Expected Net PM Peak Hour Trip Generation: 31 PM Peak Hour Trips Average Weekday Trips = 527 Summary of Impact: The applicant, Bicycle Apartments, LLC, proposes to construct a three level apartment complex containing 80 dwelling units, within the city of Yakima, Washington. Traffic from this new development will enter the Arterial Street system on Summitview Avenue. City of Yakima Administrative procedures for Concurrency Analysis use the PM Peak hour trip of the adjacent street for the selected land use category. Based upon local data, City of Yakima Traffic Volumes for PM Peak Hour is assessed as 8.7% of total Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Peak hour reserve capacity includes any vehicle trips previously assigned under the Concurrency Ordinance. City of Yakima Transportation Concurrency assesses arterial street segment capacity only and does not address intersection capacity. Seg # Street Segment Total ADT PM Pk 1Ir Vol. Peak Hr Cap. Peak Hr Reserve Cap. New Dev. PM Pk Hr Impact 2006-2016 Con- currency Trips Resulting Pm Pk Hr Capacity V/C Segment LOS (V/C Ratio) 135 Summitview: 66th to 56th Ave. 17,750 1,544 3,600 2,056 10 223 1,823 0.49 A 136 Summitview: 56th to 48th Ave. 17,370 1,511 3,600 2,089 31 248 1.810 0.50 A 137 Summitview- 48th to 40th Ave. 20,680 1,799 3,200 1.401 16 169 1,216 0.62 13 Sum maty of Impact to City of Yakima Arterial Streets: This application has been reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance. This development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review docs not include any site development or safety issues which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. The review does not address intersection level of service. Transportation Capacity Analysis Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED JUN 0 7 2017 C TY OF YAKIMA DOC. INDEX # -5 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC 118 N 50th Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Application and Environmental Review. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant; SEPA reviewing agencies, and all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of subject property; that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 6th day of June, 2017. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist DOC. INDEX # C 18132141546 109 PEACH LLC • 3083 POINT WHITE DR BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110 1813114141/ A & T MARTINEZ LLC 120 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141547 ACTEM 3 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141557 ACTEM 4 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141551 ACTEM 8 LLC 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114008 BANNER BANK 502 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141512 BENMOR REALTY LLC 5745 WILSON AVE 5 SEATTLE, WA 98118 18132141513 CASA 5329 PROPERTIES LLC 2308 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141527 D & R FAMILY PROPERTIES LLC 485 VIEWMONT DR SE MOSES LAKE, WA 98837 18132141559 EMBREE FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 6804 ALPINE WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132113468 JOHNSON FAMILY CENTURY 21 ORCHARDS, LLC 4906 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141529 JO , •N FAMILY CENTURY ORCHARD'.. -49.. SUMMITVI ,, ,VE YAKIMA, WA 98908 14..1_32141530 JOHN . MILY CENTURY ORCHARDS, LLi► - 490. - I MITVIEW : r _ YAKIMA, WA 98908 / 18132141413 KCP RE LLC 2601 S. BAYSHORE DR. 9TH FLOOR COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 18132142492 MAXIE WAYNE GREGORY LIVING TRUST 680 DOUGLAS AVE NE GERVAIS, OR 97026 18132141514 NATHE ENTERPRISES L P 119 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142494 ROGER L & DOROTHY A KLINE LIVING TRUST 135 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141548 RUDY POWELL FAMILY TRUST 2160 GREENVIEW ST EUGENE, OR 97401 18132141550 RI: •OWELL FAMILY TR 2160 GR ' ' VI EU ,, , i R 97,c 18132141516 RVCP LLC 115 N 50TH AVE STE B YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141005 SOLARITY CREDIT UNION PO BOX 2922 YAKIMA, WA 98907 18132141494 ALBERT & CHRISTINE KARAU 4936 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114442 ALBERT E & SUZANNE K LAWRENCE 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142464 ANDREW HAHN 115 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141490 BARBARA BRANTINGHAM 4933 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142471 BEVERLY A MORGAN-JENSEN 732 SUMMITVIEW AVE #669 YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141488 CAROLYN CORNING 4937 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142489 'CHARLEY JR & RUTH SCRIVNER 125 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142497 CHRIS F & JILL D BERG 140 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142468 CRAIG JOSEPH PILON PO BOX 171 COWICHE, WA 9892b®c 1515L141Sb1 CYNDI MULLENHOFF ik 1053 N PIONEER WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 0131141493 DARLENE USHER 139 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141515 DAVID L MAHONEY 5303 ENGLEWOOD HILL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132114464 DAVID R & GLORIA J TUFTS 5101 SUMMITVIEW AVE UNIT 23 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141493 DOROTHY M SIEGMETH 4934 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142484 DOUGLAS & PAMELA FADNESS 115 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141558 DOUGLAS G & DARLENE PICATTI 2004 W YAKIMA AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132142447 EDWIN A & JENNIFER A COX 5202 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142466 EVAN R & SAMANTHA 5 BURCH 119 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142465 FREDERICK W III & DIANNA WARREN 117 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141489 GABRIEL A & BEATRICE FISCHER 4935 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142491 GOLDA M. COCKRUM 129 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141562 HEATHER & CHRISTOPHER FOISY 4909 72ND AVE NE OLYMPIA, WA 98516 ,18132141552 18132141525 JACALYN K HOLZER 112 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142488 JASON R & TAMI M SCRIVNER 123 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 KASPER C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCCULLOUGH RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141553 KA ' : C & MARY C HOVSEPIAN 4171 MCC$ II GH : 0 Y • u , . • •:90 18132142493 KYLE T & MICHELLE J DUREN 8674 CHALMERS DR APT 1 LOS ANGELES, CA 90035 18132142472 LAURIE M ALLEN 116 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142467 MALCOLM E & DIANE M HANKS 11504 OCCIDENTAL RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 18132141560 MARK P & MARCIA D JOHNSON 614 5 24TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141556 MICHAEL BALMELLI 207 S 30TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141526 MICHAEL M & MARY L EDGAR 114 N SOTH AVE #114 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142463 NICHOLAS B HUNTER 111 N 53RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142485 PATRICIO J & PATRICIA G RODRIGUEZ 117 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142495 PHILIP & MARJORIE FLUAITT 137 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142490 RANDAUL & LINDA G AMMERMAN PO BOX 9364 YAKIMA, WA 98909 18132141549 (CHARD J WEAVER 203 IVY AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141496 ROBIN L GAMACHE 4937 APPLE BLOSSOM CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142498 ROCIO Y MARTINEZ 5201 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 9890& UXIIMPnA # 41/14,,w h••••••• 1,31.3L14/41 RONALD J & CLAUDIA A BURKHARDT ih4931 PEAR TREE CT ',YAKIMA, WA 98908 161311414/U RYAN A & HEATHER C MASSEY 120 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142499 SAMUEL A & DEBORAH KARR 5204 CASCADE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142469 SAMUEL 1 & DARLENE R FOGLER 122 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142487 SEAN WIEK 121 N 52ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132141528 SHARON ANN LOVELL 116-2 N 50TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98902 18132141492 SHIRLEY A ROGSTAD 4932 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 18132142486 STEPHANIE COSON 4904 SPRING CREEK RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 ;1:81(3',21111425 '51100THN',Vggal:(g,,V();144),TAN :YA:f.(01:k M 071.418. . 18132141495 VELMA E CRAWFORD 4938 PEAR TREE CT YAKIMA, WA 98908 70 Total Parcels - Next Step Housing / Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17 ItiiiiiM4 lO5015;146 PA)0017-05-Sid, ,2900rP,6W4iflitne fterkt:20 .:9!:t14 WA:VS12 1 NA40MaAWA*1: : 1 ,V6,?rtk,:.?-t:7S.tibrao(rOiN:g7, " 2e001:0Ae,rhos,jAl#10 lAiRiFIA,:kAik,9S-90 NtC o*PP c(-1 567/1 eLg 44 Oii-i7/56W7906/-17 ,5erti- (o/b//7 11) DOC. INDEX , , Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 10705-B Gilbert Road 'Yakima, WA 98903-9203 bethb@ahtanum.net Chamber of Commerce 10 North 9th Street Yakima, WA 98901 chamber@yakima.org Department of Commerce Growth Management Services, P.O. Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov Department of Ecology Annie Szvetecz, SEPA Policy Lead P.O. Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 separegister@ecy.wa.gov Department of Ecology Gwen Clear 1250 West Alder Street Union Gap, WA 98903 crosepacoordinator@ecy.wa.gov Department of Fish and Wildlife Eric Bartrand 1701 South 24th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Eric.Bartrand@dfw.wa.gov Scott.Downes@dfw.wa.gov Department of Natural Resources SEPA Center PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504 sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov Department of Social & Health Services Jeanne Rodriguez P.O. Box 45848 Olympia, WA 98504 Jeanne.rodriguez@dshs.wa.gov Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Greg Griffith or Gretchen Kaehler, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 dahp.separeview@dahp.wa.gov Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council -EFSEC Stephen Posner, SEPA Officer PO Box 43172 Olympia, WA 98504-3172 sposner@utc.wa.gov Engineering Division Bob Degrosellier and Brett Sheffield, City Engineer 129 N 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 dana. ka llevig@ya kimawa.gov Nob Hill Water Association Bob Irving, Engineering Technician 6111 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98908 bob@nobhillwater.org Office of Rural and Farm Worker Housing Marty Miller 1400 Summitview Ave, Ste# 203 Yakima, WA 98902 Martym2@orfh.org U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch Deborah Knaub, Project Manager P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Deborah.J.Knaub@usace.army.mii Wastewater Division Marc Cawley or Dana Kallevig 2220 East Viola Ave Yakima, WA 98901 marc-cawlev@yakimawa.gov danakelleviRtayakimawa.gov West Valley School District ngela Watts, Asst. Supt. Of Business & perations vi902Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908-9299 wattsa@wvsd208.org WSDOT Paul Gonseth, Planning EngineerRick 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap, WA 98903 gonsetp@wsdot.gov WSDOT Holmstrom, Development Services 2809 Rudkin Road Union Gap, WA 98903 holmstr@wsdot.wa.gov WSDOT, Aviation Division Rob Hoiyi7 7702 Terminal S[ SW tr// Tumwater, WA 98501 r ���j� / , -14ermieee@aitsfirsterrargere no-�J��yj Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Rocco Clark, Environmental Coordinator P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Rocccco.clark@bia.gov Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program Cialita Keys, Environmental Review Coordinator P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 ckeys@yakama.com' Yakama-Klickitat Fisherie s Project John Marvin 760 Pence Road Yakima, WA 98909 jmarvin@yakama.com Yakima Air Terminal Robert Peterson, Airport Asst Manager 2400 West Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 robert.peterson@yakimawa.gov Yakima County Commissioners Commissioners.web@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Health District Ryan lbach, Director of Environmental Health 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Dr Ste#200 Union Gap, WA 98903 yhd@co.yakima.wa.us ryan.ibach@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Public Services Lynn Deitrick, Planning Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Lynn.Deitrick@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima County Public Services Vern Redifer, Public Services Director 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima, WA 98901 Vern.redifer@co.yakima.wa.us Yakima Greenway Foundation Al Brown, Executive Director 111 South 18th Street Yakima, WA 98901 al@yakimagreenway.org Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency Hasan Tahat, Engineering & Planning Supervisor 329 North 1st Street Yakima, WA 98901 hasan@yrcaa.org Yakima School District Scott lzutsu , Associate Superintendent 104 N 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 izutsu.scottPyakimaschools.org * OM C Z pp ®°! 'Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Shawn Conrad, Planner 311 North 4th Street, Stet/ 202 Yakima, WA 98901 conrads@yvcog.org Yakima Valley Museum John A. Baule, Director 2105 Tieton Drive Yakima, WA 98902 john@yakimavalleymuseum.org Yakima Waste Systems Keith Kovalenko, District Manager 2812 1/2 Terrace Heights Dr. Yakima, WA 98901 keithk@wasteconnections.com t Cr- Century Link Manager '8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications Kevin Chilcote 1005 North 16th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 City of Union Gap David Spurlock, Development Director P.O. Box 3008 Union Gap, WA 98903 Department of Agriculture Kelly McLain P.O. Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 Environmental Protection Agency NEPA Review Unit 1200 6th Ave. MS 623 Seattle, WA 98101 Federal Aviation Administration 2200 W. Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 Federal Aviation Administration, Seattle Airports District office Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner 1601 Lind Ave SW Renton, WA 98055-4056 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs PO Box 40909 Olympia, WA 98504 Pacific Power Mike Paulson 500 North Keys Rd Yakima, WA 98901 Soil Conservation District Ray Wondercheck 1606 Perry Street, Ste. F Yakima, WA 98902 Trolleys Paul Edmondson 313 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 United States Postal Service Maintenance Deptartment 205 W Washington Ave Yakima, WA 98903 WA State Attorney General's Office 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 Yakima, WA 98902 WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water Christine Collins 16201 E Indiana Ave, Ste# 1500 Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Superintendent P.O. Box 632 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Program P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima School District Dr. Jack Irion, Superintendent 104 North 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima Valley Canal Co Robert Smoot 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Sandra Hull 470 Camp 4 Rd Yakima, WA 98908 Cascade Natural Gas 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Kennewick, WA 99336 Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 10705-B Gilbert Road Yakima, WA 98903 \\Apollo\Shared\ Planning \Assignments•Planning\LABELS and FORMS\SEPA REVIEWING AGENCIES updated 03.10.17. Form List.doca Type of Notice: File Number: 4IQlict ,sff4 GLS#011-)7 4 s02�./-Dly-l7 Date of Mailing: • lahaa/17 INDEX Parties of Record — Next ,,tep Housing — Bicycle Apts LLC — CLz.,r011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing c/o John Mifsud 2900 Powerhouse Rd l 120 Yakima, WA 98902 johnlc@r ncxtstephousing.com Bicycle Apartments LLC c/o Next Step Housing 2900 Powerhouse Rd 4120 Yakima, WA 98902 john 0nextstephousing com Timothy & Bernice Monahan 304 S 491h Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Don Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 dhspeer bl,rr gmail.com Debby & Don Morgan 81 Cake Box Ln Cle Elum, WA 98902 casa5329 a gmail,com Shirley & Leo Holzer 4932 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Vivian Walton 4931 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Pat Speer 108 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 mpspccr72@gmail,com Robert Vickers 115 N 50th Ave Ste B Yakima, WA 98908 rob cr fmiwcalth,net Code Administration Robin Gamachc 4937 Apple Blossom Ct Yakima, WA 98908 rohing,2@charter.net Bradley Tew 121 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 bradlev.tew(ciigmail.com Nancy Ramsey 4937 Cherry Park Ct Yakima, WA 98908 nrarnsey1019@gmail.com Pete Nathe DDS & Lynn Nathe 119 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Ivnnnath a msn.com Delores Rosdahl 106 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 rshcrib rr mail;com Sheri Haertsch rsherih a maiLcorn Suzanne:DebuSWieke@yakirctawa.gov Jacalyn Holzer 112 N 50`h Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Joyce Dahm 100 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Kathy Schneider 4908 Prestige Ct Yakima, WA 98908 Tom Lovell 116-2 N 50th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 tomluvz rr hotmail:com Alfredo Llamedo allitilotiPnWfairtinuse.org Mike — Home Source Yakima iriikr�rdhoinesourcevakima.coin Mike Shane In -House Distribution E-mail List Name Division E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administration Catolyn.Belles@yakiinawa.gov Glenn Denman Code Administration Glenn: Denirian(4yakimawa:go.v Joe Caruso Code Administration 1oe.Catuso'@jiakiinawalgov Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration Suzanne:DebuSWieke@yakirctawa.gov Joan Davenport Community Development Joatt.Davenp'ort@yakitnawalgov, Dan Riddle Engineering Dan.Riddleuryakiirmawa.gov Mike Shane Engineering Mike:Shane u4yakimawasgov Mark Soptich Fire Dept Mark.Soptich r@yakimawa.gov Jeff Cutter Legal Dept Jeff:Cutter@yakiriaawa.gov Sara Watkins Legal Dept Sara:Watkins@yakiinawa:gov Archie Matthews ONDS Archie.Matthews(t4yakimawa:gov Joseph Calhoun Planning Division Joseph.Callioun@yakiinawa.gov Chief Rizzi Police Department Dominic.Rizzi@yakiinawa.gov Scott Schafer Public Works Dept Scott.Schafer ayakiitiawa:eov Loretta Zammarchi Refuse Division Loretta.Zamfr chieyakimawa.gov Randy Layman Refuse Division Randy.Laythaii@yakiniiiwa.gov Naeem Kara Transit Division Naeeln.KaraRyakimawa:gov James Dean Utilities James.Dean@,yakimawa.gov Dana Kallevig Wastewater Dana.Kallevig(Tyakimawa.gov Randy Meloy Wastewater r Rand y:Meloy(yakimawa.gov For the Record/File Binder Copy Revised 01/2017 Type of Notice: 61-c ol 11 JthOk,/5e74- File Number: C4,244 01147/5,701 i&A/7/7 Date of Mailing: 0/6;47 DOC. • Maxey, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 11:22 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Caruso, Joe; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; Desgrosellier, Bob; lbarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Kara, Naeem; Layman, Randy; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Riddle, Dan; Rizzi, Dominic; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Soptich, Mark; Watkins, Sara; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Department of Social & Health Services - Jeanne Rodriguez; Dept Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; Scott lzutsu - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - Deborah J Knaub; West Valley School District - Angela Watts; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - Rick Holmstrom; WSDOT - Rob Hodgman; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Cialita Keys; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Yakima County Commissioners; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Services Director, Vern Redifer, Yakima Greenway Foundation - Al Brown; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Shawn Conrad; Yakima Valley Museum - John A. Baule; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Calhoun, Joseph Subject: Notice of Application & SEPA - Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC - CL2# 011-17 & SEPA#014-17 Attachments: NOTICE OF APPLICATION & SEPA - Next Step Housing - CL2 SEPA.PDF Attached is a Notice of Application and Environmental Review (SEPA) regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal please contact assigned planner Joseph Calhoun at (509) 575-6042 or email to: ioseph.callaoun ir, akimawa.gov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Specialist 1 City of Yakima Planning Division Planning Division - P: (509) 575-6183 1 F: (509) 575-6105 Direct Line: (509) 578-6669 - Lisa.Maxey(ayakimawa.gov 129 N 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 Dill I \Z` 1 INDEX • #7,1 ai city of Yakima sw® Planning Division P drinm"9 129 N 2ND ST. (2ND FLOOR) YAKIMA, WA 98901 Date of Notice PUBLIC NOTICE OF LAND USE REVIEW of Application - 06/06/2017 Project Name: NEXT STEP HOUSING/BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC CL2#011-17 Location: 118 N 50TH AVE Proposal: Proposed 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 zoning district. A land use application has been submitted near your property. This is your notice of that application. To view information online go to: www.yakimawa.gov/public-notice and select CL2#011-17 from the list to view the land use application information. More information is available from the City of Yakima Planning Division (509) 575-6183. The staff contact is: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager (509) 575-6042 - joseph.calhoun@yakimawa.gov. Decisions and future notices will be sent to anyone who submits comments on this application or requests additional notice. Comments may be submitted in writing to the address above or by email to: ask.planning@yakimawa.gov - please indude the file number in the email subject line. Written or emailed comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. on 06/26/2017 This application may include multiple land use types, including compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). For specific information, please contact the Planning Division at (509) 575-6183. Si necesita informacion en espanol por favor Ilame al (509) 575-6183 Application Submitted: 05/15/2017 Application Complete: 05/31/2017 ®®1®®Y®® PlarinTng DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DLL ARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELJPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2' Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW June 6, 2017 SEPA Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director Notice of Application for Type 2 and Environmental Review for a proposed 80 - unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story apartment buildings with 120 parking spaces in the B-1 Zoning District. LOCATION: TAX PARCEL NUMBERS: PROJECT APPLICANT: FILE NUMBER: DATE OF APPLICATION: DATE OF COMPLETENESS: 118 N. 50th Ave., Yakima WA 181321-41425 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 May 15, 2017 May 31, 2017 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Yakima Department of Community Development has received Type 2 and Environmental Review applications Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC. The proposal includes an 80 -unit affordable housing community consisting of 5 3 -story buildings and 120 parking spaces. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington, or online at: https://i+vvtVv yakimawa.§ov/services/planning/hext-step-housiii€j/ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is to notify agencies with jurisdiction and environmental expertise and the public that the City of Yakima, Planning Division, has been established as the lead agency, pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) under WAC § 197-11-926 for the review of this project. The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for this project. The Optional DNS process in WAC § 197-11-355 is being used. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained by request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC § 6.88.170. Required Permits: The following local, state, and federal permits/approvals may or will be needed for this project: Building permit, Clearing/Grading permit, Dust Control Plan, NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit, Type 2 and Site Plan Review. Required Studies: None Known Existing Environmental Documents: Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study, HUD DNL Noise Report. ura Doc. 1111' 1111.' INDEX 2015 1994 • Development Regulations for Project Mitigation and Consistency Include: State Environmental Policy Act, Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, YMC Title 12 — Development Standards, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY Pursuant to YMC § 16.06.020(A), the project considerations are determined to be consistent with applicable development regulations, as follows: 1. The type of land use: Multi -family 13+ units per acre is a Type (2) permitted use in the B- 1 zoning district. 2. Density of residential development: Approximately 27 units per acre. 3. Infrastructure and public facilities: The subject property is able to be served by public streets, water, sewer, garbage collection, etc. 4. Characteristics of development: The proposal shall adhere to all Title 12 and Title 15 development standards. Pursuant to YMC § 16.06.020(B), the development regulations and comprehensive plan considerations are found to be consistent, as follows: 1. The type of land use: Multi -family 13+ units per acre is a Type (2) permitted use in the B- 1 zoning district. 2. Density of residential development: Approximately 27 units per acre. 3. Availability and adequacy of public facilities: The subject property is able to be served by public facilities. REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENT Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed project and its probable environmental impacts. This may be your only opportunity to comment. All written comments received by 5:00 p.m. on June 26, 2017, will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. NOTICE OF DECISION When available, a copy of the SEPA Threshold Determination will be mailed to parties of record. A separate notice of the Type 2 decision will be rendered following the SEPA appeal period. Please send any written comments for the above described project to: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 North Second Street, Yakima, WA 98901 Please be certain to reference the file number(s) or applicant's name in your correspondence. (CL2#011-17 & SEPA#014-17— Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments) The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall, 129 North Second Street, Yakima, Washington. If you have questions regarding this proposal, please call Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager, at (509) 575- 6042, or e-mail to joseph.calhoun@yakimawa.gov. Enclosed: Narratives, SEPA Checklist, Project Descriptions, Site Plan, and Vicinity Map SOC. INDEX aim 0a�� ®®®ts®© Planning CITY OF YAKIMA LAND USE ACTION INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE File Number: l''L2 o(I-1-? l SEPA 01 "/-17 Applicant/Project Ai .0.)k c.i-ep 400s.;‘,1 f F; y c (e 'Site Address; 11E3 A.) SO ft. 41/ . Date of Posting:. j�. Locatipn of Installation (Check One): t9 601'1 Land Use Action Sign is installed per standards described in YMC § 15.11.080(C). Land Use Action Sign is installed in an alternate location on the site. Note: this alternate location of not pre -approved by the Planning Manager) may not be acceptable by the Planning Division and is subject to relocation (at the owner's expense) to a more visible site on the property. The alternative location is: The required notice of application will be sent to the applicant and property owners within a 300 -foot radius after the Planning Division has received this Land Use Action Installation Certification. Failure to post a Land Use Action sign and return this form signed in a timely manner may cause a delay in the application review process. I hereby testify that the installed sign fully complies with the Land Use Action sign installation standards (see pg. 2), that the sign will be maintained until a decision has been rendered, and that the sign will be returned within 30 days from the date the final decision is issued. Applicant's Siggoo nature J)iana Y/O6,L ) Applicant's Name (Please Print) Applicant's Phone Number Please remit the above certification and deliver to the City of Yakima Planning Division via email to ask.planning@yakimawa.gov or in person/by mail to: City of Yakima, Planning Division, 129 North 2"d Street, Yakima, WA 98901. Page - 1 nECE V D JUN 0 ED 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA i'LA; ;..'..3 DIV. Revised 01/2017 ./iBi aaua Planning • RE IREMENTS FOR POSTING OF PRI\ 'E PROPERTY FOR LAND USE ACTION City of Yakima Community Development Department, Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-6183 — ask.planninggvakimawa.gov GENERAL INFORMATION The Land Use Action posted signage shall serve as a method of notification to the public that a land use application has been submitted to the City for a proposed change to the property. The Land Use Action sign shall be known in this section as the "sign" referred to in YMC § 15.11.080(C) as the official signage for application of the following land use matters: o Class 3 Public Hearings; o Preliminary Long Subdivisions; o Rezones; o Right -of -Way Vacations; o Appeals; o interpretation (if required) o Comprehensive Plan Amendments as indicated in YMC Ch.16.10; o Environmental Review, except for a categorically exempt application; and, o Annexation of property by the City. For the above land use matters it is required to post one sign and in some cases more than one sign on the site or in a location immediately adjacent to the site that provides visibility to motorists using adjacent streets. The Planning Manager has established standards for size, color, layout, design, and wording of the signs which the Planning Division will supply to the applicant. The Planning Division sends out letters quarterly to property owners who have had a land use action proposal on their property that requires posting the property, reminding them to remove the sign(s) and return them to the Planning Division if they have not already done so. SIGNAGE INSTALLATION The applicant shall install the Land Use Action sign(s) in accordance with these provisions: o Signs shall be located at the midpoint on the street frontage from which the site is addressed or as otherwise directed by the Planning staff; o Signs shall be located 10 feet back from the property line; o Signs structurally attached to an existing building shall be exempt from the setback requirement, provided that no sign is located further than 10 feet from the property line without written approval from Planning staff; o The top of the signs shall be positioned between 5 and 6 feet above grade; o Signs shall be posted on the subject property so as to be clearly seen from each right-of-way providing primary vehicular access to the subject property as stated in YMC § 15.1 L.080(C); and o The sign can be easily read from the adjacent street and/or sidewalk. * ® n Page — 2 RECEIVED JUN 0 ^ CITY of Y4KIM 'I -R DIV.2017 Revised 01/2017 B7®111A'V0 P a h nYilsi `g May 31, 2017 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joa avenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov - www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: APPLICANT ADDRESS: PROJECT LOCATION: TAX PARCEL NO: DATE OF REQUEST: SUBJECT: To Whom It May Concern: CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 Next Step Housing/Bicycle Apartments LLC, c/o John Mifsud 2900 Powerhouse Rd. #120, Yakima, WA 98902 118 N. 50th Ave. 181321-41425 May 15, 2017 Notice of Complete Application The applications for Class (2) Review and SEPA Environmental Review for 118 N. 50th Ave. were received on May 15, 2017. The final requested additional information was received on May 31, 2017. As of May 31, 2017, your application is considered complete as required by the City of Yakima's Municipal Code (YMC) and site plan checklist, as referenced in YMC § 15.14.040. Please be aware that while the application is complete, the application will not be sent out for public comment until the required land use action sign has been posted and a completed Land Use Action Installation Certificate has been received by the Planning Division. Please come to the Planning Division at your earliest convenience to pick up the land use action signs and Installation Certificate. If you have any questions regarding this matter please call me at (509) 575-6042. Since ely, Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager Y. k,m�a Stm�iOf DOC MI5 INDEX m®®nnaa PCITY ' arming May 24, 2017 DEF ^ RTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVEI. "PMENT Joa, :avenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning FILE NUMBER: CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17 APPLICANT: Next Step Housing, c/o John Mifsud APPLICANT ADDRESS: 2900 Powerhouse Road #120, Yakima, WA 98902 PROJECT LOCATION: 118 N 50th Ave TAX PARCEL NO: 181321-41425 DATE OF REQUEST: May 15, 2017 SUBJECT: Notice of Incomplete Application Mr. Mifsud; The site plan for the Next Step Housing Bicycle Apartments Class (2) and SEPA Environmental Review at 118 N 50th Ave. was received on May 15, 2017. As of May 24, 2017, the application is considered incomplete as required by the City of Yakima's Municipal Code (YMC) and site plan checklist, as referenced in YMC § 15.15.030. The following information is needed in order to have a complete application: 1. Property Owner's Signature. According to the Yakima County Assessor, parcel 181321- 41425 is owned by Timothy & Bernice Monahan. The property owner needs to either sign the application or provide written authorization for Next Step Housing to apply. 2. Font Size. Many of the answers provided in both the Type 2 written narrative and SEPA Checklist are in a font size that is incredibly tiny and difficult to read. An increased font size is desired to allow ease of reading by staff and parties of record who will receive copies of the notice of application. Please either increase the text boxes to allow for larger font or provide your responses on separate page. MS Word versions of the applications will be provided electronically as well. 3. SEPA Checklist Question A.8. The response to this question identifies several environmental documents that have been completed, but no copies are attached to the application. Please provide copies of all referenced environmental documents. 4. SEPA Checklist Question A.11. The response to this question should provide much more detail, including but not limited to: size of buildings, number of residential units by type, number of parking spaces, identified common amenities, etc. The answer provided also includes a discrepancy in lot size of 2.94 acres. The Type 2 narrative and site plan identifies 2.98 acres, which is consistent with Yakima County Assessor data. 5. Site Plan. The site plan correctly identifies the R-3 zoning district on the southern property line. However, there is also a single parcel that is zoned R-2 at the SE corner of the property. Yakima '1ilJ' DO C. .4L`51 INDEX 1-1- • Therefore, we ask that you please provide the City of Yakima Planning Division with information regarding this matter by June 7, 2017, two weeks from today. Upon receipt of the requested information, your application will be considered to be complete and will continue to be processed. If you have any questions regarding this matter please call me at (509) 575-6042. Sincerely, Joseph Calhoun Planning Manager DOC. INDEX # � NEXT STEP HOUSING APP#004-17 & APP#006-17 (CL2#011-17, SEPA#014-17, APP#003-17) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER I Supplemental Information t;7 OAC 'EXiN ( 'Y �N .:' `. �, I�GG:8 8 .... l4"`' .,,.e�:.... .< . i. ... . #..*t .'..,.A I-1 Geotechnical Report 05/25/2017 I-2 Traffic Impact Analysis 05/25/2017 1-3 Statutory Warranty Deed 05/25/2017 COUNTY EXCISE TAX DATE MJAY 2 4 2a17 PAID 8 1513 5- 00 REC, NO. 447821 SY W • Y& imr, r7muntv 'r'^r+ rer's Off:'' WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Name Address 2R(n X01 c1 --o _ #rZj City, State, Zip N.IYI). -°1�j�Z• i Igill lI.II II 111)1! III 111 I12111111111 II II FILE# 7946192 YAKIMA COUNTY, WA 05/24/2017 03:16:36PM DEED PAGES: 2 FIDELITY TITLE COMPANY Recording Fee: 74.00 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Grantor(s): (I) BERNICE MONAHAN Grantee(s): (1) BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC Legal Description (abbreviated): Lot 5. CHESTNUT GROVE DEVELOPMENT Complete Legal Description on Page 1. Assessor's Tax Parcel 1D#: 181321-41425 Reference Nos. of Documents Released or Assigned: n/a THE GRANTOR, BERNICE MONAHAN, who took title as BERNIECE MONAHAN, as her separate estate, for a valuable consideration, in hand paid, conveys and warrants to BICYCLE APARTMENTS LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company, the following described real estate, situated in the County of Yakima, State of Washington: Lot 5, CHESTNUT GROVE DEVELOPMENT, as recorded in Volume "CC" of Plats, Page 27, records of Yakima County, Washington. Situated in Yakima County, State of Washington. YAKIMA COUNTY ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 181321-41425. SUBJECT TO: 1. Real property taxes and assessments for the second half of the assessment year 2017; 2. Liability for future charges and assessments by reason of inclusion within the boundaries of Soil Conservation District Number 2, City of Yakima Stormwater Fee and Horticulture Pest & Disease Control District; 3. An easement affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated herein, and incidental purposes, for tile drain, in favor of adjoiners, as recorded June 19, 1911, in Volume 119 of Deeds, under Auditor's File Number 8112; 4. An easement affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated herein, and incidental purposes, for pipeline, in favor of Berthold F. Rosenkranz, as recorded November 4, 1927, in Volume 265 of Deeds, under Auditor's File Number 436590. Said easement affects said premises; 5. An easement affecting the portion of said premises and for -the purposes stated herein, and RECEIVED Statutory Warranty Deed Yakima -County -Auditor r=ile# -7 -946492 —P -age. -1 of 2 MAY 2 2017 CITY QF YAKIMA Doc. INDEX • incidental purposes, for pipeline, in favor of William G. Schmidt, as recorded November 27, 1927, in Volume 265 of Deeds, under Auditor's File Number 436615. Said easement affects said premises; 6. An easement affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated herein, and incidental purposes, for irrigation pipeline, in favor of George Joseph Orchard Siding, Inc., as recorded May I, 1968, in Volume 704 of Deeds, under Auditor's File Number 2163521. Said easement affects said premises; 7. Yakima City Ordinance Number 3009, and the terms and conditions thereof, dated March 10, 1987 and recorded April 3, 1987, in Volume 1205 of Official Records, under Auditor's File Number 2794990; 8. An easement affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated herein, and incidental purposes, for pipeline or pipelines, in favor of Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, as recorded July 27, 1987, in Volume 1216 of Official Records, under Auditor's File Number 2805739. Said easement affects said premises; and 9. Rights reserved in federal patents, state or railroad deeds, building or use restrictions general to the area, zoning regulations, easements, conditions, restrictions, reservations, rights of way, covenants and other servitudes appearing of record or existing in fact over or upon the property, together with encroachments, claims of adverse possession, prescriptive easements or boundary line disputes visible by inspection or which would be disclosed by survey, and any future adjudication of surface water rights by any federal or state proceeding. DATED this 73 P`4 day of ✓ i 2017. BERNICE MONAHAN STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of Yakima ON THIS DAY personally appeared before me BERNICE MONAHAN, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that she signed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN*ttiind and official seal this 23 day of C`(1p,_�\ , 2017. O 7.3 Cr' /r...< \oFW Statutory Warranty Dear�® Yakirrte-County-Attditer ---FAe.4 7946.92 -2- \c\c,_\>2� NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires: % P-a94-2-ot 2 RECEIVED MAY 2 5 ?017 CITY OF YAKIMrA DOC. F"E.F,I';t:' CIV. INDEX • TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: April 3, 2017 TO: Joan Davenport, Planning Manager & Director of Community Development City of Yakima CC: Jeff Peters, Senior Planner City of Yakima FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principal, TENW SUBJECT: The Bicycle Apartments — Traffic Impact Analysis TENW Project No. 3527 This memorandum summarizes the results of a traffic impact analysis associated with The Bicycle Apartments, a proposed development of up to 80 new apartments located at 1 18 N 50th Avenue in Yakima, WA. This memo includes a project description, a description of existing transportation conditions within the immediate site vicinity, new project trip generation, trip distribution, traffic operational analysis at six study intersections and the project site driveway, a parking impact analysis, site access and circulation issues, and identification of any transportation mitigation measures to offset traffic impacts. Project Description The Bicycle Apartments project is located at 1 1 8 N 506 Avenue Yakima, WA, with up to 80 new apartment units proposed with 1 20 on-site parking stalls. One primary site access driveway would be provided onto N 506 Avenue. A site vicinity map is provided in Figure 1, and a project site plan is provided in Figure 2. Project completion is expected by 2019. Existing Transportation Conditions This section includes an inventory of existing roadway conditions, existing peak hour conditions, intersection levels of service, public transportation services and nonmotorized facilities, and planned roadway improvements. Roadway Conditions The following paragraphs describe existing roadway conditions affecting site access, including number of lanes, posted speed limits, and shoulder types and widths. Field work was conducted by TENW at each study intersection and arterial streets that would serve the site in March 2017. RECEIVED transportation Planning 1 Design I Traffic Impact & Operations PO Box 65254, Yakima, WA 98155 + Office (206) 361-7333 MAY ?017 CITY OF YAMPA DIV DOC. INDEX # T02 • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments MAY 252017 VTENW eV .rh FLIm!?v i DIV DOC. INDEX #�'a Richey Rd '",4\ •...• ..."---'4 `_ W Lincoln Ave a > < L z _ . W Avalanche Ave Summitview Ave BOrge St d < Z v m < ¢' a! 43v t Z, Z. z W Chestnut Ave 13, o, <' ¢ a` M; 4 Z' Z: P / a: ai ¢ np Z' � Z Project Site a > < r Cci tn z ,McCaraar Si • rieton Dr W Walnut St .c .o hI ✓ r W Arlington Ave ; W Arlington Ave ¢ L ap. rn N Ilig (Not to Scale) T E N WFigure 1 Project Site Vicinity The Bicycle Apartments i,o(liC impact Analysis Yakimp, 0ECEI MAY 252017 VTENW eV .rh FLIm!?v i DIV DOC. INDEX #�'a • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments (Nor to Scotel TENW Figure 2 Project Site Plan The Bicycle -1,g„_ Apartments aaf(c rmpoc: °,nary;, MN.1 Yakima,, WA rY• e1FIVED 2 , 2011 v tit Y iihimA PI_r `,......��. TENW April 3, 2017 DO 51 3 INDEX #'p2 Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments N 40th Avenue is a four -lane principal arterial with curbs, gutters and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Travel lanes are approximately 11 to 12 feet. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. N 48th Avenue is a two-lane collector arterial. North of W Chestnut Avenue, 2- to 3 -foot paved shoulders are provided on the west side of the street and curbs, gutters, sidewalks and 7- to 8 -foot paved shoulders for parking are provided on the east side of the street. South of W Chestnut Avenue, 2- to 3 -foot paved shoulders are provided on both sides of the street. Travel lanes are approximately 10 to 11 feet. The speed limit is posted at 30 mph. N 50th Avenue is a two-lane unchannelized roadway with curbs, gutters and sidewalks on both sides of the street. The curb -to -curb pavement width adjacent to the project site is approximately 30 feet. Parking is available on both sides of the street. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. N 56th Avenue is a two-lane minor arterial with curbs, gutters and sidewalks. South of Summitview Avenue, 8 -foot parking lanes are provided on both sides of the street. North of Summitview Avenue, 3- to 4 -foot paved shoulders ore provided with a center, two—way left turn lane. Travel lanes are approximately 11 to 12 feet. The speed limit is posted at 30 mph. Summitview Avenue is a four -lane principal arterial in the vicinity of N 50th Avenue. Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street. A two-way, center left -turning lane is provided along various parts of the roadway in the vicinity of commercial areas. Travel lanes ore approximately 11 to 12 feet. The posted speed limit is 35 mph west and 30 mph east of N 40th Avenue. W Chestnut Avenue is a two-lane collector arterial with 10 -foot travel lanes and 3- to 4 -foot paved shoulders. Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are provided along various parts of the roadway. The speed limit is posted at 25 mph. Tieton Drive is a four -lane minor arterial with curbs, gutters and sidewalks on both sides of the street. A two- way, center left -turning lane is provided along various parts of the roadway in the vicinity of commercial areas. Travel lanes are approximately 11 to 12 feet. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in the vicinity of S 56th Avenue. Existing Peak Hour Conditions Peak hour traffic volumes represent the highest hourly volume of vehicles passing through an intersection during a typical 4-6 PM weekday peak period. Peak period turning movement counts during the PM peak hour at the study intersections was conducted in March 2017 by /clax Data Solutions. Figure 3 summarizes existing PM peak period turning movements at the study intersections. Attachment A contains data sheets. Intersection Levels of Service Intersection levels of service (LOS) analyses were conducted at the study intersections during the weekday PM peak hour of existing conditions and with and without project traffic generated at full buildout of The Bicycle Apartments project. LOS refers to the degree of congestion on a roadway or intersection. It is a measure of vehicle operating speed, travel time, travel delays, and driving comfort. A letter scale from A to F generally describes LOS. RECEIVED %TENW MAY 2 5 2017 CITY OF YAkirorrl PLA`: !1. D1V April 3, 2017 Page 4 ©®C. INDEX • • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments ® N 56th A W....A Lon ni Pnew Ave 5611. Ave/lieton Cu 49 1449) 287 Til "Ii-- 705 4" L 103 ae 1' I _, 1 1 t I 446 'i t 106 211 58 336 104 — __ N 56th Ave Rd kli N 50tH Ave/ ummirview Ave 5611. Ave/lieton Cu X— II 18 0 17 l lsk f BSB 0.— ,., ... 4" L II ! 305— _, 1 1 t I 574 .1., - 10 4 44 336 20—x.? n 8 34 7 ElN 4018 A ve/Surnmitview Ave 5611. Ave/lieton Cu 57 431 683 /9 t- 530 /6 4" L i 78 r.. F 626 305— _, 1 1 t I ' 376 113 637 50 336 I20-- n 8 34 7 W Lincoln Ave Summitview Ave N 39th Ave _ W in8 5611. Ave/lieton Cu V-- 23 "I-128 • k— 156 257 36 159 F 626 K o Il 3 14I ' ` ! f r/ 336 -0. n 8 34 7 6-Nk ® N 50th Ave.//, Cheslnul Ave 46 f9 20 ) L. V-- 23 "I-128 • 'lc C• wstrrvt vt , 120 6 —1.-1.f K o Il 3 8 W Arlington Ave_ (Not 10 Scale) TENW Figure 3 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes The Bicycle Apartments Traffic a+,pncr An0lylis Yo, mo. WA RECEIVED TEN W MAY 2 5 2017 crrY OF YAKIMA PLANN:43 DIV April 3, 2017 2Q t. INDEX # r-0. Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments At signalized intersections, LOS A represents free-flow conditions -motorists experience little or no delays, and LOS F represents forced -flow conditions -motorists experience an average delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. The LOS reported for signalized intersections represents the average control delay per vehicle entering the intersection. The LOS reported at stop -controlled intersections is also based on the average control delay (sec/veh) and is reported for each movement. Therefore, the reported LOS at unsignalized intersections does not represent a measure of the overall operations of the intersection. LOS calculations for both signalized and stop -controlled intersections were calculated using the methodologies and procedures outlined in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manua/ (HCM,, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board (TRB). Table 1 outlines the LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections based on these methodologies. The City of Yakima maintains a level of service standard of LOS D. Existing PM peak hour LOS analyses are summarized in Table 2. As shown under 2017 existing conditions during the PM peak hour, all signalized intersections currently operate at LOS D or better and stop -controlled movements at unsignalized intersections currently operate at LOS D or better. Detailed LOS summary worksheets are included in Attachment B. Table 1: Level of Service Criteria for Intersections Level of Service A B C D E F Signalized Intersection Average Delay Range (sec) <10 >10to<20 >20tos35 > 35 to < 55 > 55 to < 80 > 80 Unsignalized Intersection Delay Range (sec) <10 > 10 to 5 15 >15to<25 > 25 to < 35 > 35 to 5 50 > 50 Source: "Highway Capacity Manual". Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 2010. Table 2: 2017 Existing Intersection Levels of Service PM Peak Hour Study Intersection Signalized Intersections #1. N 401h Ave / Summitview Ave #3. N 561h Ave / Summitview Ave #6. N 56th Ave / Tieton Drive Stop Controlled Intersections #2. N 50th Ave / Summitview Ave Eastbound Left Approach Westbound Left Approach Northbound Approach Southbound Approach 114. N 50th Ave / W Chestnut Ave Eastbound Left Approach Westbound Left Approach Northbound Approach Southbound Approach #5. N 48'h Ave / W Chestnut Ave (All -Way) LOS D C B A A C D A A B B B PM Peak Hour Delay (sec) V/C Ratio 41.5 0.76 24.5 0.70 12.4 0.51 0.30 0.21 0.40 0.03 21.0 0.28 32.1 0.18 0.6 0.01 0.3 0.00 11.0 0.05 10.5 0.12 10.4 0.45 Source: TENW using Synchro 6. RECEIVED TENW MAY G -, 201/ CITY OF YAi`IIYIPI PLA?:N::'ea OIV April 3, 2017 Page 6 Doc. INDEX Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Public Transportation Services and Nonmotorized Facilities Yakima Transit provides transit stops on Summitview Avenue for westbound and eastbound travel on the northwest and southeast corners of the N 506 Avenue and Summitview Avenue intersection, north of the project site. Both transit stops are located within 700 feet of the project site. Adequate sidewalks are provided on N 506 Avenue and Summitview Avenue to and from the project site and these transit stop locations. Planned Transportation Improvements A list of capital improvement projects was provided by the City of Yakima and was reviewed for planned transportation improvements that would provide increased traffic capacity for future growth within the immediate vicinity of the site. No planned improvements were identified in the immediate site vicinity. The following planned transportation improvements have been identified in the City of Yakima's 2040 Transportation System Plan (DRAFT Transportation Improvement Projects): ➢ Project I-10: 40th Ave / Summitview Avenue intersection Improvements. Improve the intersection by constructing larger corner radii, lengthening the tum lanes and upgrading the traffic signal system. Project may change based on 40th Avenue Access Management Corridor Study findings. Identified in the City's 6 -year 2017-2022 Transportation Improvement Program. Estimated cost - $1,093,000. Medium -range timeframe (2021-2030). Project R-21: 481h Avenue Widening from Summitview Ave to Nob Hill Road. Reconstruct and widen 481h Avenue, install curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting and drainage system. Identified in the City's 6 -year 2017-2022 Transportation Improvement Program. Estimated cost- $2,575,000. Medium -range timeframe (2021-2030). Traffic Impact Analysis The following section describes projected future baseline traffic growth, new trips generated by the proposed development, distribution of new project trips, intersection level of service impacts, a parking impact analysis, site access and circulation issues, and identification of transportation mitigation to offset impacts. 2019 Baseline Traffic Volumes The expected completion/occupancy year for this project is 2019. To estimate 2019 baseline traffic volumes without the project, 2017 traffic counts were factored by 2.5 percent per year per the City of Yakima's annual traffic growth rate. Per the City of Yakima, there are no known pipeline development projects in the project site vicinity. Project Trip Generation Trip generation rates compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012, were used lo estimate new daily traffic and PM peak hour traffic. Average rate equations for ITE land use codes for the new land use of 220 AAcartmenis ere applied for 80 proposed apartment units. ��✓�_ ' VEL) GTENW MAY 2 5 ?MU April 3,2017 Page 7 cf ry OF YHIrimpi DOC. PLAN i ; 01V INDEX # I c • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Tables 3 and 4 summarize the estimated trip generation by the project at full buildout. An estimated total of 532 daily and 50 PM peak hour vehicular trips (33 entering and 18 exiting) would be generated at full build -out of the project. Detailed trip generation estimates are provided in Attachment C. Table 3: The Bicycle Apartments Trip Generation Summary Land Use PM Peak Weekday Daily Apartments 50 532 Source: Trip Generation Manual, 9Th Edition, ITE, 2012. Table 4: The Bicycle Apartments Trip Generation Summary Time Period In Out Total Weekday Daily 266 266 532 Weekday PM Peak Hour 33 17 50 Source' Trip Generation Manual, 9Th Edition, ITE, 2012. Project Trip Distribution To distribute trips onto the vicinity -street and the arterial network, trip distribution patterns were determined based on review of existing travel patterns, and the relative distribution of schools, employment centers, and commercial density in the vicinity. Generally, average distribution and assignment of project trips was assumed as (as illustrated in Figure 4): • 25 percent north via N 401h Avenue and N 56th Avenue. > 35 percent west via Summitview Avenue, W Chestnut Avenue and Tieton Drive. • 15 percent east via Summitview Avenue. • 25 percent southeast via N 40th Avenue, N 48th Avenue and W Chestnut Avenue. Figure 5 summarizes traffic volume impacts of the proposed The Bicycle Apartments project during the PM peak hour in 2019. Weekday PM peak traffic volumes forecasts with and without the project in 2019 are provided in Attachment D. Intersection Level of Service Impacts Estimated project intersection LOS impacts during the PM peak hour in 2019 with and without the project are summarized in Table 5. Detailed LOS summary worksheets for future 2019 conditions with and without the project are included in Attachment B. As shown under 2019 conditions in Table 5, with and without the project during the PM peak hour, all signalized intersections and all stop -controlled movements at unsignalized intersections would operate at LOS D or better, meeting adopted level of service standards. RECEIVED %TENW MAY 2 2017 CITY OF YAKitvo PLA'.';t DIV A pril 3, 2017 Page 8 DOC. 8NDEX Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments W Lincoln Ave Summitview Ave W Arlington Ave W Arlington Ave (Not 10 Scale) TENW Figure 4 Project Trip Distribution The Bicycle Apartments Traffic front, t Annlysa Yakima, WA RECEIVED TENW MAY 2 2011 CITY Of YAKilviA PLAN :NG NV April 3, 2017 Page 9 DOC. INDEX # • • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments ElN 561h Ave/.,i%mrnJview Ave (94) - 51 (52) 157 302 92 .4'- 741}/43) ,t 4 L ,9. VierV Av. I 108 1 a t t. (474) 469 --0 b 111 272 61 - 109 --.4 12 Z Rd kN 50th Ave/ urnmitview Ave 561h 4.4i1;010M Dr - 12 18 0 12 t 905 2710 38 4 L 24 )37) I 12 1 9 r., !„n i)r (153) 603 -- 2 I r 0 11 4 46 128) 21 - e (141 (53) Legend 15 PM without Protect (23) PM with Protect N 401h .Are/Summitview Ave (460) 453 718 83 W Lincoln Ave 119 669 53 2 (121) Summitview Ave Barge 55 cCar ar St N 581h Ave N 481h Ave/'Ar Chestnut Ave Tieton Dr W aN 561h 4.4i1;010M Dr (273) R— 24(31) t 134 6 164 2710 38 167 "4--' 658 ) I 6 -� 9 r., !„n i)r (153) 148 1c t 353 .- 8 36 7 6—x ,_ 41 N 50th Ave/w Chestnut Ave (St) 48 (24) 9 2111 LVI0.-- R— 24(31) t 134 6 sIrt,,r F... (181 1I --Of t ( 126 -0S -.r 12 3 8 6 -� 40 191 8 29 —01 (40) 38 –0 (92) 90 —14 W Arlington Ave (Not to Scole) VTENW Figure 5 2019 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Impacts The Bicycle Apartments frpffic Impact Analysts Yakima, WA TENW MAY 2 5 2017 CITY OE YIAiris'.ti+ PLA't1,'.i';:i DIV April 3, 2017 Page 10 Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Table 5: 2019 Intersection Level of Service PM Peak Hour Impacts Study Intersection Signalized Intersections #1. N 401h Ave / Summitview Ave #3. N 56th Ave / Summitview Ave #6. N 561h Ave / Tieton Drive Slot, Controlled intersections #2. N 501h Ave / Summitview Ave Eastbound Left Approach Westbound Left Approach Northbound Approach Southbound Approach #4. N 501h Ave / W Chestnut Ave Eastbound Left Approach Westbound Left Approach Northbound Approach Southbound Approach #5. N 481h Ave / W Chestnut Ave All -Way Stop #7. N 501h Ave / Project Site Driveway Eastbound Approach Northbound Left Approach PM Peak Hour Without Proiect PM Peak Hour With Proiect Delay V/C Delay V/C LOS (sec) Ratio LOS (sec) Ratio D 42.5 0.80 D 42.8 0.81 C 26.0 0.73 C 26.1 0.73 B 12.9 0.53 1 B 12.9 0.53 A 0.3 0.22 1 A 0.7 0.22 A 0.4 0.03 A 1.3 0.05 C 21.4 0.29 I C 23.5 0.29 D 32.2 0.34 D 34.9 0.19 A 0.7 0.01 A 1.0 0.02 A 0.3 0.00 A 0.3 0.00 B 11.4 0.05 ( B 11.6 0.05 B 10.6 0.13 B 10.9 0.15 B 10.7 0.47 1 B 10.8 0.48 - - - A 9.2 0.02 - - A 1.6 0.01 Source: TENW using Synchro 6. N 50th Avenue Cul -De -Sac Traffic Impact Analysis The City of Yakima requested an analysis of traffic impacts be conducted of constructing a cul-de-sac onto N 50th Avenue to prevent through traffic onto W Chestnut Avenue. Based upon the Cily of Yakima's Municipal Code Title 12.06.050 Cul-de-sac Streets, cul-de-sacs shall be constructed within a street -right of - way of 80 feet in diameter and have an improved diameter of 65 feet. In addition, the maximum length of a cul-de-sac street shall be six hundred feet measured along the street centerline from the nearest through street intersection to the center of the cul-de-sac. To meet the City of Yakima's cul-de-sac street requirements, a cul-de-sac would need to be constructed in the vicinity of N 50r1' Avenue and Pear Tree Court, approximately 600 feet north of the street centerline for W Chestnut Avenue. This location, however would be more than 700 feet from Summitview Avenue, and therefore, would exceed the City's maximum standard to provide for safe fire/emergency vehicle circulation. In addition, installation of this type of treatment at an optimal location would require purchase of existing residential properties to construct, and therefore, construction of such a measure would not appear viable without violating City code/design standards. TENW DECEIVED MAY 2 2011 Of April 3, 2017 DIY Vr YAkuvii Page I 1 P AM::4. a niV DOC. INDEX Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Regardless a traffic operational analysis of this cul-de-sac scenario, all project trips were redistributed to the north onto Intersection #2 - N 50th Avenue / Summilview Avenue under 2019 conditions with the proposed development. In addition, existing trips that travel Summilview for residences south of the cul-de- sac were removed from the intersection as they would now be forced to take Chestnut Avenue. As shown in Attachment E, minor street approaches would continue to operate at LOS D assuming a cul-de-sac. Parking Impact Analysis The Bicyc/e Apartments development proposes to provide 120 off-street parking stalls. also available on N 506 Avenue. A parking impact analysis was conducted to evaluate parking demand that would be proposed project. The parking impact analysis reviewed: ➢ City of Yakima parking requirements. ➢ Parking demand of proposed commercial development using ITE rates. ➢ Existing parking inventory for similar Next Step Housing developments. On -street parking is generated by the City of Yakima Parking Requirements Based upon the City of Yakima off-street parking standards (Yakima Municipal Code Title 15.06.040, Table 6-1 Table of Off -Street Parking Standards), Table 6 summarizes the minimum off-street parking stalls required by the proposed development. As shown, the City of Yakima would require 120 off-street parking stalls. Table 6: Parking Requirements Minimum Off -Street Parking Parking Component Requirements' Size Total Residential - Multifamily dwellings More than 10 units 1.5 stalls per dwelling unit 80 120 Total Minimum Off -Sheet Parking Supply 120 1 - Per City of Yakima Municipal Code Title 15.06.040, Table 6-1 Table of Off -Street Parking Standards Project Parking Demand For the project, the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation, Fourth Edition, 2010, was used to determine parking demand for The Bicycle Apartments development. Based upon Land Use Code 221 for Low-Rise/Mid-Rise Apartments, direct application of published rates in Parking Generation, 4/4 Edition, estimate the peak development parking demand at a total of 76 parking stalls {see Table 7). RECEIVED VED MAY 2 5 2017 61-9TENW CITY YkkkitarA April 3, 2017 Page 12 DOC. INDEX 02 • Table 7: Off -Street Parking Demand Estimates Demand Component Low-Rise/Mid-Rise Apartments (ITE LUC 221)1 Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Peak Parking Rate or Adjustment Demand Stalls = 1.42 X 80 Units -38 76 Total Parking Demand Using ITE Rates 76 1 - Parking Generation Manual, 41l' Edition, 17E 2010. Based on other similar residential developments for Next Step Housing, a parking inventory was determined to be 67 percent of total residential units. Application of this local demand, The Bicycle Apartments development is anticipated to have a parking demand of 54 stalls. Parking Impacts The Bicycle Apartments development proposes to provide 120 off-street parking stalls, meeting the minimum required under code. Additionally, parking demand based upon ITE Parking Generation rates and parking inventory for similar Next Step Housing developments indicate parking demand for the project is estimated to range between 54 to 76 parking stalls, approximately 45 to 63 percent less than the 120 proposed off- street parking stalls. Therefore, no parking impacts off-site are anticipated by the proposed development. Site Access and Circulation Issues Vehicular site access would be provided onto N 50'h Avenue. The internal roadway within the development would provide adequate on-site, two-vvay circulation with curbs, gutters and sidewalks on both sides of the existing street frontage. The City's engineering and development code applies the International Fire Code (IFC) for secondary emergency vehicle access requirements for residential development. As the proposed project is less than 100 units, a secondary access is not required per IFC Appendix D, Section D106 Multifamily Residential Developments. Field work was conducted by TENW on March 25, 2017, along N 50th Avenue. Driver entering sight distance via the project site driveway onto N 501h Avenue is greater than 600 feet to the north and greater than 800 feet to the south. Based upon WSDOT's Exhibit 1310-19a Sight Distance at Intersections, 330 feet of sight distance is required for entering a roadway with a 30 mph design speed (5 mph over 25 mph posted speed). As such, adequate visibility for safe egress would be provided. Regardless of the IFC standards, the City of Yakima requested a review of other potential secondary access requirements. As shown in Figure 6, additional secondary access for fire/emergency purposes could only be provided onto parking lots within adjacent commercial properties, however, these locations would not be viable as they would directly impact viable building sites for proposed residential units. RECEIVED MAY 2 3 ?017 TENW CITY OF Y4Aii.,A DIV April 3, 2017 PQ,gei 0 INDEX • • Traffic Impact Analysis The Bicycle Apartments Project Mitigation A review of traffic impacts to intersection levels of service, parking impact analysis, site access and circulation issues was conducted in association with The Bicycle Apartments project, a proposed new development of 80 apartments in Yakima, WA. Based upon this transportation impact analysis, the following mitigation measures may be required: ➢ The proposed development will need to go through a traffic concurrency review process to determine the project's traffic impact fees, which is anticipated to generate 50 new project trips based upon 80 new apartment units. ➢ Adequate on-site parking would be provided, meeting both City code and expected on-site demand. ➢ The applicant may be required to dedicate right-of-way along the properly frontage onto N 50th Avenue. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this memo, please call me at (206) 361- 7333 x 101 or mikeread@tenw.com. RECEIVED r, v n VTENW _ CITY OF YAfUM, PLA N °a ; DIV Doc. INDEX # Z'o2- April 3, 2017 Page 14 iC OCt A r (11 \ 6E; the SiCVCie: poilme-os ',.•.y;,?[ TEN\i GeTENwv Figure 6 Secondary Access Options CifY ..„ DIV P-10. Bicy,:ie .A.portrne.nts A pr.I ,7.o(je CCIC. INDEX ATTAC 2017 Traffic Counts idaxdata.com 06 483 0 141 336 saws 6 TIE T N DR \ S 56TH AVE TIETON DR :Two -Sour Count Summaries Interval Start NO PM 415 PM 4:30 PM 4/45 PM 6/10/811P5536 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5.45 FM Count Total Peak Hour TIETON DR Sopi0 Hour 10 13 Olp 10. 0 TEV' 1,775 PHF • Eastbound 1/1` LT TH RT • 31 85 2 O 41 87 6 O 37 94 2 O 40 76 3 UtOrrurAVEllgururEtE 0 31 94 0 23 106 2 O 26 95 5 262 709 21 141 336 *.TIETON EH 16 swam 626 791 Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2017 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Peak Hour: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM HIV PHF •EB 04% 0 97• 0 4% 0.92 N5 0 0% 0..82 513 0 4% 0.89 TOTAL 0 4%•0 96 TIETON OR 5 56TH AVE VVestbound Northbound UT LT TH R r UT LT TH RT 0 1 119 25 0 3 11 0 0 2 133 37 G CI 12 2 0 3 134 49 0 3 /a 2 0 148 34 0 3 8 2 -itigimporapaiggesigtir 1 38 0 0 10 3 6 126 39 0 3 7 4 0 5 119 30 0 3 5 55TH AVE Southbound UT LT TH RT O 45 19 46 0 1 29 10 42 0 O 39 6 57 / 0 0 1,658 61/4966/9#11/7/7. 93194/449519 —cc He ACC 1732 O 37 9 56 446 1,775 0 30 11 60 417 1,766 0 39 12 47 391 1,715 302 89 452 3,373 0 0 159 36 257 1,775 0 19/nun Ronnie Total One Hour 0 23 4123 288 •9 626 155 17 59 17 Note. Inachou 'orand surrtmaty volumes ibbiude heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles OVerall COUTO: Interval Heavy Verucle T Start EB i/VB NB SE FE EIB N8 58 Total 4 DO Pei 3 1 0 0 Total 4 5 Bicycles 4 15 PM 2 2 0 4:30PM 1 0 0 1 2 445 PM 1 0 1 2 000 PIA 0 2 0 0 2 5/15 PM 1 0 0 0 / 5 30 PM 0 1 C, 0 1 / Count Total 6 7 C 18 ' 'I: Peak Hour 4.' 2 3 7 ' Mark Skaggs: (425) 250-0T77 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 O 0 0 0 0 O 1 1 O 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 388 402 424 Pertestriana /Cr am Leo) East VVest North South Total 0 3 1 0 4 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 4 CRNIEG))///) GNIN/N361/G.NEMEGGENG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 I 6 /0 8 8 2 28 3 3 3 0 9 , 3s - 1 •mark skaggs MaNNM INDEX idaxdatscom 05 OZZI N 48TH AVE W CHESTNUT AVE N 150 Peak Hour wet' o4 ett ekt LWCHESTNUT AVE 0 28 TEV: 680 444o PHF:087 36 88 W CHESTNUTN AVE -6emm 28 3.4 83 13 0 42 Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2017 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Peak Hour: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM HV POW EB 1 3% 0 85 0 0% 0 75 NB 0 3% 0 Be SB 3% 0 ea TOTAL 1 1% 8 / Two -Hour Cotirit Summaries MAY 2 A 2027 M V Of YA;;Iviot ZAV Interval Start CBES AV Ve CHESTNUT AVE N 48111 AVE AVE Eastbound UT LT TH RT es T LT rid TH RT Northbound u r LT TH RT UT LT TH RR SouMbound 15 4nin Tots( RoIIing One 11011r 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 0 9 4 14 0 430 PM 4 6 15 0 442 PM It 10 21 0 5ESMS/PJ65(9596r9o9E9215999149MddXM 9dMOE/551966557/2/5551655 1516PM0 9 24 0 2 0 5:30 PM 0 5 4 14 3 2 11 2 5 45 4112 1 13 1 2 3 1 7 16 28 0 40 5 24 33 3 0 2 45 4 2 36 9 41 14 22 35 1 0 22 41 1 0 3 2A222#221A22412, mommummummomm 0 22 26 0 0 2 50 5 132 155 137 175 O 22 24 4 0 4 38 6 O 11 19 0 1 40 138 136 116 0 0 599 657 680 659 600 4, Count Tot 1 Peak Hour 0 53 61 13 25 167 242 1 15 345 58 1,199 0 2 0 1 2 4 38 2 25 Note Twohour count surnmary irslumes rnclude heavy Toehicies but exclude bicycles in overall count nterval Heavy Vehicle Totals Start ES WS NB SB Total EB trades NB 58 Ti Ped Moans (Crossing Le st West North Scu(h Toted 4 GO P24 1 0 4 15 11141 0 D I 2 0 ROO PM 1 0 0 0 /0 0 0 4:46PMO 0 1 1 2.0 0 0 0 6560 pm gi 00 6 0 6 515 PM 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 5 30 FM 0 0 1 0 0 5 45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 12 O 0 •0 3 0 O 0 0 0 3 O 0 0 0 3 5559859599599655/955954/595959511555555965 0 0 1 0 1 O 3 1 2 3 0 3 Count Total 4 12 0 2 2 4 Peak HOU, 7 Mark Skaggs: (425) 25010777 mark skagg idaxdata.com 04 SOTH AVE CHESTNUT AVE Peak• Hour EV CHESTE22 AvE 222-: 23 151 :22222 128 < •WCHESTNUEN AvE N 50TH Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2011 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM Peak Hour •4:30 PM to 530 PM HIE 55: PHA' EB •1 5% 37 WB • 0 96 NB 22134 81.9 SB 30% 3L132 TOTAL.013 0.82. Two -Stour taunt Suffuse RECEIVED MAY 2 Fi ?Oil YAKIMA 20: Interval Start W•CHESTNUT AVE CHESTNUT AVE N 50TH AVE 50234 AVE Eastbound UT LT 134 RT •Westimund UT LT Th •RT Hohn UT LT TH RT 154616 Borring Southbound Tota Om Hour 132 LT TH ET .40O::PM 4.15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM O 13 2 O 2 24 1 0 2 33 8 2 O 2 21 2 0 1 29 4 O 3 28 1 0 1 34 0 2 litm5grAiatimmaimmyymymy immmmmmil„mlimmmumit 5:15 PM 0 2 30 3 0 i 32 7 0 3 5.30 PM 0 3 18 0 0 1 37 2 2 5 45 PM 24 3 I 1'7 2 4 3 30 2 3 2 4 0 4 1 4 2 0 - :3 2 1 ••• 2. 7 0 ':'!„„„„„r„r:::ttrr:rgrrrgrrrggegrSrrre/g066::l 1 . .1.0. •: 02 r 679 1;04_8.. :.5. •• • •2 •1 • 3 r 11 88 12 04 0 332 374 390 384 3•52 COLI nt Total 199 12 13 248 37 22 12 0 37 2 7 - peak i• 10 120 :1ZB 23. 0 11 3 Vote 7000 -hour count summate volumes ittclucie heavy veil:cies but exclude bicycles m overall WW1 Interval •Start Heavy Vehicle Totals greys Podestrm 5 1CroSSION Leg/ Total EB 83 83 Tot E West N nh Snot! To 4 OD P 4 15 PM 0 2 0 0 2 4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 4:45PM01001 5:00 EM 1 0 0 0 5:1s Pre 1 0 0 1 5 30 PM 0 1 0 5 45 PM Count Tot I Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (I 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 O 00•00 00101' 0 •0 0 0 •0 O 0 1 1 O 0 2 1 O 3 0 1 2 3 3 0 0 0 :3 5 0 0 7 13 1 Mark Skaggs: (425) 250-0777 eaticskaggs ere aaOm 03 N 56TH AVE SUMMITVIEW AVE • 0 103 •446 4444 104 SUNUATVI AVE Peak Hour t.. to oo te co TEV 2.3 PHE 0 92 SUMMITV AVE BIN 49 444 705 92 0 iTwo-tiour Count Summaries SUMM1TVIEW AVE SUMMITV1EW AVE East 'Westbound Start UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT 4:00 PM (; 26 105 24 0 20 128 17 415 PM 19 63 19 0 21 133 23 4,30 PM 0 21 90 19 0 19 149 14 4:45 PM 0 25 a4 31 0 26 162 16 5:00 PM 0 31 9'7 23 0 19 162 9 (000.4§(e#00 205500615 09005#603690507065754660.000160 5:30 PM 130 ZO 0 16 183 8 5:45 PM 0 30 92 16 0 '19 133 16 Count Total 0 19:3 816 182 0 171 1248 119 Peak Hour 0 103 104 0 92 705 4.9 4 0. Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2017 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:50 PM Peak Hour 445 PM to 5:45 PM 7+7 HV PHF •EB 05% 0.92 WE • 0O% NE 0...0% 094 SB .02% 0 9E0 TOTAL C 3% 3:94. N 56TH AVE Norlhocuno UT LT TH RT 14 56TH AVE Southbound UT LT TH RT 15.tratt Rotting One 0 38 44 15 0 27 70 37 554 0 O 25 45 12 0 23 57 38 498 0 O 23 57 14 0 14 67 29 516 0 0 22 58 20 0 23 79 28 584 2,152 O 29 47 15 0 27 72 46 577 2,175 ;5555145517555MR4I51412.0115015;51001 kook O 33 49 9 0 18 60 oo 582 2,398 11 37 16 0 10 59 26 465 2,279 203 394 118 106 211 58 Note Two-hou count summary volumes mclube heavy vehides but erciede bicycles in 07,Sran COL711 Interval Heavy Vehicle T. Start Es NE SE Tot* 4 00 PM 1 4 0 2 7 4 15 PM 2 2 0 0 2 4 30 PM 2 2 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 5(00 PM 1 0 0 1 615 PM , 1 0 0 5:30 PM 1 2 0 0 3 5 45 P144 2 0 0 0 2 Count 'Trkai 10 8 0 3 21 Peak Hour 3 2 1 6 4 Mark Skaggs: (425) 2500777 Bicycles EB WO NE S8 Total. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 640 279 88 287 149 4 431 0 2,398 0 Pedestrians (Cr. 59 Leg) East West North South Total 0 0 t 0 1 4 5 0 O 3 0 1 4 1 0 0 2 O 1 1 1 3 55A555L555555555555,95555555 o o o oe 8 7 8 3 4 2 2 9 2 26 idaxdata.corn 02 N 50TH AVE SUMM1TVIEW AVE 20 •SU /TOON AVE Peak Hoar TEM 1,580 PHE 0 88 Two -Hour Count Surnrn 'es Interval Start 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4.30 PM 4.45 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM Count Total SUMMITVIEW AVE Eastbound UT IT 460664 .858 23 0 z ( 892 Date- Tue, Mar 21, 2017 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Peak Hour: 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM HV PHF ES 0.5% 0.87 WS 0 1% 0.86 NB 0 0% 0.69 SB 0 0% 0 66 TOTAL 0 3% 0.88 SUNIMITVIEW AVE N 50T1 AVE Westbound UT LT 334:RT O 4 154 6 0 7 171 2 2 3 107 4 0 15 190 3 0 3 115 7 0 a 160 5 o 3 129 7 0 7 195 7 0 1 0 0 132 6 203 3 0 4 siissississississs ,...iiiississisessiseSsissiosiiiissisis 6 15147405206000 122 4 0 2 16/ 0 2 Northbound UT LT Tit RT 0. 3 O 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 DRIVE WAY fl4und UT LT TH RT 12 0 1 1 6 20 0 3 1 5 16 0 2 2 7 0 4 0 8 16 0 2 0 3 itedditt558177/%005575127777(78>dithilitE 0 13:0501 0 0 4 3 21 072 4 3 56 1 550 23 0 18 6 91 40 5 40 'n Total 346 360 37/ az848,2 38? : 302 2,958 Rolling One HOU! 0 0 1,439 1,448 1,544 1,585 1,519 9 4 0 Peak Hour 1 10 674 20 0 23 456 11 0 10 44 12 018 Note Two-hour count summary volumes inolocle heavy 000 id. but exclude bicycles rn overall count Interval Start 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:46 PM 5:03 PM 2,5716 PM., 5:30 964 5.45 PM : Count Total ], Peak Hour . Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles EB WB NB SB Total: Ed WB NB SO Total 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 320053 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000 /1 . M ..0 1000 0 2000200 3 0 0 12 6 20 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 / I 0 0 O o o o o 0 0 1,566 Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) East West North South Total 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 O 0 2 0 2 O 0 40 O 0 0 0 6 O 0 0 1 1 O 0 1 6 0 Mark Skaggs: (425) 252-0777 mark0kaggs 0•2 wwwidaxdata„com 01 1 074 801 N 40TH AVE SUMMITVIEW AVE uJ t - 0 305 mmj 376 ••• 120 S MM TVEMN AVE Peak Hour TEV 3,459 PHF 9.5 Two -Hour Count Summaries 4:00 PM 4715••PM 413E PM 4:45:PM ingoomot 51•25PM • 6130.:PM 5:45.PM Court Total Peak SU I1VIEW AVE Eastbound UT LT 12-1 RT 0 86 73 25 69 75 25 O 65 "74 24 0 71 '79 23 M403g7.061:1;NM:9;33.:19.• O 78 98 30 0 71 102 34 0 57 56 19 0 585 557 216 305 378 w g SUMMITV1EW AVE 5 57 z 530 78 0 665 515 Date: Tue, Mar 21, 2017 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Peak Hour: 4:45 PM to 5:45 PM HV %: PRF EB 04% 093 WB 0094, 087 NB 0 4% 0,95 SB 0 6% 0 95 TOTAL 0 46 096 SUM EW AVE N 40TH AVE VVestboond Northbound UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT O 27 95 O 21 101 O 18 134 0 uwl O 14 149 •0 18 120 0 •23 65 107 14 19 19 18 17 15 187 928 124 78 N 40TH AVE LT 15 -min bound Total TH RT 0 26 155 16 0 149 1 796 0 28 175 17 0 '9 152 '07 024 24 159 13 0 16 146 92 757 25 160 10 0 22 183 100 827 176 00.0, 32 163 14 0 19 172 122 902 0 30 139 18 0 15 168 96 22 131 20 0 25 160 99 213 E257 116 SO Note Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles Out exclude bicyclesin overall count, Interval Start 4•00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Totals EB W13 NB SB Totat •0 0 1 5 1 3 4 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 6 5:00PM 1 0 2 2 5 5:15 PM 2 0 0 2 4 5:30 PM 0 0 1 2 3 5 45 PM 2 0 1 3 Count Tota, *- 13 Peak Hour Mark Skaggs: (425) 250-0777 17 7 13 Bicycles EB WB NB SB Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.. "." : •0 0 0 0 •0 •0 0 O 0 • 0 O 0 0 0 03.7!.3 1073 0 0 O 0 0 0 158 1300 840 79 683 431 826 695 3 469 Rolling One Hour 0 0 0 3,234 3342 3,420 3,459 3,327 0 0 Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) East West North South Total 2 2 0 4 0 0 1 0 O 1 0 • O 2 0 0 2 O 0 3 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 0 4 0 0 3 4 5 23 11 mark ska mago9901' I Intersection Level •of• Service Calculations • HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Summitview Ave & N 40th Ave 3/29/2017 t4 ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT N8R SBL SOT SHR Lane Configurations ) tt• ) t 4 vi tt• 'I it' r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Tot ai Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 096 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3444 1805 3557 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3444 1805 3557 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Volume (vph) 305 376 120 78 530 57 113 637 50 79 683 431 Peak -hour factor. PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 328 404 129 90 609 66 119 671 53 83 719 454 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 306 Lane Group Flow (vph) 328 508 0 90 667 0 119 719 0 83 719 148 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Perrnitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 26 2 41.2 9.0 24.0 12.1 41.1 8.7 37.7 37.7 Effective Green, g (s) 26.2 41.2 9.0 24.0 12.1 41.1 8.7 37.7 37.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.36 0.08 0.21 0.10 0.35 0.07 0.33 0.33 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.5 2 2 3 2 2.2 3.2 3.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 404 1223 140 736 186 1252 134 1162 520 v/s Ratio Prot c0.18 0.15 0.05 c0.19 c-0.07 c0.20 0.05 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.81 0.42 0.64 0.91 0.64 0.57 0.82 0.62 0.28 Uniform Delay, d1 42.6 28.3 51.9 44.9 49.9 30.4 52.0 33.1 29.1 Progression Factor 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 11.5 1.0 7.9 16.9 5.6 1.9 6.4 2.5 1.4 Delay (s) 54.0 29.3 59.8 61.8 55.5 32.3 58.4 35.6 30.5 Level of Service 0 C E E E C E D C Approach Delay (s) 38.7 61.6 35.6 35.2 Approach LOS 0 E D D intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 41.5 HCM Level of Service 0 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0 76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.8% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group ,FCEIVED MAY 2 7017 CP Y PtANK..i.: The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Transportation Engineering Northwest Synchro 6 Report Page 1 DOC. INDEX # c2.. HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Surnmitview Ave & N 50th Ave Mo et Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly fir, rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane "ltacith (ft) Walking Speed (Ns) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) oX. platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 con( vol vCir, unblocked vat tO, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) p0 queue five % cM Di - Volume Total Volume Left Volume Right cSH Volume to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Control Delay (s) Lane LOS App • - Delay (s) Approach LOS a114, ESL EBT PPR Prt. Free 0% 11 574 20 23 0.87 0.87 087 0.86 13 660 23 27 1010 1010 41 2.2 98 . paerty)(Whit1)4.44.4688111, n.r4.t r ray 1„,;, Average Delay 4c— 11 Inte14...didi4Capacity)Utilization)4 457,4%)44 Analyais.Period (rain) IF 683 3 41 2.2 97 913 Free 858 086 998 11 086 13 343 353 526 512 88 35 13 0 27 0 12 14 0 23 0 13 52 21 1700 913 1700 293 193 002 021 003 0.30 023 018 1 0 2 0 22 18 06 00 08 0 0 210 32.1 A A 0.3 04 210 32.1 C D 3/29/2017 f NipintleriviNBRIEsatulmmagripar 10 085 12 Stop 4 0 85 5 None 4 Stop 014 44 12 0 18 085 085 085 085 52 14 0 21 None 1249 1761 341 1467 1766 505 1249 1761 341 1467 1766 505 7.5 6.5 6.9 75 6.5 6.9 3.5 4,0 90 94 122 81 33 3.5 40 3.3 92 82 100 96 77 81 518 1,1181411.161211141115111118611111(8111111914121,„,2191118W11611111WII, ICU Level of Service The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Transportation Engineering Northwest 8 PECENT11, MAY 2 ..E1 2217 CITY Cf1 PLA12222:1:012 Synchro 6: Report. Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Summitview Ave & N 56th Ave 3/29/2017 , 4ksi, tfr. ,401 Movement • ESL EST ccR vvaL vBT .V#SR tat fler SERE. SBL ••. 'EST 'S Lane Configurations ideal Flew (yptip) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 40 4,0 4.0 4.0 Lane Utt Factor 1...00 0,35 1,00 005 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0 97 1.00 0,99 1.00 1,00 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 095 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd, Flow (prot) 1787 3473 1787 3539 1805 1900 Fit Permitted 0.95 1 00 0,95 1,00 095 1.00 Satd Flow (perm) 1787 3473 1787 3539 1805 1900 Volume (vph) 103 446 104 92 705 49 106 211 Peak hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 092 0,85 0.86 0.86 0,94 0.94 A01. Flory (vatl) 112 485 113 107 820 57 113 224 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 4 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 112 581 0 107 873 0 113 224 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% Turn Type Prot Prot Prot Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 6.7 21.6 Effective Green, g (s) 6.7 22,6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.33 Clearance Ti (s) 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.2 2,0 Lane Gm Cap (von) 173 1133 vis Ratio Prot c0,06 0,17 vis Ratio Perm vie Ratio 0.65 0.51 0.64 0.76 Uniform Delay, dl 30.2 189 30.3 21.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ncr- ntal Delay, d2 6,1 02 5,7 2.8 Delay (s) 36.3 191 36.0 23,8 Level & Service D B 0 C App -eh Delay ( ) 21.8 252 Approach LOS 6.5 21.4 6,5 22.4 0,09 0.32 4.0 5.0 1.2 2,0 168 1144 0,C* c0,25 c c 2 1000 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 0.85 1,00 1,00 0,85 1.00 0.95 1,00 1.00 1615 1787 1881 1599 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1615 1787 1881 1599 58 z 287 149 0,94 0.90 090 0.90 62 98 319 166 46 0 0 76 16 98 319 90 0% 1% 1% 1% Perm Prot Perm 1 6 2 6.7 17.0 17.0 6.2 16.5 6,7 18,0 18.0 6.2 17,5 010 026 0.26 009 0,25 4,0 5,0 5,0 4,0 5.0 1,2 1,5 1.5 1.2 1,5 175 494 419 160 475 c0.06 012 0.05 c0,17 0.01 006 0.65 0.45 0.04 0.61 0.67 0.22 30.2 21.5 192 30.4 23,3 20.5 1.00 IDO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 6,0 0.2 0.0 4.8 2.9 0,1 36,2 21,8 192 352 26.2 20.6 D C B D C C 25.4 26.1 6 16.5 17.5 0.25 5.0 1.5 fiCP01Average Control Delay 24.5 HCM Level of zce HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.3 intersection Capacity Utilization 61.1% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of ServiceB 160 c RECEIVED MAY 2 5 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANY.:,743 DIV. The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 500 pm 3/28/2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Page 3 Transportation Engineering Northwest HCM Unsignalized Intersection CapacityAnalysis W Chestnut Ave & N 50th Ave Movernent Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (ve11/11) Peak Hour Factor HourIy* rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) 1Afalking S. - (ft%) P= -re Blockage Right turn flare (van) ian type tan storage vett) Upst m signal (ft) pX, Oat= = unblocked vG. conflicting volume 157 vC1, stage 1 core vol N2, stage 2 == f vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) (s) 2.2 p0 queue -P. ESL 22Y Free 10 120 077 077 13 156 157 41 99 ate capacity (venift) 1422 1421 512 tkelitiel6111M2121212212211pillatipl",.... Volume Total 177 164 28 91 VolumeLeft 13 6 14 24 Volume Right 8 24 10 56 cSH 1422 1421 615 746 Volume to Capacity 0,01 0.00 0,05 012 Q e Length 95th (ft} 1 0 4 10 Control Delay (s) 0,6 0.3 11..1 115 Lane LOS A A App. = De* (s) 06 0.3 11.1 10_5 Appr* h LOS R W8 BT Free 6 6 128 23 077 0.98 0.96 098 8 6 133 24 _14 3/292017 affeeR• Stop Stop 0% Ofliv 11 3 8 20 9 46 079 079 079 082 082 082 14 4 10 24 11 56 164 405 358 160 41 2.2 itm 356 None 347 145 405 358 160 358 347 145 7.1 6.5 6.2 71 3.5 4.0 3,3 15 9798 99 99 6.5 4.0 6.2 3,3 98 94 891581 572 9°7 Average Delay Inte - hen Cgtacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 3.1 221% ICU LeNtel of Service A 15 RECEIVFO MAY 2 2017 OEN OF Y499- PLA2:21..iC The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5,00 pm 3/28/2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 4 HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 5: W Chestnut Ave & N 48th Ave %.02.601.ftfifi Lane Configurations Sign Control Volume (vph) Peak Hour Factor Hourly fl :.88. Stop 28 36 085 085 rate (von) 33 42 882 W82 W81'...8VBR 281.. ..882.'.'22 Stop Stop 13 28 3 94 138 3/29/2017 44/ 4+ Stop 8 8 182 3 085 075 0.75 0.75 086 088 088 088 086 0, 101 17 35 4 109 160 9 9 207 43 Darrel !SI W81 III I 82 Volume Total (vph) 176 56 279 259 Volurne Left (vph) 33 17 109 9 Volume Right (vph) 101 4 9 43 Hadj (s) 4.29 002 0.08 4.08 Departure He. $ ay (4) 5.0 5,6 5,0 4.8 Degree Utilization, x 025 009 0.38 0.35 Capacity (veh/h) 647 564 694 705 Control Delay (s) 97 9.1 11.0 104 Approach Delay (a) Approach LOS A A B B tirsiii !h.!' .$1ry 10,4 8 46.3% 15 97 9.1 11.0 104 Delay HCM Level of Service Inte bon Capty Utilization . . clysis Period (min) ICU Level of Sent - RECEIVED MAY 2 5 20P crry OF YAKImA PLAIDD The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 312 Transportation Engineering Northwest /2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Page 5 DOC. INDEX HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6. Tieton Dr & N 56th Ave Movement Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Said. Flow (prot) Flt Permitted Said. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak -hour factor. PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Group Flow (vph) Heavy Vehicles (%) EBL 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.23 434 141 0.97 145 0 145 1% EBT EBR WBL ft. 1900 4.0 0.95 1.00 1.00 3565 1.00 3565 336 0.97 346 1 351 1`7/0 Turn Type pm+pt Protected Phases 7 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 38.0 33.3 Effective Green, g (s) 39.0 34.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0 65 0.57 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.4 2.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 410 2035 v/s Ratio Prot c0.03 0.10 v/s Ratio Perm 0.20 %tic Ratio 0.35 Uniform Delay, d1 5.2 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 Delay (s) 5.3 Level of Service A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS Into:OS(16ot) •SUmMeqr., •.: • • ••• HCM Average Control Delay HCM Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) c Critical Lane Group 0.17 6.1 1.00 0.0 6.2 A 5.9 A 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.54 1018 6 9 0.97 0.92 6 10 0 0 0 10 1% 1% pm+pt 3 8 29.0 30.0 0.50 4.0 1.3 517 0.00 0.01 0.02 7.6 1.00 0,0 7.6 A k. 4\ WT VVBR NBL tl. 1900 1900 1900 4.0 4.0 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.95 3467 1805 1.00 0.31 3467 580 626 156 8 0.92 0.92 0.82 680 170 10 22 0 0 828 0 10 1% 1% 0% Perm t P 3/29/2017 NBT NBR SBL $BT SBR t 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1900 1.00 1900 34 0.82 41 0 41 2 r 1900 4.0 1.00 0.85 1.00 1615 1.00 1615 7 0.82 9 7 2 0% Perm 1 1900 4.0 1.00 1.00 0.95 1787 0.73 1374 159 0.89 179 0 179 1% Perrn 1900 1900 4.0 1.00 0.87 1.00 1633 1.00 1633 36 257 0.89 0.89 40 289 226 0 103 0 1% 1% 6 2 2 6 28.3 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 29.3 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 0.49 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 1690 126 414 352 299 356 c0.24 0.02 0.06 0.02 0.00 c0.13 0.49 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.60 0.29 10.4 18.7 18.8 18.4 21.1 19.6 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 2.5 0.3 10.5 18.9 18.8 18.4 23.6 19.9 B 8 BC B 10 5 18.8 21.2 12.4 HCM Level of Service 0.51 60.1 Sum of lost time (s) 57.9% ICU Level of Service 15 12.0 8 1ECEIVED MAY 2 2 017 CITY OF YAKIMA Div The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, VVA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2017 Existing PM Peak Hour Transportation Engineering Northwest Synchro 6 Report Page 6 DOC. INDEX # HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Summitview Ave & N 40th Ave Movement Lane Configurations 11 ft+ 41 ft+ 41 ft+ 11 tt r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Fri 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (pro() 1787 3445 1805 3557 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perrn) 1787 3445 1805 3557 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Volume (vph) 320 395 126 82 557 60 119 669 53 83 718 453 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 344 425 135 94 640 69 125 704 56 87 756 477 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 325 Lane Group Fk:Av (vph) 344 535 0 94 701 0 125 755 0 87 756 152 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.2 40.8 10.4 26.0 12.4 39.9 8.9 36.4 36.4 Effective Green, g (s) 25.2 40.8 10.4 26.0 12.4 39.9 8.9 36.4 36.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.35 0.09 0.22 0.11 0.34 0.08 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.2 3.2 2.2 3.2 3.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 388 1212 162 797 191 1216 137 1121 502 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.16 0.05 c0.20 c0.07 c0.21 0.05 c0.21 Ws Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.89 0.44 0.58 0.88 0.65 0.62 0.64 0.67 0.30 Uniforrn Delay, dl 44.0 28.9 50.7 43.5 49.7 31.7 52.0 34.6 30.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 20.7 1.2 3.8 13.3 6.4 2.4 7.4 3.3 1.6 Delay (s) 64.8 30.0 54.5 56.8 56.2 34.1 59.4 37.9 31.7 Level of Service E C ID E E C E D C Approach Delay (s) 43.2 56.5 37.2 37.1 Approach LOS 0 E D 0 tflersctior St4pirr HCM Average Control Detay 42.5 HCM Level of Servic HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.80 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.0 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.8% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 3/29/2017 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 20.0 D ECE1VED NAY 2 2017 CITY OF YAKitviA PLAN:: DIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5.00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 Without Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 1 DOC. INDEX HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 2: SunniNiew Ave & N 50th Ave 41/4. 'llt\ Ms/2017 filovernent ESL EST S Viet. SWI INER Net. N83* Lane Configurations 414 42* 4 Free Free Stop Stop 0% 0% Ofilo 0% 12 803 21 24 901 12 11 4 48 12 0 18 0.90 090 090 0,90 090 090 0.9) 0,90 090 0.90 0.90 0.90 13 870 23 27 1001 13 12 4 51 13 0 20 Sign Controi Grade Volume (vehin) Peak Hour Factor Hourly fl. rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Sr * (Ws) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (yen) Median type Median storage veil) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, coral:sting volume 1014 vel s 1 conf vol vC1 s 2 conf vol None 693 1262 1778 347 1478 1781 507 vCo unh ed vol 1014 693 tC, single (s) 4.1 41 te, 2 - re (a) 1282 1778 7,5 85 347 1478 6.9 7,5 1781 85 507 6.9 tF (s) 2.2 2.2 15 4.0 3.3 3.5 AO 33 p0 queue free % 98 97 90 94 92 82 100 96 cM capacity (vends 685 905 119 79 655 76 79 516 1" -- -1815511151.6 ..,stLIEStrEEREMESsMit lit .:441u E Valu Total - 348 358 527 514 68 33 Volume Left 13 0 27 0 12 13 Volume Right 0 23 0 13 51 20 cSH 685 1700 905 1700 287 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0,21 0,03 0,30 0.24 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 2 0 22 Control Delay (s) 0,6 0.0 0.8 0.0 21A LaneLOS A A C 0,,3 Apo 4 : ch Delay (s) OA 21A Aber* - h LOS 0 tote osisjimfyik s55990. Average Delay Inter ion Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) 190 018 15 32.2 32.2 17 596% ICU Level of Service 15 RECEIVED MAY 2 0 2017 CITY OF Alt PLA. N:42 DIV The Btcycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 500 pm 3/28/2017 2019 Without Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 2 DOC. [NOV HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Summitview Ave & N 56th Ave Movement Lane Configurations 'I tro 1 ti. t r 1 + r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd Flow (prot) 1787 3474 1787 3540 1805 1900 1615 1787 1881 1599 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1,00 Satd. Flow (perrn) 1787 3474 1787 3540 1805 1900 1615 1787 1881 1599 Volume (vph) 108 469 109 97 741 51 111 222 61 92 302 157 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 117 510 118 113 862 59 118 236 65 102 336 174 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 4 0 0 0 48 0 0 75 Lane Group Flow (vph) 117 611 0 113 917 0 118 236 17 102 336 99 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Prot Prat Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.0 22.4 6.9 22.3 7.0 18.0 18.0 6.5 17.5 17.5 Effective Green, g (s) 7.0 23.4 6.9 23.3 7.0 19.0 19.0 6.5 18.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 010 0.33 0.10 0.32 0.10 0 26 0.26 0.09 0 26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.2 2.0 1.2 2.0 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.5 15 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 174 1132 172 1149 176 503 427 162 485 412 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.18 0.06 c0.26 c0.07 0.12 0.06 c0.18 ids Ratio Perm 0.01 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.54 0.66 0.80 0.67 0.47 0.04 0 63 0.69 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 31.3 19.8 31.3 22.1 31.3 22.2 19.6 31.5 24,1 21.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.8 0.2 6.7 3.7 7.8 0.3 0.0 5.4 3.4 0.1 Delay (s) 39.1 20.0 38.0 25.8 38.9 22.4 19.6 36.9 27.5 21.2 Level of Service D C D C DC B D C C Approach Delay (s) 23.0 27.1 26.6 27.3 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 26.0 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.8 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.5% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group f -410 t 3/29/2017 EEL EBT EER 'NEL ':VBT V/B NBL NBT NF! SBL 3ET SEA 16.0 nECEIVED MAY 2 :7 2 017 CITY OF YAKII0A PLAV.C,i3 °IV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 Without Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 3 DOC. INDEX HCEI Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 4: W Chestnut Ave & N 50th Ave mart Lane Configurations Sign Control Free Grade 0% Volume (yeti(%) 11 126 6 Peak Hour Factor 0."77 0 77 0,77 Hourly ft. rate (kph) 14 164 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (Vs) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (vett) Median type Median storage ver) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 165 vC1, stage 1 pion( vol vC2, stage 2 conf vet vett, unblocked vol 165 tC, single (s) 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 EEL EBT EBR... 1/661.. WBTWBR TNIBL NET 3/29/2017 $ $ SBN Free Stop Stop 6 134 24 12 3 8 21 9 48 098 0.96 096 0,79 079 079 082 082 082 6 140 25 15 4 10 26 11 59 Norte None 171 425 373 168 373 365 152 171 425 373 168 373 365 152 41 71 85 6,2 7.1 6.5 82 22 35 40 3.3 35 40 3,3 100 97 99 99 96 98 93 572 558 899 cm capacity 0,9ehfto 1414 1412 495 552 552 tit in FF....v.v.... Volume Total 186 171 29 95 VolumeLeft 14 6 15 26 'Volume Right 6 25 10 59 cS11 1414 1412 1 1 „ 593 734 Votume to Capacity 0.01 0,00 0.05 0 13 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 4 11 Control Delay (s) 0,7 0,3 11,4 10,6 Lane LOS A A BB Approach De ay (s) G 0.3 11.4 10,6 App (oh LOS 027•1ffilf Int T'2"iottSum._ '77...22222277276277,2722e27222277.7.7.2.2.7.227.222677.12.6.26272.6266271171ilesslier=277111•101 Average Delay 3,2 Intersection Capacity utilization 231% IOU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 nk,,,CEIVED MAY. 2. Cf) 7017 crry OF Vi IM/ PIJ22.222.C.1:22 The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 500 pm 3128/20172019 Without Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 4 DOC. 1ND HCM Unsignatized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: W Chestnut Ave & N 48th Ave Movement Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Volume (vph) 29 38 90 Peak Hour Factor 085 0 85 0 85 Hourly flow rate (vph) 34 '45 itCA ESE 88E E8R W8E WBT t NE4:47 Stop Stop Stop 14 27 3 99 145 8 8 191 4 075 0.75 0.75 a 86 0.86 086 0,88 0.68 088 19 36 4 115 169 9 9 217 45 3/29/2017 **1 Direptiolt Latle # -ES 1 v 14 1 851 V01# Total (vett) 185 59 293 272 Volu Left (yob) 34 19 115 9 Volume Right (vph) 108 4 9 45 Hart (s) -0.29 0.02 0.08 -0.08 Departure H. = • ay (s) 5 1 5./ 5.0 4.9 Degree Lite* i* x 0.26 0.09 0.41 0.37 Capacity (tirehrh) 635 550 683 693 Control Delay (s) 100 9.2 11.4 108 App • -oh Delay (s) 10.0 92 11.4 10,8 App * ch LOS A A 88 HCM L Inte = «ion Cape* Utilization Analysis Period. (min) I of Service 10 7 47 0% ICU 1 of Se RECEIVED MAY 2 5' 2017 PEA:8:8E8i 081 The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 500 pm 3/252017 2019out Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 5 DOC. HCM Signe ized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Tieton Dr & N 56th Ave 3r29/2017 t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WEIR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4 0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.87 FR Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3566 1787 3467 1805 1900 1615 1787 1634 Flt Permitted 0.21 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.73 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 400 3566 1000 3467 555 1900 1615 1370 1634 Volume (vph) 148 353 6 9 658 164 8 36 7 167 38 270 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0 92 0.92 0.92 0.82 0 82 0 82 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 153 364 6 10 715 178 10 44 9 188 43 303 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 22 0 0 0 7 0 236 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 153 369 0 10 871 0 10 44 2 188 110 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prri#Pt pm+pt Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 38.9 34.3 29.4 28.8 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 Effective Green, g (s) 39.9 35.3 30.4 29.8 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.65 0.57 0.49 0.48 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.4 2.5 1.3 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 396 2044 501 1677 123 423 359 305 363 vls Ratio Prot c0.04 0.10 0.00 c0.25 0.02 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.21 0.01 0.02 0.00 c0.14 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.18 0.02 0.52 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.62 0.30 Uniform Delay, d1 5.6 6.3 7.9 11.0 19.0 19.1 18.6 21.6 20.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 2.9 0.3 Delay (s) 5.8 6.3 8.0 11.2 19.1 19.1 18.7 24.5 20.3 Level of Service A A A B 6 B B C C Approach Delay (s) 6.1 11.1 19.1 21.8 Approach LOS A B 8 C intersection Summary • HCM Average Control Delay 12.9 HCM Level of Service HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.6 Sum of lost time (s) Intersection Capacity Utilization 60.3% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 12.0 RECEIVED MAY 2 :7) 2017 CITY OF YAKinvi PLANN::.i3 CIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 Without Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 6 DOC. INDEX # HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Summitview Ave & N 40th Ave 3/29/2017 Movement Lane Configurations ) t 1. 1 t T. '1 t I. ) + t r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost tirne (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3444 1805 3558 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3444 1805 3558 1787 3535 1787 3574 1599 Volume (vph) 323 398 127 82 562 60 121 669 53 83 718 460 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow (vph) 347 428 137 94 646 69 127 704 56 87 756 4.84 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 25 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 323 Lane Group Flow (vph) 347 540 0 94 707 0 127 755 0 87 756 161 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type Prot Prot Prot Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 25.1 40.8 10.4 26.1 12.6 39.9 8.9 36.2 36.2 Effective Green, g (s) 25.1 40.8 10.4 26.1 12.6 39.9 8.9 36.2 36.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.35 0.09 0.23 0.11 0.34 0.08 0.31 0.31 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 2.5 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.2 3.2 2.2 3.2 3.2 Lane Grp Cap (yob) 387 1211 162 801 194 1216 137 1115 499 v/s Ratio Prot c0.19 0.16 0.05 c0.20 c0.07 c0.21 0.05 c0.21 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.45 0.58 0.88 0.65 0.62 0.64 0.68 0.32 Uniform Delay, d1 44.2 28.9 50.7 43.5 49.6 31.7 52.0 34.8 30.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 22.4 1.2 3.8 13.5 6.3 2.4 7.4 3.3 1.7 Delay (s) 66.6 30.1 54.5 57.0 55.9 34.1 59.4 38.1 32.2 Level of Service E C D E E C E 0 C Approach Delay (s) 44.0 56.7 37.3 37.4 Approach LOS 0 E D 0 Irlt*:500.99.q4MillerY.:. HCM Average Control Delay 42.8 HCM Level of Service 0 HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.81 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 116.0 Sum of lost time (s) 20.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.2% ICU Level of Service 0 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 With ProjectPM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 1 DOC, INDEX HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2 Sununitview Ave & N 50th Ave 3/29/2017 MoyBirtpil 8 88 goR WBL We T WBR NBL Noy hT SeR 4'4 41+ Free Free Stop Stop 12 603 28 37 901 12 14 4 53 12 0 18 0.90 0.90 090 090 090 090 090 090 0.90 090 090 090 13 670 31 41 1001 13 16 4 59 13 0 20 Lane Configurations Sign Control Grade Volume (ven/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane . h (ft) WaiHng Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare Mehl Medan type Median storage vein Upstream signal (ft) oX, platoon unbirmked vC, conflicting volt/ 1014 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vo vCu, unblocked vo te, single (s) tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 p0 queue % 98 cM capacity hmhild 685 1014 4,1 None None 701 1295 1809 351 1613 1818 507 701 1295 1809 361 1613 1818 507 4.1 7.5 6.5 6.9 7,6 6.5 6,9 42 15 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 96 86 94 91 81 100 96 899 111 75 651 69 74 516 .:711111)16111GISID7777h7 7777-7-777thif3Vii)p Volume Total 348 386 542 514 79 33 Volume Left 13 0 41 0 16 13 Volume Right 0 31 0 13 59 20 CSH 685 1700 899 1100 272 173 Volu p 0,02 0.22 0,06 0,30 0.29 0_19 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 4 0 29 17 Coritrol Delay (s) 0,6 0.0 1,2 0,0 23.5 34.9 Lane LOS A A C App Delay (s) 0,3 0.6 23.5 34,9 Atter.. ti LOS C 0 Average Delay Intersedion Capacity Utilization 66,2% ICU Level of Seryice C 15 2; Analysis Pe ".. (min) RECEIVED MAY 2 2017 crry OF YAKIMA PLANNI4O DIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 With Project PM Peak Hour Synchrc 6 R Transportation Engineering Northwest rt Page 2 DOC. NDa • HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: Summitview Ave & N 56th Ave 3/29/2017 Movement Lane Configurations li ti, "I 1.1. ) +f, lit r Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util, Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.85 FR Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3474 1787 3539 1805 1900 1615 1787 1881 1599 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1787 3474 1787 3539 1805 1900 1615 1787 1881 1599 Volume (vph) 108 474 109 97 743 52 111 222 61 94 302 157 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 117 515 118 113 864 60 118 236 65 104 336 174 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 17 0 0 4 0 0 0 48 0 0 75 Lane Group Flow (vph) 117 616 0 113 920 0 118 236 17 104 336 99 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% Tum TypeProt Prot Prot Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.0 22.4 6.9 22.3 7.0 18.0 18.0 6.5 17.5 17.5 Effective Green, g (s) 7.0 23.4 6.9 23.3 7.0 19.0 19.0 6.5 18.5 18.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.10 0.33 0.10 0.32 0.10 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.2 2.0 1.2 2.0 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.5 1.5 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 174 1132 172 1148 176 503 427 162 485 412 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.18 0.06 c0.26 c0.07 0.12 0.06 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.54 0.66 0.80 0.67 0.47 0.04 0.64 0.69 0.24 Uniform Delay, di 31.3 19.8 31.3 22.1 31.3 22.2 19.6 31.5 24.1 21.1 Progression Factor 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 7.8 0.3 6.7 3.9 7.6 0.3 0.0 6.4 3.4 0.1 Delay (s) 39.1 20.1 38.0 26.0 38.9 22.4 19.6 37.9 27.5 21.2 Level of Service 0 C D C D C B D CC Approach Delay (s) 23.1 27.3 26.6 27.5 Approach LOS C C C C I nteilectIon.SuMMY • ... - ••••• .. * HCM Average Control Delay 26.1 HC...M Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.8 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.6% ICU Level of Service B EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group CED WO' 2 .7, ?017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 With Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 3 DOC. INDEX # HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4; W Chestnut Ave & N 50th Ave I ane Canfgu Sign Control Grade Voterne (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly , ,,. rate ( h) Pedestrians Lane Width {ft} Walking S Percera Blockage Right turn 'hare(vett) an type Median sty re h) Upst pa pi vC, confhct►ng vola vC 1 „ st .r 1 core dl vC2 stage 2 cord vol tiCu, undirsked vol 172 tC, single (s) tCa 2 stage (s) tF ( 2.2 p0 queue free 98 cM capacity ( 1405 al (ft) h uribiocitai BL EST. F 0% 18 126 6 6 1 12 0.77 0.77 077 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.79 0 23 164 8 1S7 BR Stop 0 172 Volar Volo Veli cSH Vold to Capacity Queue Length 95th (ft) Central Delay {s} Lane LOS App ch Delay is 1.0 App * . h LOS 140 7 412 45 3/2912017 24 9 1 062 082 062 29 11 62 156 6.2 4.0 98 895 176 29 102 29 10 62 05 1412 572 716 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.14 0 4 12 .0 0.3 6 10.9 A A B E3 Average Delay Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period {rrun) 2 5 CU Level of Service HAY 2 "; 2011 CITY Of YA IM 431i The Bicycle Apart nts Yaki WA 5:00 pm Transportation Engineering Northwest 2 2017 201 nth Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Page 4 NCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis W Chestnut Ave & N 48th Ave 4\ 312912017 Moynerit ESL . Ear geR. 'V 1/ lAm livsp. 110L. 454 -484 ' 4,,,48 ..884 Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 29 40 92 14 30 3 102 145 8 8 191 40 Peak Hour Factor 085 0.85 0.85 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.86 0,86 0.86 0.1: 088 0. Hourly 'flow rate (von) 34 47 108 19 40 4 119 169 9 9 217 45 0irtexon;ttriww.',:.:.:f.12:!F. 4 jj,. 1., 7D ._..........u......................._......___..._................________________...._ Volume Total (vph) 189 63 297 272 Volume Left (yph) 34 19 119 9 tiolurrie Right (vr)h) 108 4 9 45 Hadj (s) -0.29 0.02 0,08 -0.06 Departure - J ay (s) 52 5,7 5.1 4,9 Degree UtilizaWri, x 0.27 0,10 0.42 0,37 Capacity ( h) 632 547 689 687 Control Delay (s 10,1 9.3 11.6 10,8 Approach Delay (s) 10.1 93 11 6 10.8 App :Mt LOS B A 8 Delay HCM L CS Inters J.-. 'on Capacity Uhlion Analysis Pe 'J.. (min) 10.8 47.5% ICU Level of 15 RECEIVED MAY 2 5 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA KA44'4j DIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 500 pm 3/28/2017 2019 With Project PM Peak Hour Synch 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 5 DOC. INDEx • HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 6: Tieton Dr & N 56th Ave 3/29/2017 t \* 1 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WEIR NBL NBT NOR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ' t -F. 11 t Ft ) + rr vi i• Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.87 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1787 3566 1787 3467 1805 1900 1615 1787 1634 Flt Permitted 0.21 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.29 1.00 1.00 0.73 1.00 Satd. Flow (perrn) 400 3566 1000 3467 555 1900 1615 1370 1634 Volume (vph) 153 353 6 9 658 164 8 36 7 167 38 273 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0 97 0 97 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.82 0.82 0 82 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph) 158 364 6 10 715 178 10 44 9 188 43 307 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 1 0 0 22 0 0 0 7 0 239 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 158 369 0 10 871 0 10 44 2 188 111 0 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% Tum Type pm+pt pm+pt Perrn Perm Perrn Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 39.1 34.5 29.5 28.9 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 Effective Green, g (s) 40.1 35.5 30.5 29.9 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 Actuated g/C Ratio 0 65 0.57 0.49 0 48 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 1.4 2.5 1.3 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 399 2048 501 1677 123 421 358 304 362 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.10 0.00 c0.25 0.02 0.07 v/s Ratio Perm 0.22 0.01 0.02 0.00 c0.14 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.18 0.02 0.52 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.62 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 5.6 6.2 8.0 11.0 19.1 19.2 18.7 21.7 20.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0,2 0.1 0.0 3.0 0.3 Delay (s) 5.8 6.3 8.0 11.2 19.2 19.2 18.7 24.7 20.4 Level of Service A A A B B B B C C Approach Delay (s) 6.1 11.2 19.2 21.9 Approach LOS A B 8 C IriterSection:Surntriary HCM Average Control Delay 12.9 HCM f Service a HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.8 Sum of lost time (s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 60 8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group "ED MAY 2 2017 CITY Of YAKIiAti PI DIV The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 With Project PM Peak Hour Transportation Engineering Northwest Synchro 6 Report Page 6 DOC. INDEX HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis 7. Project Site Dr & N 50th Ave fVovernetit Eat_ 88R Nei- Ner SBT SBR Lane Configurations M Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0510 Volume (vehib) 11 7 13 49 63 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0 92 092 0,92 0.92 0.92 Hourly fly late (vph) 12 8 14 53 68 22 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) VValking Speed (ftis) Pe nt Blockage Right tum flare (vett) Median type Median storage yen) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 161 79 90 vC1, stage 1 pont vol v02, stage 2 conf vol vCri, unblocked vol 181 79 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3,5 3.3 2,2 0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (vehrtir 822 981 1505 None 4.1 Volume Total 20 67 90 Volume Left 12 14 0 Volume Rigitt 8 0 22 cSH 877 1505 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0,01 0.05 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 1 0 Control Delay (s) 9.2 1.6 0.0 Lane LOS A A App *- ch Delay (s) 9.2 1.6 00 Approach LOS A 0100r4041f0615ittitIOTE Average Delay bite ctiorr Ca* ity UH tion Analysis Period (min) 16 20.0% 15 ICU Level of Service A 3/29Q017 erre" lFettVED. MAY 2 2 .10.17. CITY OF 'YAK1M PLAMM:AiZ. r1.IM The Bicycle Apart nts Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/28/2017 2019 VVrth Project PM Peak Hour Synchro 6 Report Transportation Engineering Northwest Page 7 AT AC-MNT Detailed Trip Geller tion Esfimate Elicyde Apartments - Yakima TENW P . c No 3527 Bicycle Apartments Trip Generation Summary Directional Split Trip Trips Generated Land Use Units 1TE LUC 2 In Out Rate in Out Total Weekday Daily Trip Generation Proposed Uses Apartments DU 220 Aver Rate 266 266 532 New Weekday Daily• Trips 7: 266 266• 532 Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Gerieration 'Prorresed Uses 'Apartments DU 220 65% 35% Ave Rate 33 17 New Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips = 33 17 50 N 1 DU = Dwelling Unitst GLA = Gross Lea - . de Area, 2. institute of Transportation Engineers (TE) Trip Generator; Manual 8th edition land use code 3. internal and passby trips ba -. on Trip Generation Handbook Second Edition, June 2004 4 1.4. 129/2017 Attachment B Meseta Apts Trics Generate:Gass DOC. INDEX # 177 Ai ACHNAE1 Tc PM Peak Traffic Volume Fore s Turning Movement Volu Project Name: UTycie Aprrn Project #: 3527 Peak Hour: PM Peak 2017 Existing Existing Year = 2 Future Year = 2019 2019 Baseline N aft .64a3abotwbor Aye NOM Ave tSbmnimbeNnr Oen 1 12V Project Distribution tNer LAJI 33 It Project Trips 2019 With Project Al KO *vel Safetroktwkw Aso PI Mit Ar•iimmaniento Ara SOtb Av.* turenthrevr 0.1oN N NO% Soo S 652 0.30th Anil NI Crum sr* 13, DM Ars SameorNew Meg 5ot• N *Rh *go J NobbstVAIN, Ave 685 N Dui •••o !VI Mow. Na 1 5 N SoTh 41m Sanebor., N SINN Sanwelerwq• 7 .'33.33.13,,e • 666 10 WO. Ave ikannAtirloN an • N 160. AVM 140.11•11VIT• 121.11 •.17. N ISANN! tuoznalow N 5403 Sys, Ave N AM IN I amine' INN 51»c e4' fri* Aso I IN CoNoNINOLN9 •rwtee‘e • 46'. 11F A.W. 413 371 1St Z.r.; •,3.• 13333,• 7'3 Dal* ,re.se a 2.2"4+20..7 ProjeCt Barrie: Brame ;Apartments = Yakima Basehne Prefect e 3527 h Rate e 2.5% Peak Hour PM Peak ExistingYear " Future Year 2019 053 2017 Existing AosiVf elmstriAlcao 2019 Baseline Project Distribution Wag 000 33 1? Project Trips 2019 With Project 43. _ 000 .60 103 ..%° 13 .333 46 Al. 0 61 g 4 13% 6060 636e 60 20% 0aa 10% 10% 7333 7 4 bErftOss. o o 3 173 100 33:3:133: 333333333333337 73 2.9 40 :43 ,,. 132_ 47 .637606 066.6 37.4437 Off 34 502 507 4,40f Or Of473374343, 5 .5 331 154 1444 621 1514 as 3 010 5 6 33E3 153 33 353 511‘ 1 47 112 „ 11000004 .3.744. 0% 33 10 13 .377 1666666 0 3733 0 17 '701 P, fie 034 :37343 33. .377 37 .9744347747744. 5 4.4 334. 7337 9343344434333:3:3:4 47443:r3333 312%20 E 7 ATTACH ENT D LOS of Su:mitview Avenue and Cui-De Sac N 50th Street with RECEIVED MAY 2 2 2017 OTY YAKIM# PLANK:43 MOW. INDU HCM Unsignalized 2- Surnmitview Ave Lane Conftgurations Sign Control Grade Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Pedestrians Lane VVidth (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right tum flare (veil) Median type Median storage veil) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked ve, conflicting volume vC1, stage 1 conf vol 42, stage 2 cord vol vCu, unblocked vol tC, single (s) Intersection Capacity Analysis & N 50th Ave —to ft' 8L E8T gBR 4-t4 Free Free 09i0 0% 12 603 28 32 901 12 090 090 090 090 090 0 90 13 670 31 36 1001 13 16 0 90 18 3/29/201/ 441 NBT NBR $8L $BT SBR Stop Stop 0% 0% 4 50 12 0 18 090 090 090 0.90 090 4 56 13 0 20 None None 1014 701 1234 1798 351 1498 1807 507 1014 701 41 4.1 1284 1798 7,5 5,5 351 1498 6.9 7.5 1807 85 507 6.9 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3,5 4.0 3.3 3,5 4.0 3.3 p0 otieue fr % 98 98 84 94 91 81 100 96 cM capacity (veh/h) 685 899 114 76 651 72 75 516 irkskikawaidairikas kir„ Volume Total 348 366 536 514 78 33 Volume Left Volume Right cSH 13 0 36 0 18 13 0 31 0 13 56 685 1700 899 1700 260 Volume to Capacity 0.02 022 004 0.30 0.30 Queue Length 95th (ft 1 0 3 0 30 Control Delay (s) 0.6 0,0 1.1 0,0 24.7 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay (s) 03 0,6 24.7 Approach LOS 20 180 019 16 33.8 33 8 0 Average Delay 2,1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65,0% ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 .REDEIVED 1Y2 '7, 22 I/ WY OF YKitvu. The Bicycle Apartments - Yakima, WA 5:00 pm 3/25/2017 2019 With Project PM Peak Hour Cu Transportation Engineering Northwest Wit Page 1 Doc. INDEX to '1 NLA HIXO. Bicycle Apartments t Yakima Next Step Housing 124 Crestrnont Ear. Acceptable Aru®{#able Acceptable 622 0 0 62.2 2016 2016 2016 510-842-8586 Oakland, CA 94619 1©12912©16 MAY 2 r 2017 CITY OfYA6066 PLAA7 :11 aim DOC. DM, Calculator - HUD Exel Site ID Record Date User's Name Road # 1 Name: 118-50 10-18-2016 'fancy Meyer N 50th Ave Road #1 Vehicle Type Cars iL1 Medium Trucks J Heavy Trucks Effective Distance 35 35 35 Distance to Stop Sign 307 307 307 Average Speed 25 25 25 Average Daily Trips (ADT) 820 220 16 Night Fraction of ADT I Road Gradient (%) 0 POMP ONL 48,2 51 3 58,4 Calculate Road #1 DNL 59,5 Reset Road # 2 Name: Road *2 Vehicle Type Cars g,1 Medium Trucks Y,1 Heavy Trucks W1 MAY 2 5 2017 DIY OF YAK.NN;, PLA'M0 20 n07 Sumenitview Ave. Page 2 of 4 RECEIVED httosckwww,hudexchangoint-Mprogr stenvir entehreviewldni-calculalog if* DNL Calculator - Distance to Stop Sign Average Speed 219 229 29 35 35 35 Average Daily Trips (ADT) 10924 2530 414 Night Fraction of ADT 1110 Road Gradient (%) 0 Vehicle DNL 52.1 46,4 574 Calculate Road 42 DNL 58,8 Reset Al Road Source Add Rail Source . . Airport Noise Level Loud impulse Sounds? Combined DNL for all Road and Rail sources Combined DNL including Airport Site NL with Loud Impulse Sound Calculate OYes 4.)No 62.2 NA ItttpaPwww.hudexchangoinfolprograms/apeir entahreviewldni-ealculatota Page 3 of 4 RECEIVED MAY 2 2 2027 ary oF YAKno PLA' ?2 22 NV DOC. Ms. ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING •••••••••••21,,,,,,Rftes REPORT ON GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS Bicycle Apartments, LLC Proposed Residential Housing Development 1 1 8 North 50'h Avenue Yakima, Washington 98907 Yakima County Tax Parcel Id: 181321-41425 April 1L2017 PISA Project No. 17087 ,y - Prepared for: Bicycle Apartments, LLC ciio Next Step Housing P.O. Box 784 Yakima, WA 98907 • . . CEIVED MAY 2 7: 7/17 Y DOC. INDEX Tale of Conten s Iintroduction ...:....::...; ;......a..;e ......a,: :;.....;...:;:: Land Use Surface onditi ns .... ......... ......... Seismic Considerations..„........... :.:......::. .......:: ....:..:< :..,....::.W Liquifaction Potential a..a.:..... ......... .............. . : ..................... Sub-Surface4 Li6 Soil Rearing Recommended ns ,...,.:: ......... .......:. .......:.....:.....:. 2 Lateral Earth Pressure............ ......... .................. .................:... StructuralViii W; . ......... .......................... ......... ......... ............ to grater Disposal (Soil In fiitr tion Rtes)......... ......... ............ 2 .2 . : 4 .. 5 PECEI ED MAY 2017 WY OF YAKIMA cif Vi INTRODUCTION Ricych Apartments. LLC, retained PLSA Engineering and Surveying to perform a geotechnical investigation on an approximate 3 sere property, loeated approximately 1 block south of Summitview Avenue, on the west side of BEAvenue in Yakima Washington. See Appendix "A" for vicinity map. This report summarizes the results of our geotechnical investigation and offers our recommendations for soil bearing values and site preparation for mobilizing soil support for a future paved parking facility. The investigation consisted of visual inspection of the area, drawing upon extensive local knowledge of nearby soil conditions, and examination and togging of 5 test pits excavated using a John Deere 410L tractor mounted backhoe, See Appendix 13- Test Pit Location Map. A geotechnical engineer from PLSA, experienced with local soil conditions, logged the excavations and observed and field classified the soils found. Included in this report are the following: • Seismic zone information. • Liquefactirm Potential. • Excavation logs and field classifications of the soils encountered in the 5 test pits. • Estimated host penetration. • Structural fill recommendations. • Recommended minimum footing depth and width. • Recommended footing trench preparation. • Soil bearing recommendations. • Lateral Earth Pressure • Stormwater Recommendations • Slab on grade support recommendations. • Parking lot site preparation and paving recommendations. LAND USE AND SURFACE CONDITIONS subject imoperty is vacant and located on a bench apprOXiMately 6 Met above 50B Avenue and the adjacent property to the south. Elevations on the north and west botmdart es am nearly level with the adjacent properties along those boundaries. The site generally slopes to the South at approannately 5 dement. The surface is well vegetated with healthy field grass. Several large trees populate the northwest corner. Surrounding property use consists of a mix of residences and commercial and professional businesses. 3 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Based on Table 20.3-1 Mund in ASCL-7. Chapter 20, and the him silt observed during Me field investigation, the site is classified as Soil Class D. This classification is also in general agreement with the Site C Lis Map of Yakima County, Washington published by the Washington State RECEIN MAY 2 201? evrt OF FOOROA Department of Natural Resources. Site specific design values, using the Class D designation, are provided below in Table 1. ahle V: 4:rs DkNiRti l'arwtileivrQ 0.2 ond 1.0 Second • . • Maximum Considered Earthquake ( CE) Spectral Ss=0.525 51=0.215 Acceleration Site Coefficient MCE Adjusted for Site Class effects Design Spectral Acceleration 4 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Fs=1.380 Fv=1.970 5u5=0.724 Sm.=0.424 SDS=0.483 551=0.283 Liquefaction is a phenomenon caused by a rapid inc c in pore water pressure, in loose soils, that reduces the etTective stress between soil particles to near zero. This rapid increase in pore water pressure can cause a loss of soil shear strength. Groundwater was nm observed during the field investigation and is known to be at depths of more than 50 feet below the ground surface (bash Absence ofgroundwater eliminates the potential of liquefactions In agreement with the field observations, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Liquefaction Susceptibility maps show the susceptibility of this location to be Itwe 5 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS observations in all 5 test pits were similar. Fill consisting of I to 3 feet of dy silt was observed overlying a deep stratum of silt that increased in cemented qualities with depth. Hard pan can he expected at a depth of 10 feet bus. See test pit logs found in Appendix "C'h USDA Soil Conseil/anon Service classifies the native topsoil as l'Esquatzel Silt Lo Fe eability reported as moderately high, and therefore suitable for onssite sto water disposal. Before designing any onssite sto water disposal system, an investigation of current local stormwater disposal requirements is recommended. Frost action is usually severe in the area due to the water holding capacity of the silt soiL Frost penetration for the project location is estimated at 30 inches Frost damage may be minimized by placing footings a minimum of 30 inches below finished grade and by directing drainage away from the buildings 2 RECEIVED MAY 2 .5. :7:017 ern( OF YAKIMA 6 SOIL BEARING RECOMMENDATIONS PLSA understands that development of the property will include the construction of 5 apartment buildings with up to 3 stories and 80 apartment units. The development will also include all necessary utilities, access drives, parking lots, and pedestrian sidewalks. A minimum footing depth of 3 feet below finished grade is recommended, for mobilization of soil strength and frost protection. Footing depth is measure to the bottom of the gravel capillary barrier as specified below. The recommended minimum footing width is two feet. Recommended footing trench preparation is as follows: Excavated footing trenches two feet wider than the footing width and 12 inches deeper than the desired bottom of concrete footing depth. Proof roll the exposed trench bottom to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D-1557. Place a minimum of 12 inches of compacted, cohesionless, free -draining, gravel, such as 1¼ inch minus crushed surfacing base course, in the prepared footing trench, up to desired bottom of concrete footing grade. Compact the crushed rock in lifts to 95 percent of maximum density as dete ined by ASTM D-1557 to produce a firm, stable, arid unyielding surface. Using a minimum footing width and the footing trench preparation recommended above, satisfactory soil support for loadings up to 2,000 pounds per square toot (psf) should be achieved. If a greater soil bearing value is required contact this office for additional recommendations. Slabs on grade may be placed over silt surface soil. Remove all vegetation and other organic material from over areas planned to support slabs. Compact the exposed surface, for depth of 8 inches, to 95 percent of maximum compaction as determined by ASTM D -I557. If optimum moisture content for compaction is exceeded, dry the soil by excavation, aeration, or replacement. Place a 6 -inch minimum thickness, capillary barrier, consisting of compact, granular, free -draining material such as 5/8 inch minus crushed rock meeting APWA standard specifications for top course. Compact the granular material in a minimum of two layers to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D-1557. Using this preparation, a subgrade reaction value, Ks, of 200 pounds per cubic inches (pic) should be achieved. All roof and surface drainage is recommended to be directed away from the footings and exterior slabs. Buildings should be elevated or placed on structural fill as necessary to provide slope to insure adequate drainage. 7 LATE L EARTH PRESSURE Magnitude of lateral earth pressure varies with the height of the supported face, soil internal friction, backlitl soil density, presence or absence of water, and amount of surcharge. if any. PLSA recommends selecting 110 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) as an appropriate unit weight of compacted native soil backtilltJsc of other soil types for backfill will require using a unit weight appropriate for the type of soil selected. Coefficients of lateral pressure and unsaturated equivalent fluid weight for the native silt is as follows uivalent Fluid Wt, (NO_ Sand & Gravel Active 0.33 40 At Rest , Passive I Kp Ko 0.50 8 STRUCTURAL FILL 3.00 55 330 All areas to receive structural fill are recommended to be stripped of all paving, vegetation, organic material, and trash. Proof rolled the exposed surface to 95 &reent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D1557 or a depth of 6 inches &hire pl&ing fill. The it should be near optimum moisture content for compaction. Add water or dm the mil b p &sing as necessary to achieve moisture content suitable Mr compacti&. lithef subgrade soils are persistently too wet to achieve specified compaction, contact this office for additional fill subgrade preparation r mmendations. Imported soil used for structural till is recommended to be cohmionless, free draining. non -Mastic material with a ma.ximum particle size of mo inches, m other material as approved by a geoteehnical engineer from this office. structural till should he placed and Gfinpamed in layers not exceeding 6 inches in thickness. Water should be added as needed to achieve satisfactory ITIOiSture content for compaction. &ils too wet to be adequately compacted should be dri& to a suitable moisture content before ineorporati& in structural fill. Recommend& compaction for strUettiral fill is 95 percent of maximum& density as determined by ASTM DM 557. It is Mrther recommended that all mil compaction as ommended herein be monitored using a noel = density gauge and &cum&ted, Structural fill should not be pier& over debris which may 1 poorly consolidated or contain organic material or metal. that may decompose and settle with time. All such unsuitable materials should be removed and replaced with additional structural till as &scribed above. Excavations resulting from removal of underground structures such as septic tanks. or petroleum tanks are recommended to be backfilled using procedures described for structural fill, Structural fill placed as described above is expected to provide bearing support equivalent to that for recommended preparation of footing trenches in the native soil supporting the fill. Soil bearing support for slabs on grade on structural fill placed as recommended herein is also expected to be equivalent to that recommended for the native soil prepared as recommended herein. 9 STORMWATER DISPOSAL (SOIL INFILTRATION RATES) The soil observed for several feet below the ground surface contains a fine silt andior significant silt component. The USDA Web Soil Survey reports that these soils are classified in the 4 CiPTCENED INDEX MAY 2 2 2227 212/ OF YAKIMA 222 212 Hydrologic Soils Group B with a moderately high rate of infiltration. Ehe minimum report cation - exchange capacity (CEC), for the native soil, is 7.5 milliequivalents per 100 grams of dry sod, exceeding the minimum requirement of 5 tnilliequivalents. The site is suitable for stormwater disposal by infiltration. Based on experience with these soils, a long-te infiltration rate of 0.50 incites per hour can be expected for the native undisturbed silt. All construction traffic is recommended to be prohibited in areas that arc proposed to he used for stormwater infiltration. Even minimal incidental compaction can reduce infiltration perfo ance significantly. All roof and surface drainage is recommended to be directed away from the footings. Buildings should be elevated or placed im structural fill as necessary to provide slope to insure adequate drainage. 10 PAVING RECOMMENDATION All areas to be paved should be cleared of all graft. roots, ftash, metal and organic materials doWn to full depth below the paving mm. The exposed soil surface should then be proof mlled to a 6 - inch depth, to 90 percent of the maximum theoretical density as dete Used by ASTM 1)-1557, using a mechanical vibratory compactor. The following specification is our recommendation for paving and subgrade: Asphaltic Concrete Paving, mix design and placement, shall conform to Washington State )e iia cm of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications 2016, Division 5, CiassilMA V2. Areas subject to truck traffic shall be a MiTliMum of 3 inches, COITIpacted thicknesx of asphaltic concrete placed over a minimum of 9 inches of free -draining, crushed surfacing conM ing to the particle size distribution for Base Coarse found in se on 9-03.9(3) of the WSDOT Standard SpecificatMns. Base Coa gravel shall be compacted in lifts to 90 percent of the maximum theoretical density as deterhied by ASTM D-1551, usMg a mechanical vibratory compactor. Asphaltic concrete paving placed on parking lot areas used exclusively by automobiles may be reduced to 2 inches compacted thickness. 5 .EXCEIVED DOC. MAY .2. 5. Zall INDEX yAKimik. Vicinity PLSA S t. R.VEYI? t•"S-k LAti t 'MTH r;I K. 'k AKIMA WA WOW 57 Tat 04-1 E -2 1 Y.ala a C imty Parcel 3 12 3 - .1425 North 50th r' ven ue, Yakima, a, W. put t: pARt•D FOR BicyiLe Apartments, LLQ APPENDIX 8: Test Pit •Location Map MAY 2 AMA ty OF YAKIMA ikA'Y•;1\1::ii:i• • ••• • •••••- •••••• •• • - • •• PLSA I-\i,l?.III+.!"li-�I_If111'1. TEST PIT LOC'AT'ION MAP I I NI,Rrll 1)1 I1.111:N1°I .1:1h:IMA WA • - iill•l CLE :11':1R 1\11-N1 ti. I.I.(' APPENDIX C: Test •Pit Logs DOC. IN D :222 2 714/ PLSA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 1120 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE YAKIMA, %%A98902 509 575 6990 By: SDG Project No.: 17087 Location: NE 1/4 of Site Surface Conditions: Grass coo, 313,o 4.4 33.3 2 4 5 7 030 Oat CO3 0 L MI 10 13 14 16 NIL EXCAVATION LOG Na: Description Sandy Silt Thin AshLayer Silt Partially Cemented Date: 316/201 Elevation: NIA Remarks Fi -Fill Med Brown Moist Firm Dark Brown Firm Light Drawn Dry A MAY 2 0. 2017 010 yL Y0000 100,..11,11.11:110 00,1„ PLSA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 1120 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE YAKIMA, WA 98902 509-575-6990 EXCAVATION LOG NO.: 2 By: SDG Project No.: 17087 Location: NW 1/4 of Site Surface Conditions: Grass Date: 3/6/2017 Elevation: N/A Q Description Remarks ML Sandy Silt 3 Firm - Fill Med Brown Moist Silt Fi Light Brown Dry ML Partially Cemented Silt Very Firm Dry 10 12 13 14 15 16 RECEIVED MAY 2 20117 CI1Y ui YAM DIV PL.SA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING I20 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE YAKIMA, %%A 98902 509-5754990 By: SDO Project No.: 17087 Location: SW 1/4 of Site Surface Conditions: Grass 2 4 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [6 a?" fra ME M EXCAVATION LOG NO.: 3 Description Sandy Silt Thin Ash Layer Cemented Silt Date 3612017 Elevation: N/A Remarks Firm - Fill Med Brown Moist F1 Light Brown Dry #222 2 5 22# ,42tY Of YAKIMA PLSA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 1120 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE YAKIMA, WA 98902 509-575-6990 EXCAVATION LOG NO.: 4 By: SDG Project No.: 1708°7 Location: South Center Area of Site Surface Conditions: Grass 2 3 4 10 13 14 15 16 ML ML Description Sandy Silt Partially Cemented Silt Cemented Silt Date: 3/6/2017 Elevation: N/A Remarks Finn - Fill Med Brown Moist Fi Light Bro Dry. Vety Lim Dry 11111Y L111 11111311:1m.o,,4 111,44.11.11.1 11,1 11111„1 PLSA ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 1120 WEST LINCOLN AVENUE YAKIMA, WA 98902 509-575-6990 By: SDG Project No 1 TOSS Location: East 3of Site Surface Conditions: Gross w 44, .RZ 24' # im M EXCAVATION LOG NO,: 5 Description ME Sandy Silt Thin Ash Layer Silt Cemented Silt 10 12 13 14 Date: 3/6/201 Elevation: IN/A 00C. INDEX Remarks Fill Med Brown-Aloist Fins Med Brown -Moist Very Firm Light Brown Dry 202.022.2 XT SE SI r.. APP#00447 & APP# 7 (CL2#01147, S' A# l447, APP#00347) EXHIBIT... I ,'SST CHAPTER Appeal 1o HHearingExamine App lc tion GARB R. arILDIar PC RAMIS K ADAMS NIB W WARINFR, ENDA WAGNER, LISLOFF & ADAMS Attorneys at Law A PROFESSIONAL LIMN ED LIABILITY COMPANY 20.1.0 W Nob Hal Blvd., Sono YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98902 August I, 2017 Joan Daventrort, AICP, Community Development Director City of' Yakiina Department of:Community Development I 23 N. 2h Street Yakima, WA 98901 ERHONE DAN) 248D0 I FACSIMILE EIHN 248-4970 EMAIL. VOLAGI VILA LA W ODG Melia R, Franck, Legal Arsiraant RE: CL2401 irl 7 and SEPAP014-I Applicant: Next Step I-lousing/Bicycle Apartment.. PLC Appeal of Notice of Decision and threshold Determination Request for Type 2 and SEPA Environtriental Reivew Dear Ms. Davenport: I represent Lynn Nathe, David Mahoney, Robert Vickers, Bradley Few, Tina Ir and their spouses, They own land in the immediately vicinity. oldie project identi lied above. I have prepared on their behalfand have enclosed an appeal of the Decision and Determination reterred to ahoy c. I also enclose my Prins trust cheek for $580.00 Mr the appeal. If you have any questions, please tent free:10 eall„ Sincere!), WAGNER, ENLOE& & ADAKIS„ P.L.L.C. o vc Jarnes K. Adams JKArmrl Etic cc: Clients 1 ANN) USE APPI„ICA RION CITY OF' AK1M A, DEPARTMENT COMNI UNITY DEVELOPMENT 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, 'W AMNIA, MA 98901 VOICE: (509) 575-6183 FAX; (509) 575-6105 INSTRUCTIONS - PLEASE READ FIRST Please type or print your 1415,WCIEES CEME1S Answer all questions completely. if SKSE have any questions about this fermi oi the application process, please ask a Plapaer. Remernber b5ing all necessary attachments anti the required tiling feu when the application is submitted The Plamung thivision (Amish accept an application unless it is condgette and Mc filing fee paid Piling fees arc ma refundable. This application consists of lour pads, PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV CERTIFICATION are on this page. PART El rind RI comain addRional information specific to vim proposal and MUST be aitachnd tele page to complain the application • PART I — tENER AL IMPORM Al ION °nue: Applicant's Ellaninationi Applintatit s 1 rile:Test 13rinfierty: . ',;NEEIEJle" 3 Phisperty fIssitrior's • sks.shess, Mohr Ram Artisiliciinia: so Rh A .rA EfE AAEA AA EA, IA ELF A A AtEELEA,,,,-; A • Adslress. 1A.7. /.„11„),75, MT •ih„ " ela -F RE' , . 4 SEES/S SE' IES../E4 FIN DerflI FPI Fame: _5;9 ) ,E.,'••A • • E • JAI EAA EAE, • ()offer • El Aperit • Ismichmani ()cher mak tis SiAS rEE Ei ‘Es EV() E ESE. "SEEJ., E 7/2, ICE 1-fsass rd • pris„.• • , . th„,„ • / • SS'S SE: fjp; ciEShZ_E. MISERS 'Sfs'EsEE it 97 „ • EMT& • GERD 2 (2,_ Fieh 4 Ditties -1 Property's Assessor's Parcel Fit imberIsh• ti•Dizt 4 at LID 5, Legal Ikscription of Property (if lenothy, pleass: Dash a on a separate document> uns 0313 ne ..5"r e c T's7 r rT 6,4 , 6/ Proper sy Address: , ( AL, ;/„., t•)„,/, !,A A 7 ProperEs PAistina toning: LI SR Rd DR -2 IE R-3 MG 0-2 SCC Ca I CC [2] ORD Cj coo 0 KEI M -1 91-2 8 I ype (If Applicatioic 7Chgek All E .Adinininteative Eipeatotent Type Realino 0 Pane IT) RAMA oynanoTRunicid Prefienionty Sliort.PM1 Fingi Short Plat StiOttPlai :.AlnatdMeRt O Preamitusfy LeMg Rat • Finallsong Pint .0 Plat Alteration oliong Plat DM Apply) faitairshifsiGaisiteNtiNIMISEPA ItegiNST 17:1 RightimisMiny VilatitioSt Transfmrtationtionesiscosasy ottoliJcoorittootjg, tttestoottoto Aootoo ttit coottcoototo 0 tolototectoott fixattiiith jjj .Jotottiotatioo 17] tottojotottottotoot Cj cotootoottoottototcocroctitottottot .A.otcootocto 0 ShOft D iiciserriaist Reiease [j] Rearnse ShOFEED .ottot 'Recto,. D 01o:onto • ilhirmoriary Use Perrest Ovicrlay D Binding Site ['tiro D ItItroloo utoototottoto PART 11 - SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION, PART 111 a REEF MOOT ATTACIIMENTS, & PART IN - NARRATIVE 9. SEE A TIACHED SHEET'S PART V v CERTIFICATION V V V Ts eeKify that the formation ori this application and the scout:et' ailachmerds are true Tad sorreci to the hest of my knowledge, „Issincr's poi. I, is g amie 77C79797s 77*,52 Applicant's Sigriattde FILL APPi rioNtsio ATE 11 %1D y Revised 0852015 ICED BY: A c 04/0 Date RRIOUNT PRI 1_ etIlk Rf FIR N „ C\I-- 1 DOC. INDEX Supplentental Application for: APPEAL Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15.16 At Of Administrative Official's Decision E Of Subdivision Administrator's Decision E Other Appeal cif file Num era U24 mil - at7 RECEIVED AUG 0! 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PL* DV _I Of I Daring Examiner's Decision Of SEPA Detemination Date Arden Taken I. Description of Action Being Appealed: g naiad a ar -Laic r t gucted I, . t ...................... 't,4114.1 re IA (A "ral- k r Le. 4A-3 ............... _............._,...._ ......... _........................._.._____________ ... Reason for Appeal: Describe the specific error(s) or Usuests) upon which the weal is based, including an explanation of why the decision is not consistent with the Yakima Urban Area Plan, The Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, or other provisions of law. (Deference the section, paragraph, and page of die oroviaionist cited) (Attach if lengthy) Bet ised 0812015 Page 4 DOC. INDEX EXHIBIT "A" AUCi 0 71 201? CITY OF YAKIMA PLAO., 0 DIV This appeal is based on two issues. First. and foremost, the Administrative Official tailed to consider the actual nature olN. 50' Avenue as a nciahborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector,. Second., the Administrative Official failed to recognize and mitigate the effect the size and height of the project win have on the neighborhood, As a result, the Determination of Non - Significance under SEPA and Decision are in error and should be reversed, Traffic Concurrency The size and scope of the project poses significant negatfie impacts on the traffic on 50' Avenue. These imparts can only be mitigated by reducing the scope of the project or improving the infrastructure,. North 50' Avenue s only thirty DO) feet wide in its paved portions. It is two-way arid parking is allowed on the east and west sides. On -street parking is heavily utilized Monday - Friday. YRIC 12,06,020 sets birth pavement width standards for streets in Yakima. Residential access streets are to be paved to a width of 32 feet. Neighborhood collectors are to bc paved to a width of 40 leek North 3 Ofi Avenue is actually a neighborhood collector or a hybrid neighborhood collector despite its designation LES a local access street. It is certainly more than residential access street. Yet, it is only paved o 30 feet wide. This condition causes traffic congestion and safety problems, First, 50" Avenue collects traffic from several businesses on it northein portion, including a credit union, Credit unions are obvious high traffic businesses. Located on the north portion of N, 506 Avenue, these busthesses collect and deposit traffic onto arterials, primarily Sunimitview Avenue. Second, 50' Avenue collects traffic from three cuhde-sacs emptying their traffic onto 50'h ,Avenue to use either W, Chestnut Avenue to the south and Summitview Avenue to the north, Each of the cul-de-sacs serves six residential buildings that do not front 50' Avenue, Third, it is obvious that N. 50' Avenue would collect traffic from Peachtree and Plum anes for traffic accessing Summitview Avenue. This is especially true of traffic traveling cast to the downtown of Vakibut Because of the actual status as a neighborhood collector, N, 50' Avenue is insufficiently' paved, It is paved ten feet less than its necessary width of 40 Net. It is even paved less than a residential access street. Traffic concurrency requires that N, 50th Avenue be improved to 40 feet in paved width. This is made necessary by the additional 80 residences for which N, 50' Avenue is their only access to the arterials of Summitview Avenue and West Chestnut Avenue, Traffic using N. 50th Avenue as a result of this project will increase by 532 trips with 50 additional trips during peak hours, This is in addition to the traffic from seven businesses and 34 residential structures using N, 50'h Avenue directly. It is easy to conclude that traffic will nearly double on the inadequately paved N, 50' Avenue as a re,sult of the proposed project, The Administrative Official failed to recognize the increased daily traffic as a restilt of the proposed 80 residences. The on-site parking situation exacerbates the obvious inadequacy of N. 50" Avenue. By way ofillutaratiort, i have attached an aerial photograph to these comments. It has been previously. provided by my client, David Mahoney, The aerial photograph illustrates the inade,quaey of the paved portion of N, 50 Avenue. The photograph as likely taken on weekend as Cari be seen by the lack of cars parked at the RECEIVED 000 0 I 2017 CITY OF YAK/MA MAC:C.1:1 DIV DOC. INDEX businesses, ( It is likely a Saturday, given the parked cars at Solarity Credit Union) The picture depicts the obvious difficulties for two-way traffic to negotiate N. 5 0' Avenue with cars perked on the street, As [said, my clients report that there is substantial use °fon-street parking on N. 50' Avenue, Doubling the traffic that wilt be lasing N. 50'll Avenue will create a dangerous and intolerable condition. The Administrative Official recognized that apartment complexes result in a higher demand tbr on -street parking. However, the Administrative Official chose to wait until after the project is occupied to determine the appropriate mitigation measures. The project will create a problem, yet the Administrative Official chose to ignore. Concurrence demands appropriate mitigation measures be required before construction and occupancy. it is obvious that N. 50th Avenue is inadequate for the traffic and parking it handles presently. A potential of the doubling of traffic as the result or the project creates an untenable situation. Finally, the traffic study did not appear to take into account the potential traffic of the nature of the residents. As the project will serve low income and homeless, it is likely that traffic in and out of the project will not be limited to just residents and employees. It is likely there will be service providers accessing the property, Site and Site Plan The site is approximately 10-15 feet above the street level of N. 50th Avenue. The site is consequeritly 10-15 feet above the properties to the east, south and west. The site plan shows five (5) buildings on the parameters of the property. The locations of the buildings, as proposed, are at or near the set back lines of the properties. The buildings are three Of) stories and will be 36 feet above grade. Consequently', the actual height of the buildings RECEIVED AUG 0 ?..007 CITY OF YAK MA pIj NV DOC. INDEX will be approximately 46 to 51 feet above the street level of 50P Avenue and neighboring orogen ies, The size of the buildings and their orations on the set back lines of the property hall impose significant barriers to sight and light, In addition, the close proximity of the buildings will negatively impart the privacy of the persons and property to the south and west. The obvious solution is to reduce the overall height of the project. The buildings should be reduced in height. This solution ould reduce the negative impacts of the project on neighboring properties. The solution would protect the privacy of the neighbors and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. The proje would not be so overbearing Oil the neighborhood, The height of the project relative to the surrounding properties also creates a lighting or light glare concern, specifically for the residential properties to the south and west. Parking and parameter lighting is designed to point down. With lighting as high as 50 feet, there will be no ability to deflect the light away from neighboring properties. In addition, there will be light generated from the interiors from two and three story buildings and directed out and over the neighboring properti The impact of the size of the buildings and the light that will be generated by the project must be investigated. The aesthetics of the neighborhood, the privacy of neighbors arid the night time glare °flights generated by the project, unless mitigated, will seriously and negatively impact the ne hborhood. Conclusion The Decision and SEPA DNS shou d be reversed or modified to consider the effects traffic and project height. RECEIVED 000 0' 2017 CITY Of YAKIMA PL DIV RECEIVED C)0C. INDEX _ —,.a' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OILLPILD1 Planning Division 129 N 2rIti Si (2nd floor) Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-61831 www•builclingyakimaxorn Payer/Payee: WAGNER LULOFF & ADAMS 2010 W NOB HILL BLVD //2 YAKIMA WA 98902 Receipt Number: CR -17-005516 Cashier: JULIA CRUZ Payment Type: CHECK (2250) Date: 08/ 1G017 APP*003-17 PLANNING - _ ARING 118 N 50"71.1 A1lE EXAMINER Fee Description Appeal to Hearing Examiner AP - • 03-17 TOTALS: TOTAL PAID: Fee Amount Amount Paid Fee arise $580.00 $580.00 $0,00 $580.00 $580.00 $0.00 Transaction Summary 001 8954503 001. 54503 $580.00 $58000 Printed 08/01/2017 1535:00 by Julia Cruz $580.00 Page a I T STEP HOUSING APP#00447 APP#00647 (C 2#. 11-17, SEP/001,4-17,APP#00347) EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER Exhibits Submitted at Apnea a ring K-1 Photos of Subject Proper & Surrounding Area Submitted by Appellants' Attorney James Adams (K-1.1 - K-1.40) K-2 K-3 DVD — Video Taken by Drone of 50th Ave Subtnitted b At t s pants' An e= 3a esAdarr Ea ap Aerial Photo of Subject Proe Area Stamllined iy Appellants' Attorney ,iaesAdas i Surrounding 09/25/20.17 139/, 7 "Mimi 1. s" and "Housing/Awards" ebpages fret Next Step Housing Website Submitted b A&.licant's Attorrtt Glenn Amster Professional Profile for Mark King, ZBA Architecture, and for Z A Architecture PS (overall) Site Plans from A Architecture K-7 s Pr©fessi hat Profile for tehaei Read, P.E., TEN 09/25; 09/25/201 09/25/2017 09/25/2017 Education: Bachelor of Science, Civil Engineering, University of Washington Years of Experience: 29 Registrations: Registered Professional Engineer (Civil) Slate of Washington Certificate 33235 State of Oregon Certificate ft 62644PE Member - Institute of Transportation Engineers 1FTE) ACCOMPLISHMENTS: APA Merit Award, 2007, Eatonville Town Center and Corridor Program 2010 Governor Smart Vision Award - City of Snoqualmie Downtown Master Plan 2010 Governor Smart Choices Award - City of Chehalis Downtown Revitalization Plan PSRC 2020 Vision Award Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment & EIS Michael J. Read, P.E. Principal Profile TENW IrcarporfQ-1ori Ergir:eeri69 iorf^vvesf 9ECEIVED SEP 2 ;-, 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA Michael Read, P.E. is a principal engineer and founder of iransporlation Engineering Norhwest. His diverse experience iriciiudes corridor studies, transportation impact analyses for SEPA./NEPA environmental assessment's and impocl statements on individual projects and programmatic assessments, muitimodal transportation des'an. traffic operations analysis. spreadsheet model aevelopment and financial dnalysis, transportation alternatives analysis, transit and nom -notarized planning, He has occiJmulated nearly 30 years of experience, in the transpor-tolon engineering profession. He has served os project engineer for a variety of corridor and new roadway studies throughout the Northwest including Vancouver, SeaToc, Bellingham, Ellensburg. Southeast Alaska, and Spokane. Mr. Read hos also mode extensive 5e of botn manual methods and computer software to translate model forecasts into travel speeds, delays and LOS vaiues for corgeston and air quality analysis. He hos also managed complex projects with muiti-jurisdictional invuvement, and has a thorough understanding of •ocal agency design requirements. His protects have inciuded the incorporation ot transit, ferry, intermodal terminals that include rail, pedestrian, and bicycle features. Selected Project Experience Expert Witness Testimony Mr. Read has provided expert witness testimony for hearings. thals, arbitrations in o wide range ot topics before hoaring examiners, citizen review beards elected ol'icials, and in state/federal courts. Exarnples include: • Willow Shopping Center Condemnation (Pierce County. WAj Testimony on traffic forecasting, traffic operations, and access impacts.. • Burke -Gilman Trail Redevelopment (Lake. Forest Park, WA) Testimony on sighl dislance, hike/vehicle conflicts, and crossing treatments. • Kenmore Town Center Condemnation ((enmore, WA) Testimony an traffic forecos'ing, traffic operations, ard access impacts. • Boeing Comprehensive Pion Amendment EIS (Renton: WA) Testimony on regional p1anning. forecasting. level of service/salety review, and transportation planning applications or lona use changes. Bch Point Communities EIS ri'hatcorr, Counry. WA) Testimony on traffic forecasting, traffic operations. reaional trarisportaficn improvements and access impacts. • Petersburg Transportation Inipoct Study and Mitigation Report (SE Alaska) Testimony on traffic forecasting, "ritermodal operc-'ilions, regional transportation improvements, and intercommunity access demands. • Pleasant Harbor Master P/onneci Resort (Brinnon. WA) Testimony on traffic forecasting. Portia operations, regional transportation improvements and site access needs for this innovative ac,riveritian and corido-hote: resort vvith 2.50-slio marina arid championship golf course, li,J1 if PO Box 65254 .3eollte. WA 98155 1 Orice 23& 361•73,33 •er • AS., # K-7 RECEIr SEP 2 7, 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA: DIV APHC , ;" Y . 1, YAK , YAK! A UT OvE ADDITIO RECEIVED SEP 2 S 201 YAKIMA N.21 T.1 F#.; F2,# ,. W M.y CITY YAKIMA COUNTY, WASWON SES' 2 5 2017 CITY YAKIMA N.21 T.1 F#.; F2,# ,. W M.y CITY YAKIMA COUNTY, WASWON SES' 2 5 2017 CITY YAKIMA 300 BICYCLE APARTMENTS YAKIMA, WA RECEIVED SEP 2 2222 PLASEN3 NV NE TEP HOU IN+ LEGEND: BDILDIN© FOOTPRINT SIDEWALK LAWN ASPHALT MITI CH AND PLAY AREA X3©NI 000 BICYCLE APARTMENTS YAKIMA, WA 9ECEIVED SEP 2 2017 CITY Of YAKIMA DIY NEXT STEP HOUSING ww, • •*.XBcJNI BICYCLE APARTMENTS YAKIMA, WA RECEIVED SEP 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA DIV. NEXT STEP HOUSING XBaNr 300 BICYCLE APARTMENTS YAKIMA, WA iECEIVED SEP 2 ;; 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA f''..�.'.,.....: CIV. NEXT STEP HOUSING Mark S. King, AIA, NCARB: CSBA r,40,7;k 11Q5 16 jr' e Ape:tier-Ice Arrr:t-rrTer-;,t. rnrolurt:ing eighT VeOr4,' Zrz.ErA Arc riltectr,,rF, Her r-ro;: to•rz,erc !ER, oFve.--1iilNr-,114.7,ry levelnpnents. ,nyras rtlatit-pc5.....)utrit-tror pertoirrcrice itoges rturtrerts and arcriattle hr.:using orojecrs. • 'jr),j Fro Renerriatir:,-I (Hr.:riL't RAC.rn, ,,c,n(Inttrc„ • tii,cc PIJ73 nior Sprorioner, • !-Irt.;trottc Rc.ttse ,e=rort,-e.c.rts Vr.rArt • BerFrrn 3JIJIg R' Spc/rone rr,r%,,a • rr:rD;r:', Srztnro ito*Ar • Srst:r acez !nes C:::rurt rT3r onro view. rrAtA • t3r. 11 • latle r_rnio Arorio tArtro • Trr,•rtar:ter crro.r-cnr.= Z7JAARC,t • Yakima Hs:r...rsirg Authorrtv (HI.JD Aprortr--6.o.ls • 7::errrj.Ap:Tt,--;c,r,Ts • E,751.,,v0(_,1 Ap(2.7'1-1_•r115 • CrosCorrie Ar.rrortnterrtt; • Erigev.rocrri AonrIments • Parkvrew Apartments • tquovo Prmervero • Spror _ane Apartr-nent:5 • Fair Ayende • 9ta Street Aporin.reras • .v'vlilorro., Lone Apar-In-rents • Yr.ikno Terrace. • Filesseri Kateri • Cmto 17erri • jr Patric = Reno ger Cerr,o r• pose ct kloryltracre • Desert Pose Ter::::Cre • St Nrlarnri e Porres Ho..€ • Horn -cry Prork ATI.DN el -ret:( of Arcrtrtecl,re t,Itrashirqlcr. Store tJnIr.rersity • Licensea 4.r.cro.ecr .,Aiosnington, • NCAPEr, Ce,t Hobie • Ac • Vtort_:-Iteer i-itern.:.,:nteri :F,;_tro.Kartte C 1 re O'ret ' 1---k.)F7P-rlek:k3 'iorgrr4E3:-ItEAirr;troicr;trie De' tielctprcent Str:if rriarrj Crteer 'an NAL-cr-,rr RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2017 DOC. CITY OF YAKIMA .:.. DIV. INDEX # jreQ inatar caraoraticn n no P3j 3j arc r.)(r) estani:sre.-t ..."1,mrst:. cot c.Jatic .......ierrsrrt:+r It funaed n.C..15,r•43.• ,enrear 2011);;;na 'le trri 0.4,33 ten.arnt7-1 ie jr the) t..rrr., t3e:l.zr re't,reci e4 204 Parz.ly Varnc;:t Kirtg e bece.):tle ttn-r, ca*nridten.-: oxterdina sor...*ice1L. ncp_JSing inte) niaJ tinie greol ar :serving an rrr) raobiic private) n)...JIt far- y housing clientele. prcvlaIng a .rideisiTiv-iiling cif tre eiemen,t5 troCSC I SCCTh. is tc r:r.'Dpe.r.ties andn.v,rcr.rnen's in evni1 v& ra oj tarniries ...309-"!crlat)le 11../ "Hp 'Dr ;5cteiIne D'nt•Jna make it cers.;Dr..ci 78A.Af?Ohfi7ECT"ArL D'E4-=r; tr.c. crc ocntoti • Witn Lj • 3c,d aptirla er,visr.;nr-tervt,..: acrr...c)irt;r0 • A t«.....:rn a' €,,,T,,e"s Qra,J:L. ::,tvat4ob:e), rd c • 'ins-c.n tv prin,:+pfxs • Con-iin,tmen" L)r.d ovpeftlise in ene(gv design RECEIVED 5E2_2 ?LUZ CITY OF YAKIMA • 01V. DOC. INDEX # iECEIVEtJ P 2+OW CP? Of YAW-, NORTHWEST 76A :re1731 3' 3 r'ne Adnbte teen rec:gni?e:-..• both c;r1,-.1 tecpc:noit.e w irl u\A••_11....k• dPik;ri • .3 2:Cc, 1,....Nclr,‘,1(:+f Rio HeL•rn.,2.• •.)00"1" rSpot,;cr,,R Orc;ecT ‘c, Pcrtf,•ri,r5 = Pofn- ;I .11 ?,pc:r1 stort Ce fAj L)re very r 1, trine 0.•-••vt,Ic•pr-1,-•="ok .14.)tc vv4,4 have pet s ceftif!ec, vrler ILSCS 7BA, P•Ircic.al Psa L), tr.e. 0,,•,;;-\;ngicor. rt t )••/‘.7 • r^t. cecs 4of 0,', furoLS INDEX MLLTOWN APARTMENTS srocipc.,nt. C,,..17-lolork---.KI 2013 • 5ni!:; of far-r-,iy hcu3ing. rov,rirc,c-e3:ir-41 t1at5 • !ouncry, :=FeaS. ‘7.ffices or:J c;)r-dre.- roDrn • (7,er'ie:-.3.,..EED tcr -1c.J.F.,?sPlotir.Jr ;ir-lierpn5e .:14reen Cornr-...Jmit ZbA.A.[ChilC.7.1_,RE coy RECEIVED SEP 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA OIV COC. INDEX # K- A PPL EVVIAV COURT 1 & Ct",t— 019t4,1 COVED 2 2017 DOC. CITY OF YAKIMA ILA.!fV ,I=1,,a,kgfeiplite4§,§1=z41,;::My (-BE FORE AFTER' Yak t k?. • Low-ir,corre 'ax clears • 150 • 13 S47.0-tf?reC • OC.C.t.,;/ed icr • S.,.jing ,enov(:,,,on5 • cnory • r..,,,?.vjreen Sj n:301,-2 A .4 lE..AARC!-CCCT;JRF.C;lr../. ,-1ECEIVED SEP 2 ri 2 017 DIV DOC. NDEX # 1<-5 0.vi• .14, • '•••••,. *. • • . . • , 4TH AND PEARL FAMILY HOUSING 11N.:or 4 • 0 butldi!.,4:" 3 • :30iit 0:30.03 4SS d 1'335 'r 4. ,..it•li:Ar3 fl 'S C:r*.ofj*.t, opci ; e '4ECEIVEP SEP 2 2017 (TY OF Muhl% DOC. iNDEX # K- 7-1 TY Of 'YAKIMA INV MIL 016 111V RVIC1 • Imo HI) „ A(1k )1 lot 1)RI,R;.1 Home About Us v• Housing / Awards Finances Contact/ Donate mt • Net Step Housing (NSH) has provided quality, clean and sober, supportive housing to residents of Yalcima since 1991. NSH pioneered the development of Alcohol and Drug Free Communities (ADFC's) in Washington and currently owns and operates the only clean and sober permanent housing for large families with children in the State. Our community-based Board of Directors and Staff have many years of experience in service provision for special needs populations and expertise in financial management as well as in developing and managing affordable housing. Combined, the Board and Staff have a collective: • 337 years of Community Development • Another z63 years in Financial Service • 212 years of experience in Property Management • zio years in Project Management • 1.81 years in Housing Development • 149 years of experience in Social Services, and • 116 years of Construction Management. In 6, 51% of the organization's residents were exteme1y low-income earning e s than 3096 of the Yakima Area RECEIVED SEP 2 Di 7 WY QF YAKIMA INV IP? In zoi6, tic of the organization's residents were extreme) ow-in,c©rne earningless than ©% ©f the Yakima Area } 3 Median Income (AMI). Another 14% were below 4o% of the AMI, and another 28% were below 50%. A total of 93% of our residents were at or below 5o% of the AMI when they first moved in. Arnold() Hernandez President Since July 1999 DSIIS DDA SOLA Manager (Retired) 509.952.2957 (cell) Terry Wheat Treasurer Since November 2012 Gesa Credit Union Chief Executive Officer 509.248.6492 (work) Lisa Baldoz Vice -President Since November 2012 WA State Dept. of Health Disease Intervention Specicrlis 509.969.1553 (work) T. Mattingly Community Rep Since July 1999 h Treatment Services ousing Director 09.248.1800 (office) RECEIVED SEP 202017 CITY OF YAKIMA PLA. Robert Barth CHDO Rep Since May 2.005 Yakima a Step Programs 509.452.0902 (home) Hertis Harris CHDO Rep Since April 2009. Crossroads House Resident Manager (Retired 509.307.1254 (home) John Probst Community Rep Since January zoo Catholic Charities Ilousing Development (Retired) 509.852.2793 (office Kerri Faulkner CHDO Rep Since April 2009 Pear Tree Place Resident 509.469.7549 (home) RECEIVED SEP 2 . 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA 'ter„ SIV. • John Mifsud (since June i995) Executive Director Mr. Mifsud is celebrating 22 years as Executive Director of NSII. Ile has over 40 years of program design, implementation and management experience as well as 35 years of experience in property management and development in the private, non- profit and public seetor9. A long-term housing advocate for people with special needs, Mr. Mifsud developed the first affordable, independent clean and sober housing units for families with children in the State of Washington. Mr. Mifsud has managed portfolios of Boa+ units in four states including commercial properties and tax credit developments..A Certified Families. for Self -.Sufficiency Specialist, Mr. Mifsud also designed and supervised on-site case management services for a diversity of special needs populations in Washington. Currently, Mr. Mifsud manages all staff as well as finances, fundraising, land acquisition, new developments and major capital improvements for NSI L Diana McClaskey (since March z©vz Deputy Director Pear Tree Place 509.249.0390 (office) 509.469.0203 (fax) Ms. Mcclaskey reached sobriety in October 2001 and moved into an NSII property in November of that year. She became the [Louse Manager in March of 2.002. She has dedicated herself to NSII and has managed every property in our portfolio.. Diana is also the Resident Manager and Case Management Supervisor for Pear Tree Place 1, R & 111. Ms. McClaskey supervises a staff of six employees for NSII and has full responsibility for all leasing, rent collection, compliance, income certifications and resident files. As Deputy Director, she supervises all on-site management and maintenance staff VED SEP 2 ;, CITY OF YAKIM. F'G DIV. 7 • Connie Cleary (since January zoo5) Asset Manager Sommerset Apartments 509.457.8771 (office) 509.457.0173 (fax) Ms. Cleary achieved sobriety in 1003 and began working for NSII as a I Iousekeeper. She was promoted to Resident Manager in zoo6. Ms. Cleary is a veteran with certified training in customer service_ Connie became the NSII Asset Manager in zoo7. Ms. Cleary has managed two comprehensive capital renovations at both the Clean I louse and the Lamplighter Apartments. She managed all on-site maintenance staff as well as subcontractors and inspections. She is currently the Resident Manager of the Sommerset Apartments as also acts as the On -Site Case Manager for u homeless/disabled units She has dedicated her life to NSM and the people who benefit from the agency's supportive housing. RECEIVED SEP 2 :: 2'< CITY OF YAKIiviik FCR:. :111. Mike Ryckman (since March 2.003) Maintenance Co -Superintendent 509.853.5107 (cell) Mr. Ryckman reached sobriety in zo of and moved into NSI I housing in December of 2ooz. Mr. Ryckman became the NSI l Maintenance Assistant in 2oo3. In June of zoo', Mr. Ryckman was promoted to Maintenance Superintendent. Ile has dedicated his life to NSI I and manages all maintenance staff and major remodels with full responsibility for all maintenance requests, upgrades, curb appeal, grounds, subcontractors, unit turnovers and punch lists for new construction, Mr. Ryckman also manages inspections and maintenance compliance for all NMI investors including all federal, City, County and State funders. • Keith Ericks©n (since January :tow) Maintenance Co -Superintendent 509.594.6242 (cell) SEP 2 201-S Y OF YAKIMr Mr. Erickson shares the title of NSI E Maintenance Superintendent with Mike Ryckman. Keith became sober in zoo7 and has been working with NSE1, since WLO. Ile is active in the Yakima Narcotics Anonymous community. Keith says, «Working with people in recovery is really a dream come true for me. I love that I am on staff at Next Step. Being of service to my community helps keeps me clean and sober." Rigoberto Dominguez (since April 2.013) Case Manager 509.823.8017 (cell) Mr. Dominguez originally came to NSII as a resident in zoto. In wiz, he began working for NSM as a People 4 People intern through their Parents Work First Program. Ile was hired as a Case Manager to work with homeless veterans at Pear Tree Place III in zo13. He received his Associates of Applied Science in Chemical Dependency Counseling from Yakima Valley Community College in 2012 and completed his Bachelor of Science in Religion in zoiz. Mr. Dominguez is bilingual and bicultural and also works for Yakima Memorial ilospital as a Chaplin focused on hospice and end of life care services. Ile sirs on the hospital's Ethics Committee and Critical Incidents Team and is currently on the Board of Directors for Triumph Treatment Services. Crystal Cleary (since April 2013) Lamplighter Apartments Resident Manager Clean House Apartments Manager 509.248-0633 (office) 509.577.7434 (fax) • r9ECEWED SEP 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA F�,'.,....� NY. al is the Resident Manager at the Lamplighter Apartments and also manages NSll's Clean I louse Apartments. She is currently working towards her BA in Business Management. Alegria & Company, PS, is a certified public accounting firm licensed in the State of Washington with offices in Yakima and Prosser. Alegria has been serving nonprofit organizations for nearly 70 years and manages NSH's financial reporting and accounting including accounts payable, accounts receivable and payroll. Additionally, Alegria manages annual audit preparation and tax returns. Brian Newhouse, CPA is the partner in charge of all services provided for NSH. H ousli -WED 2 Y OF YAKVviA c•i Pear Tree Place III 2901 Powerhouse Road 509.249.0390 • z studios, .8 ones and 4 two -bedrooms • Veterans • Single adults living with Developmental Disabilities (DD) • Small families with established sobriety Pear Tree Place II 290a Powerhouse Road 509.249.0390 • 8 twos and 4 four -bedrooms • 4 State Operated Living Alternative (SOLA) homes for i6 single adults living with significant DD • Small and large families with established sobriety Pear Tree Place 1 2900 Powerhouse Road 509.249.0390 • 8 ones, 7 twos, and 11 throe -bedrooms • Single adults with established sobriety • Small and large families with established sobriety FiECE VED SEP 2 2017 (TY OF YAKIMA (��,....,.• oIV. Sommerset Apartments 711 West Walnut Street 509.457.8771 • 5 studios, zo ones and zo two -bedrooms • Single adults with established sobriety • Small families with established sobriety Lamplighter Apartments 406 North Naches Avenue 509.248.0633 • 12 ones and 4 two-bedrOOms • Single adults with established sobriety • Small families with established sobriety Clean House Apartments no North Second Street 509,248.0633 • 21 studios and 1 one -bedroom • Single adults with established sobriety RECEIVED SEP 2 2017 CITY OF YAKIMA f Lt.:......_ D� Avc a Rigoberto Dominguez 2013 Resident of the Year Award X QNI *AA?, CITY OF YAKIMA FLA!.0IV. • 1 • In 2015, Next Step Housing's (NSH) .Pear Tree Place Apartments received the National Community of Quality Award for 1.rernpIary Development for Pe le with Special Needs from the National Affordable Housing Management Association (NAH.MA); • Also in 2015, Keith Erickson, Maintenance Co -Superintendent, received the Maintenance Person of the Year Award from the Affordable Housing Management Association of Washington (AHMA-WA); • In 2013, Michael Ryckman, Maintenance Co -Superintendent, received the 2.013 Success Story of the Year Award from AHMA-WA. WA. This was the first award of its kind inspired by Mr. Ryckman's careerwith • In zo11, the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance presented NSH with the 2011 Movement BurldingAward for exemplary affordable housing advocacy; • In zoo8, Diana McClaskey, NSH's Deputy Director, received the Community Dery Award for homeless advocacy services from the Washington State Coalition for the Homeless; • Also in z008, Connie Clear , NSH's Asset Manager, received the Site Manager of the Year Award from AFLMA-WA; • Again that year, AHMA WA also presented John Mifsud, NSH's Executive Director, with their 2008 Pioneer in Affordable !lousing Award; • In 2007, NSH was awarded the Washington State Housing Finance Commission Friend of Housing Award; • In 2004, the NAHMA honored theSomtnerset Apartments and NSH with the National Community of Quality Award for Outstanding Turnaround of a Troubled Property; • In 1997, NSH won. the National Tax Credit Housing Coaliii©n Award for Excellence 0 RECEIVED SEP 2 5 2017 CITY QF YAKIMA DIV. • 1.,11 „.,...1!..g.i..1.1p.P!.r. • •'!*!.1.r"11.'''. '1 ^ .44444444,44.44, NET STEP US APP#004-17 & APP#00647 ( 2 11.1..7,.: 1 11, _17 EXHIBITIST CHAPTER Exhibits Subd After Appeal a ng for t' a Record Plan Me o SummonsingnVehicle Trips for Alta atire Type 1 Development Sub fitted by Applicant's Attorney Glenn Amster wtno rom Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun Regarding e 1 Review Tra is Generation 4 Adams Accompanied by Email Com Bill Almon, Almon Commercial Real Estate sub fitted b A • *ell is Anodic Jaynes Adams sponses to Contingent condition 04 of Hearing Examine Decision L-ila: Glenn stcr (for Bicycle Ary ents EEC) Response L -b Loc; Gan/ Outlier (Hearing Ex. finer) Response 21201? Joseph Calhoun (for City of aki a) Response /2017 Gary M. Cuillier ATTO EY AT LAW 314 N. SECOND STREET YAKIMA. WASHINGTON 98901 Noember 15, 2017 Joseph Calhoun Yakima City Planning Division 129 NOMh 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 RECEIVED NOV 1 5 2017 OF YAKIMA DIV (509) 575-1800 FAX (509) 452-4601 Re: Bic Ue A artrnents — APP#003-1/: CL2#011-1 / and 5EPA#014-17 Dear Joseph, Your analysis of the contingent condition number 4 set forth in your letter of November 14, 2017, is correct. Absent an appeal of the decision to the City Council by a party claiming that the contingent condition is factually and legally capable of being perfo ed, the applicant's position set forth in its letter dated November 7, 2017, to the effect that the condition is not capable of being perfo ed would become final and the contingent condition should be stricken without the need for the City Council to decide that uncontested position. On the other hand, if the decision is appealed to the City Council by a party contending at least in part that the contingent condition is factually and legally capable of being performed, then the applicant's position othe ise would not become final until that contested issue would be decided by the City Council on appeal after hearing the arguments on both sides of the contested issue. If this does not clarify the contingent nature of that condition, please let me know. Yours very truly, GARY CL. 1 1ER GMC: krr DOC. INDEX tiriViN. PiahnIb"g" DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan [)i pot A1CP, Director Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 askadanninWdlyakimawiegov wwwwakimawa,gowiserviees/plannitig November 14, 2017 To: Gary Cuillier, Hearing Examiner From: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager Subject: Bicycle Apartments AP 03-17, CL2#O1 117, SEPA Dear Mr. Cuillier; In regard to your October 30, 2017 decision on the above stated project, the City of Yakima has reviewed the contingent condition number 4 arid provides the following analysis: The contingent condition requires two things to happen in order to become effective — the City must prohibrt parking on one or both sides of N. 50th Avenue and there must, at the time, be a surplus of parking on the Bicycle Apartments site. Further, the condition requires the applicant to advise the City Planning Division as to whether or not the condition can be performed and, if so, to propose the wording of a covenant to be recorded and, if not, the specific reasons why the condition cannot be performed The applicant submitted the attached letter by email on November 7, 2017 (hard copy r ived November 13, 2017), which cites several reasons why the condition is not capable of being performed. The City of Yakima agrees with the applicant's reasoning for why the condition is una ptable and likely would be considered a taking. As the condition is essentially unenforceable by the City of Yakima, additional guidance is requested on how to treat the condition moving forward. It is unclear if the Planning Division, based on the letter from the applicant stating that the condition cannot be met, can strike the condition from the decision or if the decision would need to be appealed to the Council to ultimately decide. Thank you a d look forward to your response. Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager via electronic and US Mail November 7, 2017 Mr. Joseph Calho , Manager City of Yakima Planning Division 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 TKANTOR TAYLOR NOV 3 2017 FY tt A ifr Re: Bkyde Apartments tAPP Me 003-1; C12e(11-17; SEPA#01447) Dear Mr. (alhoun, On behalf of our client, Bicycle Ap. ents, LLC, we are ting to advise the City that the "contingent conditiori" added to the Class (2) use pe it by the Hearing Ex. iner's is on dated October 30, 2017, is unacceptable for a n ber of r ons.. As a preliminary matter, our client has asked us to express its appreciation for the I tearing Ex. inerls thoughtful analysis of the issues and his affi ation of the City's decisions and denial of the appeals. We also understand the Hearing Ex. mer's desire to reduce tensions in the neighborhood by suggesting a mechanism for acco dating the parking demands of neighboring businesses in the event the City of Yakima decides at some time in the future to eliminate perking on North 50111 Avenue. Nonetheless, our client has concluded the "contingent condition" would adversely affect its ability to finance the project and would impede fut operation of the community and, therefore, is not capable of being performed. Moreover, regardless of whether the Planning Division or He. ing Examineragrees with our client's conclusions, the "contingent condition" constitutes an unwr anted exaction of its property in violation of state law. Adverse Effect on Current Financing. As we understand it, the "contingent condition" calls for a covenant to be recorded against the development site requiring Bicycle Apartments to allow employees of nearby businesses to use surplus parking spaces within the is unclear from the * ision whether the PI ing Division or the Hearing Examiner intends to evaluate the aPPItcant's response to this "contingent condition', whether there will be a dete ination based on that evaluation of the continued viability of this Faller Taylor Nelson Evan & Der mu PE, condition, and what that determination may mean, if anything, in the context of this land 901 F flt Avenue, Style ATAXT use process, so, ys I EA DOC. AA EA, ABAFT INDEX ETA TAO 91O r Mr. Joseph Calhoun Planning Division November 7, 2017 Page 2 cbmmunity at Intle or no charge if the City at sorne undefined point in dine decides to prohibit parking on one or both sides of North 50th Avenue. Bicycle Apartments, LLC, financed the acquisition of the development site through a loan secured by a fairly typical deed of trust, granting the 11. der certain rights in the pr )pert the event the lo. is not repaid in accordance with the M s of the loan documents, The deed of trust requires Bicycle Apartments, LLC, as borrower, to protect the lerider's interest in the property by, . ong other things, covenanting and agreeing to keep the property -free and clear of all charges, liens and encumbrances" other than the deed of t t. Recording a covenant against the community property like the one contemplated by the "contingent conditio i would violate this obligation and would, according to another provision of the deed of trust, constitute a material default. Accordingly, the "contingent condition" would violate the express te s of 13icycle Ada ems' acquisition financing by causing the breach of an explicit covenant to the lender. Adverse Effect on Future Financing, Financing for the Bicycle Apartments project will consist of both debt and equity fi Mild. The "contingent condition" will adversely impact the ability to obtain such financing. Both investors and lenders will underwrite the project based on the site design, including the number and location of parking spaces identified in the development plans and specifications. Because of the contingent nature of the conditions that would trigger use by neighboring businesses and the fact that the condition has no limit or the number of spaces that Bicycle Ada ems may be required to . c available to third parties, investors and lenders cannot uncle rite what impact this contingency could have on the operation of the project. In addition, the use of the puking by such third parties could create potential liability issues for the property, which . y not be insurable and, even if they were, at an u o cost, The inquisition of trm "contingent condition" would, therefore, have art adverse effect on financing for the Bicycle Apartments community. 3. Adverse Effect on Future Community Operations, The "contingent condition" also would hamper future operations at the Bicycle Apartments community, principally due to the biguity of the obligation and the resulting issues that may arise at any time, The condition„ as written, has no expiration; Bicycle Apartments property management may be confronted with "enforcement" issues years from now. By way of example only, there is no definition of "surplus parking spaces"; is it five spaces? Ten? Or more How long must the "surplus" exist before neighboring businesses can demand access? One week? One month? Is it an average number of spaces or a one-tinte occurrence? What are the "neighboring businesses"? Is it every business located on North 51ff Avenue? Can those businesses enlarge their buildings or eliminate their own parking and create even mom of a demand? Does a business have enforcement rights even if the City doesn't eliminate parking on its side of the street? "No chargeis understandable, but what is "little charge"? Should neighboring businesses contribute to maintenance? Who will monitor use Who OC. INDEX c1/4_ Mr. Joseph Calhoun Planning Division November 7, 2017 Page 3 will he responsible for customers or employees of neighboring businesses? Will the neighboring businesses be required to carry insurance for any occurrence on the Bicycle Apartments property resulting from use of the parking spaces by their employees or customers? Again, our client can appreciate the Fleming Examiner's attempt to alleviate thc concerns expressed by neighboring businesses, but placing this burden on Bicycle Apr ents management is unfair, unv . anted and unworkable. 4.If Left to Stand the "Conlin tent Conditiort" Would Constitute an Illegal Taking. The Ilcontingent condition", if left to stand, would require Bicycle Apartments to record a covenant granting neighboring businesses the dght to use a portion of its property if certain circ stances came to pass at some time in the future. According to the Hearing Ex'. bier's findings and conclusions and the unrefuted evidence, this exaction of an interest in Bicycle Apartroents' property would constitute a unlawful taking. RCW 82.02.020 prohibits local government from imposing any tax, fee or charge, whether direct or indirect, on development unless it can be demonstrated the exaction is reton* necessary as a direct result of the proposed development. A required dedication of land or interest in land is an indirect tax, fee or charge. See Isla Verde International Hoklirds Inc_ v. City of Camas, 146 Wn. 2d 740, 757, 49 9 3d 867 (NW), Thus, in order to be sustained, the "contingent condition" must be reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development of the Bicycle Apartments community. It is plain from the irrefutable rindings2 and the contingencies themselves - that imposing an obligation on Bicycle Apeats to address an alleged parking shortfall that may or may not occur in the future is not the result of the development of the Bicycle Apartments. Rather, if such a shortfall were to occur, it would be the result of the neighboring businesses themselves failing to provide adequate parking and, even then, only if the City prohibits onstreet parking. The issue presented by the "contingent condition" is analogous to the issue in Luxembourg Group, Med v. Snohomish County, 76 Wash. App. 502, 887, 9.2d 446 (1995) where Division 1 of the Court of Appeals struck do a condition imposed by the County that would have required the property owner to dedicate riglarcf-way to accommodate a neighbor's landlocked parcel. Likewise, in Unlimited v. Kitsa Count , 50 Wash. App. 723, 750 P. 2d 651 (1988), Division 11 of the Court of Appeals invalidated a condition requiring the developer of a small convenience store to dedicate an easement to a neighboring parcel that had limited access as a result of prior County action. 2 See, eg„, Finding Vill(4): "The evidence establishes a foreseeable surplus of parking spaces for the proposed apartment complex for at least 40 years." See also Finding VIII(5): [Ilhe fact that employees of nearby businesses currently park on the portion of North 5011 Avenue near the proposed site during weekday work hours does not confer a continued right to do so in the future • Mr. Joseph Calhoun Planning Division November 7, 20 17 Page 4 E .4 ED NOV I 3 veiv .„1 In sum, there is little doubt in our client's mind that the proposed "contingent condition" would significantly and adversely affect its financing, use and operation of its property and the residential comm ity. But regardless of whether Bkycle Ap. ents conclusion is accepted by whatever City of Yakima authority will make that determination, the "contingent condition' should be stricken because implementation or enforcement would constitute an illegal exaction of Bicycle Am, emsproperty. Finally, our client has asked us to reiterate its intention to work with the neighbors of the new Bicycle Apartments co unity to minimize any potential conflicts in the future. It cannot, however, accept a condition obligating it to allow the use of its property by others under circumstances over which it has no control. We look forward to the City's coral ation or our client's conclusions, as stated above, and the withdrawal of the contingent condition from the land use decision. Th. you in advance for your attention to this matter. cc: Jeff Cutter, City Attorney John Mifsud, Bicycle Apartments, LLC GARY R JAMMER IN," JAMES K ADAMS PHIEAP W NYAGNIBB Retifed October 1 2017 Mr, Gary CuiHier Hearing Examiner City of YAirria ern Pla ing Division 129 North 2° Street Yakima, V\)8 WAGNER, LULOFF & ADAMS Attorneys at LaW A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 2010 W Nob NW Blvd MEN 2 YAKIMA, WASHENUTON 98902 preW3377777) CC T it• 21117 Re: Next Step 'lousing/Bicycle Aria ents APP 003-17 Dear Mr, randier, TELEPHONE. OMB 248MM° FACSIMILE (509) 2484970 EMAIL MARWLALAW LFGAL Melia R. Franck, Legal Assistant Pursuant to your instructions at thc close of the hearing on the above -referenced matter, 1 have enclosed the following Mail transmiwion Of Bill Almon, tr. of Almon Commercial Realty. As ran be seell, the two 46,800 alternative proposals are not realistic, The best use and mulish° scenarios results in less parking spaces and fewer weekday trips than orthe pr posal. responw to the memorandum of October 16 2017, Michael Reed, Principal, PE TENW any discussion of a 46,800 square feet medical/dental clinic would clearly require a new traffic study. The l582 daily trips would require a neighborhood collector to accommodate presem and projected traffic. N. 507 .Avenue is a residential access street of thirty-two (37.3 feet in width, Neighborhood collectors are required to be forty (40) feet in width. In addition, the memorandum failed to address intersection level of service impacts. FinalD, the development would also require a secondary access for fire response. The aiternoive general office results in fewer weekday trips than the proposal. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Very truly youm, fa -s Adams il(Alcab Enclosure ames Adams From: Sent To: Cc: Subjet: Bill Almon Jr <wcalmon@almoncommercialcom› Friday, October 6, 2017 1203 PM James Adams David Mahoney; Helen Mahoney Parking stall impact - 118 N 50th Ave Jim, David Mahoney asked that I get you some feedback with respect to what a traditional commercial user of the al zoned lot at 118 N 50th Ave might command by way of traffic capacity or parking requirements (presumably a user that would fall into a Class 1 Review such as professional office or medical users), While there's no way to estimate the former without hiring a traffic engineering study, I suggest we can at least establish a baseline expectation of the number of likely parking stalls for such a user by estimating the maximum commercial building size that might reasonably fit/work on the 3 -acre parcel Given the configuration of the lot and the single access point, it's my estimation — derived from a combination of looking at similar parcels developed with office buildings, talking with an architect and from my own experience selling similar land to developers or end users — one could reasonably assume a maximum building size of about 20,0005F on two levels; From there, referencing our municipal code for off-street parking which provides for a minimum of 1 stall per 2005F of finished area for those traditional office or medical users, such a building would therefore support the need for approximately 90 parking stalls, so about 25% less than the planned multi -family project, While one might reasonably assume the traffic impact would therefore be about 25%, I don't think the correlation would be the same between the two uses, whereby I suspect the multi -family use has a more considerable impact on traffic than would a traditional office/medical use: Bill Almon, Jr, CCIM Designated Broker Almon Commercial Real Estate 218 SSgt Pendleton Way Yakima, WA 98901 509.966.3800: 0 509.961.7575: C 509.965.5225: F pppmmospPpappm Limptppresappom October 16, 2017 DEPARTMENT OF COMMLrNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, MCP, Director Planning Dih ision Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.pranningarryakimawmgov www.yakimawygoviservieeklplanning To: Gary Cuillier, Hearing Examiner From Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager Subject- Bicycle Apartments/Next Step Housing Site Type -1 Traffic Generation This review examines the traffic generation of an outright permitted Class (1) use on the vacant property at 118 North 50th Avenue, as requested by the Hearing Examiner at the September 25, 2017 hearing on the Next Step Housing application for multi -family residential use on said property. For this review, the Class (1) land use from YMC 15.04.030, Table 4-1 of "Offices and Clinics" s used. Please note that due to different parking requirements for a Multi -Family Residential use versus Offices arid Clinics uses, this analysis does not I. at the traffic generated if the proposed build -out of the Bicycle Apartments project utilized the same footprint and layout but was an Office/Clinic use. The parking required in such an analysis would not fit on the property if 81,000+ square -feet of office s constructed. For this analysis, staff identified CL1#151-13 and CL3#007-17/SEPA#015-17 as recent examples to show how a medical office/clinic could fit on the property and affect traffic. Those projects include the following s - ifics: CL1#151-13. Parcel. 181334-21924 Address: 4003 Creekside Loop Property size. 2.8 acres Project: +1- 24,000 square foot medical office building with 133 parking stalls CL ,107-17/SEPA#015-17 Parcel: 181315-14472 Address. 1111 N. 35th Ave Property size: 0.83 acres Project: +1- 9,200 square foot medicat office building with 49 parking stalls The size of these projects in relation to their respective parcels was used to estimate what a similar medical facility project would look like on the vacant lot at issue in this appeal, as follows: Yakima IW4 Address 4003 Creekside Loop 1111 N 35th Ave Project Size (sq. ft. 24, 2 IF 9200 Estimate 118 N 50th Ave Parcel Size (sq. ft) 121968 36154.8 Average: Parcel Size (sq. ft.) 29,287 I 129808.8 Ratio of Project to Parcel 0.196772924 0.2 61372 0.225617148 40.225617148 To estimate traffic, the ITE Trip generation Manual 9T Edition was used for a 29,000 square -foot medical -dental office building, which is expected to generate Average Daily Trips (ADT) of 1,048 with 104 PM Peak Hour Trips. A 29,000 square -foot office park is expected to generate 331 ADT and 43 PM Peak Hour Trips_ The estimated trips generated by the proposed Bicycle Apartments is 532 ADT with 50 PM Peak Hour Trips. Via Federal Express October 11, 2017 Mr. Gary Chillier Hearing Ex mer City of Yakima cio Ph ing Division 129 North 2J4 S ;.°1. Y. a, Washington 98901 Dear Mr. Wilier, (FKANTOR TAYLOR Next Step Housing/ Bicycle Apartments — APE 003-17 P t to your instructions at the close of the hearing on the above ref need matter, we enclosing the following materials for the ord: L T smittal frorn ZBA Architecture dated October 6,2017, a hing a site plan depicting an al ative Type 1 development for the subject property. 2. Memo d from Michael Read, PE, TENW, s .ing the vehicle trips expected to be generated by the al - tive development ° • .1 'o and comparing those to the vehicle trips projected to be gen- it by the proposed Bicycle Ai ents. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. cc: Mr. Jeff Cutter, City Attorney Mr...1 es Ad. s, Esq. Mr, John Mifsucl, Next Step Housing - Kantor Taylor Nelson Evan & Decina PC 901 F rith Awns& Sone 4000 Doc. 52221195 WA 98164 206 625 9898 INDEX 2016 625 9951 H E c TRANSMITTAL "Wa4.416.nast Keifieleffelie"beelekeeief Company: KantorTaylor A Glenn Amster Project: Bicycle Apartments, Yakima From: Co eras: rk King :zA=.1k4f,KNyfFc..TA,RE:c.:1:,A4 t Sag 456 f3:216 Date 10/EN/2017 ZBA Project No. 1705 Glenn; Attached you will find an citernate site plan for office use on the Bicycle Apa -nts let as requested by the Heigring Examiner, As you know, the Hearing Examiner requested a design for an allowed on the lot other th an apa ant complex, Of the allowed Type I Uses in the Kaki Municipal Code, a medical/dental office building seemed to be mod logical for the site xi the surrounding area, The size of the building is limited by the parking. Office use requires one parking space per 2CX) square f t of buildiryg. Setbacks and other Kcibma Municipal Code restrictions for the lot basically re ined the some as the clean M use including the 35' height restrict" Thank you, bacabbablo3 o Mark S. King IRANSMS rrAL RECEIVED OCT 12 Z017 OF YAKIMA RAIIKYY1DV RECEIVED 1 2017 YAKIMA rwLW INDEX MEMORA TENW hansom -fallen engineering Neenwest \IDUM RECEIVED DATE: October 6, 20 I 7 C T 1 2 2017 TO; Glenn Amster, Kantor Taylor Netson Ever Decina PCCFTY OF YAKIMA PLAfiana CC: john Mitsud, Executive Diredot - Next Step Hoosing FROM: Michael Read, PE: Princi TENW SUBJECT: The Bicycle Apermems - Hearing Examiner Thp Generation Comparative Anaysis response to the Hearing Examiner's request dizird the appeal hearing held on September 25, 2017 in Yakima, WA, this memorandum summarizes the resutts of a comparative trip generation analysis of alternative devoMernere scenarios allowed. within the subiect property on which the 80-unif Bicycle Apartments development. ts proposed or t 8 N 5021) Avenue Yaklrno, WA. As shown below, wah development ol either beige! office th similar medical/dental office uses, traffic impacts that would be generated by these alternative development scenarios would be significantly higher (tonging frorn 30 to 300 percent) during the peak hours al adjacent shoo' traffic than the currently proposed residential apartment complex Comparative Trip Generation Eva at Trip generation rotes compiled by the institute of Transportation Engineers PTE) ir the Trip Geneva's -on Manual, 96 Edition, 203 2, were used to estimate new daily traffic and PM titi.k. hour traffic. Average rote eauchions for 1TE land use codes (220 Apartments) were applied for 80 proposed a(*.rtment units, office uses 1730 General Office Building): and medical/aerhal office uses (720 Medical -Dental Office Building. An evaluation of commercial buirding development based oh Yakima City code requirements for building setbacks, parking requirements: ond height limits yielded a 45,800 square -loot commercial builaufg that could be developed to lease for genera; office or medicallderhal chnic uses. As summarized In Table 1, alernative buidout of commercial uses ot the site would generate between 30 (15 additional peak Phut trips) (rid 3001106 additional peak hour Mos) percent higher vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hours of adjacent she& traffic:. As noted in the &cycle Apartments — Troific Impad Anal:yds April 3, 201 7, TEN30, no deductions wore mkon for the offordobte commurty housing proposed„ and as such, these conclusions ore very. conservative dosed OUF °Nervations ot other developments. Table 1: Comparative Teo Generation Sumrrtary Land Use PM Peak Weekday Dane Bicycle Apartments (80 Units) 50 332 General Office (46,800 square feet) 65 483 Medical/Denial Clinic 640.84446guorefifeet) t 56 .1,582, she r GAAAAA, albalarbaram. Ar 2012 DAAAA AAA, AA: ANAAAA Ark, LAAAAI AllOOMere It you have ony questions r ordmg the inicamotier presentee in this memo please coil me 2,2 2206) 361- 7333 it 101 al mikipe, ifikorm con: 12222222220212222022 P10222222q 2222e22422 2222ft 222222222Ct OP$222220222 320. 829 .65254; 22253925, 33/324 98355 Of955 .39063 3632333 DOC. INDEX ATTACHMENT Trip en r tion Est ates RECEIVED OCT 1 2 2017 YAKIMA NG Bicycle Apartments - Yakima TENW Project No 3527 Bicycle Apartments Trip Generation Summary Directional Split Trip Trips Generated Land Use Area Units 1 1TE L,LIC 2 Old Rate Iri Out Total Weekday Daily Trip Generation Proposed Uses Apartments 80 DU 220 9.. 50% Average Rate 266 266 532 N.•.•••Weekday Daily Trips = 266 266 532 Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Proposed Uses Apartments 80 DU 220 •65% 35% Average Rate 33 17 50 New W kday PM Peak Hour Trips = 33 •17 50 Notes: 1. DU = * Aline Units, GLA k, Gross Leasable Area. 2, Institute of Transportation Engin - ; s (1TE) Trip Generation Manual 9th edition land use oode, OCT 1 2017 tk YAA PLANNN3 DIV. 10/6/2017 Appendix A - Bicycle Apts Trip Generation.xlsx Bicycle Apartments - Yakima TENW Project No. 3527 Alternative Development Trip Generation Summary Directional Split Trip Trips Generated Land Use Area Units 1 ITE LUC 2 In Out Rate In Out Total Weekday Daily Trip Generation Alternative Uses Office Building 43,800 GLA 710 Average Rate 241 242 483 New W kday Daily Trips = 241 242 483 Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Generati`on Proposed Uses Office Building 43,800 GLA 710 17% 83% Average Rate 11 54 65 New Wee kday PM Peak Hour Trl ps 11 54 65 Notes: 1. DU = * - ling Units, GLA = Gross Leasable Area. 2. Institute of Transportation Engi z.-rs fITE) Trip Generation Manual 9th edition land use de TICCEIVED OCT 1 2 2017 YAKIMA FLA._ rnv 10/6/2017 Appendix A - Bicycle Apts Trip Generation.xlsx Bicycle Apartments - Yakima TENW Project No. 3527 Alternative Development Trip Generation Summary Land Use Area Units I Weekday Daily Trip Generation Alternative Uses Medical/a - tat Office Building 43, : ITE LUC 2 GLA 720 Directional Split Trip Trirss Gerterated In Out Rate In Out Total Average Rate New Weekday Dal 791 791 1,582 ly Trips = 791 791 1,582 Weekday PM Peak ilotir Th p Generation Proposed Uses Medical/Dental Office Building 43, GLA 720 2 New IN 72% Average •Rate• 43 113 156 kday PM Peak Hour Trips A- 43 113 156 es: 1. DU = D tang Units, GLA Gross Leasable Area. 2. Institute of Trans. • -bon Engineers (ITE) Trip Gene tbn Manual ath editiori %rid use code 1018/2017 Ap t RECEIVED OCT 1 n zoi7 WY I; YAKIMA fl...k.:Cv3 dix A - Bicycle Apts Trip G ration.xlsx