Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-044 J. Lawrence Wright, et al Rezone ORDINANCE NO 2005- 44 AN ORDINANCE concerning land use and zoning, rezoning two parcels (Parcel Nos 191332 -33004 and 191331-44001) located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington, from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS), and amending the Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map to reflect said rezone WHEREAS, by application dated March 2, 2005, Hordan Planning Services, on behalf of property owner J Lawrence Wright (hereinafter "Owner "), requested a rezone from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) and amendment of the Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map regarding two parcels (Yakima County Assessor's Parcel Nos 191332 -33004 and 191331-44001) located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington (hereinafter "Subject Property "), and WHEREAS, on May 12, 2005, the Hearing Examiner for the City of Yakima conducted an open- record public hearing regarding the requested rezone, and WHEREAS, on May 26, 2005, the Hearing Examiner issued Hearing Examiner's Recommendation regarding UAZO RZ #1 -05, EC #9 -05, which recommended that the Subject Property should be rezoned from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS), and WHEREAS, at a closed- record public hearing on July 19, 2005, the City Council considered the requested rezone, including the documents and other evidence which comprise the record developed before the Hearing Examiner, the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, and the statements of interested persons, and WHEREAS, after considering the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, the contents of the file, and the statements of interested persons, the City Council finds with respect to the requested rezone that. a. The requirements for public notice of the rezone application and public hearing were satisfied, and b The Subject Property is suitable to be classified Central Business District Support (CBDS), and 1 c The requested rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation for the Subject Property; and d The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, and e The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the criteria, requirements and considerations set forth in Chapter 15.23 Yakima Municipal Code, and f The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the goals and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and g The requested rezone and associated uses are compatible with neighboring land uses, and h There are adequate public services available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on the Subject Property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed for the Subject Property; and i The requested rezone is in the public interest as the area has become a commercial hub, and there is need for additional commercial zoning in this area as existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace, and j SEPA review resulted in the April 13, 2005, issuance of a Determination of Nonsignificance, and no appeal of that has been filed, and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to enact the following to approve the requested rezone, now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA. Section 1 Subject to the specific terms of this ordinance, the Yakima City Council adopts the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation regarding UAZO RZ #1 -05, EC #9 -05, dated May 26, 2005, and incorporates the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation by reference as part of this ordinance 2 Section 2. Regarding the Subject Property, Yakima County Assessor's Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 and 191331- 44001, a more complete description of which is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference in this ordinance, and subject to conditions stated below, the City Council finds formally that, for the uses described by the Applicant: a. The requirements for public notice of the rezone application and public hearing were satisfied, and b The Subject Property is suitable to be classified Central Business District Support (CBDS), and c The requested rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation for the Subject Property; and d The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, and e The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the criteria, requirements and considerations set forth in Chapter 15 23 Yakima Municipal Code, and f The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the goals and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and g The requested rezone and associated uses are compatible with neighboring land uses, and h There are adequate public services available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on the Subject Property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed for the Subject Property; and i The requested rezone is in the public interest as the area has become a commercial hub, and there is need for additional commercial zoning in this area as existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace, and j SEPA review resulted in the April 13, 2005, issuance of a Determination of Nonsignificance, and no appeal of that has been filed 3 Section 3 The Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map and all other zoning and land use maps shall be amended or modified, subject to conditions stated below, to rezone the Subject Property from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) Section 4 The rezone granted by this ordinance is expressly conditioned on the Owner's satisfaction of the following conditions stated on page 9 of the referenced and incorporated Hearing Examiner's Recommendation a. Any future development of the Subject Property shall be subject to all requisite environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review, building permits and other related requirements b If development is proposed for the Subject Property in the future, all applicable development standards shall be met unless adjustments are approved following prescribed public notice and comment requirements. Section 5 If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is declared invalid or unconstitutional for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance Section 6 The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance with the Yakima County Auditor Section 7 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law and by the City Charter PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL at a regular meeting and signed and approved this 2 day of August, 2005 // Paul P Georg -; Mayor ATTEST 1 -v-- City Clerk Publication Date 8 - - 2005 Effective Date 9 - - 2005 4 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO FOR MEETING OF August 2, 2005 ITEM TITLE Ordinance approving the rezone request by J Lawrence Wright et al to rezone property located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima from M -1 to CBDS SUBMITTED BY illiam Cook, Director of Community & Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE Mary Lovell, Associate Planner, 575 -6164 SUMMARY EXPLANATION On July 19, 2005 the Council conducted a "Closed Record" hearing to consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve the rezone request by J Lawrence Wright et al to rezone two (2) parcels from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support. Approval of this rezone will increase the inventory of commercially zoned property in the vicinity of the NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road, Yakima. The Council voted to uphold the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve the rezone request Resolution Ordinance X Contract Other (Specify) Funding Source APPROVAL FOR SUBMITTAL. City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt ordinance BOARD RECOMMENDATION Hearing Examiner recommends approval of the rezone application COUNCIL ACTION Ordinance passed. ORDINANCE NO. 2005 -44 City of Yaldma, Washington Rearing Examiner's Recommendation May 26, 2005 In the Matter of a Rezone Application ) Submitted by: ) ) UAZO RZ #1 - J. Lawrence Wright et. al. ) EC #9 - 05 ) To Rezone Property near Northwest ) Corner of Valley Mall Blvd. and ) Old Town Road from M -1 to CBDS ) And Environmental Review ) Introduction. The hearing examiner conducted a public hearing on May 12, 2005, and has issued this recommendation within ten business days thereof. The staff report presented by Associate Planner Mary Lovell addressed the pertinent considerations and recommended approval of the rezone application with conditions. The applicant's representative, Mr Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, explained the need for additional commercially zoned property m this area and the compatibility of this rezone request with the comprehensive plan and existing commercial uses in the area. Mr John Hodkmson and Mr Jim Murphy also testified m favor of the requested rezone. No one submitted testimony or written comments in opposition to the requested rezone. Summary of Recommendation. The hearing examiner recommends approval of this rezone application by the Yakima City Council, subject to conditions. J Lawrence Wnght et. al. 1 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 — DOC. INDEX # AA--/ Basis for Recommendation. Based upon a view of the site without anyone else present on May 11, 2005, the information contained in the staff report, exhibits, testimony and other evidence presented at an open record public hearing on May 12, 2005, and a review of both the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance; the hearing examiner makes the following: FINDINGS Applicants. The applicant is J Lawrence Wright and others, 310 North 22n Avenue, Yakima, WA 98902. Location. The location of the requested rezone is in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington, parcel numbers 191332 -33004 and 191331 -44001 Application. This application requests a rezone of two vacant parcels containing a total of approximately 45 76 acres in area from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) in order to increase the inventory of commercially -zoned property in this vicinity No specific uses or development plans have been determined or submitted at this time. Notices. Several comments were received from SEPA reviewing agencies as a result of notices for the SEPA process. Notices for that process and for the public hearing were provided in accordance with applicable ordinance requirements in the following manner — DOC. J Lawrence Wright et. al. 2 INDEX Rezone from M -1 to CBDS # AA-1 Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 Mailing of notice of application and SEPA review March 18, 2005 Postmg of notice on property March 18, 2005 Mailing of notice of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Publishing of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Mailing of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 Pubhshmg of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 State Environmental Policy Act. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the City of Yakima relative to this nonproject rezone request on April 13, 2005, based on SEPA guidelines m WAC 197 -11 -355 There was no appeal of the SEPA determination. Future development of the property for specific uses will be subject to any requisite environmental review at that time. Current Zoning and Land Uses. The site is currently vacant and zoned M -1 The zoning and land uses existing on adjacent properties are Location Zoning Land Use North CBDS Mixed Commercial South Union Gap Mixed Commercial/Vacant West M -1 Burlington Northem Railroad East CBDS/Umon Gap Mixed Commercial Rezone Review Criteria. Recommendations regardmg rezone applications within the Yakima Urban Area must be based upon criteria specified m Section 15.23 030 of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (UAZO) 1) The testimony at the public hearing. The testimony at the hearing consisted of testimony by Associate Planner Mary Lovell, the applicant's representative Bill Hordan, John Hodkinson and Jim Murphy who all favored approval of the rezone request. No one testified in opposition to the request. J Lawrence Wright et. al. 3 HOC. Rezone from M -1 to CBDS INDEX Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 # A/4 2) The suitability of the property for uses permitted under the proposed zoning: The property is well - suited for CBDS uses and such uses already exist m the general area where the property is located. The area is characterized by a mixture of commercial and industrial uses, with some residential uses and residential zoning to the southeast. Commercial uses abut the property on the north, south and east. Industrial uses he to the west and northwest. Central Business District Support zoning makes a better transition and buffer than Light Industrial zoning between the industrial uses to the west and northwest and the professional business, commercial arterial and residential uses near this property The substantial commercial development of the Valley Mall and nearby properties, the extension of Valley Mall Boulevard along the south boundary of this particular property and the installation of traffic signals along South 1 Street make the subject property more suitable for CBDS uses than for the more potentially intrusive M -1 fight industrial uses. 3) Recommendations from interested agencies and departments: No agencies submitted recommendations regarding this rezone request, but they will have an additional opportunity to comment m the future if specific development projects require environmental and/or traffic concurrency review Input of City departments or divisions regarding public facilities is discussed in section 5 below 4) The extent to which the proposed rezone is in compliance with and/or deviates from the goals and policies as adopted in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance a) The Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map (Map III -3) of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as suitable for Industrial development. The Future Land Use Map to Zoning Map Consistency Chart, Figure III -3, indicates that the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district may be considered compatible with the Industrial J Lawrence Wright et. al. 4 DOC Rezone from M -1 to CBDS INDEX Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. n_ /j —� RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 # A - - comprehensive plan designation. The proposed rezone would be in compliance with Objectives and Policies of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan such as Objective G1 which is to encourage the physical development of the Yakima urban area m a manner that enhances its image as the cultural and business center; Policy Gl 1 which is to strive to make the Yakima urban area the center for activities throughout the Yakima Valley by forming public /private partnerships that diversify the economic, cultural and service opportunities offered m the urban area, Policy G8 4 which is to encourage major commercial, industrial and multi- family developments to locate within city limits, Pohcy G9 4 which is to encourage commercial, industrial, office and multi- family developments to locate in distinct clusters in planned growth areas, Objective C2 which is to encourage the development of the majority of commercial establishments within the urban area, and Policy C2 1 which is to encourage the development of retail businesses within the city limits. b) The Zoning Ordinance: Subsection 15 03 030(11) of the UAZO states that the purpose of the CBDS zoning district is to accommodate wholesale and retail activities with some high - density residential development. This distnct is primarily located near the central business district and along the major artenals leading to the central business district. Like the CBD district, a variety of land uses are permitted. However, the intensity of development is intended to be less than m the CBD district. Chapter 15 05 of the UAZO establishes basic development requirements as minimum criteria which must be met to assure land use compatibility and promote the public health, safety and general welfare. The zoning ordinance sets forth specific standards for minimum lot size, maximum lot • coverage, minimum building setbacks, requisite parking, maximum building height and requisite sight screening. If future development is proposed at this site, J Lawrence Wright et. al. 5 Rezone from M.-1 to CBDS DOC. Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 # I /1. �� all applicable development standards will be satisfied unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. 5) The adequacy of public facilities such as roads, sewer, water and other required public services. The property is currently served by all necessary public facilities and services. The property has frontage on Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road. The development services team meeting held on March 30, 2005 resulted m comments from the Traffic Engineering Division to the effect that the requested nonproject rezone is presently exempt under the Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance, but that a determination will have to be made when a specific land use is proposed whether concurrency review is required at that time. If, for example, a 280,000 - square -foot shopping center were proposed m keeping with densities of nearby commercial areas, about 11,000 daily trips or 1,040 PM Peak Hour Trips would be generated. Other developments m the area located both in Yakima and Union Gap such as Home Depot, Mercy Theaters and the Valley Mall Expansion have participated m a pro -rata share contribution to various street and intersection upgrade projects and it is expected that a similar request will be made at the time of actual project level review for the property subject to this rezone request. The Engineering Division also noted that there will eventually be a need for a civil design of frontage improvements which will have to be made to the extent required by the uses to be developed on the site. The Water/Irrigation Division indicated that there is a twelve -inch waterline in South 1 Street near the northeast corner of the site, but there is no City waterline along Old Town Road or Valley Mall Boulevard. The site is located in a Low Level Pressure Zone where the exact requirements will have to be determined when there is a specific development proposed. In general, development will require looping a public waterline through the site between South 1 Street and the Long Fiber property as is identified m the 2004 Water System Plan Update. J Lawrence Wnght et. al. 6 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOC. Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 6) The compatibility of the proposed zone change and associated uses with neighboring land uses: CBDS zoning and associated uses would be more compatible with neighboring land uses than the existing industrial zoning and associated uses. CBDS zoning and uses would be more of a continuation of the existing zoning and development-pattcrn m the arca. Compatibility of the future CBDS uses would be determmed through the respective types of review set forth m Table 4 -1, Permitted Land Uses, of the UAZO In view of the zoning classifications and existing uses of surrounding properties, the respective types of review listed for uses to be located within the CBDS zoning district would suffice to ensure their compatibility with land uses near the subject property 7) The public need for the proposed change: The testimony and other evidence submitted at the hearing established that this area has become a commercial hub and that there is a need for additional commercial zoning m this area where existmg large commercial tracts are bemg developed at a rapid pace. Consistency of the Rezone with Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan under the Criteria Required by YMC 16.06.020(B) is determined by consideration of the following factors 1) The types of land uses permitted at the site m the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's Industrial designation for the site. 2) The density of residential development or the level of development such as units per acre or other measures of density would not be a factor weighing against this rezone application because this rezone would not result m additional residential use of the property and any future commercial uses would be consistent with the density allowed by the applicable zoning ordinance provisions. 3) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities J Lawrence Wright et. al. 7 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOc Valley Mall Blvd. & Old To Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 is not an issue relative to this rezone request, but traffic concurrency issues may be presented when the specific type of commercial uses are known. 4) The characteristics of the development, when the exact type of commercial uses become known m the future, will have to be consistent with the CBDS zoning provisions and the applicable development regulations, or with any adjustments thereto that may be allowed after following the prescribed pubhc notice and comment requirements. CONCLUSIONS 1 The hearing examiner has jurisdiction to make a recommendation to the Yakima City Council regarding this rezone application. 2 The public notice requirements of Chapters 15 and 16 of the Yakima Municipal Code have been satisfied. 3 SEPA review resulted in the issuance of a Declaration of Non - significance on April 13, 2005, without any appeal being filed. 4 Adequate public services are available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on this property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed in the future. 5 All of the testimony at the hearing was in favor of this rezone request. 6 The requested rezone satisfies the seven rezone criteria m Section 15.23 030 and the four consistency criteria in Subsection 16 06 020(B) of the Yakima Municipal Code which are the applicable criteria to determine whether the requested rezone should be approved. J Lawrence Wright et al. 8 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOC, Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 RECOMMENDATION The hearing examiner recommends to the Yakima City Council that this application for a rezone of property from the Light Industrial (M -1) zoning designation to the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning designation described in the documentation submitted for UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC 9 -05 be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions 1) Any future development of the subject property will be subject to all requisite environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review, building permit and related requirements. 2) If development is proposed at this site in the future, all applicable development standards will be met unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed pubhc notice and comment requirements. DATED this 26 day of May, 2005 L 1L Gary M. Chillier, Hearing Examiner J Lawrence Wright et. al. 9 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS — DOC, Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 s Return To: Yakima City Clerk 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Document Title ORDINANCE NO. 2005-44 Rezone / Northwest corner Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road Grantor City of Yakima Grantee J Lawrence Wnght ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: 1) That portion of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 32, Township 13 North, Range 19 East, W.M., lying southwesterly of the State Road No 3 (See Exhibit `A' for the complete legal description.) 2) That portion of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 31, Township 13 North, Range 19 East, W.M. (See Exhibit `A' for the complete legal description.) PARCEL NUMBERS: 1) 191332 -33004 and 2) 191331 -44001 111111111M II I III 111 I 111 7565878 Page 1 of 16 06'67'2067 16 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 66 Yakima Co, WA ORDINANCE NO 2005- 44 AN ORDINANCE concerning land use and zoning, rezoning two parcels (Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 and 191331-44001) located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington, from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS), and amending the Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map to reflect said rezone WHEREAS, by application dated March 2, 2005, Hordan Planning Services, on behalf of property owner J Lawrence Wright (hereinafter "Owner"), requested a rezone from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) and amendment of the Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map regarding two parcels (Yakima County Assessor's Parcel Nos 191332 -33004 and 191331-44001) located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington (hereinafter "Subject Property"), and WHEREAS, on May 12, 2005, the Hearing Examiner for the City of Yakima conducted an open- record public hearing regarding the requested rezone, and WHEREAS, on May 26, 2005, the Hearing Examiner issued Hearing Examiner's Recommendation regarding UAZO RZ #1 -05, EC #9 -05, which recommended that the Subject Property should be rezoned from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS), and WHEREAS, at a closed- record public hearing on July 19, 2005, the City Council considered the requested rezone, including the documents and other evidence which comprise the record developed before the Hearing Examiner, the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, and the statements of interested persons, and WHEREAS, after considering the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, the contents of the file, and the statements of interested persons, the City Council finds with respect to the requested rezone that. a. The requirements for public notice of the rezone application and public hearing were satisfied, and b The Subject Property is suitable to be classified Central Business District Support (CBDS), and 1 111 11111 111 11111 7565878 Page 2 0{ 16 66/67/2667 16 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD *47 66 Yakima Co, WA c The requested rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation for the Subject Property; and d The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, and e The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the criteria, requirements and considerations set forth in Chapter 15.23 Yakima Municipal Code, and f The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the goals and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and g The requested rezone and associated uses are compatible with neighboring land uses, and h There are adequate public services available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on the Subject Property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed for the Subject Property; and i The requested rezone is in the public interest as the area has become a commercial hub, and there is need for additional commercial zoning in this area as existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace, and j SEPA review resulted in the April 13, 2005, issuance of a Determination of Nonsignificance, and no appeal of that has been filed, and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to enact the following to approve the requested rezone, now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA. Section 1 Subject to the specific terms of this ordinance, the Yakima City Council adopts the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation regarding UAZO RZ #1 -05, EC #9 -05, dated May 26, 2005, and incorporates the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation by reference as part of this ordinance 2 01111 11111 Mil 111 7565878 Page 3 of 16 06/07/2007 CITY OF YRKIMR - CODES DI ORD $'47 00 YimaWA Co, 55R Section 2. Regarding the Subject Property, Yakima County Assessor's Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 and 191331-44001, a more complete description of which is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference in this ordinance, and subject to conditions stated below, the City Council finds formally that, for the uses described by the Applicant. a. The requirements for public notice of the rezone application and public hearing were satisfied, and b The Subject Property is suitable to be classified Central Business District Support (CBDS), and c The requested rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Map designation for the Subject Property; and d The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, and e The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the criteria, requirements and considerations set forth in Chapter 15.23 Yakima Municipal Code, and f The requested rezone is consistent with and complies with the goals and policies of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, and g The requested rezone and associated uses are compatible with neighboring land uses, and h There are adequate public services available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on the Subject Property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific and use is proposed for the Subject Property; and i The requested rezone is in the public interest as the area has become a commercial hub, and there is need for additional commercial zoning in this area as existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace, and j SEPA review resulted in the April 13, 2005, issuance of a Determination of Nonsignificance, and no appeal of that has been filed 3 11110 11C1 II 1111111111 7565878 Page 4 of 16 86/6712667 16 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 89 Yakima Co, WA Section 3 The Official Yakima Urban Area Zoning Map and all other zoning and land use maps shall be amended or modified, subject to conditions stated below, to rezone the Subject Property from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) Section 4 The rezone granted by this ordinance is expressly conditioned on the Owner's satisfaction of the following conditions stated on page 9 of the referenced and incorporated Hearing Examiner's Recommendation a. Any future development of the Subject Property shall be subject to all requisite environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review, building permits and other related requirements. b If development is proposed for the Subject Property in the future, all applicable development standards shall be met unless adjustments are approved following prescribed public notice and comment requirements. Section 5 If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is declared invalid or unconstitutional for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance Section 6 The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance with the Yakima County Auditor Section 7 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law and by the City Charter PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL at a regular meeting and signed and approved this 2nd day of August, (Ztap Paul P Georg Mayor ATTEST K putii,v,, 1` v - ' Certified to be a true and correct copy of the City Clerk original filed in my office 7 `/7 -, A CITY CLE � =' � Kim Publication Date 8 - - 2005 Effective Date 9- 4-2005 B MI: � A ,, -o t a; SE L r 4 �� Sfrt PlG .' il I 756526878 Page 5 of 16 66/87/07 16 55A CITY OF YRKIMR - CODES DI ORD $'47 66 Yakima Co, WR EXILBIT 'A' EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION 191331 - 44001 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 13 NORTH, RANGE 19 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION , THEN NORTH 1337 FEET, THEN WEST 687 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE CENTER OF THE MAIN TRACT OF NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, THEN SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE OF SAID MAIN TRACT 1406 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION, THEN EAST 250 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE RIGHT -OF -WAY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY 191332 - 33004 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 13 NORTH, RANGE 19 EAST, W.M., LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE STATE ROAD No 3, EXCEPT BEGINNING 548 FEET NORTH AND 40 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, THEN NORTH 392 FEET, THEN SOUTH 84° 36' WEST 178 FEET, THEN SOUTH 71° 12' WEST 85 FEET, THEN SOUTH 51° 50' WEST 146 FEET, THEN SOUTH 1° 57' EAST 257 FEET, THEN EAST 89° 53' EAST 361 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY, AND EXCEPT RIGHT -OF -WAY OF THE STATE HIGHWAY LESS EASEMENT TO THE UNTIED STATES, AND EXCEPT SOUTH 208 FEET OF THE WEST 268.7 OF THE EAST 298.7 FEET, AND EXCEPT THAT PART EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, AND EXCEPT A STRIP 100 FEET WIDE WEST OF THE STATE HIGHWAY AND PARALLEL TO THE STATE HIGHWAY 7565878 Page 6 of 16 96/07/2607 10 55A CITY OF YRKIMR - CODES DI ORD $47 00 Yakima Co, WA EXHIBIT "B" 1 . ) : • _ - — — - % -=- — — 1 - t ' — ___ 17 1 -,— — _ _ ..--- _ _ v . — v /*/ / r la . , —.. ,.. < A ;# is ,c'''' : \ • < - '• A'''' ..;:ii; ... ,,, , — — — — .......... . .... _ . I.; 57 ;j 4 j/ ...... — °IIVIIKatlavo_ _ \ 13 A 4 ....■ _ _ – ---- w) 4 A V ■ 4 f-l ' k' '' Cd - - \ ----- -- .7:: Ks _.-- - . _ _ \--- _ — _ - — - — - — \ -- - — -- ' - - — _ -- — — — — — — — — — — 1 — — — — — — — Na — -- - "-- — — - CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON i rM/ Notified Property FILE NO: UAZO RZ#1-05 & EC #9-05 1 Owners within 500 Ft APPLICANT J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al N Subject Site REQUEST REZONE 2 PARCELS (APPROX. 46 ACRES) ' i . FROM M--1 TO CBDS & SEPA REVIEW 1 e" I iN Lx LOCATION. NW corner Valley Mall By & Old Town Rd I oih lie PARCEL NUMBER(S):19133233004 19133144001 Seale -lin .700ft # .61 j 1 R24-0503/15JOS - I 0 350 700 _anesaa=ares6 1111111311111 110 1 III 1 II 11 Ill 7565878 Page 7 of 16 66/67/2007 10 55A CITY OF YAKIMA -CODES DI ORD $47 09 Yakima Co, WA City of Yakima, Washington Hearing Examiner's Recommendation May 26, 2005 In the Matter of a Rezone Application ) Submitted by: ) ) UAZO RZ #1 - J. Lawrence Wright et. al. ) EC #9 - 05 ) To Rezone Property near Northwest ) Corner of Valley Mall Blvd. and ) Old Town Road from M -1 to CBDS ) And Environmental Review ) Introduction. The hearing examiner conducted a public hearing on May 12, 2005, and has issued this recommendation within ten business days thereof. The staff report presented by Associate Planner Mary Lovell addressed the pertinent considerations and recommended approval of the rezone application with conditions. The applicant's representative, Mr Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, explained the need for additional commercially zoned property in this area and the compatibility of this rezone request with the comprehensive plan and existing commercial uses in the area. Mr John Hodkinson and Mr Jim Murphy also testified in favor of the requested rezone. No one submitted testimony or written comments in opposition to the requested rezone. Summary of Recommendation. The hearing examiner recommends approval of this rezone application by the Yakima City Council, subject to conditions. J Lawrence Wright et. al. 1 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 —DOC. INDEX 11 1111 11 IN 11111111111 7585878 Page 8 of 16 06/07/2007 10 55A CITY OF YRKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 864 Yakima Co, WA Basis for Recommendation. Based upon a view of the site without anyone else present on May 11, 2005, the information contained in the staff report, exhibits, testimony and other evidence presented at an open record public hearing on May 12, 2005, and a review of both the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance; the hearing examiner makes the following: FINDINGS Applicants. The applicant is J Lawrence Wright and others, 310 North 22nd Avenue, Yakima, WA 98902. Location. The location of the requested rezone is in the vicinity of the northwest comer of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old To Road, Yakima, Washington, parcel numbers 191332 -33004 and 191331 - 44001 Application. This application requests a rezone of two vacant parcels containing a total of approximately 45 76 acres in area from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) in order to increase the inventory of commercially -zoned property m this vicinity No specific uses or development plans have been determined or submitted at this time. Notices. Several comments were received from SEPA reviewing agencies as a result of notices for the SEPA process. Notices for that process and for the public hearing were provided in accordance with applicable ordinance requirements in the following manner — DOC. J Lawrence Wright et. al. 2 INDEX Rezone from M -1 to CBDS * Q I Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 MI111111111 111 11 11 11 7565878 Page 9 or 16 06107/2007 10 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 66 Yakima Co, WA Mailing of notice of application and SEPA review March 18, 2005 Posting of notice on property March 18, 2005 Mailing of notice of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Publishing of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Mailing of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 Publishing of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 State Environmental Policy Act. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the City of Yakima relative to this nonproject rezone request on April 13, 2005, based on SEPA guidelines m WAC 197 -11 -355 There was no appeal of the SEPA determination. Future development of the property for specific uses will be subject to any requisite environmental review at that time. Current Zoning and Land Uses. The site is currently vacant and zoned M -1 The zoning and land uses existing on adjacent properties are Location Zoning Land Use North CBDS Mixed Commercial South Union Gap Mixed Commercial/Vacant West M -1 Burlington Northern Railroad East CBDS/Union Gap Mixed Commercial Rezone Review Criteria. Recommendations regarding rezone applications within the Yakima Urban Area must be based upon criteria specified m Section 15.23 030 of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (UAZO)• 1) The testimony at the public hearing. The testimony at the hearing consisted of testimony by Associate Planner Mary Lovell, the applicant's representative Bill Hordan, John Hodkinson and Jim Murphy who all favored approval of the rezone request. No one testified in opposition to the request. J Lawrence Wright et. al. 3 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS . Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 # : n 11114 III 1 7565878 Page 10 of 16 CITY OF YAK I MA - CODES DI ORD $47 00 08,67/2097 , WR SSA 2) The suitability of the property for uses permitted under the proposed zoning: The property is well - suited for CBDS uses and such uses already exist in the general area where the property is located. The area is characterized by a mixture of commercial and industrial uses, with some residential uses and residential zoning to the southeast. Commercial uses abut the property on the north, south and east. Industrial uses he to the west and northwest. Central Business District Support zoning makes a better transition and buffer than Light Industrial zoning between the industrial uses to the west and northwest and the professional business, commercial arterial and residential uses near this property The substantial commercial development of the Valley Mall and nearby properties, the extension of Valley Mall Boulevard along the south boundary of this particular property and the installation of traffic signals along South 1 Street make the subject property more suitable for CBDS uses than for the more potentially intrusive M -1 light industrial uses. 3) Recommendations from interested agencies and departments. No agencies submitted recommendations regarding this rezone request, but they will have an additional opportunity to comment in the future if specific development projects require environmental and/or traffic concurrency review Input of City departments or divisions regarding public facilities is discussed in section 5 below 4) The extent to which the proposed rezone is in compliance with and/or deviates from the goals and policies as adopted in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. a) The Comprehensive Plan The Future Land Use Map (Map III -3) of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as suitable for Industrial development. The Future Land Use Map to Zomng Map Consistency Chart, Figure III-3, indicates that the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district may be considered compatible with the Industrial J Lawrence Wright et. al. 4 DOC. Rezone from M -1 to CBDS INDEX Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. # RZ # 1 -05, EC 49 -05 �'l 1111 III 1 11 1 1111 11111 1 11 7565878 Page 11 of 16 06/07/2087 10 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 08 Yakima Co, WA comprehensive plan designation. The proposed rezone would be in compliance with Objectives and Policies of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan such as Objective G1 which is to encourage the physical development of the Yakima urban area in a manner that enhances its image as the cultural and business center; Policy G 1 1 which is to strive to make the Yakima urban area the center for activities throughout the Yakima Valley by forming public /private partnerships that diversify the economic, cultural and service opportunities offered m the urban area, Policy G8 4 which is to encourage major commercial, industrial and multi- family developments to locate within city limits, Policy G9 4 which is to encourage commercial, industrial, office and multi - family developments to locate in distinct clusters m planned growth areas, Objective C2 which is to encourage the development of the majonty of commercial establishments within the urban area, and Policy C2 1 which is to encourage the development of retail businesses within the city limits b) The Zoning Ordinance Subsection 15 03 030(11) of the UAZO states that the purpose of the CBDS zoning district is to accommodate wholesale and retail activities with some high - density residential development. This distract is primarily located near the central business district and along the major arterials leading to the central business district. Like the CBD district, a variety of land uses are permitted. However, the intensity of development is intended to be less than in the CBD district. Chapter 15 05 of the UAZO establishes basic development requirements as minimum cntena which must be met to assure land use compatibility and promote the public health, safety and general welfare The zoning ordinance sets forth specific standards for minimum lot size, maximum lot coverage, minimum building setbacks, requisite parking, maximum building height and requisite sight screening. If future development is proposed at this site, J Lawrence Wright et. al. 5 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DO Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1-05, EC #9 -05 # A-1 11111110111 11 111111 7565878 Page 12 of 16 06/07/2067 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORO $47 60 Yakima Co, WA all apphcable development standards will be satisfied unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements 5) The adequacy of public facilities such as roads, sewer, water and other required public services. The property is currently served by all necessary pubhc facihties and services The property has frontage on Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road. The development services team meeting held on March 30, 2005 resulted m comments from the Traffic Engineering Division to the effect that the requested nonproject rezone is presently exempt under the Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance, but that a determination will have to be made when a specific land use is proposed whether concurrency review is required at that tune. If, for example, a 280,000- square -foot shopping center were proposed in keeping with densities of nearby commercial areas, about 11,000 daily trips or 1,040 PM Peak Hour Tnps would be generated. Other developments in the area located both in Yakima and Union Gap such as Home Depot, Mercy Theaters and the Valley Mall Expansion have participated in a pro -rata share contribution to various street and intersection upgrade projects and it is expected that a similar request will be made at the time of actual project level review for the property subject to this rezone request. The Engineering Division also noted that there will eventually be a need for a civil design of frontage improvements which will have to be made to the extent required by the uses to be developed on the site. The Water/Irrigation Division indicated that there is a twelve -inch waterline m South 1' Street near the northeast corner of the site, but there is no City waterline along Old Town Road or Valley Mall Boulevard. The site is located m a Low Level Pressure Zone where the exact requirements will have to be determined when there is a specific development proposed. In general, development will require looping a public waterline through the site between South 1 Street and the Long Fiber property as is identified in the 2004 Water System Plan Update. J Lawrence Wnght et al. 6 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOC Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 7 11 II 1111111 11111 ill 111 Page 13 of 16 96/07/20 8 10 55R CITY OF YRKIMR - CODES DI ORD $47 68 Yakima Co, WA 6) The compatibility of the proposed zone change and associated uses with neighboring land uses. CBDS zoning and associated uses would be more compatible with neighboring land uses than the existing industrial zoning and associated uses CBDS zoning and uses would be more of a continuation of the existing zoning and development patter - n - in - tire - area— eornpatibility of the future CBDS uses would be determined through the respective types of review set forth m Table 4 -1, Permitted Land Uses, of the UAZO In view of the zoning classifications and existing uses of surrounding properties, the respective types of review listed for uses to be located within the CBDS zoning district would suffice to ensure their compatibility with land uses near the subject property 7) The public need for the proposed change The testimony and other evidence submitted at the hearing established that this area has become a commercial hub and that there is a need for additional commercial zoning in this area where existing large commercial tracts are bemg developed at a rapid pace Consistency of the Rezone with Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan under the Criteria Required by YMC 16.06.020(B) is determined by consideration of the following factors 1) The types of land uses permitted at the site in the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's Industrial designation for the site. 2) The density of residential development or the level of development such as units per acre or other measures of density would not be a factor weighing against this rezone application because this rezone would not result m additional residential use of the property and any future commercial uses would be consistent with the density allowed by the applicable zonmg ordmance provisions 3) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities J Lawrence Wnght et. at 7 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. DEC RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 INDEX 7565878 Page 14 of 16 CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD *47 60 Yakima 2 8o, WA 55R is not an issue relative to this rezone request, but traffic concurrency issues may be presented when the specific type of commercial uses are known. 4) The characteristics of the development, when the exact type of commercial uses become known m the future, will have to be consistent with the CBDS zoning provisions and the applicable development regulations, or with any adjustments thereto that may be allowed after following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. CONCLUSIONS 1 The hearing examiner has jurisdiction to make a recommendation to the Yakima City Council regarding this rezone application. 2 The public notice requirements of Chapters 15 and 16 of the Yakima Municipal Code have been satisfied. 3 SEPA review resulted in the issuance of a Declaration of Non - significance on April 13, 2005, without any appeal being filed. 4 Adequate public services are available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on this property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed m the future. 5 All of the testimony at the hearing was in favor of this rezone request. 6 The requested rezone satisfies the seven rezone critena m Section 15.23 030 and the four consistency criteria in Subsection 16 06 020(13) of the Yakima Municipal Code which are the applicable criteria to determine whether the requested rezone should be approved J Lawrence Wright et al. 8 Rezone from M -1 to CADS DOC Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC 49 -05 11 11 In 111 11 11 0 7565878 Page 15 of 16 96/07/2007 19 55A CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 09 Yakima Co, WA RECOMMENDATION The hearing examiner recommends to the Yakima City Council that this application for a rezone of property from the Light Industrial (M -1) zoning designation to the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning designation described in the documentation submitted for UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC 9 -05 be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions 1) Any future development of the subject property will be subject to all requisite environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review, building permit and related requirements 2) If development is proposed at this site in the future, all applicable development standards will be met unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. DATED this 26 day of May, 2005 /4_ t— LLL: Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner J Lawrence Wright et al. 9 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS —DOS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDE RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 n 1 il 1111 11111 11 1 1 11111 11 7565878 Page 16 of 16 2 CITY OF YAKIMA - CODES DI ORD $47 89 'Yakima Co, WR 55A J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al REZONE EXHIBIT LIST City Council Closed Record Public Hearing July 19, 2005 Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright, et al File Number: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 Site Address: Vicinity of the NW corner of Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. Staff Contact: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner Table of Contents CHAPTER AA Hearing Examiner's Recommendation to City Council CHAPTER A Staff Report CHAPTER B Maps CHAPTER C DST (Development Services Team) Comments CHAPTER D SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) CHAPTER E Comment Letter Received CHAPTER F Application CHAPTER G Notices CHAPTER H Wetland Analysis Report J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al EXHIBIT LIST City Council Closed Record Public Hearing July 19, 2005 CHAPTER AA HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE AA -1 Hearing Examiner's Recommendation 5/27/05 City of Yakima, Washington Hearing Examiner's Recommendation May 26, 2005 In the Matter of a Rezone Application ) Submitted by: ) UAZO RZ #1 -05 J. Lawrence Wright et. al. ) EC #9 -05 ) To Rezone Property near Northwest ) Corner of Valley Mall Blvd. and ) Old Town Road from M -1 to CBDS ) And Environmental Review ) Introduction. The hearing examiner conducted a public hearing on May 12, 2005, and has issued this recommendation within ten business days thereof. The staff report presented by Associate Planner Mary Lovell addressed the pertinent considerations and recommended approval of the rezone application with conditions. The applicant's representative, Mr. Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, explained the need for additional commercially zoned property in this area and the compatibility of this rezone request with the comprehensive plan and existing commercial uses in the area. Mr. John Hodkinson and Mr. Jim Murphy also testified in favor of the requested rezone. No one submitted testimony or written comments in opposition to the requested rezone. Summary of Recommendation. The hearing examiner recommends approval of this rezone application by the Yakima City Council, subject to conditions. J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 1 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 - DOC. INDEX Basis for Recommendation. Based upon a view of the site without anyone else present on May 11, 2005; the information contained in the staff report, exhibits, testimony and other evidence presented at an open record public hearing on May 12, 2005; and a review of both the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance; the hearing examiner makes the following: FINDINGS Applicants. The applicant is J. Lawrence Wright and others, 310 North 22 Avenue, Yakima, WA 98902. Location. The location of the requested rezone is in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington; parcel numbers 191332 -33004 and 191331- 44001. Application. This application requests a rezone of two vacant parcels containing a total of approximately 45.76 acres in area from Light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support (CBDS) in order to increase the inventory of commercially -zoned property in this vicinity. No specific uses or development plans have been determined or submitted at this time. Notices. Several comments were received from SEPA reviewing agencies as a result of notices for the SEPA process. Notices for that process and for the public hearing were provided in accordance with applicable ordinance requirements in the following manner: DOC J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 2 INDEX Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. —� RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 Mailing of notice of application and SEPA review March 18, 2005 Posting of notice on property March 18, 2005 Mailing of notice of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Publishing of SEPA determination April 13, 2005 Mailing of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 Publishing of public hearing notice April 18, 2005 State Environmental Policy Act. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by the City of Yakima relative to this nonproject rezone request on April 13, 2005, based on SEPA guidelines in WAC 197 -11 -355. There was no appeal of the SEPA determination. Future development of the property for specific uses will be subject to any requisite environmental review at that time. Current Zoning and Land Uses. The site is currently vacant and zoned M -1. The zoning and land uses existing on adjacent properties are: Location Zoning Land Use North CBDS Mixed Commercial South Union Gap Mixed Commercial/Vacant West M -1 Burlington Northern Railroad East CBDS/Union Gap Mixed Commercial Rezone Review Criteria. Recommendations regarding rezone applications within the Yakima Urban Area must be based upon criteria specified in Section 15.23.030 of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (UAZO): 1) The testimony at the public hearing: The testimony at the hearing consisted of testimony by Associate Planner Mary Lovell, the applicant's representative Bill Hordan, John Hodkinson and Jim Murphy who all favored approval of the rezone request. No one testified in opposition to the request. J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 3 - -DOC. Rezone from M -1 to CBDS INDEX Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 # .. 2) The suitability of the property for uses permitted under the proposed zoning: The property is well- suited for CBDS uses and such uses already exist in the general area where the property is located. The area is characterized by a mixture of commercial and industrial uses, with some residential uses and residential zoning to the southeast. Commercial uses abut the property on the north, south and east. Industrial uses lie to the west and northwest. Central Business District Support zoning makes a better transition and buffer than Light Industrial zoning between the industrial uses to the west and northwest and the professional business, commercial arterial and residential uses near this property. The substantial commercial development of the Valley Mall and nearby properties, the extension of Valley Mall Boulevard along the south boundary of this particular property and the installation of traffic signals along South 1 Street make the subject property more suitable for CBDS uses than for the more potentially intrusive M -1 light industrial uses. 3) Recommendations from interested agencies and departments: No agencies submitted recommendations regarding this rezone request, but they will have an additional opportunity to comment in the future if specific development projects require environmental and/or traffic concurrency review. Input of City departments or divisions regarding public facilities is discussed in section 5 below. 4) The extent to which the proposed rezone is in compliance with and /or deviates from the goals and policies as adopted in the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the Zoning Ordinance: a) The Comprehensive Plan: The Future Land Use Map (Map III -3) of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as suitable for Industrial development. The Future Land Use Map to Zoning Map Consistency Chart, Figure III -3, indicates that the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district may be considered compatible with the Industrial J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 4 DOC. Rezone from M -1 to CBDS INDEX Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 comprehensive plan designation. The proposed rezone would be in compliance with Objectives and Policies of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan such as Objective G1 which is to encourage the physical development of the Yakima urban area in a manner that enhances its image as the cultural and business center; Policy G1.1 which is to strive to make the Yakima urban area the center for activities throughout the Yakima Valley by forming public /private partnerships that diversify the economic, cultural and service opportunities offered in the urban area; Policy G8.4 which is to encourage major commercial, industrial and multi- family developments to locate within city limits; Policy G9.4 which is to encourage commercial, industrial, office and multi - family developments to locate in distinct clusters in planned growth areas; Objective C2 which is to encourage the development of the majority of commercial establishments within the urban area; and Policy C2.1 which is to encourage the development of retail businesses within the city limits. b) The Zoning Ordinance: Subsection 15.03.030(11) of the UAZO states that the purpose of the CBDS zoning district is to accommodate wholesale and retail activities with some high - density residential development. This district is primarily located near the central business district and along the major arterials leading to the central business district. Like the CBD district, a variety of land uses are permitted. However, the intensity of development is intended to be less than in the CBD district. Chapter 15.05 of the UAZO establishes basic development requirements as minimum criteria which must be met to assure land use compatibility and promote the public health, safety and general welfare. The zoning ordinance sets forth specific standards for minimum lot size, maximum lot coverage, minimum building setbacks, requisite parking, maximum building height and requisite sight screening. If future development is proposed at this site, J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 5 ® ®C� Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 all applicable development standards will be satisfied unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. 5) The adequacy of public facilities such as roads, sewer, water and other required public services: The property is currently served by all necessary public facilities and services. The property has frontage on Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road. The development services team meeting held on March 30, 2005 resulted in comments from the Traffic Engineering Division to the effect that the requested nonproject rezone is presently exempt under the Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance, but that a determination will have to be made when a specific land use is proposed whether concurrency review is required at that time. If, for example, a 280,000- square -foot shopping center were proposed in keeping with densities of nearby commercial areas, about 11,000 daily trips or 1,040 PM Peak Hour Trips would be generated. Other developments in the area located both in Yakima and Union Gap such as Home Depot, Mercy Theaters and the Valley Mall Expansion have participated in a pro -rata share contribution to various street and intersection upgrade projects and it is expected that a similar request will be made at the time of actual project level review for the property subject to this rezone request. The Engineering Division also noted that there will eventually be a need for a civil design of frontage improvements which will have to be made to the extent required by the uses to be developed on the site. The Water/Irrigation Division indicated that there is a twelve -inch waterline in South 1st Street near the northeast corner of the site, but there is no City waterline along Old Town Road or Valley Mall Boulevard. The site is located in a Low Level Pressure Zone where the exact requirements will have to be determined when there is a specific development proposed. In general, development will require looping a public waterline through the site between South 1 Street and the Long Fiber property as is identified in the 2004 Water System Plan Update. J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 6 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOC Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 6) The compatibility of the proposed zone change and associated uses with neighboring land uses: CBDS zoning and associated uses would be more compatible with neighboring land uses than the existing industrial zoning and associated uses. CBDS zoning and uses would be more of a continuation of the existing zoning and development-pattern-in-the area: C ompatibility of the future CBDS uses would be determined through the respective types of review set forth in Table 4 -1, Permitted Land Uses, of the UAZO. In view of the zoning classifications and existing uses of surrounding properties, the respective types of review listed for uses to be located within the CBDS zoning district would suffice to ensure their compatibility with land uses near the subject property. 7) The public need for the proposed change: The testimony and other evidence submitted at the hearing established that this area has become a commercial hub and that there is a need for additional commercial zoning in this area where existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace. Consistency of the Rezone with Development Regulations and the Comprehensive Plan under the Criteria Required by YMC 16.06.020(B) is determined by consideration of the following factors: 1) The types of land uses permitted at the site in the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning district would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's Industrial designation for the site. 2) The density of residential development or the level of development such as units per acre or other measures of density would not be a factor weighing against this rezone application because this rezone would not result in additional residential use of the property and any future commercial uses would be consistent with the density allowed by the applicable zoning ordinance provisions. 3) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 7 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. ®C ' ` RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 INDEX LAA- is not an issue relative to this rezone request, but traffic concurrency issues may be presented when the specific type of commercial uses are known. 4) The characteristics of the development, when the exact type of commercial uses become known in the future, will have to be consistent with the CBDS zoning provisions and the applicable development regulations, or with any adjustments thereto that may be allowed after following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. CONCLUSIONS 1. The hearing examiner has jurisdiction to make a recommendation to the Yakima City Council regarding this rezone application. 2. The public notice requirements of Chapters 15 and 16 of the Yakima Municipal Code have been satisfied. 3. SEPA review resulted in the issuance of a Declaration of Non - significance on April 13, 2005, without any appeal being filed. 4. Adequate public services are available to satisfy the utility and access requirements of future commercial uses on this property, but future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property and the City Traffic Engineer will determine if traffic concurrency review is required at the time when a specific land use is proposed in the future. 5. All of the testimony at the hearing was in favor of this rezone request. 6. The requested rezone satisfies the seven rezone criteria in Section 15.23.030 and the four consistency criteria in Subsection 16.06.020(B) of the Yakima Municipal Code which are the applicable criteria to determine whether the requested rezone should be approved. J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 8 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS DOC, Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05 RECOMMENDATION The hearing examiner recommends to the Yakima City Council that this application for a rezone of property from the Light Industrial (M -1) zoning designation to the Central Business District Support (CBDS) zoning designation described in the documentation submitted for UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC 9 -05 be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1) Any future development of the subject property will be subject to all requisite environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review, building permit and related requirements. 2) If development is proposed at this site in the future, all applicable development standards will be met unless adjustments are approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. DATED this 26 day of May, 2005. he—. Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner J. Lawrence Wright et. al. 9 Rezone from M -1 to CBDS D®C Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. INDEX RZ # 1 -05, EC #9 -05_ . _/ J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Exhibit List CHAPTER A Staff Report EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE A -1 Staff Report 5/12/05 City of Yakima, Washington Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division — Staff Report PUBLIC HEARING May 12, 2005 Rezone Application submitted by: ) UAZO RZ #1 -05 J. Lawrence Wright et al for the ) EC #9 -05 Rezone of two (2) parcels from M -1, ) Staff Contact: Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central ) Mary Lovell Business District Support ) Associate Planner And Environmental Review ) (509) 575 -6164 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION. Staff recommends approval of this rezone application with conditions. From the view of the site, the matters contained in the application, Development Services Team comments, and a review of both the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, staff makes the following: FINDINGS Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright et al 310 North 22 Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 Location: The vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima WA Parcel Numbers: 191332 -33004 and 191331 -44001 Application: Rezone two (2) parcels from M -1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central Business District Support. Proposed Uses. A specific use has not been determined for this site. No development proposal was submitted with the rezone application. Background: This rezone request concerns two vacant parcels of land, which total approximately 45.76 acres in area. The property is located within the City of Yakima in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road. No development plans have been submitted at this time. The applicant is rel. - rezone to increase the inventory of commercially zoned property in this icinity. Filed Hearing Examiner EXH # i4 Date i '' File # �Z 6� Current zoning and Land Use The subject property is currently vacant and zoned M -1, Light Industrial. Adjoining properties have the following characteristics: Location Zoning Land Use North CBDS Mixed Commercial South Union Gap Mixed Commercial /Vacant West M -1 Burlington Northern Railroad East CBDS/Union Gap Mixed Commercial Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan This rezone is compatible with the following Policies and Objectives of the 1997 Urban Area Comprehensive Plan: • The Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map designates this area as being suitable for Industrial development. The Future Land Use Map to Zoning Map Consistency Chart, Figure III -3, provides a guide to the compatibility of land use designations and the zoning districts. The Chart indicates that the Industrial designation may be considered compatible with the CBDS, Central Business District Support zoning district. • Objective Gl: Encourage the physical development of the Yakima Urban Area in a manner that enhances its image as the cultural and business center. • Policy G1.1: Strive to make the Yakima urban area the center for activities throughout the Yakima Valley by forming public /private partnerships that diversify the economic, cultural and service opportunities offered in the urban area. • Policy G8.4: Encourage major commercial, industrial, and multi - family developments to locate within city limits. • Policy G9.4: Encourage commercial, industrial, office and multi - family developments to locate in distinct clusters in planned growth areas. • Objective C2: Encourage the development of the majority of commercial establishments within the urban area. • Policy C2.1: Encourage the development of retail business within the city limits. Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15.03.030 states that the purpose of the CBDS zoning district is to accommodate wholesale and retail activities with some high- density residential development. This Wright RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 2 INDEX NE corner Valley Mall /Old Town Rd - • • district is primarily located near the central business district and along the major arterials leading to the central business district. Like the CBD district, a variety of land uses are permitted. However, the intensity of development is intended to be less than in the CBD district. Site Design and Improvement Standards The Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance at Section 15.05.010 establishes basic development requirements as minimum criteria, which must be met to assure land use compatibility and promote the public health, safety and general welfare. The Zoning Ordinance sets forth specific standards for lot size, maximum lot coverage, minimum building setbacks, parking, building height, sight screening, etc. When a future change is proposed at this site, all applicable development standards will be met or adjustments approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. Chapter 15.23.030 Rezone criteria Within the Yakima Urban Area, recommendations for approval of rezone applications are governed by seven criteria specified in Section 15.23.030 YMC. 1. Testimony at public hearing. To be considered by the Hearing Examiner. 2. Suitability of property for proposed use. The property is well suited for the range of uses permitted within the CBDS zoning district. 3. Recommendations from interested agencies. No agencies have registered any recommendations concerning this non - project rezone. Agencies will have an opportunity for additional comment in the future if specific development projects require environmental or traffic concurrency review. 4. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use Map to Zoning Map Consistency Chart, Figure III -3, provides a guide to the compatibility of land use designations and the zoning districts. The Chart indicates that the industrial designation may be considered compatible with the Central Business District Support zoning district, and is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Adequacy of public utilities. This property is currently served by all necessary public utilities. The subject property has frontage on Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, which are public streets within the jurisdiction of the City Union Gap. According to staff analysis, the site will need a looped public waterline between South 1 Street and DOC. Wright RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 3 INDEX NE corner Valley Mall /Old Town Rd A - I Long Fiber at the time of development. This is identified in the current Water System Plan Update (2004). 6. Compatibility of proposed use. A specific project is not named in this rezone application. Compatibility will be determined for future uses based upon Table 4 -1, Permitted Land Uses, of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance. 7. Public Need This rezone fulfills the public need for zoning regulations that are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Development Services Team comments A Design Services Team meeting was held on March 30, 2005 to discuss the technical aspects of this proposal. The written comments received were general since there was no specific development project to review. The following written comments were received: Code Administration — No issues until a project is proposed. Traffic Engineering - Traffic Engineering has reviewed the Rezone application and SEPA checklist for the proposal to rezone approximately 46 acres from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support in the vicinity of South First St/Main St & Old Town Road. We understand the rezone does not require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and it is generally considered "compatible" with the existing commercial nature of the area. Since the rezone is a Non - project" request, it is difficult to predict the expected volume of traffic that may be generated from future development. However, some general conclusions can be drawn based upon the standards established in the Trip Generation Handbook published by the Institute of Traffic 7 Edition, 2003). Development under the current Light Industrial zoning for the 46 acres would create a range of between 1,800 to 2,900 Daily trips or between 385 to 407 PM Peak Hour trips if developed as either an Industrial Park (high end) or Manufacturing Plant (low end of estimates). Given the size of the total rezone, approximately 280,000 square feet of shopping center type development could be located on this area, given the densities of other nearby commercial areas. Traffic impacts from a shopping center type of development on this size parcel would generate approximately 11,000 daily trips or 1,040 PM Peak Hour trips. Other recent developments in this area located within the cities of both Union Gap and the City of Yakima (Home Depot, Mercy Theaters, Valley Mall Expansion) have participated in a pro -rata share contribution to various street and intersection upgrade projects. It is expected that a similar request will be made at the time of actual project level review for the property subject to this rezone. All streets fronting this development are within the jurisdiction of Union Gap. - DM INDEX Wright RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 4 4 _ J NE corner Valley Mall /Old Town Rd f'I /L • Engineering — Eventually, there will be a need for a civil design of frontage improvements package. To what extent those improvements will have to be made will depend on what will ultimately be developed on this site, and on what external improvements currently exist. Water - Existing 12" waterline in South 1 Street near the NE corner of Parcel No. 191332- 33004. No City waterline along Old Town Road or Valley Mall Blvd. frontage. Site is located in the Low Level Pressure Zone. Exact requirement to be determined at time of development proposal. In general,. site will need to loop a public waterline through their site between South 1 Street and Long Fiber. This is identified in the current Water System Plan Update (2004). Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance This rezone application was determined to be exempt under the Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance. The City Traffic Engineer will determine if concurrency review is required at the time a specific land use is proposed. State Environmental Policy Act A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued by the City of Yakima on April 13, 2005. This determination was based on SEPA guidelines (WAC 197 -11 -355). Three written comments were received from SEPA reviewing agencies during the 20 -day comment period. The SEPA appeal period ended on April 28, 2005. One additional comment was received from a SEPA agency following the appeal period. Public Notice Notice for the hearing was provided in accordance with the UAZO requirements in the following manner: Mailing of Notice of Application and Environmental Review To adjacent owners & SEPA agencies March 18, 2005 Mailing of SEPA decision April 13, 2005 Legal Ad published —SEPA Determination April 13, 2005 Posting of property March 18, 2005 Mailing of Notice of Public Hearing to adjacent Owners and Legal Ad published April 18, 2005 No comment letters were received. Conclusions The Division of Environmental Planning for the City of Yakima, Washington has reviewed this rezone request and offers the following findings: 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to issue a recommendation to the City Council on this rezone application. Wright RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 5 INDEX NE corner Valley Mall /Old Town Rd 14 2. No adverse impacts have been identified from granting approval to this rezone request. 3. Adequate public services are in place to meet the utility and access requirements of this proposal. However, future development proposals may require looping of the water service to the subject property. 4. Testimony at the hearing should be considered in determining whether this proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses. 5. SEPA review resulted in the issuance of a DNS on April 13, 2005. 6. This rezone meets the seven criteria specified in Section 15.23.030 YMC for approving the rezone. 7. All public notice requirements of YMC Chapters 15 and 16 have been completed. Recommendation The Division of Environmental Planning recommends that this rezone from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Future development of the subject property is subject to environmental review, traffic concurrency, plan review and building permits. 2. If development is proposed at this site in the future, all applicable development standards will be met or adjustments approved following the prescribed public notice and comment requirements. INDEX Wright RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 6 NE corner Valley Mall /Old Town Rd J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Exhibit List CHAPTER B Maps EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE B -1 Maps: Vicinity, Mailing, Aerial, Zoning and Atlas 3/15/05 w Ilk •• 4 • • I • 9 • S. • . Alk \ 0 4. .... 0 ♦ Q < 0 • • • r♦ —� - ' VII ' RI awn III , I ..ARKET STREET AMU ' '`t", 5 1 1 11111 =.-F' \ 3 c L 11111111111 _- 'y m 00,:, Z .... . 1015. 5 mum ma s 1: D MN I ST REET N I 1 i - 4 — ` OAKSTREET I I Q OAK STREET m A LD I R STREET ALDER ST; _ _ - JM RD C —'— _ t c 4 of Yet ■ CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON acr l4 VICINITY MAP 44 .44. 0 5 FILE NO: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 APPLICANT: J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al 1‘ Subject Property REQUEST: REZONE2PARCELS (APPROX. 46 ACRES) Filed . • Yakima City Limits FROM M-1 TO CBDS & SEPA REVIEW Hearing Exam! e ' r • Scale lin = 700ft LOCATION: NW corner Valley Mall By & Old Town laH # 8 --( Date 3 RZ -1 -05 03/15/05 Fite# lez -#1 a'S 8 9 010• K e 2 A 11 � ��1z5 li; • 1 ,2 j j �y000�,ll � , 44 aot '' ://'m \ � � 0 ..a02 err1. /: ip P. \ 1 \ 0140A.s / 339 D• / " Il l • WIN/ PIONEER STREET \ //. /,I %,I / // /� / / / ��O / /G � � � - -� %; � �IOie/. / / - "VEL ALL Diva — . _ — — __ I e 'V �'/ O 1 % / 1 . /I % %may /j _ / MARKET STREET V'/�! �/ i/ 7 � • 1 „ , A #, WM10 ' ft / — 0 ' r/ - - - 111- o g o L y s , 5 - 7 c �l 03 - _ LOCUST STREET OAK STREET OAK STREET _ALDER STREET __ - E - - - ALDER STREET - - - -- r " .A. - -- - - - ALDER 6igEFf _ _ w % CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON // Notified Property 11LE NO: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 Owners within 500 Ft APPLICANT: J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al Subject Site REQUEST: REZONE 2 PARCELS (APPROX. 46 ACRES) N FROM M-1 TO CBDS & SEPA REVIEW � � ( . 1 � °I 4 � 4 LOCATION: NW corner Valley Mall By & Old Town Rd I`�►7� 5 PARCELNUMBER(S):19133233004 19133144001 °Aloa�' 2 Scale -lin = 700fr u 0 350 700 RZ -1 -05 03/15/05 r i • . . 1 -. - 2 '' .* .- — • .• ' ..- !f r — t. r t I a� _ , • " , r 4 . s . -x I " — r — 4 •• : ,� ;= q ,,� z1 - - . 4 -r — I • .I- i • ft> .. 4 ' 4 b l . r I Y . ! APR. F / % J L' " y I r , ti. :: i I PIONIERIINk[I I. ''SliiiThelau sivc : WRKtl STREET - , - ___ _ - 11 •' .J -. -y 4 4 - f � r 1r s z '• � • z . ' I I `\ fff[111 I( I 1 — 41 . r AtnCN SMUT I runt r ' ' r CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON kale —f to = 700ft lim A Information Services - GIS 0 350 700 FILE NO: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 APPLICANT: J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al N Subject Property REQUEST: REZONE 2 PARCELS (APPROX. 46 ACRES) Yakima City Limits FROM M-1 TO CBDS & SEPA REVIEW x ID' LOCATION: NW corner Valley Mall By & Old Town Rd RZ -1 -0503/15/05 UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 I i SR Suburban Residential R - I Si - F Reside J. LAWRENCE et al � �•�i ` 1II I WRIGHT, = R 2 Two - Family Residential REZONE 2 PARCELS (APPROX. 46 ACRES) - R-3 Multi-Family Residential Minillir B-1 Professional Business mikalim 1 ' B-2 Local M -1 TO CBDS & SEPA REVIEW NI Bocal Business it M i a NW corner Valley Mall By & Old Town Rd Historical small Convenience Center ? = LCC Large Convenience Center \ I‘ Subject Property No _ CBD Central Business District -; CBDS CBD Support 1 — City Limits I 1 M -1 Light Industrial - M-2 Heavy Industrial X CI i - -- - - - - -- Q i s e S i s \ r ‘ U W 0 N C4 O P - - - -_ -_ — w I -- _. — _ _ t894VtYY ova ' - ro MARKET STREET _ `-_ ^J .. °s _- -- ` ‘ I I 1 h _ ° a -1 — — i 1 o -- ,� � _L— \ 1 g P, — rr- --�F -1 1 • € Iocu T - __,___R 1 1 t _, i >tr "---- 6 - _ _ i 1 -, , L p _ _ ; - 7R _ +--- ALDER STREET _ __. - - -y -- STREET -- -_ - - -- -- __ r - _ -- _._ ALDER STREET - r - -_ F III V . � t oi Yo Scale - tin =700ft _ City of Yakima, Washington CO . I t � • _ 1 . 0 350 700 A , .4 ,� • RZ_1-05 5 March 15 , 2005 t ue . %. Current r ''° I c. Yakima Zoning oo Water & Sewer \ 1 — �oo =o s° CURRENT ZONING K. 1 N Water Line SR Suburban Residential \ ° I /' D O 0. R4 Single -Family Residential : ,, a N Sewer Lines _B ., , R-2 Two Family Residential y — N Irrigation Main 2 `` ' _ II R-3 Multi- Family Residential B-1 Professional Business \ I " 4 ■ 13-2 Local Business .. 12 a. 1 MI ■ HB Historical Business , 2,1 l I SCC Small Convenience Center '° (; 41 r . : LCC Large Convenience Center 0 Q J ■ CBD Central Business District °' _' -- J CBDS CBD Support _______________ M-1 Light Industrial - -` -- ( I .l ■ M- Heavy Industrial - - _ I _ R. nulin K ii 1 � I 1 \ -- 1 N Subject Site _ � faun ml [ P' ,„ I I FILE NO: UAZO RZ81 -05 AND EC M8-05 - - -- -- `• � _ -- —I `` - "' 77 _ -- — - APPLICANT: J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et a1 Future �. � " ,� ; , �r T Digital Land Use 17,411•R', _ I': E 4:r . :�;f <r � Orthophoto -. g y p • ,, , ' "` '•* Mosaic of Digital A - r Orthophotography A•,� { rt flown 08/01/2002 " w J Subject Property � FUTURE LAND USE . - Low Density Residential - r � • Medium Density Residential - % : High Density Residential t Y \ \ • � I Professional Office -{" r \ ,i + , it II Neighborhood Commercial 1 , q F,' t +l "1 i lt r,R PO x AT .0 19) Large Convenience Center I „ t I ,r ✓ .. i 1 Arterial Commercial y: ' 4 if �*: - �∎ , - ;s D 1111 CBD Core Commercial ,. 4 _ f CITY OF YAKIMA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND Industrial -- - }r ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMENT — Urban Reserve 129 North Second Street :, �¢ rs � _ N Subjec Site 1r rt * , - _ Yakima Washington 98901 — r ... f 1"_ aYV , ti K, t r Phone: (50 915 7 5 -6113 INDEx j j = - 3 i, axle Fax: (5091575-6105 6-( _ f t .`,r `I - - -_ ' . 1 All maps shown at 1" = 600ft � m" MITE, z 1 ; 1 , One page Atlas: rz -1 -05 a r-- •, 1 -- ' - Created: March 16, 2005 J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Exhibit List CHAPTER C DST Comments EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE C -1 Request for Comments 3/18/05 C -2 Agencies Contacted 3/18/05 C -3 Comments from Max Linden, City Wastewater Division 3/22/05 C -4 Comments from Scott Schafer, City Wastewater / Utilities 3/22/05 C -5 Comments from Mike Shane, City Water / Irrigation Division 3/30/05 C -6 Comments from Sandy Cox, City Code Administration 3/29/05 C -7 Comments from Al Rose, City Engineering Division 3/30/05 C -8 Comments from Joan Davenport, City Traffic Engineering Division 4/5/05 Division i ) MEMORANDUM To: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner From: Joan Davenport, Supervising Traffic Engineer Date: April 5, 2005 Subject: Proposed Rezone of 46 Acres from M -1 to CBDS, Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road Traffic Engineering has reviewed the Rezone application and SEPA checklist for the proposal to rezone approximately 46 acres from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support in the vicinity of South First St/Main St & Old Town Road. We understand the rezone does not require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and it is generally considered "compatible" with the existing commercial nature of the area. Since the rezone is a Non - project" request, it is difficult to predict the expected volume of traffic that may be generated from future development. However, some general conclusions can be drawn based upon the standards established in the Trip Generation Handbook published by the Institute of Traffic 7 Edition, 2003). Development under the current Light Industrial zoning for the 46 acres would create a range of between 1,800 to 2,900 Daily trips or between 385 to 407 PM Peak Hour trips if developed as either an Industrial Park (high end) or Manufacturing Plant (low end of estimates). Given the size of the total rezone, approximately 280,000 square feet of shopping center type development could be located on this area, given the densities of other nearby commercial areas. Traffic impacts from a shopping center type of development on this size parcel would generate approximately 11,000 daily trips or 1,040 PM Peak Hour trips. Other recent developments in this area located within the cities of both Union Gap and the City of Yakima (Home Depot, Mercy Theaters, Valley Mall Expansion) have participated in a pro -rata share contribution to various street and intersection upgrade projects. It is expected that a similar request will be made at the time of actual project level review for the property subject to this rezone. All streets fronting this development are within the jurisdiction of Union Gap. Filed Nearing Examiner EXH File # • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Al Rose 1 Project Engineer TO: City. of Yakima Development Services Team ► FROM: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner DATE: March 18, 2005 SUBJECT: UAZO RZ #1 -05, and UAZO EC #9 -05 PROPOSAL: J. Lawrence Wright et al has applied for a rezone of two parcels from M- 1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Professional Business. This is a non- project rezone; no development proposal has been submitted. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW comer of Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road PARCEL NUMBER: 191332 -33004 & 191331 -44001 Please review the attached 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 March 30, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. Should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e -mail address is mlovell @ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575 -6105. Please call me at (509) 575 -6164 if you have any questions or require additional information. COMMENTS: """\./V-v1-41A-ez.-t(1 IAJZA\ a- 1 4e- A. CA:1/ r \- ci� 4-v -�. 1 r ro� -e S k.._ -1�.�j c J V W `t : /` .o J efo -- et - s S 2 e k i N ( eae 3 G fit% Contact '� Department / Agency DOC INDEX oY 1 ; .„ DEPARTMENT < ! t' COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DE1 _ OPMENT ;,,� Office of Code Administration • codes @ci.yakima.wa.us . :: `' <: Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us �� ��� '�� ; 0 l29 Yaki North ma, W Second ashington Street 98901 , 2nd Floor • , ' t1' YC � R PORAi E _ _= (509) 575 -6126 or 575 -6121 • Fax (509) 576 -6576 __ March 29, 2005 To: Mary Lovell From: Sandy Cox Re: UAZO RZ #1-05 UAZO EC #9 -05 J. Lawrence Wright I have no issues with this until a project is proposed. Yakima INDEX 11111! # , ` — .—R,......... 19,94 Water/Irrigation DST Comments Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright Comments Submitted By: Location: Vicinity of NW corner of W. Valley Mall Blvd. & Mike Shane, Water /Irrigation Engineer - 576 -6480 Old Town Road Parcel #: 191332 -33004 & 1 91 331 -44001 Division: Date: 3/30/2005 Water /Irrigation Division 1= primary review 2= secondary review Development Description: Rezone of two parcels from M -1, Light Industiral, to CBDS, Professional tm s �, Business. This is a non - project rezone; no development proposal has been N p . C o E 2_- m ` i i = submitted. 0 1- ` W m a in m is WATER & IRRIGATION existing water location, size, etc. Existing 12" waterline in S. 1st St. near the NE corner of parcel 191332- 33004. No City waterline along Old Town Road or Valley Mall Blvd. frontage. Site is 1 2 located in the Low Level Pressure Zone. Static pressure range - 100 - 113psi. water extension necessary, size Exact requirement be determined at time of development proposal. In general, site will need to loop a public waterline through their site between S. 1st St. and 1 2 Long Fiber. This is identified in the current Water System Plan Update (2004). 1 2 2 fire hydrant Nearest City fire hydrant on easterly side of S. 1st St. near NE corner of parcel. 2 1 new public easements Easements will be required for all on -site public waterline 1 2 LID /connection charges To be determined at time of development proposal 2 1 service installation charges To be determined at time of development proposal ' 1 1 public /private system Public 1 2 2 Fireflow calculations To be determined at time of development proposal WellHead Protection Area No 2 Irrigation System No City irrigation. - e; S; c7C3 rn o ><" M Shane 3/30/2005 RECEIVED • MAR 2 2 2005 CITY OF YAKIIM A REQUEST FOR COMMENTS PLANNING DIV. FrZ —i• SCOTT SCHAFER WAS TEWATER/UTILIT1 4441-- City City of Yakima Development Services Team TD'. Imo: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner DATE: March 18, 2005 SUBJECT: UAZO RZ #1 -05, and UAZO EC #9 -05 PROPOSAL: J. Lawrence Wright et al has applied for a rezone of two parcels from M- 1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Professional Business. This is a non - project rezone; no development proposal has been submitted. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road PARCEL NUMBER: 191332 -33004 & 191331 -44001 Please review the attached 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 March 30, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. Should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e -mail address is rnlovell @ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575 -6105. Please call me at (509) 575 -6164 if you have any questions or require additional information. COMMENTS: ND oitirt EAJ ` 1&\ wasTcWgrE.CL_ Contact Department / Agency - 0 0C. INDEX e _ • • ) RECEIVED MAR 2 2 2005 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF YAKinifi, PLANNING DIV• Max sit Was t• ''r /LTtilit'es _` --MOM: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner DATE: March 18, 2005 SUBJECT: UAZO RZ #1 -05, and UAZO EC #9 -05 PROPOSAL: I. Lawrence Wright et al has applied for a rezone of two parcels from M- 1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Professional Business. This is a non - project rezone; no development proposal has been submitted. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road PARCEL NUMBER: 191332 -33004 & 191331 -44001 Please review the attached 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 March 30, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. Should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e -mail address is mlovell @ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575 -6105. Please call me at (509) 575 -6164 if you have any questions or require additional information. COMMENTS: /VC/ 0•4x /A): / Contact Department / Agency DOC, INDEX ,) ) DST PACKETS DISTRIBUTION LIST Applicant: V. UAZO# /21 4 - ge,° Date of Meeting: LIA..447/(56" City of Yakima Divisions / Yakima County Planning & Public Works: Joan Davenport . finti„: .,..".. , '' odes Doug Maples r , , ,-.... . - ';-;-.:.,74" ,t7ii,67.;KAL5!* 0*00,0PL.r.:94, ... ; ' . : 1- 4.4 ' ' ' 6 6 6 0 ° d:! I '' ' ''' '' ' ' ' A ' ' '' ' ''' ' '' ' '''' 1'..4 t ).1. A :. ' 4 ii Cox ' . '''''' ''' ' ' ''''''' - '' ' ' 1 Parks & Recreation „ ....,..„„.,,,,,, : „ 111 „., e ,... n r ) . s9Nrcho1s rf.4..?;,3!,, , ,;,.,3:, S an d y ..,.-- ,,,,, _,,....,, ,,,. .. ,,, 7„..„, ,7-„,,,,,,,,-,i•r;',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;„,;..::..,,,.*:_mn,,,tvlailir odes k „...,,,,,.,,,,,•,„., 4 : - ..' „ terd4ril;' , -A .- ..i,i::: , 155r , -. 1 '::k':2'-'0 4- t , aii i, h 3 °- - -6. -11:4el " :' ''' ' ''''' :':- it e '1N ''''''''''''' i s-''' ,.:99 L ate Jerry Robertson '" '''''''''" Rose St,717i,'RAZ4:':6'"'i:-'nii7"."...-':1--,47:P:All64.''POIPt iri:3-WF:::-':‘Z(-?'16,,-:=A.,--,:',-1,-'1i,::,:::::';:i::,'Plii..,e17:-H-Vito.ivii9ie1■:<a,,,,,.,,,,,...,,,,,, tria:Ovi00:1111g Al 4 .:;e' . :'PA. - ,,- ---- ----- ' - ' 19 Police Dept. ::-..,,glifte4,,mil:;,--, . r / Irrigation Mike Shane , _,,,,,,,,„„, „,......,,,,,--,-, 01 --- itig , q1A,;. - 4. - i., , k5 . ..k , ,!:01-4:,-,v„; - ,,, : ,,grgaiRop,_, I ,„...,,,,,„,,,.. ...„.. ,-. , , .y ,, , , -- OaiireiVulf,:' A, WC 4#00044 ,...,..„ _, Refuse N ancy Fortier - - -------'" '-'F.:Vii6.'144ilif4rgl:Kii,,s.:-..,::., GUiVastewater/UtilitiesMaxLind% vi:24.,4m77:. Zill .:4 1: kcigo:0640:01,0,x0.,,7,,j) ki a °"'Ij f6411;3:2'':;**:-:41:°1-1';:e'''' '''' ' ''' ' ia ' Yakinia County Planning ..,,, ,. /T ! r; ! ,:: , .. 1, ? - f - : - - - ; , Ty . ; , :',,:' : '-,. - ; :> LP. nPY,.B„,9:9!!..7,:_A,,;x.,,:,,A-,r=-,:-=:i:.:1':-AviM.3i'::::::::,:-,!:Vr,'Vif4:7-:;:.'7',::C::ft,16',_il,'i:?!..6:;,::;::;,:-r;!::'::,,,i62,.,:,\''ig;::-$ii.;,,,-,,i, 1: k''''' 14 telf"--V Other Agencies: .,,...., ,:,..:',,' ,r, Di r,R,,,, ,,,-; , - ' ' - '"'""'''' k: digikik i'" -:7016711 21 Nob Hill Water 4-- l'teYkl'•'•1• 41°- 4,7„, "-• ' " ,,i, 2:' I • Preston Shepherd 6111 T 1 ,9 -,. .Dr. 96908 „,,,„,..,,N1:_„...,,:,,:„:1,...„0;..,..i.:,,,4g. ....,,.9 , ; ,-... , . F .,-, ,:i ,---, :r ., : .. ; : i: . .. - , ...,.. 4 .,,,,, , ., , .,, . , Hea lth. Art 411 -CtS4Pnn,r - '!''-i'.::Z 4?:614 - ' ' ' — Debbie Smith ,,,,. ..."--, ........„ - . v. . -, ,i - .2•:: : rf'1 - 074'iN . 1 et St k'§ I 15 W. Yakima Ave. Suite o989,,.. tfgtift4 23 WA State Department of Ecology„,7.,,,,,,.„,3,:,dii7.‘-fk.x.i,-10*1=?etry,,: ,, ,.- f.:4 500 No. , Ker R r'g0‘ Pacific Power & Light Co. Cascade ,_,,..__,..„,„..„.„,,,i...i..„11i Ni,a710iTi.,,f g-f;a0411:R-00041p§992.. - ,--. - --- v-r.;-:-,;,;:.:-:,;:-..-i-,F::;::::f:::::::,:,,..P.JOWAYav ,'-'fizT'',,-'--- 4**,i.:::Z--imw-4,--:i:,-I S he i l a Ross 27 ba Natural Gas Co....... ...,_,.,.,,,,„,„, ,,,,o,,,3 , f 1, :;!b ,. ri ,, 6,a,,;,:, , ,, , fi,,,::: ,,, ,aiz:q;:iii,, ,, , 7 1o 0. ::4 1 ,;, S o . : , ,:,4 i i s ll t ,: A 6 v v e a . w? Y t3 a :9 k ci r 4 29 a3ir1.981.0!,.;,:p:,::::,::,,,,I, — - ' - 'aditiraiap,',;:.P,1 , .,,. : . ,,,... ___ 2 8 Y School District Valley a Peter e ?j,..An_!_ingi,:::,,,,,,,,,,:,,,,,w7tr ,a,9., 99006:04;;;,,,,,,i,,,z,,,,,:„,..11,.,,,,:,:.,,,E.7:: - . -- 'f -- :i , - 8- -- get: 4 A. , , -, - -,, A3"-:-*.P":-..:-.,:=,.; 5- -- -- `' ''f.:-::";?'''7,:i.="1'',5:ST!'.f:iclo ' c=f340 •• - : ,-:'-'` I*•14- 4 ' *°"4C'"6rj**"9" i V ''''' '' ' ' Les _ Iq • 31 County Clean Air Authority .,,..„.,,, 6 S. 2n,i!....7 1016 1--,,,fr, riii._:...-c§-E66firY.N.,7,M '''''' '''''';: 'lliieitttiliFTW.:Z-' : W,„,..,,,,,,,,„_ .0j,,x4K Scott .-. , .. .--,, ... 63'” Yakima Greenway Fp --: ' rr':P V vk O.. 4,-, ? -- ;";' , ---' ,- -- ---- - Wayne Wantland YID _:,_. _,,,-„,,,, w ;5;„ y 17,,.pvq'jq.1-',1:::.!,,,,3. 35 Yakima County 911 ._,,_ ,„ „..,,,,,„,,,,,-,,,--1-,-,-,4-tia6Wann y000.00- Stii,VEox,,,,,h, '151i"re'°"*""--';'' 4 ' ' 1761 S. 'A__010011*1109NAPYTed Clusing . _ .,-; 24th Ave. 98902 ---- Ellen ' ''- ::!..VMg30.20:::r: 3 Department of Wildlife;_.„..„, ,,am,:c.,a,..„,,,,,::_,,:;:17,34y.t.,u;i-,!!7,6v:,,co,zoipyigrig,r.gfg„..q190.,,ar.v\i-;,, 6,..6i..6-,,,. '','•:S6-1--tj61)Wkii6110--!:00041040...104§94 a ::::),Imii 1 h Al-Tamimi 2809 Ryc11i12FV.Y.r:i?.'1Tc.:,,,,pr,:irway--=,:.?,,'; 36WSDOT(Department of Transportation) 4 _....„,,.„,...., ...: i ffo : ,,,,,L)zz. , ?, : ,_,?, ; pd.,1 : 6 K& 6 (5t:56 1 5 4 r :* 76 its§t:gtgiktT4* ; . ;. \A 66 - 4 , Bill Beckley- P.O. Box 151 --,9---------M..7-t- AVg:,::6760$01.fgc.X: 41 Yakama Inqi..T.;19,,,:?0,k7-.44-wi-1.A ,P,PINVLA',..,..,„,,,,,,,,,--,--. r.46?-v R r igiww .- Aritorkt. , *: 44 , ,,,,,, :g.: ,2, A',qk,;: , fte,:aza . ::::.e:,:.,,,,.,,,„,,,,„„:„.,,„--- 309 ':'''"''-'-'-'. ' ' ' - • Jerry Henderson 9 N ...„.,: 7 35th Ave. 98902 ,Ngii;tytifait oigw:A ipap0_3: 45 WSDOT, Aviation Division 5 43 Trolleys IWP'ijkVrqOP4P47Z;7L;Tf!an.P.T..71rIt!!!: 3704 172nd St. NE, Suite PitAfg -___.- .,-- ' K 2 Arlington, WA 98226 ,,,..,-...-,,,...----,,,,,,,35-,..,.:tf:p--,7.,:5:,,.:Twi,,am54:4;mia:.,,-*=-4:::-vo=„A:::;:::i-,-.,.:ta-r. ..,-;,.,,,,,,,,-,-,- a..- --,- - '• - (61,20 DOC:; v 65-i-L.00-e-e, L3 5 b oT e0.130K INDEX # e-_ . - . . REQUEST FOR COMMENTS TO: City of Yakima Development Services Team FROM: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner DATE: March 18, 2005 SUBJECT: UAZO RZ #1 -05, and UAZO EC #9 -05 PROPOSAL: J. Lawrence Wright et al has applied for a rezone of two parcels from M- 1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Professional Business. This is a non - project rezone; no development proposal has been submitted. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard & Old Town Road PARCEL NUMBER: 191332 -33004 & 191331 -44001 Please review the attached 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 March 30, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. Should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My e -mail address is mlovell @ci.yakima.wa.us and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575 -6105. Please call me at (509) 575 -6164 if you have any questions or require additional information. COMMENTS: Contact Department / Agency INDEX J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Hearing Examiner Exhibit List CHAPTER D SEPA REVIEW EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE D -1 Environmental Checklist 3/3/05 D -2 Notice of Application & Request for Comments 3/18/05 D -3 Agencies contacted 3/18/05 D -4 Adjoining Property Owners notified 3/18/05 D -5 Affidavit of Mailing 3/18/05 D -6 Legal Notice of Application and Request for Comments 3/18/05 D -7 Affidavit of Publication of Legal Notice 3/18/05 D -8 Press Release of Notice of Application 3/18/05 D -9 Comment Letter from Gwen Clear, WA State Dept. of Ecology, Yakima 4/1/05 D -10 Comment Letter from Scott Golbek, P.E., WA State Dept. of 4/11/05 Transportation, Union Gap D -11 Comment letter from Les Ornelas, Yakima regional Clean Air Authority 3/30/05 D -12 Determination of Nonsignificance 4/13/05 D -13 Notice of Decision, Determination of Nonsignificance 4/13/05 D -14 Agencies and Adjoining Property owners notified 4/13/05 D -15 Affidavit of Mailing 4/13/05 D -16 Legal Notice of Determination of Nonsignificance 4/13/05 D -17 Press Release of Determination of Nonsignificance 4/13/05 PRESS RELEASE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON April 13, 2005 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone two parcels from M -1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central Business District Support. PROPONENT: J. Lawrence Wright et al, property owner. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, WA. (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 & 191331- 44001) LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima. 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. [ X ] This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197 -11 -355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. APPEALS: You may appeal this determination to the Hearing Examiner not later than 5:00 p.m. on April 28, 2005. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. A notice of such appeal must be filed in writing and delivered to the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development, 129 North 2 Street, Yakima, WA 98901. Appeal foims may be obtained from the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development and must be accompanied by the appeal fee of $505.00. Contact Mary Lovell, Associate Planner (509) 575 -6164 for more infolination. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575 -6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 - Filed DATE: April 13, 2005 Hearing Examiner EXH # '17 .Date 03/ Fife #, P2 —QC • 1 ) LEGAL NOTICE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON April 13, 2005 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone two parcels from M -1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central Business District Support. PROPONENT: J. Lawrence Wright et al, property owner. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, WA. (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 & 191331 - 44001) LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima. 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. [ X ] This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197 -11 -355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. APPEALS: You may appeal this determination to the Hearing Examiner not later than 5:00 p.m. on April 28, 2005. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. A notice of such appeal must be filed in writing and delivered to the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development, 129 North 2 Street, Yakima, WA 98901. Appeal forms may be obtained from the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development and must be accompanied by the appeal fee of $505.00. Contact Mary Lovell, Associate Planner (509) 575 -6164 for more information. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575 -6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 DATE: April 13, 2005 PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE ONLY ON WED, APRIL 13, 2005 Send Invoice and Affidavit of Publication to: Account #11002 City of Yakima, Planning Division DOC. INDEX ✓✓ //// AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING SEPA NOTICE STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA Re: EC #9 -05 J. Lawrence Wright Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. I, Christine Wilson as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Decision, Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was mailed to the applicant, adjoining property owners within a 500 -foot radius, public and private agencies and parties of record, which are individually listed on the mailing lists retained by the Planning Division. That said notices were mailed by me on the 13th day of April ,2005. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Christine Wilson Planning Specialist DOC, INDEX 191206 -11025 1206 -11007 1206- 11007,,,,a NOEL INVESTMENT PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT CO PA FIC POW & LIG CO PO BOX 111 825 NE MULTNOMAH STE 1600 B25 OMAH STE 0 YAKIMA, WA 98907 PORTLAND, Oregon 97232 -2131 PORTLAND, Oregon 97232 -21 ....... 191206 -12002 1206 -12003 191331 -44004 CIFIC POW& L T C PA FIC POWE & LIG CO PRINTING PRESS PROPERTIES LLC 8 NE MU , NOMAH STE 825 EMU OMAN STE 1 3008 MAIN ST POR , Oregon 97232 -2131 PORTLAND, Oregon 97232 -2131 UNION GAP, WA 98903 191206-11016 19 206 -11017 191332 -34011 RICHARD M & ELEANOR M SANDER RI ARD M & ELEANOR AN ROBERT & NAOMI M KUHNS 1014 39TH AVE E 1014 9TH AVE 105 N 57TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98112 SEATTL , •8112 YAKIMA, WA 98901 17.332 -34018 191332 -32012 191206 -11004 RO E I 7T T & NAOMI M UHN ROBERT J ETAL DBA MARTIN REAL ES RON OR CELESTE MASTERS 105 ST PO BOX 2244 I 502 W VALLEY MALL BLVD YAKIMA, A-a41 1 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2244 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -1615 191331 -41406 191332 -32409 191206 -11012 RUSSELL A REILAND SYSTEM CAPITAL REAL PROPERTY CO Ri THE OSUS LLC 14 E WASHINGTON AVE 1 MCDONALDS PLZ PO BOX 1125 YAKIMA, WA 98903 OAK BROOK, Illinois 60523 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -1125 191332 -34009 191331 -43005 191332 -33001 THOMAS S & ALICE HAINLINE WILLIAM B & SALLY G DOUGLAS WILLIAM J JR &LINDA BEERMAN 3913 E LIBERTY AVE PO BOX 2923 1209 PLEASANT AVE SPOKANE, WA 99217 -6967 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2923 YAKIMA, WA 98902 191332 -33002 1 1332 -33003 191332 -32023 WILLIAM J. BEERMAN WM J. BEERM 71 YAKIMA COUNTY FAIR JOINT VEN7 2416 S 1ST ST 241 S 1ST T • 5302 S CORKERY RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 -1604 YAKI A 98903 -1604 SPOKANE, WA 99223 191206-11027 1.1206 -11028 YAKIMA WELDER'S SUPPLY YAKIMA WELDERS UPPY I •�` PO BOX 9813 1 PO 'IX 9813 YAKIMA, WA 989090813 YAKI W '8909 -0813 56 labels printed for map sheet rz -1 -05 — tr t k f � r SVI Fltd 17 7. Si-, I 6'4 Al- tN.cifj 99 J. Lawrence Wright ' Bill Hordan 310 N. 22nd. Ave. Hordan Planning Services )✓1 - 4/ 4 Yakima, WA 98902 410 N. 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98901 -/3-- a ` , • • DOC, INDEX # I-IL • 191332 -34004 332 -32407 9 -34401 ARROYO HONDO LLC , _/COE LLP )LLIE E & LYNN L COX 420 S 48TH AVE 720 OLIVER WAY SUITE 1300 PO BOX 3042 YAKIMA, WA 98908 SEATTLE, WA 98101 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -3042 19 332 -3440 191206 -12001 1 331 -44001 BIL IE E LYNN L OX BRADLEY P ET AL BUSEY B LEY P ET AL B M PO B 42 PO BOX 27 PO OX 27 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -3 42 YAKIMA, WA 98907 YAKI , WA 9 7 �. 131332 -33004 1 1332 -33008 �� 1 1332 -33008 BR DLEY P ET BU B ADLEY P E SEY B DLEY P ET SEX PO OX 27 P BOX 2 ._. PO OX 27 98907 YAKI W 8907 YA MA, 98907 YAK A, I 191206 -13003 1206 -13003 1 1331 -41010 `j2 BURLINGTON NORTHERN. RAILROAD B LINGTON NO', ERN �AD B LINGTON NORTHE . RAILROAD PO BOX 961089 PO OX 9610J,91 PO OX 961089 .� FORT WORTH, Texas 76161 -0089 FORT S4- , Texas.76161 -0089 I FOR ■RTI3, xas 76161 -0089 191332 -34016 91332 -34022 191332 -34025 CENTER OAK PROPERTIES LLC CE; TE OAK PR R S LL DONALD L & PEGGY MILLER 649 NW 12TH ST 64 GRESHAM, Oregon 97030 GREH�fM1-- .Q 97030 YAKIMA, WA -1500 191332 -32025 191332 -34008 191206 -11018 E W POULIN EDGARD & REGINA BOTTINO EVERETT E & ISABELLE C MELVI 4104 NACHES HTS RD 141 SISOTOW BELLE LN 402 ALDER YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98903 UNION GAP, WA 98903 191332 -34024 191332 -32408 191332 - 32411 GARY S ETUX LONG GJS INVESTMENTS LLC G S INVESTM I S 4302 SCENIC DR PO BOX 10936 P BOX 10 6 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -1936 YAK'MF.., A 98909 -1936 • I 191332 -32406 1 191206 -11023 191332 -33005 HARMAN CAFE EMPLOYEE PROFIT SHAR HELENA CHEMICAL CO INC KIM & CONNIE J & FAY BROYLE: 199 FIRST STREET I PO BOX 1600 814 8 58TH AVE LOS ALTOS, California 94022; ( ROWLETT, Texas 75088 -1600 i YAKIMA, WA 98908 191206 -11006 191206 -11026 191332 -32433 KING BROTHERS K G BROTHE'L LINDEMAN GAMMELL FAMILY TRU. PO BOX 3024 • PO OX 302 30 BAYCLIFF PL • UNION GAP, WA 98903 UNIO +4 ", WA 98903 PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 - 952' • • • 191332 -33006 91332 -33007 191332 -32415 LONG CO INC S E L G CO INC E MCDONALDS CORPORATION (46 -0 PO BOX 9783 PO OX 978 � �- ���""" Pd BOX 66207__ ... YAKIMA, WA 98909 -0783 YAKI W 98909 -0783 CHICAGO, ill'i'nais 60666 . €DEX 191331 -41009 191332 -31006 1 1332- 34002 - ' MERVIN A. ET UX WARK MINER ASSOCIATES MI ER ASSOCIA S 214 N 22ND AVE 2415 S 1ST ST 241 S 1ST / 9 YAKIMA, WA 98902 -2427 YAKIMA, WA 98903 YAK A, W 98903 • Transportation Planner Mr. Bill Beckley YVCOG Yakama Indian Nation 6 S 2nd St. Suite 605 Environmental Protection Prog. Yakima, WA 98901 P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Federal Aviation Administration Mr. Doug Mayo Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Wastewater Treatment Plant Seattle Airports District Office 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Renton, WA 98055 -4056 Environmental Coordinator Bureau of Indian Affairs WSDOT Aviation Division PO Box 632 John Shambaugh Toppenish, WA 98948 3704 172 " St. N.E. Suite K -12 Arlington, WA 98223 Mr. Wolferd Yallup, Chrm Mr. Marty Miller Yakama Tribal Council Office of Farmworker Housing PO Box 151 1400 Summitview #203 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 Donna J. Bunten Critical Areas Coordinator Soil Conservation Dist D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. Attn: Ray Wondercheck Assistance Program 1606 Perry St Suite F P.O. Box 47600 Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 Martin Humphries Eric Barstrand Yakima Valley Museum Dept. of Fisheries 2105 Tieton Dr. 1701 So. 24 Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, Wa 98902 Mr. Buck Taylor, Manager Mr. Scott Nicolai Yakima Airport Yakama Indian Nation - Fisheries 2400 W. Washington Ave. P.O. Box 151 Yakima, WA 98903 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima Greenway Foundation 111 S. 18 St. Yakima School District Yakima, WA 98901 Attn: Ben Soria 104 N. 4th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 lI/ (lc D NS " ALWAYS S WV School District APPLICANT TO 1A) Attn: Peter Ansignh 0 �� 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908 f%/3 '"er DO C, INDEX. c i�s Army Corps Dept of Natural Resources Mr. Greg Griffith P.O. Box C -3755 713 Bowers Rd Div of Archeol & Hist Pres Seattle, WA 98124 Ellensburg, WA 98926 PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 Sheila Ross Mr. Paul Donahue WA State Attorney Gen. Office Cascade Natural Gas Dept of Soc/Health Service 120 S 3rd St #100 701 S. l Ave Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg#2, Yakima, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98902 MS OB -23B Olympia, WA 98504 Chamber of Commerce Dept. of Health Mr. Richard Smith 10 N 9th St. Michelle Vazquez Terrace Heights Sewer Dist Yakima, WA 98901 1500 W. 4 Ave. St. 305 314 N 2nd St Spokane, WA 99204 Yakima, WA 98901 Kathleen Holscher, City Mgr. Dept of Transportation Blake Davis City of Union Gap Planning Engineer Q- West PO Box 3008 2809 Rudkin Road 8 So. 2nd Ave. Rm 304 Union Gap, WA 98903 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 Les Ornelas Environmental Protection Agency Yakima Co. Commissioners Clean Air Authority 1200 6th Ave, MS 623 128 North 2 Street 6 S. 2nd St., Room 1016 Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. John Daly FAA Yakima Co Health Dist Dept. of Agriculture 2200 W Washington Art McKuen 406 Gen. Adm Bldg. Yakima, WA 98903 104 North 1st St Mail Stop AX -41 Yakima, WA 98901 Olympia, WA 98504 Gwen Clear Interagency Committee Mr. Steven Erickson Dept of Ecology Outdoor Recreation Yakima Co Planning 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 P.O. Box 40917 128 N 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -0917 Yakima, WA 98901 Department of Ecology, Mr. Vern Redifer Environ Review Section Nob Hill Water Co Yakima Co Pub. Services PO Box 47703 6111 Tieton Dr 128 N 2nd St., 4 Floor Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98901 WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. Pacific Power Mr. Bill Bailey Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Mike Paulson Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. Supervisor 500 N. Keys Rd 128 N. 2 "d St. 4` Floor Building 20 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 Camp Murray, WA 98430 -5122 Mr. Ted Clusing Dept. of CTED Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Growth Management Services Mr. Caroll Palmer 1701 So. 24 Ave. P.O. Box 42525 Yakama Indian Nation Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -2525 PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 ` '` \ '`' ^, DEPARTMENT OF )IMUNITYAND ECONOMIC DEVEL( EN3 Planning Division • Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us V ' 6) ". 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor Yakima, Washington 98901 I N C ,4 4y RPpRATED � e Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 NOTICE OF DECISION Compliance with the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) April 13, 2005 On March 18, 2005 the City of Yakima, Washington issued a Notice of Application and Environmental Review regarding a SEPA review application submitted by J. Lawrence Wright et al. This review concerns the environmental analysis for the proposed rezone of two parcels from M -1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central Business District support. The subject property is located in the vicinity of the NW corner of Valley Mall Blvd. and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington. Parcel number: 191332 -33004 & 191331 -44001 City File Numbers: UAZO EC #9 -05 UAZO RZ #1 -05 Following the required 20 -day public comment period, and consideration of all comments received, the City of Yakima has issued the enclosed SEPA Threshold Decision. This decision may be appealed within 15 working days from the date of mailing. Appeals must be in writing and on forms available from the City of Yakima Planning Division, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington. The fee of $505.00 must accompany the Appeal Application. For further information or assistance, you may wish to contact Mary Lovell, Associate Planner at (509)575 -6164 at the City Planning Division. \tUr Doug Maples Planning & Code Administration Manager Notice of Decision Mailing Date: April 13, 2005 Enclosures: SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance Vicinity Map and Mailing Map Yakima - DOC ' INDEX ,'IIIf - f 3 _`. 1994 } i WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON April 13, 2005 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rezone two parcels from M -1, Light Industrial, to CBDS, Central Business District Support. PROPONENT: J. Lawrence Wright et al, property owner. LOCATION: Vicinity of NW corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, WA. (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 191332 -33004 & 191331- 44001) LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima. 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. [ X ] This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197 -11 -355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. APPEALS: You may appeal this determination to the Hearing Examiner not later than 5:00 p.m. on April 28, 2005. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. A notice of such appeal must be filed in writing and delivered to the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development, 129 North 2 11d Street, Yakima, WA 98901. Appeal forms may be obtained from the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development and must be accompanied by the appeal fee of $505.00. Contact Mary Lovell, Associate Planner (509) 575 -6164 for more information. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: William Cook POSITION / TITLE: Director Community & Economic Development TELEPHONE: 509 / 575 -6113 ADDRESS: 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 DATE: April 13, 2005 SIGNAT ' . L MIFF DOC. INDEX 1......21:1_,?:: I i l Regional ir Authority Six So. Second St., Suite 1016, Yakima, WA 98901 Phone: (509)834 -2050, Fax: (509)834 -2060 http://www.co.yakima.wa.us/cleanair RECEIV March 30, 2005 MAR 3 0 2005 CITY OF City of Yakima, epart Department Commu & Development /Iv "IA Di v. 129 No 2 St Yakima, WA 98901 RE: UAZO Rezone #1 -05 and EC #9 -05 J. Lawrence Wright et al Dear Mr. 4 // Our comment on UAZ ezone #1 -05 and EC #9 -05, J. Lawrence Wright et al, to rezone two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review located at the vicinity of NW Corner of Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road in Yakima, WA follows: This proponent specifically declares its rezone as not proposing any development, thus most environmental elements do not apply. We, therefore, conclude another environmental review will be necessary prior to any turning of dirt/construction /or improvement on this property. Thank you for your continued support in helping the air quality in Yakima County. Since ely, G/ 7 / Les Ornelas Air Pollution Control Officer DOD, INDEX / chasm /wpfiles/ permitting /SEPA/City_of_ Yakima /Maples_UAZO105_Wright_30Mar05 L--:II RECEIVED � Washington State South Central Region APR 1 2005 iI/ Department of Transportation 2809 Rudkin Road, Union Gap Douglas B. MacDonald P.O. Box 12560 CITY OF YAKlMA, Secretary of Transportation Yakima, WA 98909 -2560 PLANNING DIV. 509 - 577 -1600 April 7, 2005 TTY: 1 -800- 833 -6388 1� www.wsdot.wa.gov Planning Division City of Yakima 129 North Second St., City Hall Yakima, WA 98901 -2637 Attention: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner Subject: UAZO Rezone #1 -05 & EC #9 -05, J. Lawrence Wright, et al. Rezone 46 Acres Light Industrial to Central Business District Support I -82, Exit 36 (Valley Mall Boulevard interchange) Vicinity We have reviewed the proposed rezone. The proposed site is not adjacent to any WSDOT- maintained roads, but will utilize Interstate 82 Exit 36 (Valley Mall Boulevard interchange). We have the following comments. We are not opposed to the proposed rezone. However, we do have concerns with the cumulative impact developments are having on our interchanges. Furthermore, retail developments tend to be more intensive traffic generators. We are interested in reviewing any future developments for their impacts to the WSDOT system. The Valley Mall Boulevard Interchange currently operates at a Level of Service D. It is likely future developments utilizing this interchange will require improvements to the interchange. Impacts that are determined to be significant will require mitigation, and it is anticipated that all costs will be borne by the development(s). This information is normally obtained through a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) perfouned by the developer. We will likely recommend pro rata contributions to make the necessary improvements to the interchanges created by development. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have any other questions concerning this project, please contact me at 577 -1631. Sincerely, Ated "eat Scott Golbek, P.E. Acting Regional Planning Engineer SG: rh/jjg cc: File #10, SR 82 Rick Gifford, Traffic Engineer Troy Suing, Development Branch Project Engineer INDEX Don Wherry, Area 2 Maintenance Superintendent 1_171 0 p:\ planning \devrev\sr82 \yakcity_wright_cbds rez.doc STATE ) RECEIVED O Q JF , , APR ®7 2005 '41880 , e STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY YAKIMA DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PLANNING DIV. 15 West Yakima Avenue, Suite 200 • Yakima, Washington 98902 -3452 • (509) 575 -2490 April 1, 2005 Your address WILIftgr ��� is in the a `¢L • ' "� - watershed Doug Maples City of Yakima Dept. of Community Development 129 North 2 Street Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Mr. Maples: .. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the pre_ threshold determination for the rezone of 2 parcels from M -1 to CBDS, proposed by J. Lawrence Wright et al [UAZO RZ1- 05/EC9 -05]. We have reviewed the environmental checklist and have the following comment. Water Quality Future development on this site required erosion and sediment control and may require an NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit. If you have any questions concerning the Water Quality comments, please contact Ray Latham at (509) 575 -2807. Sincerely, .24 7W-6 ( 1 611-1 Gwen Clear Environmental Review Coordinator Central Regional Office (509) 575 -2012 330 (/4. INDEX j f PRESS RELEASE CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DA'Z'E: March 18, 2005 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application for Rezone and Environmental Review NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: Vicinity of NW Corner of Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road, Yakima, WA Project Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright et al Date of application: March 3, 2005 Date of determination of completeness: March 11, 2005 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an application for the rezone of two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed rezone for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) for this rezone. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional DNS process in WAC 197 -11 -355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed rezone. Comment due date: April 7, 2005 REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed rezone and its probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by April 7, 2005 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: DOS, INDEX Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2 Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, UAZO Rezone #1 -05 and EC #9 -05). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed rezone: No impacts identified Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits /approvals are needed for the proposed rezone: None Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: N/A NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination and Notice of Hearing will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Associate Planner at (509) 575 -6164 or e -mail at mlovell@ci.yakima.wa.us. DOC. INDEX ` p • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION • STATE OF WASHINGTON,) CITY OF YAKIMA YAKIMA ) OTICE OF APPLICATION N ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW D • DATE: March 18, 2005 IVELY, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and. Ad - 3 the Accountant of Yakima Herald- Republic, Inc., joining Property owners newspaper. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper approved FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Plan- Superior Court of the State of Washington for Yakima • Wing Manager der an order made and entered on the 13th day of February, • SUBJECT: Notice of Application for, Rezone and Environ- d it is now and has been for more than six moni mental Review ate bo hr referred to, publi prshed or i Project nc eaar lCATION n l ish of lan pa ua li e cati y w p Project Location: Vicinity of NW Comer of Valley Mall Blvd g g g conti n nually erei nafte as a dail ne a er in & OldTownRoad,Yakima,WA kima County, Washington. Said newspaper is now and ha Project Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright et al g all of said time printed in an office ' maintained i Date of application: March 3, 2005 resaid place of publication of said newspaper. Date of determination of completeness: March 11, 2005 • IProjectDescription: The. City of Yakima Department of annexed is a true copy of a Community & Economic Development has received anM P, plication for the rezone of'two parcels of property Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, YAKIMA NOTICE r i with Environmental Review. rublished in regular i (and not in supplement form) I ENVIRONMENTAL RE 1 - 'The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed rezone for eWSpaper once each DAY and for a period of 1 probable adverse environmental impacts and os this re- expects sue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) wit; On { zone. A copy of the subsequent threshold ed erminattion • may be obtained on request and may app pursuant 1 be a to YMC 6:88.170. The optional DNS process in WAC 197- • 1 11 -355 is being used This may be your only opportun le 18th day of MARCH, 2005 1 to comment on the environmental impacts of the pro- posed rezone. i Comment due date: • April 7, 2005 ,R SUES all W'ITT NC • ENT Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review • and comment on the proposed rezone and its probable envi- ronmental impacts. All written comments received by April 7, 2005 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA de- termination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: Doug Maples, I Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development , • 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 . I Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, • UAZO Rezone #1 -05 and EC #9-05). . The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the ' • proposed rezone: No impacts identified newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers Required Permits = The following local,-state and federal o said period. That the full amount of the fee charged permits/approvals are needed for the proposed rezone: go publication is the Sum of $214.90 None Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: - None l-061 `J'Z,--e..�t� Preliminary determination of the development regula- . • tions that will be used for project mitigation and cons's- tency: N/A Accountant • N OTICE OF DECIS A copy o the SEPA thres determination and Notice of Hearing will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd SWORN to before me Aflis 18th day of rch, 2005 floor City Hall. r you have any Associate Planner on this proposal, I /J �!)� � � please 164 or e-mail at mlovell @cf yakima.wa us.er at (509) �/��/`� (09534453) March 18, 2005 • I NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the �. °'• \ ' s " , State of Washington, . J '" , `-'://X.: -i/X • • ' {�U�' ' * `' e . . .' residing at Yakima. r /1 %, F / O F I W t P�\`� g INDEX `� II .2-7 �iJ • ) 1 LEGAL NOTICE CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DATE: March 18, 2005 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application for Rezone and Environmental Review NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: Vicinity of NW Corner of Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road, Yakima, WA Project Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright et al Date of application: March 3, 2005 Date of determination of completeness: March 11, 2005 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an application for the rezone of two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed rezone for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) for this rezone. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional DNS process in WAC 197 -11 -355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed rezone. Comment due date: April 7, 2005 REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed rezone and its probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by April 7, 2005 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: - - - DOC. INDEX co 1 Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2 Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, UAZO Rezone #1 -05 and EC #9 -05). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed rezone: No impacts identified Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits /approvals are needed for the proposed rezone: None Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: N/A NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination and Notice of Hearing will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. 1f you have any questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Associate Planner at (509) 575 -6164 or e -mail at mlovell@ci.yakima.wa.us. PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE ONLY ON FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 2005 Mail Invoice and Affidavit of Publication to: Account #11002 City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N. 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98901 - Dot, INDEX �.yunrtl. - AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING SEPA NOTICE STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA Re: UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC #9 -05 J. Lawrence Wright et at NW corner of Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. I, Christine Wilson as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a SEPA Notice of Proposal and Request for Comments. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith. That said notice was addressed to the applicant and all property owners of record within a 500 -foot radius of subject property, public and private agencies, all of which are individually listed on the mailing lists retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 18th day of March , 2005. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. • .ii' Christine M. Wilson Planning Specialist DOC INDEX 1_1175_ L91206 -11025 1 106 -11.: " JOEL INVESTMENT P_..LFIC •OW:R & LIGHT CO /'FIC P. : LIGHT CO ?O BOX 111 8'5 N MULT OMAH STE 1600 825 NE 4LTNOM'H STE 600 fAKIMA, WA 98907 P4 T AND, Or =•on 9 232 -2131 POR 41D, Oreg. 97 2 -2131 191206 -12002 19 206 -12003 191331 -44004 PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT CO PACIFIC PER & LIGHT CO PRINTING PRESS PROPERTIES LLC 825 NE MULTNOMAH STE 1600 82" NE 4LT OMAH STE 1600 3008 MAIN ST PORTLAND, Oregon 97232 -2131 PO•TLA 1,. 0 egon 9232 -2131 UNION GAP, WA 98903 191206 -11016 19 206 -11 7 1.1332 -34 '1 RICHARD M & ELEANOR M SANDER RI HARD ELEANO � % M SANDER ROBERT N M KU 1014 39TH AVE E 10 4 39 H VE E 105 N TH .T SEATTLE, WA 98112 SE TT , WA 98 2 YA IMF-, WA 9:': I • 191332 -34018 191332 -32012 191206 -11004 ROBERT & NAOMI M KUHNS ROBERT J ETAL DBA MARTIN REAL ES RON OR CELESTE MASTERS 105 N 57TH ST I PO BOX 2244 1 502 W VALLEY MALL BLVD YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2244 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -1615 191331 -41406 191332 -32409 191206 -11012 RUSSELL A REILAND SYSTEM CAPITAL REAL PROPERTY COR THE OSUS LLC 14 E WASHINGTON AVE 1 MCDONALDS PLZ PO BOX 1125 YAKIMA, WA 98903 OAK BROOK, Illinois 60523 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -1125 191332 -34009 191331 -43005 191332 -33001 THOMAS S & ALICE HAINLINE WILLIAM B & SALLY G DOUGLAS WILLIAM J JR &LINDA BEERMAN 3913 E LIBERTY AVE PO BOX 2923 1209 PLEASANT AVE SPOKANE, WA 99217 -6967 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2923 YAKIMA, WA 98902 191332 -33002 1:1332 t003 191332 -32023 WILLIAM J. BEERMAN W . J. BEERMAN YAKIMA COUNTY FAIR JOINT VENT 2416 S 1ST ST 2A•16 . 1 T ST 5302 S CORKERY RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 -1604 YA I•A, W 903 -1604 SPOKANE, WA 99223 f 1 J. Lawrence Wright 310 N. 22nd Ave. 191206 -11027 19206- k028 Yakima, WA 98902 YAKIMA WELDER'S SUPPLY YA IMA DERS s P•Y INC PO BOX 9813 I PO BO 9813 I YAKIMA, WA 989090813 YA A, W% 9•:909 -0813 Bill Hordan Hordan Plannipg Services 56 labels printed for map sheet rz -1 -05 410 N. 2nd St. -19 Yakima WA 98901 5- x13 q (ob J 1 ®t INDEX 191332 -34004 • ^1332 -32407 .1'1332 -34401 ARROYO HONDO LLC )COE LLP ')LLIE " & ,YNN L COX 420 S 48TH AVE 'r,0 OLIVER WAY SUITE 1300 0 BOX 3042 . YAKIMA, WA 98908 SEATTLE, WA 98101 UNION GAP, 9 :'63 -3042 • 191332 -34402 1:1206 -1 i• :1331 -4 BILLIE E & LYNN L COX BADLEY P E' AL BUs Y B•ADL • ET A :USEY PO BOX 3042 Pe BO 27 P4 B. 2' UNION'GAP, WA 98903 -3042 YA WA 9:90 Y-AK A, •:907 • 191332 -33004 191332 -3.608 191332- 3008 BRADLEY P ET AL BUSEY BRADLEY P IT AL :6SE. :RADL P :T AL BU Y PO BOX 27 P• BOX 27 '0 By 27 YAKIMA, WA 98907 YA IM WA 989'7 .'MA, WA 7 191206 -13003 '91206 -1300 191331 -41016 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD :■RLINGTO■ NORTHERN 'AIL'•OAD BU "LINGTO. NORTHERN " LROAD PO BOX 961089 PO BOX •.1089 PO :OX '61089 FORT WORTH, Texas 76161 -0089 FOR ••RTH, Texas 76161 -0089 FOR •RTH, Texas 76161 -0089 191332 -34016 •1332 -.•.22 191332 -34025 CENTER OAK PROPERTIES LLC *ENTE• OA PROPER LC DONALD L & PEGGY MILLER 649 NW 12TH ST 649 Ni 12T,. ST 718 COUNTRY CLUB DR GRESHAM, Oregon 97030 G•E 'AM, Or- -o 97030 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -1500 • 191332 - 32025. 191332 -34008 191206 -11018 E W POULIN EDGARD & REGINA BOTTINO EVERETT E & ISABELLE C MELVII 4104 NACHES HTS RD 141 SISOTOW BELLE LN 402 ALDER YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98903 UNION GAP, WA 98903 • 191332 -34024 191332 -32408 19.332 -324 1 GARY S•ETUX LONG GJS INVESTMENTS LLC GJ` INVEI • NTS LL 4302 SCENIC DR PO BOX 10936 PO ' :OX 093• YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -1936 YAK '•, WA •890' -1936 . 191332 -32406 191206 -11023 191332 -33005 HARMAN CAFE EMPLOYEE PROFIT SHAR HELENA CHEMICAL CO INC KIM & CONNIE J & FAY BROYLES 199 FIRST STREET PO BOX 1600 814 S 58TH AVE LOS ALTOS, California 94022 I ROWLETT, Texas 75088 -1600 YAKIMA, WA 98908 191206 -11006 91206 0 026 191332 -32433 KING BROTHERS NG :'0 HERS LINDEMAN GAMMELL FAMILY TRUS'. PO BOX 3024 Po Be 34 4 30 BAYCLIFF PL UNION GAP, WA 98903 • U oN GAP, 98903 PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 -9529 191332 -33006 191 32 -.k007 191332 -32415 LONG'CO INC S E LONe Ct I C S . MCDONALDS CORPORATION (46-07: PO BOX 9783 PO :k0 97:3 PO BOX 66207 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -0783 YAKI ••, W'. •:909 -07: CHICAGO, IllinjiyU60666 INDE> 191331 -41009 191332 -31006 1 9 133 - 34002 •• ~ -- MERVIN A. ET UX WARK MINER ASSOCIATES M E• ASSOCIATES 214 N 22ND AVE • 2415 S 1ST ST 24'5 S 1'.T T YAKIMA, WA 98902 -2427 YAKIMA, WA 98903 YAKIMA, WA 98903 � 1 _ YMATS Planner Mr. Bill Beckley YVCOG Yakama Indian Nation 6 S 2nd St. Suite 605 Environmental Protection Prog. Yakima, WA 98901 P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Federal Aviation Administration Mr. Doug Mayo Cayla Morgan, Airport Planner Wastewater Treatment Plant Seattle Airports District Office 1601 Lind Ave. S.W. Renton, WA 98055 -4056 Environmental Coordinator Bureau of Indian Affairs WSDOT Aviation Division PO Box 632 John Shambaugh Toppenish, WA 98948 3704 172 St. N.E. Suite K -12 Arlington, WA 98223 Mr. Wolferd Yallup, Chrm Mr. Marty Miller Yakama Tribal Council Office of Farmworker Housing PO Box 151 1400 Summitview #203 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 Donna J. Bunten Critical Areas Coordinator Soil Conservation Dist D.O.E., Shorelands & Environ. Attn: Ray Wondercheck Assistance Program 1606 Perry St Suite F P.O. Box 47600 Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -7600 Eric Barstrand Martin Humphries Yakima Valley Museum Dept. of Fisheries 2105 Tieton Dr. 1701 So. 24 Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, Wa 98902 • Mr. Bob Clem, Manager Mr. Scott Nicolai Yakima Airport Yakama Indian Nation- Fisheries P.O. Box 151 2400 W. Washington Ave. Yakima, WA 98903 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima Greenway Foundation 111 S. 18 St. Yakima School District Yakima, WA 98901 Attn: Ben Soria 104 N. 4th Avenue Yakima, WA 98902 WV School District ALWAYS SEND TO APPLICANT Attn: Peter Ansignh �Q 8902 Zier Road - ,4 Yakima, WA 98908 M W S a a --r WOC: Y 0 $cam \O INDEX WI'- ,25(00 # ..,23 Army Corps - Dept of Natural Resources ) Mr. Greg Griffith P.O. Box C -3755 713 Bowers Rd Div of Archeol & Hist Pres Seattle, WA 98124 Ellensburg, WA 98926 PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504 Sheila Ross Mr. Paul Donahue WA State Attorney Gen. Office Cascade Natural Gas - Dept of Soc/Health Service 120 S 3rd St #100 701 S. 1 Ave Capital Programs Ofc. Bldg #2, Yakima, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98902 MS OB -23B Olympia, WA 98504 Chamber of Commerce Dept. of Health Mr. Richard Smith 10 N 9th St. Michelle Vazquez Terrace Heights Sewer Dist Yakima, WA 98901 1500 W. 4 Ave. St. 305 314 N 2nd St Spokane, WA 99204 Yakima, WA 98901 Kathleen Holscher, City Mgr. Dept of Transportation Blake Davis City of Union Gap Planning Engineer Q- West PO Box 3008 2809 Rudkin Road 8 So. 2nd Ave. Rm 304 • Union Gap, WA 98903 Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 Les Ornelas Environmental Protection Agency Yakima Co. Commissioners Clean Air Authority 1200 6th Ave, MS 623 128 North 2 "' Street 6 S. 2nd St., Room 1016 • Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 Mr. John Daly FAA Yakima Co Health Dist Dept. of Agriculture 2200 W Washington Art McKuen 406 Gen. Adm Bldg. Yakima, WA 98903 104 North 1st St Mail Stop AX -41 Yakima, WA 98901 Olympia, WA 98504 Gwen Clear Interagency Committee Mr. Steven Erickson Dept of Ecology Outdoor Recreation Yakima Co Planning 15 W. Yakima Ave. St. 200 P.O. Box 40917 128 N 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -0917 Yakima, WA 98901 Department of Ecology, Mr. Vern Redifer Environ Review Section Nob Hill Water Co Yakima Co Pub. Services PO Box 47703 6111 Tieton Dr 128 N 2nd St., 4 Floor Olympia, WA 98504 -7703 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98901 WA State Emergency Mgmt. Div. Pacific Power Mr. Bill Bailey Mitigation, Analysis & Planning Mike Paulson Yakima Cnty Dev. Serv. Ctr. Supervisor 500 N. Keys Rd 128 N. 2 " St. 4 Floor Building 20 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 Camp Murray, WA 98430 -5122 Mr. Ted Clusing Dept. of CTED • Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Growth Management Services Mr. Caroll Palmer i 1701 So. 24 Ave. P.O. Box 42525 Yakama Indian Nation Yakima, WA 98902 Olympia, WA 98504 -2525 PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 9,8948 1NDE # 3 REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed rezone and its probable environmental impacts. All written comments received by April 7, 2005 will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination on this application. Please mail your comments on this proposal to: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2 Street Yakima, WA 98901 Please be sure to reference the applicant's name or file number in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, UAZO Rezone #1 -05 and EC #9 -05). The following conditions have been identified that may be used to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed rezone: No impacts identified Required Permits — The following local, state and federal permits /approvals are needed for the proposed rezone: None Required Studies: None Existing Environmental Documents: None Preliminary determination of the development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and consistency: N/A NOTICE OF DECISION A copy of the SEPA threshold determination and Notice of Hearing will be mailed to you after the end of the 20 -day comment period. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, 2nd floor City Hall. If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Associate Planner at (509) 575 -6164 or e -mail at mlovell@ci.yaldma.wa.us. Encl.: Narrative, Site Plan, Environmental Checklist, Mailing and Vicinity Maps • DO , INDEX of Y,l,� „,4, DEPARTMENT OF _IMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELt.MENT i 4 ♦ ' % Planning Division � I' ;'” Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us $ O '�' 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor • 4, 4, �� ", Yakima, Washington 98901 4y \ nR `` BP r Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DATE: March 18, 2005 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Code Administration and Planning Manager SUBJECT: Notice of Application for Rezone and Environmental Review NOTICE OF APPLICATION Project Location: Vicinity of NW Corner of Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road, Yakima, WA Project Applicant: J. Lawrence Wright et al Date of application: March 3, 2005 Date of determination of completeness: March 11, 2005 Project Description: The City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development has received an application for the rezone of two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed rezone for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) for this rezone. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination may be obtained on request and may be appealed pursuant to YMC 6.88.170. The optional DNS process in WAC 197 - 11 - 355 is being used. This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposed rezone. Comment due date: April 7, 2005 Yakima D - teal INDEX � tII �' RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT CITY OF a'AKIMA PLANNING DI V. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST File No. Date: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: J. Lawrence Wright et al Phone Number: (509) 575 -6611 Address of Proponent: 310 North 22 Ave., Yakima, WA 98902 2. Person Completing Form: Bill Hordan Phone Number: (509) 249 -1919 Address: 410 North 2nd St., Yakima, WA 98901 3. Date Checklist Submitted: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development 5. Name of Proposal, if Applicable: Not applicable. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable) : This is a non - project rezone. No timing or scheduling is proposed at this time. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, at some point, it is anticipated that commercial development would eventually occur on the property. 8. List any information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None known. DOC, -1- INDEX HECEivED MAR t, 2005 CITY OF YAKIMA 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmealkUNG Div approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Rezone from Light Industrial to Central Business District Support. 11. Give brief, 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. The proposal is to rezone approximately 46 acres from Light Industrial to Central Business District Support. This is a non - project application. 12. Location of the proposal. Give stufficient 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 application related to this checklist. The proposal generally lies at the northwest corner of West Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, within the City Limits of Yakima, Washington. There is no known address. 13. Taxation Parcel No.(s): 191332 -33004 and 191331 - 44001. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one) : rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope) ? Approximately 1 percent. -2- DE RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF YAKIMA c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for PLANNING DIV. example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck) ? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. According to the Soil Survey of Yakima County Area Washington, the site contains Zillah silt loam. It is classified as prime farmland. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading is proposed as part of this rezone. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, con- struction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No clearing or grading is proposed. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or building)? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No impervious surfaces are proposed. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone. No activities are proposed on the property. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No air emissions will be present. DOC. INDEX - 3 - !C7,1 MAR 0 3 2005 b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor uRY it'AK @ii PLAMC DIV. that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None are known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No emissions will be produced. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -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. Yes, a small stormwater ditch from properties to the north flows through a portion of the property. There is no known name for ditch. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) of the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No work is to occur on the property. 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. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No work is to occur on the property. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No work is to occur on the property. DOC INDEX RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? CITY NING ►KB BA �I��as� If so, note location on the site plan. PL� DIV. No. 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. No. b. Ground: 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general descrip- tion, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste 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. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No waste material is being generated. c. Water Runoff (including storm water) : 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known) . Where will the water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No runoff will be generated. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No waste material will be generated. INDEX - 5 - J4 RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, CITY OF YAKIMA and runoff water impacts, if any: PLANING DIV. None proposed as this is a non - project rezone application and no runoff is being generated. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle type of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass _XX pasture crop or grain wet soil plants; cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No vegetation is proposed to be removed or altered. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. Native species will remain at this time. DOC, -6- INDEX RECEIVED LIAR 03 2005 CITY OF Y,A'AKIMA 5. ANIMALS PLANNI6' i DIV. a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Bird: hawk, heron, eagle, songbird other: C{tt44( - 14 5 Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is this site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. Existing vegetation will remain and preserve any wildlife which currently exists 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 project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No sources of energy are necessary. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. 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: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No energy will be used. DOC- INDEX RECEIVED } # MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF YAKIl;lA 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PLANNItit D V. a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be needed as part of this non - project rezone application. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No environmental health hazards are being produced by the rezone. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other) ? The property abuts an existing railroad line, which will generate occasional noise. 2. 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. No noise will be created by the rezoning of this property. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is used for pasture. DO. INDEX RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF Y, E' IMA b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, PLANNis C �I describe. Yes, the site has historically been planted in pasture. c. Describe any structures on the site. The property is vacant. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is currently zoned Light Industrial. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The comprehensive plan designation for the site is Industrial and Arterial Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No one is proposed to work or reside on the site. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No one will be displaced. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No one will be displaced. DOC. INDEX 7 'ECE,IVPD MAR 03 2005 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible �� , Z M with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. However, it is the intent to comply with the standards of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance as part of this rezone. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high -, middle- or low- income housing. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No housing units are proposed. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high -, middle -, or low- income housing. Not applicable. The property is vacant. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No impact to housing exists. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed struc- ture(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No structures are being constructed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? This rezone will not alter or obstruct any views. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No impacts to aesthetics exists. DOC- INDEX RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY lyd� meta°, 11. LIGHT AND GLARE PLANNIC DIV. a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No light or glare will be produced. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No light or glare is being produced. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The site lies within the Yakima Urban Area, and thus, there are numerous parks and pathways in the area used for miscellaneous recreational activities. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No impact to recreational activities exists. DOC INDEX RCS E MAR 0 3 2005 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION CITY OF Yd ,t6ec :� PLANNINC DIV. a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application and the site is vacant, no impact to historical or cultural work is expected. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site id served by South 1st Street, Old Town Road and West Valley Mall Boulevard. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No parking spaces are proposed. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways. If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. DOC. INDEX -12- / L...2 RECER1ED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate PLANNIWC Iv. vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Yes, a railroad line abuts the property on the west. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No vehicular trips will be generated. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No impacts to transportation exist. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other ?) If so, generally describe. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No public services are needed. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None proposed, as this is a non - project rezone application. No direct impacts on public serves exist. 16. UTILITIES a. Cir le the utilities currently availab_- .e site: dirINENEEM .- Ural gas water efuse service tele.hone anitary sewer septic system, irriga ion, cable T►, ; drains, o er. 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. Not applicable, as this is a non - project rezone application. No utilities are needed for the rezone. DOC, INDEX MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF Yd -v ,t.JA PLANNIIC DI V. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete t the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. .-'"" aZ--- Proponent or Per +n Completing Form lk ►, = t re of P :'' -t Owner INDEX Ir RECEWED MAR 0 3 2005 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS CITY OF ,� � iirtiv • eat NC: uS�, Because these questions are very general it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the i s� o�S `' the elements of the environment When answering these questions be aware of the extent the proposal or the types of activities likely to 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? No increase to water, emissions to air or toxic / hazardous substances are proposed. No increase in noise levels are anticipated by a change to the zoning. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are; Complete and additional SEPA check list once a project is proposed. 2) How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish or marine life? This proposed rezone will have no affect on plants, animals, fish or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish or marine life are; Conservation of these items would be reviewed through additional SEPA review and implementation of rules and regulations of a critical areas ordinance, if necessary. 3) How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Does not apply. No project is proposed. Proposed measure to protect such resources to avoid or reduce impacts are; Not applicable. 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 or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? Compliance with local, state and federal ordinances will ensure protection occurs. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are; See above answer. DO C, INDEX MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF i`Avilava PLA D V 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? The proposal will not likely affect shorelines, however commercial uses could occur as a result of this proposal being approved. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are; Compliance with local, state and federal shoreline and land use ordinances, if necessary. 6) How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? New development would likely increase traffic on local and state roadways. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are; All new development would be required to meet traffic concurrently requirements. 7) Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment No conflicts are anticipated as a result of this rezone because the Comprehensive Plan indicates that the existing zoning and proposed zoning are concurrent with the underlying Comprehensive Plan Designation. - DOC INDEX J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Hearing Examiner Exhibit List CHAPTER E COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE E -1 Letter from Ed Rush, Pacific Power, Portalnd, OR 4/29/05 825 N.E. Multnomah St. Portland, OR 97232 RECEIVED // PACIFICORP PACIFIC POWER UTAH POWER APR 2 9 20 0 5 • CITY OF YAKIM PLANNING DIV April 29, 2005 City of Yakima Planning Department Attn: Mary Lovell 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Mary, I am writing this letter in response to your letter dated April 13, 2005 regarding the rezoning of two parcels on the NW comer of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road in Yakima, Washington. (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 191332 -33004 and 191331- 4001) Pacific Power and Light occupies these properties with two transmission lines by virtue of easements granted by Thomas H. Wheeler and Daisy A. Wheeler dated July 18, 1942 and recorded on September 25, 1942 by Instrument Number 1005930 in Volume 370 Page 7 in the Records of Yakima County and Mary Tomich and Martin Tomich and George Babare and Mary Barbare dated September 17, 1942. The width specified in both of these easements is 150 feet. Also, an easement was granted by Eugene Luisi and Eva Luisi dated May 19, 1972 recorded on May 26, 1972 and September 21, 1972 in Volume 840 Pages 666 and 667 by Instrument Number 2284110 and Re- Recorded in Volume 853 Pages 347 and 348 by Instrument Number 2295787 for a Guy Stub Pole and Anchor. Both easements grant "the perpetual right to enter and to erect, maintain, repair, rebuild, operate and patrol one or more electric transmission lines and the necessary appurtenances thereto" and "the further right to clear said right of way and keep the same clear of brush, timber, inflammable structures and fire hazards and that no fire hazard shall be created thereby ". As the property is developed, no buildings are to be placed in the easement area. Access to all transmission structures, wire and equipment must be maintained. All grade changes, landscaping and lighting plans designed for the easement area need to be reviewed and approved by Pacific Power and Light prior to construction. USA Filed a * ♦1 Hearing Examiner B6 O5C2E0 Proud Sponsor of the EXH # 6- ( Date 7 0 . 5 2002/2004 U. S. Olympic Team Fly 14 � Z • All NESC and OSHA safe working clearances must be maintained at all times during construction. If you have any further questions or assistance please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Ed Rush 503 -813- 6981 - Office 503 - 50201136 -Cell 825 NE Multnomah, Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97232 ed.rush@pacificorp.com CC: Mike Paulson Larry Young % INDEX J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Exhibit List CHAPTER F APPLICATION EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE F -1 Rezone Application 3/3/05 - ` - CITY OF YAKIMA: RECEIVED ' LAIC)) USE APPLICA1,..MN "z li .Y• ;,� MAR 0 3 2005 ' • � 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ' ' .•a . it " 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR CITY OF YAKIMA J ' 4 a, 1 .. / YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901 PLAN NING DIV. '',,LN,:"ATE° ,A (509) 575 -6183 FAX: (509) 575 -6105 Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this form or the application process call, come in person or refer to the accompanying instructions. 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. 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 g �, f" , .. ,, r , �.g , p � :9 wa 3 . ,��"+r � .*,.b. ��s l oi �R����`.y ".� ���� ��� �`"� 19'� 1 i M a' °I ® S £� zt'. f�e 5�.?; sE�i. +, a'iZ -3u � %a'` �w:s`3. f .'? ''•",�.' �: 7 ' 2 ,,."���a",`t; ?7 -> ..: ^ , : s . -• t= z 7'F u aY xoa1'4$; 6�iafc at.. .i ..".. Stit w.%av, ,.,m... 1. APPLICANT NAME /� /? w / AO P L 6 5-06s 2. APPLICANT ADDRESS STREET ' z / p A)0 1 ..r-, CITY y M # 4, AND PHONE NUMBER STATE W4 ZIP -1 l p/ PHONE ( 5/) z'/9 11/9' MESSAGE ( ) 5 e 3. APPLICANT'S INTEREST CHECK ❑ OWNER g OWNER REPRESENTATIVE IN PROPERTY ONE ❑ CONTRACT PURCHASER ❑ OTHER 4. PROPERTY OWNER J ���� � (IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT) NAMES L # . R #i CCC `,, Z-1 , ` r (.1.- a I 5. PROPERTY OWNER'S, STREET ID i k joi zz %: iqc CITY , ,y • ADDRESS AND PHONE ( ) (1F OTHER THAN APPLICANT) STATE 4 ZIP 0gDZ PHONE ( $b/) �7 S (� / 0^1C 6. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER (S) FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY: /47/33L — 3 3 o©ci , 1 5 /471331- 44 C>0f • 7. EXISTING ZONING OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: t l4• , t / - ` ��O usnz , 4 L (A4-/ ) 8. ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 11•1 0 kiJOWsk -4 5 5 -- 41 I9/4D j S 0 -Cu 9. TYPE OF APPLICATION: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) ❑ Class (2) Use XEnvironmental Checklist (SEPA) ❑ Right -of -Way Vacation ❑ 'Class (3) Use ❑ Modification to Approved Class (2) & (3) Uses ❑ Short Plat Exemption Rezone ❑ Appeal ❑ Shoreline ❑ Variance ❑ Nonconforming Structure/Use ❑ Utility Easement Release ❑ Horne - Occupation ❑ Preliminary Subdivision ❑ Interpretation by Hearing Examiner ❑ Administrative Adjustment ❑ Short Plat ❑ Other ';�;� ��.yy p'o{ amt@ <`� � y (� � ( _ �.. c � K t �(1y,�'� <, te r. x�,�:e�. �,v ` OA p `, till i ` 0 g j. C5 i E ' _ F b%` a '10 ,: >i fdr.� *kg D�yy c I p ,v && .-��, ..._ 4Y gg - s.�_t..li�4�- u < „ ; � .i���� 'y �s iL` S9 fie] �: F2?7 L b� '` z. 10. SEE ATTACHED SHEETS �+ Y a."x` - tslr'� c"�`�a-- s^r�a',pzTR`�nzvr?` S �", 3 °.. r � ,' J2 a+� ! r� 1 d '°`.�"' ' �°'z ,r .• s , "s^' s.c ^^., -� o- w g F R t .s9' 3* .'&'F" t G ss a ti's �... v - -�,. ". ' +a�.d.3,�?��- . " sue s:�tz�i✓ e2 ,w*s�. sass .r�a3is3u...u•:,:waa.., �:. t;. ".... .,........ .�. _ .u._ . � . .s:s' 11. I certify that the info atio on this application and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. ?"--3.__:__ -3 —2._ -- S ---- SIGNATURE DATE Revised 9 -98 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLY Filed FILE 1. E E� D xaminer AMOUNT RECEIPT NO. r'v /� / / " NG DATE DATE FE PAID EIVEDBY , G it Q `� E` r5 L:. 4( Al / .. lit V 0 933, 0-6 / ( File # ,Z# /-05— r `` s SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION FOR: .. . N,, , ; ) RECEIVED REZONE -'F' y�t, f MAR 0 2005 \ /. I + ff Ylm,' ;' , � �� 0 F `'ANIMA 4 . t,,T :„ .. CHAPTER 15.23, YAKIMA URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE ( A. 4 , M DIV. .,. -. ; . .. ,.. <- ..�...: . ...:. i. ... .. .. r, ..,.,. .. �. `�,..>, S,i C <il "iha "Si s`�'':e>E �• .F �� �3 `Y�6 L 5i hF�e ia :%L % %s"i�; ... ,, . ..... .,, , . < ;; ., ..., .. � .. . s ,: •`3. -' 'j" 1_.n� s �:: � ��� �%:�i .. * � ?�,s 3.� N,;� i "z:}�` a ; , .< k . , e e "- : .,, : : ` _ ` ;^ . A , " "'�. ::,,, YS:,,} '...,, . z q � . n�e.,,, ,f, a . 9 i .Y.'Fz'y s (F r.>. .. ;: . °F�s � � z � ,J. � . �� . 'F� ��� . ��,��� F.:f � �k�`�J " <. „,”4'. �n;;'s...;us,<< -: «��' _.... « <.. r., , . 1. REQUEST: , (I, we) the property owner(s) request that the following described property be rezoned: From L-161 -7' .. ..riuotiz 7?t/4C__ 6 1 4 - / To Ceviledie, aeS /riCSS Oa7 14C4 .5 Lrf"M 2 2. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: (Attach if lengthy) SG- +ii'4 G 3. OWNER'S SIGNATURE: (I, we) certify that (I, we) are t • = 4 i b r ` of all of the above scribed property: yob N 4 f � 4 1 _ . _ Egli U1 Npr �rt 3* O A ..� v L f j,; (OWNER(S) SIGNATURE) STATE OF WASHINGTON) V 20 , s 4 ? COUNTY OF YAKIMA ) � 4 $ HiNG On this day personally appeared before me J. Lktme.43-4 LA- known to me to be the individual(s) described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they are the owner(s) of the property requested to be rezoned, have read the application and know the $ contents thereof, and believe the same to be true. Pi GIVEN under my hand and official seal this day of , ffi Y , .P �. a� ” ".z < '`*: :v< <: ,ar° . :q.3, '. a . y :: '',, .: ` a , , 'kR" ?'S" y" , *N ass ,'f-.' >"" ve'f, e, "4,4,,,,„..„4 , � t, .a><." �F.a:3 x ,.,:.#—,,, f�::,"�Yi,°;::, « :3. , .. .5 . � '. " 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A properly completed Environmental Checklist is mandated by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for a rezone request. Checklists should be obtained from the Planning Division. 5. WRI'1"1'EN NARRATIVE thoroughly answers the following questions in as much detail as possible: A. Is the requested zoning change suitable with the property in question (subject property)? How so? B. How is the rezone request in compliance with and /or how does the request deviate from the 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan as amended? C. Are there adequate public facilities, such as traffic capacity, sewer service,potable water, storm water and other public services and infrastructure existing on and around the subject property? Are the existing public facilities capable of supporting the most intensive use of the new (requested) zone? If not, what mitigating measures are going to be implemented to address any short falls in public services that may exist? D. Is the proposed zone change and associated land uses changes compatible with the existing neighboring uses? What mitigating measures are planned to address incompatibility, such as site screening,buffering building design, open space traffic flow alternation, etc.? E. Is there a public need for the proposed change? 6. SPECIFIC PROJECT If this request is for a specific project please include the following: Ft A. Written project description including number of housing units and parking spaces. If the proposal is for a business describe hours of operation, days per week and all other pertinent information related to business operations. B. Site Plan (Please use the City of Yakima Site Plan Checklist) Note: All submitted information will be forwarded to the Hearing Examiner along with your application and will become part of the public hearing record. Clear, comprehensive and accurate detail of the information is in the best interest of the applicant. DOG Revised 9 -98 D RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNINS. D V 191331 -44001 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 13 NORTH, RANGE 19 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION , THEN NORTH 1337 FEET, THEN WEST 687 MEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE CENTER OF THE MAIN TRACT OF NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY, THEN SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTER LINE OF SAID MAIN TRACT 1406 PEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION, THEN EAST 250 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE RIGHT -OF -WAY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY. 191332 -33004 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 13 NORTH, RANGE 19 EAST, W.M., LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE STATE ROAD No. 3, EXCEPT BEGINNING 548 FEET NORTH AND 40 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, THEN NORTH 392 FEET, THEN SOUTH 84° 36' WEST 178 FEET, THEN SOUTH 71° 12' WEST 85 FEET, THEN SOUTH 51° 50' WEST 146 FEET, THEN SOUTH 1° 57' EAST 257 FEET, THEN EAST 89° 53' EAST 361 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY, AND EXCEPT RIGHT -OF -WAY OF THE STATE HIGHWAY LESS EASEMENT TO THE UNITED STATES, AND EXCEPT SOUTH 208 FEET OF THE WEST 268.7 OF THE EAST 298.7 PEET, AND EXCEPT THAT PART EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, AND EXCEPT A STRIP 100 FEET WIDE WEST OF THE STATE HIGHWAY AND PARALLEL TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. DOC. INDEX RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF Y'AKIMA PLANNlNS. DIV. WRITTEN NARRATIVE (FOR REZONE FROM M -1 TO CBDS) A. Is the requested zoning change suitable with the property in question (subject property)? How so? The requested zoning change is suitable with the property in question because the property is served with all urban services and is currently designated Industrial by the Yakima Urban Area Future Land Use Map. This designation is consistent with Figure III -3 "Yakima Urban Area Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Compliance. This means the underlying comprehensive plan designation and the zoning are consistent. The general area is a mixture of commercial and industrial, with some residential uses and residential zoning lie to the southeast. Most commercial uses lie to the north, south & east and abut the subject property. Industrial uses lie to the west and northwest. The residential uses to the southeast are multi- family residential and single- family residential. A change from Light Industrial to Central Business District Support is a better option because it makes a logical transition and buffer from the industrial uses to the northwest and west to the professional business, commercial arterial and residential uses which surround this property. Since adoption of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Plan Designation in this area has changed from Arterial Commercial and Wholesale /Warehouse to Industrial and Arterial Commercial. However, since that adoption, there has been substantial change in the Valley Mall area to warrant a rezone from industrial to commercial. The extension of Valley Mall Boulevard across the south line of the property and the explosion of substantial commercial development in the surrounding Union Gap area, along with the installation of traffic signals along South 1st Street, warrants a commercial retail center instead of an industrial area. DOC. • INDEX RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2005 CITY OF i PLAN= DIV. B. How is the rezone request in compliance with and /or how does the request deviate from the 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive plan as amended? The rezone request is in compliance with an amendment to the 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. The specific amendment is the adoption of the Future Land Use Map to Zoning Map Consistency Figure III -3. This table determines consistency between comprehensive plan designations and zoning. In this instance, both are consistent. Additionally, the underlying comprehensive plan designation for portions of the property was changed after the adoption of the 1997 Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. This proposal is consistent with those changes as well. The proposal also meets many of the goals, objectives and policies of the plan which are listed in the General Development, Public Services, Commercial Development, Land Use, Transportation, Utilities and Capital Facilities element of the Plan. C. Are there adequate public facilities, such as traffic capacity, sewer service, potable water, stormwater and other public services and infrastructure existing on and around the subject property? Are the existing public facilities capable of supporting the most intensive use of the new (requested) zone? If not, what mitigating measures are going to be implemented to address any short falls in public services that may exist? Yes, there are adequate public facilities to serve this proposal. All urban level services are also available to the site, or can be easily extended to the site. Subject to the Traffic Capacity Analysis of the City for any proposed project, the project will be in compliance with the transportation element of the Growth Management Act and City Development Standards. The property can be served with all other infrastructure including domestic water, sanitary sewer, natural gas, electricity, telephone, cable TV and any other needed utilities. No mitigation is proposed at this time; as preliminary indications are that all infrastructure needs can be met. DOC. INDEX t1 UJEVED } MAR 032005 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. D. Is the proposed zone change and associated land use changes compatible with the existing neighboring uses? What mitigating measures are planned to address incompatibility, such as sitescreening, buffering building design, open space, traffic flow alternation, etc.,? Yes, the proposed zone change and associated land use changes are compatible with existing neighboring uses. The proposal is a continuation of a development pattern which exists in the immediate area. That development pattern is commercial. In fact, based on surrounding zoning and existing uses in the area, a commercial zone is more compatible with the surrounding uses than potentially intrusive industrial uses. The site is generally bounded by existing commercial zoning on the north, east and south. The only portion of the property which abuts industrial zoning is the northwest corner of the property and the west property line. The west property line is also a railroad line. This railroad line will provide a substantial buffer between existing commercial uses, proposed commercial uses and existing and proposed industrial uses to the west. At this time, no specific mitigation measures are proposed as part of this proposal. However, as the environmental checklist is processed and public hearings are conducted, some mitigation may be required for compatibility purposes. Additionally, as site specific projects are proposed for the property, development standards in the zoning ordinance will ultimately be implemented to ensure compatibility between uses. E. Is there a public need for the proposed change? The land use reclassification is needed because there is a need for additional commercial zoning in this area of the urban area. The majority of the commercial zoning in this particular area is currently being "built -out" as the "commercial boom" in this area continues. Commercial properties are becoming a rare commodity in this area and a need for more exists. This area has become a commercial hub and there is a need to keep the hub healthy and not limit it boundaries, unless incompatibilities warrant such restrictions. In this case, the proposal is compatible with surrounding uses. To stay competitive with other larger metropolitan areas, commercial property must be available for development. Existing large commercial tracts are being developed at a rapid pace and there is a need for more commercial zoning in this area. This property is served with all urban level services and can accommodate the growth. Based on this, there is a public need to provide commercial zoning to meet the needs of the Yakima Urban Area and the surrounding area. D®C. INDEX J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Hearing Examiner Exhibit List CHAPTER G NOTICES EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE G -1 Determination of Application Completeness 3 -11 -05 G -2 Notice of Public Hearing 4 -18 -05 G -3 500 -foot Radius Adjoining property owners notified 4 -18 -05 G -4 Affidavit of Mailing 4 -18 -05 G -5 Legal Notice 4 -18 -05 G -6 Posting of Property Certification 3 -18 -05 G -7 Hearing Examiner Agenda 5 -12 -05 G -8 Hearing Sign -in Sheet 5 -12 -05 G -9 Notification of Hearing Examiner's Recommendation to the Yakima 5 -27 -05 City Council G -10 Parties of Record Notified 5 -27 -05 G -11 Affidavit of Mailing 5 -27 -05 G -12 City Council Agenda Statement setting July 19, 2005 for closed record 6 -28 -05 public hearing BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM NO. FOR MEETING OF: June 28, 2005 ITEM TITLE: Set July 19, 2005 as the date for a "Closed Record" hearing to consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation on a rezone request by J. Lawrence Wright et al for property located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima. SUBMITTED BY: William Cook, Director of Community & Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Mary Lovell, Associate Planner, 575 -6164 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Set July 19, 2005 as date for a "Closed Record" hearing to consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve the rezone request by J. Lawrence Wright et al to rezone two (2) parcels from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support. The applicant is requesting the rezone to increase the inventory of commercially zoned property in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima. Resolution _ Ordinance_ Contract _ Other (Specify) Funding Source APPROVAL FOR SUBMITTAL: City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Set July 19, 2005 as date for "Closed Record" Hearing. BOARD RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner recommends approval of the rezone application. COUNCIL ACTION: DOCs' i ;r; INDEX AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA Re: UAZO RZ #1 -05 J Lawrence Wright et al Vicinity of NW Corner W. Valley Mall Blvd & Old Town Road I, Christine Wilson as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of the Hearing Examiners recommendation to the Yakima City Council. A true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to all parties of record which are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 27th day of May , 2005. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. 'A 46 Christine M. Wilson Planning Specialist DOC.:4... INDEX l ` I f \ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & S`� 3 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � Planning Division 5 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 , /- y R, J. Lawrence Wright 310 N. 22nd Ave Yakima, WA. 98902 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 S Bill Hordan Hordan Planning Svcs 410 N. 2 Street Yakima, WA. 98901 1 DOC. INDEX # 6- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Jim Murphy 517 Follow Thru Dr. Yakima, WA. 98901 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ■ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT a Planning Division 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Jay Sentz 118 Gilbert Dr. Yakima, WA. 98902 • 1 DOC. INDEX 1 - r Yom """ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4:4rwir•ii„ Planning Division Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us ' • �� �� •• >• II 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor ",ARP -�6 =' Yakima, Washington 98901 Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION Yakima Urban Area Hearing Examiner Recommendation May 27, 2005 On May 12, 2005 the Yakima Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing to consider a rezone Land Use Application submitted by J. Lawrence Wright et al.. The applicant is requesting zoning approval for rezone of two vacant parcels from light Industrial (M -1) to Central Business District Support ( CBDS). The requested rezone is in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, Washington. On May 26, 2005 the Hearing Examiner rendered a recommendation to the City Council to approve this application subject to conditions. Enclosed is a copy of the Hearing Examiner's findings and decision. Any part of the decision may be appealed. Such appeal 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 filing fee of $295.00 must accompany the Appeal application. For further information or assistance you may contact Mary Lovell, Associate Planner, City of Yakima Planning Division, located on the 2nd floor of Yakima City Hall, ..(129 North Second Street), 575 -6164. ND k Doug Maples Planning and Code Administration Manager encl. Date of mailing: May 27, 2005 BOG. Yakima INDEX ',`` r® ILL_.6LLff`'-'' `•' 1994 HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET CITY OF YAKIMA BEARING EXAMINER YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS HEARING DATE: May 12, 2005 CASE #: APPLICANT: SITE ADDRESS: A RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 . Lawrence Wri ' ht NW corner Valle Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. (B) UAZO CL(3) #4 - 05 Trinity Baptist Church 606 S. 13th Ave. (C) UAZO INTERP #2 - 05 Del Matthews 1408 S. 1st St. INDICATE CASE NO. NAME: ADDRESS: ZIP: (A,B,C): PLEASE PRINT 2e 5 r . ' q 1 '.) • -,S 4 e, lc) t. 4 107 s. /3 9 ,P46 Z.- - I } a4., & w, me4 79 OZ hn 20len (3 4-.e 71 2 A JP0 fig on.lAt 1 q0 ► �. Soy., �, (� r t • 9a 4 . DOC. INDEX • oc. Y�, °'',, DEPARTMENT Planning Division OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT � - � ' ....\ . Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ei.yakima.wa.us �s '�,' v� e s 6 = � L) T ' 129 Yakima, North Washington Second Street, 2nd Floor 98901 Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 CITY OF YAKIMA HEARING EXAMINER AGENDA . Thursday, May 12, 2005 Yakima City Hall 9.00 am Council Chambers I. CALL TO ORDER II. INTRODUCTION III. PUBLIC HEARING e l J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT, et al Planner Assigned: Mary Lovell File Number: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 Location: Vicinity of NW comer Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. Request: Rezone 2 parcels (approx. 46 acres) from M -1 to CBDS B. TRINITY BAPTIST CHURCH Planner Assigned: Mary Lovell File Number: UAZO CL(3) #4 -05 Location: 606 S. 13th Ave. Request: Establish a church office in the R -1 Zone C. DEL MATTHEWS Planner Assigned: Vaughn McBride File Number: UAZO INTERP #2 -05 Location: 1408 S. 1st St. Request: Interpretation of definition of amusement parks IV. 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. Filed Hearing Examiner Yakima EXH #._...._.,c...Date _ 1 -A'° j File -- 1994 MAR -21 -05 02:52 PM •HDRDAN PLANNING P.02 • : / 4•)C}Ut z, R•FZEIVED .:.; � MAR 2 2005 ` mo w: . CITY OF YAKIMA � '� n e e . LAND USE ACTION INSTALLATION PLANNING DIV. CERTIFICATE • • . Pro - eet Number: (4 A zo e 0.1e g . - o . Date of Installation: 5 -i ' c a S ---77-"--- 1 Site Address: Mk) C(nv ri.e r • u F' Viz tu Y+ u t c_ r ( Taw le Location of Installation (Check One) ...___Land Use Action Sign is installed per standards described in YUAZO § 15.11.090(C). Land Use Action. Sign is installed in an alternate location on the site. Note: this alternate location (if not pre - approved by the Code Administration and Planning Manager) may not be acceptable by the Code Administration and Planning Division and is subject to relocation (at the owner's expense) to a more visible site on the property. The alternative location is: • ilownaumes 1 hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the Land Use Action sign layout specifications and installation standards, and that the sign will be maintained until a decision has been rendered. Applicants Name (please print) Date • Applicants Signatur Telephone Number of Applicant r ~� 2 '4'7 -- (//‘) The required comment period will begin when the Code Administration and Planning Division have received the Land Use Action Sign Installation Certification. The date of installation certificate receipt will begin the notice period. Failure to post a Land Use Action sign and return this form in a timely manner will cause a delay in the application review. Please remit the above certification and deliver; FAX at 509 -575 -6105; or mail to: City of Yakima, Code Administration and Planning Division, 129 North Second Street, Yakima, WA 98901. DOC. INDEX 1 � LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 18, 2005 TO: Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Building Codes & Planning Manager PROJECT DESCRIPTION: On March 3, 2005, the City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development received a Class (3) zoning review application from J. Lawrence Wright et al for the rezone of two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review. The subject property is located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, WA. (UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC #9 -05) A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued on April 13, 2005 following environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act. 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, WA. NOTICE OF OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARING An open record public hearing will be held before the Hearing Examiner on Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. in the Yakima City Council Chambers, 129 North 2 11d Street, Yakima, WA. You are welcome to attend the public hearing. You may submit your written comments on this project to: Doug Maples, Building Codes & Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, Washington 98901. Please be certain to reference the file number or applicant's name in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC #9 -05) If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Associate Planner, at (509) 575 -6164. Other Permits Required: None PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE ONLY ON MONDAY, APRIL 18, 2005 Send Invoice and Affidavit of Publication to: Account #11002 City of Yakima, Planning Division DOC. INDEX 1 ) AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA Re: UAZO RZ #1 -05 & EC #9 -05 J. Lawrence Wright et al NW corner of Valley Mall Blvd. & Old Town Rd. I, Christine Wilson as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Public Hearing by the Yakima City Hearing Examiner, a true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant and all property owners of record within a radius of 500 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 18th day of April 2005. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Christine M. Wilson Planning Specialist DOC. INDEX • 191206 -11025 ..,91206 -11007 1206 -11007 4OEL INVESTMENT PACIFIC POWER &. LIGHT CO P CIFIC POW & LIk +i',,. *• ?O BOX 111 825 NE MULTNOMAH STE 1600 82 NE MUL OMAN .$-" t, 160o fAKIMA, WA 98907 PORTLAND, Oregon 97232 -2131 POR & Oregon 97232 -2131 •1206 -12002 1 206 -12003 191331 -44004 ?'.IFIC POWE^ & LIGHT 10 PA FIC POWE• & L ', Co PRINTING PRESS PROPERTIES LLC 325 E MULTNOMAH STE 161.0 825 'E MULTiyoMAH STE .06 3008 MAIN ST ?ORTL^. m *regon 97232 -2131 PORTL—*I,..Sregon 97232-2 UNION GAP, WA 98903 191206 -11016 114206-11017 191332 -34011 RICHARD M & ELEANOR M SANDER RI E RD M & EL .4 OR ' SA R ROBERT & NAOMI M KUHNS 1014 39TH AVE E 1014 •TH AVE 105 N 57TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98112 SEATTL 4 '8112 YAKIMA, WA 98901 19 32 -34018 > 191332 -32012 191206 -11004 ROBE-7T & NAO M KUHNS / ROBERT J ETAL DBA MARTIN REAL ES RON OR CELESTE MASTERS 105 57TH PO BOX 2244 502 W VALLEY MALL BLVD YAKIMA, A. '8901 ' YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2244 1 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -1615 191331 -41406 191332 -32409 191206 -11012 RUSSELL A REILAND SYSTEM CAPITAL REAL PROPERTY COR THE OSUS LLC 14 E WASHINGTON AVE 1 MCDONALDS PLZ PO BOX 1125 _YAKIMA, WA 98903 OAK BROOK, Illinois 60523 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -1125 191332 -34009 191331 -43005 191332 -33001 THOMAS S & ALICE HAINLINE WILLIAM B & SALLY G DOUGLAS WILLIAM J JR &LINDA BEERMAN 3913 E LIBERTY AVE PO BOX 2923 1209 PLEASANT AVE SPOKANE, WA 99217 -6967 YAKIMA, WA 98907 -2923 YAKIMA, WA 98902 191332 -33002 I 91332-330o I 191332 -32023 WILLIAM J. BEERMAN J. BEE•MAN YAKIMA COUNTY FAIR JOINT VEN 2416 S 1ST ST 24 6e T ST 5302 S CORKERY RD YAKIMA, WA 98903 -1604 YAKIMA, WA 98903 -16&4 SPOKANE, WA 99223 T . Bill Hordan Hordan Planning Services 191206 -11027 ;.91206 -1102: 410 N. 2nd St. YAKIMA WELDER'S SUPPLY YAKIMA WE. PERS PPY 40 Yakima, WA 98901 PO BOX 9813 PO :OX 9'13 YAKIMA, WA 989090813 YAK i WA 98909 -0813 i J. Lawrence Wright, et al ---7-----" it/77 310 N. 22nd Ave. 5 labels printed for map shee rz -1 -05 Yakima WA 98902 / 01 , ,,,41,, )1,6_, - dge )0144 .(7//fir hvg" ol_ij • DOC. INDEX ' L91332 -34004 j 1332 -32407 91332 -34401 '?RROYO HONDO LLC ._� /COE LLP )ILLIE E & LYNN L COX 120 S 48TH AVE 720 OLIVER WAY SUITE 1300 • PO BOX 3042 (AKIMA, WA 98'908 SEATTLE, WA 98101 UNION GAP, WA 98903 -3042 L ,332 -34402 191206 -12001 191331 -44001 3IL E E & LYNN COX 414 11 BRADLEY P ET AL BUSEY B LEY P AL ?0 BO 3042 PO BOX 27 PO OX 27 NN 7NION eA.P, WA '8903 -304'2 YAKIMA, WA 98907 YAKI A 98907 3004 91332 - 33008 1 1332 -33008 B LEY P ET B B ADLEY P ET L BUSEY B DLEYP ET AL SUS: PO B 27 PO OX 27 P BOX --- �,. YAKIMA, WA 8907 YAK W 98907 YA , WA 98907 191206 -13003 1 1206 -13003 19 331 -41010 BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD B LINGTON THERN . ROAD BU LINGTON RTHE ILROAI PO BOX 961089 PO OX 96 89 PO OX 96 89 -., FORT WORTH, Texas 76161 -0089 1 FOR W9 H, Texas 61 -0089 1 FOR H, Tex 76161 -008! 191332- 34016 +91332 -34022 191332 -34025 CENTER OAK PROPERTIES LLC `LATER OAK P "e "ERT DONALD L & PEGGY MILLER 649 NW 12TH ST 6A' NW 12T 'ST 1 11414 718 COUNTRY CLUB DR GRESHAM, Oregon 97030 GR' AM, !regon 97030 YAKIMA, WA 98901 -1500 • 191332 -32025 191332 -34008 191206 -11018 E W POULIN EDGARD & REGINA BOTTINO EVERETT E & ISABELLE C MELV 4104 NACHES HTS RD 141 SISOTOW BELLE LN 402 ALDER . YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98903 UNION GAP, WA 98903 191332 -34024 191332 -32408 191332-32411 GARY 8 ETUX LONG GJS INVESTMENTS LLC JS INVEST '11 4302 SCENIC DR PO BOX 10936 ". BOX 1.`36 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -1936 Y•..IMA A 98909 - 199.3.. f . 1 . 191332 -32406 191206 -11023 191332 -33005 HARMAN CAFE EMPLOYEE PROFIT SHAR HELENA CHEMICAL CO INC KIM & CONNIE J & FAY BROYLB 199 FIRST STREET PO BOX 1600 814 S 58TH AVE LOS ALTOS, CalifornL.a 94022 I ROWLETT, Texas 75088 -1600 I YAKIMA, WA 98908 191206 -11006 '•1206 -1102 191332 -32433 KING BROTHERS K,NG BROT RS LINDEMAN GAMMELL FAMILY TRt PO BOX 3024 PO BOX 3e 4 30 BAYCLIFF PL UNION GAP, WA 98903 UNIQA e'P, WA 98902, PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 -95'. 191332 -33006 91332 -3300 191332 -32415 LONG CO INC S E L NG CO I■ S E �I'.. MCDONALDS CORPORATION (46 -t PO BOX 9783 PO RQX, ,9" 83 '`fir'' PO BOX 66207 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -0783 YAKIMA, WA 98909 -07= CHICAGO, I11ir 60666 INDEX # - 3 191331 -41009 191332 -31006 91332 -340 _ ,, ' MERVIN A. ET UX WARK MINER ASSOCIATES NER ASS CIATES 214 N 22ND AVE 2415 S 1ST ST 24 5 S 1 ST YAKIMA, WA 98902 -2427 YAKIMA, WA 98903 YA A, A 98903 • DEPARTMENT OF ! MMUNITYAND ECONOMIC DEVEL VENT j A \� r"§, Planning Division Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us g Y �E. 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor a '° Yakima, Washington 98901 l R PORATEO. ,� Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 18, 2005 TO: Applicant and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Doug Maples, Building Codes & Planning Manager PROJECT DESCRIPTION: On March 3, 2005, the City of Yakima Department of Community & Economic Development received a Class (3) zoning review application from J. Lawrence Wright et al for the rezone of two parcels of property from M -1, Light Industrial to CBDS, Central Business District Support, with Environmental Review. The subject property is located in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Valley Mall Boulevard and Old Town Road, Yakima, WA. (UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC #9 -05) A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued on April 13, 2005 following environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act. 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, WA. NOTICE OF OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARING An open record public hearing will be held before the Hearing Examiner on Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. in the Yakima City Council Chambers, 129 North 2n Street, Yakima, WA. You are welcome to attend the public hearing. You may submit your written comments on this project to: Doug Maples, Building Codes & Planning Manager City of Yakima, Department of Community & Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, Washington 98901. Please be certain to reference the file number or applicant's name in your correspondence. (J. Lawrence Wright et al, UAZO RZ #1 -05 and EC #9 -05) If you have any questions on this proposal, please call Mary Lovell, Associate Planner, at (509) 575 -6164. Other Permits Required: None Encl.: Narrative, Vicinity and Mailing Maps Yakima DOC 1 t:md INDEX � ij I' # 1994 • DEPARTMENT OF 1 MMUNITYAND ECONOMIC DEVELr'WENT �r''a Planning Division icw / Doug Maples, CBO, Code Admin. and Planning Manager • www.ci.yakima.wa.us ( 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor "q,, b,9 ORAT;a$_- Yakima, Washington 98901. p ED e Phone (509) 575 -6183 • Fax (509) 575 -6105 March 11, 2005 Bill Hordan Hordan Planning Services 410 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Determination of Application Completeness — Wright Rezone UAZO RZ #1 -05 and UAZO EC #9 -05 Dear Bill: Your zoning review application on behalf of J. Lawrence Wright et al to rezone 2 parcels from M -1 to CBDS was received March 3, 2005. Your application has been determined complete as of March 11, 2005. Continued processing of your request will include, but is not limited to, the following actions: 1. Notification of adjacent property owners of the public hearing, legal notice of public hearing published in the Yakima Herald Republic, and the posting of the property on this land use proposal twenty days prior to the hearing date. A hearing date has been scheduled for May 12, 2005 at 9:00 a.m. in the City Council Chambers. 2. Issuance of an environmental threshold decision in compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act. 3. Preparation of staff report. 4. A public hearing before the Hearing Examiner on Thursday, May 12, 2005. 5. Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner forwarded to the City Council for a "Closed Record" public hearing for a final decision on the rezone. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at 575 -6164 or e -mail me at mlovell @ci.yakima.wa.us. Sincerely, Mary Lovell Associate Planner Yakima u1•aR�cnr INDEX ( 1994 J. LAWRENCE WRIGHT et al Hearing Examiner Exhibit List CHAPTER H SPECIAL REPORT- WETLANDS EXHIBIT # DOCUMENT DATE H -1 Wetland Analysis Report 7/29/03 THORNER KENNEDY 8. GANG Fax:15094536874 Mar 25 2005 9:28 P.02 . ° . 'r� DEPARTMENT OF T HE ARMY ' ' ;'' . f ` CORPS OF E N GINEERS ti ;: : ; T � � y \ SEATTLE D ISTRICT, I �; ., . Z ;! `. % c:;- \ P.O. BOX 3759 !! 1 �`p� .... p.' ' _ gy S EATTLE, WASHINGTON 981243755 .,� `� „� r , ^i n� �TTEN ION OF JUL 2 9 2003 �t .�- .._ -- -. _..- ..._... Regulatory Branch • � ,. MAR 2 5 2005 Mr. Bryan Evenson CITY Thomer, Kennedy, & Gano P.S. PLAN DM4 Post Office Box 1410 Yakima, Washington 98907 -1410 Reference; 200100812 Wonder Property Dear Mr. Evenson: This letter concerns the wetlands on the referenced property located in the Yakima River watershed in Union Gap, Washington. After reviewing your submitted information and our office resources, and after visiting the site, we have dete determined upland/wetland ethere are dep rtment s f the Army (DA) regulated waters on your property. Th e original in the enclosed drawing dated February 23, 2000. While there are wetlands present, we have determined these wetlands, pursuant to the preamble of the DA regulations dated November 13,1486, which state in part that "artificially United States. ou do not need a DA permit for upland if irrigation ceased” are not waters work within the boundary marked on the enclosed delineation. Other state and local regulations may still apply tohere wetlands. 's Aqua c r Resources sending of copy letter to Ecology and to the Environmental Protection This jurisdictional determination is valid for a period of 5 years from the date of this letter unless new information warrants revision of our determination. In certain circumstances, you have the right to appeal our determination that these wetlands are not waters of the United States. Enclosed is a packet of information about our appeals process. If you have any questions about this letter or any aspect of our regulatory program, please contact Mr. Chris McAuliffe, of my staff, at telephone (206) 764 -6878. Sincerely, 4 , 4 4 .. ,/ Thomas F. Mueller Filed Chief, Regulatory Bra eh Hearing Examiner Enclosures EXH #._,4' l Date. 7/`7 / 6 3 File# so-/ -05 THORNER KENNEDY & GANO Fax:15094536874 Mar 25 2005 9 :28 P.03 Jug. ^bu -ue 1u:,IAM riuKra 1f11G6ve na4Wvinleb L70-unc-4104 1 - 11U r UL/1.14 r - Vo3 • -2- cc w/o enclosures: Mr. J, Lawrence Wright Post Office Box 22730 Yakima, Washington 98907 - 2715 Mr. Aubrey C. Reeves Jr. — -- _ . • Mayor, City of Union Clap ' ._ Post Office Box 3008 Union Gap, Washington 98903 Mr Ed Sewall f B -12 Associates, Inc. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 -5751 Mr. J.L. Haney I. T,. itattey 'Realty. and Appraisal Company • 116 North 6 Avenue Yakima, Washington 98902 oc with drawings and JD fozm: Washington Department of Ecology ATTN: Permit Assistance Center nv�ronrnent ra £ecti0 Agenc .. _,.. _ _. ATTN: Mr. Gay Voerman • INDEX • :-?" C U 1 ` 44 .— i . EXHIBIT H i 3i Z 1 ../1 *3 7- / I Z t K U \ .41 f { 1 M 1 V< ' 1 i. f .PJ. R.19 �. H. �,(. z 1-... [ IA s ell 9° ct 1/4 SE ION 31 !a 31 � ]4 ,J • 53 1 _ r`" WA _ 1 :z 1 ` . � ; i.13�1. R.19E.1V �1 I.1 3N F -1 ".vial. �: ` y2 - " 1 SVi 1 /4 SECTION 32 � , ii T. I g � X • Y a,3•t:.. , 7 $W1/4 SECTION 2 � �- ° • 1 \ u �n \ `�-.� n -` 1 .1 • ' � �_ �� WONDER et aL PROPERTY �g • .. -..----.. j Si l j x63 \4 / 1 it j 1 1 .w V4 +4 sr , \ n+fa0 9 U 1 - ! Ei1di UAW '.11 ! 1 • ': • t _T I \ 440011 ,,.. \ � . 13004 cs j j.- , K + 33006 .. . \ _ , . `. �' \ \ • parcel b 34018 '.. 1 ,� "2. — _\ - t } 1 % PI v / ,3 4 :e iwrr � ` c ve' r if �. `; ` • 1 e� 1 .- __i__,.. . v _ zt a - - -x ►' --� �L "` " _.t om 3 011 r __ 3 ?6 Alliii.6' r.) ii 'c v� . . • $ "' , �t, used Valley Mall Boulevard Exteasras +=� ?' 11-, - rm. -- .1- -i�'S` r L,- a,.- I \' ' n...~_ _� -- :�,� y� .1-1- �" i I ff.2T�5 � wy�� ?e ,� wiw�1' qE ' j -- -�_ ' "� - 1 I .. I ; G..", / tat r..-.r ,O , , , < < `" 4. '� s� 'r s 11018 1 ;_ 023 KYROLOGIC MONIT ORING MAP N • 1 k .. \ - . ] 1 026 x s , 3. -.- c0 X9 0 G V 11G�i? • loom Q Limits of Wonder et 21. property . • W F I S , T_9 ¶_ r•srsas - ,� G . t , — 1 i �u wc. z • ,C is ai nt r ;,• , , s \ y S S -; .. .,... ir n wE _ s t i = X =B• twelve Associates hydrologic monitor dal3 p S '' — toad! as ider<tined hs ddoipb+�a �— = Approximate Iae atiaD aC th edge o fHR ...)•:.... ' = ' f O A I 1 \ ', T.12N. R.19E.W.M. — - --- -- _ • % ,' � . — N 4 SECTION 5 = ���� � • V Ares depicted as aglxnd by Adolphsoa' . scr � •:= �� �e:'.t • 1 , \ • . CJ of `- Vmll daalnrrC �� } , J 'Refers to Figure 4 of the Adalphmn Ass oeiales, far• " - = � 1 coneepleal • don Plan, Crry of Union G• • 'data Juh 3000. • C • 11 ,,,•; j , . . , , . .. ,V2,,,.. • 13-twelve Associates, Inc ..... , , _ -.._ . ,.. .,, . 1.1 . 41 ..,2 't= 44, ,..' 'p. .1` -- I WONDER PROPERTY tt ,•;:, ,-„ Wetland Analysis Report :,,, .i; m CITIES OF UNION GAP AND YAKIMA, WA '‘t ,--: r,... oi ' 0 . Prepared For: uN Thorner, Kennedy & Gano P.S. :A Attorneys at Law -0 , ,442 -4, PO Box 1410 lei Yaldma, Washington 98907-1410 1 4. Attn: Bryan Evenson .,',e t il 4 , 4 .44 ...,....„1 13 August 21, 2001 Job# A1-139 ' C' .,4 .-. B-twelve Associates, Inc. Phone: 253-859-0515 - 1103 W. Meeker Street, Suite C Fax: 253-852-4732 Kent WA 98032 • �''9lua . i B- twelve Associates, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker St. (v) 253 - 859 -0515 Kent, WA 98032 -5751 (f) 253 - 852 -4732 (e) info @b12assoc.com WONDER PROPERTY WETLAND ANALYSIS REPORT YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Location This report describes existing conditions and characteristics in regards to jurisdictional wetlands and streams on the 58 acre irregularly shaped agricultural property referred to as the "Wonder property ", located in both the City of Yakima and the City of Union Gap, Washington (the "site "). The site is actually comprised of three (3) separate parcels owned by Scott Wonder, et al.; Parcel No. 12001 which is located within the City of Union Gap and is 7.07 acres in size, and abutting parcels to the north including Parcels 33004 and 44001 which are both located within the City of Yakima and are 34.3 and 11.4 acres, respectively (see Exhibit A). 1.2 Existing use The entire site has been under agricultural use since the late 1800's when the first irrigation water was supplied to this part of Yakima. An old turn of the century shed and silo still exist on the northeast comer of the site. The site has been used for various agricultural uses in the past, including growing hay as well as pasturing livestock. Since the early 1970's pasturing beef cattle on the site has occurred throughout the spring, summer and fall months when irrigation water is present to grow forage. Currently the site is vegetated with a mix of herbaceous species including various grasses and forbs. Irrigation water has been supplied to the site for nearly 100 years from two (2) irrigation companies, the New Schanno Ditch Company and the Broadgage Ditch Company. The property is not within the Broadgage Ditch Company District, although Broadgage Ditch Company irrigation waters not used by its members are directed to the northwest corner of the site as tail - water. The New Schanno Ditch Company supplies water at the northeast corner of the site. Both irrigation companies generally start supplying water to their members approximately April 1 and continue to supply water into the middle of October. Currently the City of Union Gap is proposing a condemnation of a portion of all three parcels for the extension of Valley Mall Boulevard. In the process of the background 4 Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 • _ . B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 2 work for the project, the City of Union gap hired Adolfson Associates, Inc. to conduct a wetland study of the property. The study declared the majority of the site to be jurisdictional wetland. The report (Valley Mall Boulevard Extension Project Wetland Study, Union Gap Washington, dated June 1999) was submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers (the "Corps ") and the delineation was approved by the Corps, based upon the Adolfson study as well as a site visit in the summer of 2000 with US Army Corps representative Debbie Knaub. Unfortunately, the Adolfson study did not reveal that the irrigation water entering the site is an artificial water source that can be, and is, manipulated depending on the agricultural practices occurring at the time. The study stated that the wetlands on the site were supported by precipitation and makes no mention of the irrigation water that is supplied to the site. The Adolfson study and investigation were performed without the knowledge or consent of the property owners. Therefore, Adolfson did not have access to information about the artificial sources of water on the property and its history of intensive flood irrigation. The Corps made its determination based upon the assumption that what Adolfson stated in the report was correct, that these wetlands were supported by natural hydrology. I spoke to Debbie Knaub of the US Army Corps on both March 15 and June 6, 2001. Ms. _ , _ . _ ... Knaub stated that she was aware when she conducted the site visit with Adolfson in the _ summer of 2000 that there were some irrigation issues on the site, but that Adolfson did not try to differentiate what was irrigation supported and what was not as it was too difficult to determine. Adolfson Associates, Inc. subsequently produced a report in July of 2000 "Valley Mall Boulevard Conceptual Mitigation Plan, City of Union Gap" which was apparently never submitted to the Corps (see attached Exhibit ). The report was provided to us by Steve Jones, consul for the City of Union Gap on this project. This report includes data on the site not in any of the reports submitted to the Corps, particularly related to the area north of the proposed "take ". This July 2000, report, on page 4, it describes existing conditions and a delineation of the approximate 40 acres north of the proposed right -of -way. The area described is the northern portion of the Wonder site. As described in the third paragraph on page 4, Adolfson's biologists conducted a delineation on April 4, 2000. The report states the wetlands are contiguous with those delineated in the proposed road corridor and includes 18 acres that they delineated as wetlands in this area north of the proposed road. At the . bottom of page 4 it states, "The wetlands are characterized by hydric soils and wetland vegetation. During the field visit, wetland hydrology was indicated by oxidized root channels and wetland drainage patterns. Wetland hydrology exists on this site due to water flowing through irrigation ditches, mainly during the summer months." This statement basically agrees with our findings that the wetlands are present due to irrigation waters. As stated in the April 4, 2000 report, during their early (April) growing 1 Fl-- Wonder Property/MI-139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 3 season observation of the site no wetland hydrology was present. We believe that Adolfson then agrees with what we have found; that only through flood irrigation is any wetland hydrology present on this site. However, this information at this level of detail was excluded from the Adolfson Concept Mitigation Plan dated December 2000, Revised February 2001 submitted to the Corps. What is described in the submitted February 2001 revised Conceptual Mitigation Plan (pg4, under "Site 1 ") is a brief description of the area of the Wonder "wetland" as a potential mitigation area. The Concept Mitigation Plan submitted to the Corps does include one important statement regarding hydrology on the area north of the proposed road project. The Plan states; "The main limiting factor for this site is the lack of . availability of wetland hydrology." So although Adolfson made a brief statement about irrigation as a source of hydrology to the wetlands and infers that no natural wetland hydrology is present on this site, this artificial source of wetland hydrologywas apparently overlooked in the review process. The Adolfson studies submitted to the Corps did not accurately characterize the substantial influence that irrigation waters have on the site's soils and plants (and ultimately what is and isn't a jurisdictional wetland). Therefore, this B- twelve study has been prepared to accurately portray the site conditions and to describe why the acceptance of the original Adolfson delineation by the Corps should be amended. 2.0 SITE HISTORY As previously stated, the site has been used for agricultural purposes since the turn of the century. In the late 1800's until early 1900's, the site started receiving water from the two irrigation companies for this area; the Broadgage Ditch Company (incorporated 1885) and the New Schanno Ditch Company (started in 1872). Both of these Companies get their water deliveries from the original 1872 Pacific Power and Light (PP &L) Power Canal which diverts water from the Naches River into the system. New Schanno Ditch Company directs water from the PP &L wasteway. Broadgage originally obtained its water from Cowiche Creek near the headworks of the Fruitvale Power Canal. In 1911- 1912, New Schanno and Broadgage ditch companies united and rebuilt the upper part of the ditches with a common intake referred to as the Broadgage - Schanno Diversion out of the PP &L wasteway. Both ditch companies have rights to water from the PP &L wasteway from April 1- October of each year. In October, at the end of the growing season, the diversions are closed and no water passes through the ditches. Over time the City of Yakima has become the major stockholder in each of these drainage companies. However, they both remain as separate viable companies and 'each has its own "ditchrider" or maintenance worker who maintains the channels, diverts the water and turns on and off any diversions. INDEX • • Wonder Property/#A1 -13 9 B- twelve Associates, Inc. • August 21, 2001 • Page 4 Currently, the New Schanno Ditch Company can deliver water to the site on the northeast comer of the property in the vicinity of the old loafing sheds. A control structure is located on the east side of 1S Street. The main ditch directed water diagonally across the site towards the center of the site where it joined the Broadgage tail -water canal through the site. Numerous laterals fan out from the main ditch and provided flood irrigation to the east side of the site when needed. Irrigation water not used by Broadgage Ditch Company members is directed to the site as tail -water in a ditch located near the northwest comer of the site. A control structure (not • maintained by Broadgage but installed and operated by the owner) is located at the point where the ditch enters the site. The owner placed this structure many years ago to direct tail -water onto the western side of the site for flood irrigation. When water passed through this structure which recently was damaged and could not be "shut off', water would enter several channels with numerous laterals and would spread water out across the west side of the site. Any water remaining would enter a ditch near the south end of the site and be directed back to the main Broadgage tail -water canal. This canal leaves the southeast corner of the site near the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard Extension. When Adolfson conducted their study water was being directed onto this portion of the site through the damaged control structure and was running over the top of the ditch were the sides had been broken down by cattle. For nearly 100 years, water has been directed to the site through these two irrigation ditches. This water has been directed to, and spread out over the site through a series of ditches and shallow laterals using standard flood irrigation practices. The location and direction of the flow of water varied depending on where it was needed to encourage plant growth for hay and forage. As is common in the Yakima valley, flood irrigation was /is a common, "low tech" way of irrigating large areas of land that would otherwise not support plant growth other than bunchgrass and sagebrush. The technique of flood irrigating is to take dry land and flood it with surface water through a series of shallow ditches and swales to get water to spread out and saturate all of the soil. Generally, the surface water flows across the site and through the conveyance laterals and any extra water is carried away from the site in a tail -water ditch. Since a given site is only one user in the chain of properties receiving irrigation water, it is typical that the landowner must convey the tail -water onto the next property that has irrigation rights. It turns out that the subject site, it is the last user (subscribed user in the case of New Schanno) in both these irrigation systems. If the New Schanno water is not wanted on the site a control structure on the east side of South ls Street can stop the flow to the . site. However, tail -water entering the site in the Broadgage ditch must either be used for irrigation or directed off the site in the tail -water channel that heads east along the existing Valley Mall Boulevard. ` 0 , • Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 5 For the last 30 years the site has been grazed by livestock that have trampled and blocked many of the laterals and ditches across the site. As previously stated, prior to 1999, the control structure located at the Broadgage ditch where the ditch enters the site was damaged. Damage included destruction of the gate valve and the berm, which normally diverted water to the main tail -water canal near the center of the site. This resulted in irrigation water flowing uncontrolled across most of the west side of the site. Additionally, the tail -water ditch that carried all tail -water off the site near the southeast corner of the site had been blocked by construction of the sewer and water line that was installed across the site. The construction occurred approximately 6-8 years ago when the City of Yakima installed a sewer and water line through the site in the location of the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard extension. There were no wetland issues in this area at the time this project was done (to our knowledge). Incidentally, historically a rail spur crossed the site in the location of the sewer line and proposed road extension.. Some of the remnant grades of the spur are still evident on the east side of the site along the old PP &L transmission line easement. The sewer and water line construction work resulted in piles of fill being left in the tail - water channel.. Since that fill work tail -water backed up and filled the tail -water canal and much of the.western portion of the site for several years. This back - flooding encouraged wetland vegetation growth in this area. Recent Irrigation Maintenance Work When it was discovered in the fall of 2000 that the City of Union Gaps consultant Adolfson Associates Inc. had called much of the site a wetland in 1999, it was recognized by the owners that a combination of flood irrigation and the failing irrigation system had most likely caused these artificially supported wetlands to form. At that time, and as was routinely done on the property when conditions required, work was conducted to fix damaged irrigation features. First the New Schanno Ditch Company was contacted and the delivery of water to the site through that irrigation ditch was shut off in the fall of 2000. Although unauthorized by the owners, this water was turned on again in early May of 2001 by the lessee running cattle on the site, but was shut off again before it had started to spread across the site. The New Schanno delivery was a major contributor to the hydrology in the area called Wetland A in the Adolfson report as well as to an isolated 'area of wetland they mapped on the northeast side of the site, east of the Broadgage north -south tail -water channel. - Secondly, the damaged owner installed control structure of the Broadgage ditch at the north side of the site was closed and the water directed into the main tail -water ditch through the site. This cut off all water to the laterals and feeder ditches on the west side of the site, which supplied water to the area called Wetland B/C by Adolfson in their study. • Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 • Page 6 The blockage of the Broadgage tail -water ditch at the southeast corner of the site was removed allowing tail -water to pass through the site unobstructed. Areas of trampled and disturbed soil within the main Broadgage ditch through the site were cleaned out to facilitate movement of irrigation water through the ditch. Several blockages have occurred during the course of the summer causing tail -water to back up and pond in the main tailgate ditch. These blockages were removed as routine maintenance. Several blockages have also occurred within the ditch system to the south within the City of Union Gap. Some of these blockages have also slowed or backed up tail -water on occasion. Blockages off -site need maintenance work at this time. As in the past, cattle continue to be grazed on the site but were removed in mid July as no green forage was left at that time. 3.0 METHODOLOGY As described in my June 1, 2001, wetland analysis study critique addressed to Bryan Evenson of Thomer, Kennedy & Gano P.S. (see Exhibit F), the status of wetland hydrology is a major point of contention on this property. The Adolfson 1999, Valley Mall Boulevard Extension Project Wetland Study contends that jurisdictional emergent - and scrub -shrub wetlands are present on the site. The study states that these wetlands are precipitation fed, although the subsequent December 2000 Valley Mall Boulevard Conceptual Mitigation Plan (Adolfson Associates, Inc.) concedes that the area referred to as Wetland A is "bisected by a seasonal drainage fed by irrigation runoff". Based upon my research and observations of the site in 2001, it was evident to me that although wetland soils and vegetation are present on the site, they are the result of very long term (close to 100 yrs) flood irrigation practices and recent lack of irrigation facility maintenance. It is well known that if water is placed on an upland area and conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding exist for long enough for anaerobic conditions to be created during the growing season, wetland vegetation will colonize, and, eventually, wetland soils will develop. Some studies suggest that in as short as 30 days some hydric soil indicators start to form in the soil profile under these conditions. As water has been flood irrigated over a vast majority of the site during the growing season for decades, it is inevitable if soil saturation occurs during this flooding, that hydric soil indicators will form. In fact, hydric soil indicators are present on much of the site but reflect a long -term artificial hydrology supported area. If the flood irrigation were to cease, it is likely that the soils will retain some of their hydric characteristics, although they would no longer be wet nor considered wetlands. Vegetation on much of the site also meets wetland criteria. Most species are typical facultative pasture species found in both uplands and wetlands. Examples of these facultative species include tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), quackgrass (Agropyron repens), velvet grass (Holcus lanantus) and bluegrass (Poa spp.). Others, particularly on the west side of the site in the area mapped as Wetland B/C have a fairly thick cover of • Wonder Property / #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. • August 21, 2001 Page 7 rush (Juncus balticus), some reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and foxtail (Alopecurus spp.) in areas where flood irrigation was heaviest and lateral ditches were blocked by trampling from livestock. The vegetation present on the site is a result also of a combination of long term flood irrigation practices during the growing season allowing hydrophytic vegetation to persist and colonize, and, selective grazing by livestock of the more palatable non - wetland species. Regardless of the presence of hydric soil and vegetation indicators on the site, the presence of wetland hydrology is the driving force behind wetland presence, without wetland hydrology an area does not meet wetland criteria. As stated on page 80 of the Washington State Wetlands delineation Manual "CAUTION; If hydrophytic vegetation is being maintained only because of human induced wetland hydrology that would no longer exist if the activity (e.g. irrigation) were terminated, the area should not be considered a wetland". In addition, under the definition of "Wetlands" on page 9 of the Manual, its states; "Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass lines swales, canals, etc. ". • The US Army Corps of Engineers uses a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 94 -5 that was released from the Seattle District Office of the Corps on September 30, 1994 (see attached. Exhibit G). This SOP it outlines how the Corps will review areas affected by irrigation waters. Item #7c, states; "Wetlands or open water areas that have developed because of a regional rise in water table from either the influence of a reservoir or multiple farmers irrigation practices where, if one farmer ceased irrigation, there would not be a change to upland conditions, would be waters of the United States within the Corps jurisdiction ". Item #7d states; "Wetlands or open water areas that have developed as a result of a single farmers irrigation practices, that would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased, are not waters of the United States and are not within the Corps jurisdiction ". Therefore, only areas on the site that would naturally contain all three parameters meet • the definition of a wetland. Areas that do not have hydrology once the on -site irrigation is ceased do not meet wetland criteria. In order to determine what portion of the site was supported by natural water and not artificial irrigation water, an analysis of wetland hydrology was conducted within the areas depicted as wetland in the Adolfson studies. DOC. INDEX # 14— Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. • August 21, 2001 Page 8 Site Hydrology Monitoring Methods The site was visited between the period of March 14, 2001- July 5, 2001. Specifically, a site visit was conducted on March 14, April 2, April 28, May 16, June 5, July 5, 2001, and August 14, 2001 to collect hydrology data. Generally the growing season in Yakima, according to the Soil Survey starts on April 25'. Discussion of the accepted start of the growing season for Yakima with several experts ranges from the middle of March (Cathy Reed, WADOE) to the middle of April (Debbie Knaub/US Army Corps and Ron Raney USDA NRCS). Based upon soil temperature >5 degrees Celsius (41 degrees F) at a depth of 19.7" below the surface, the site was in the growing season on March 14 of this year because soil temps were 45 degrees F. Although on March 14, 2001, no active plant growth was noted, we used this as a conservative start time to monitor site hydrology based on the soil temperature criteria. A total of 56 data points were located on the site (see Exhibit H), primarily within the areas delineated as wetlands by Adolfson Associates in the 1999 study. At each point a soil pit was excavated at least 16" deep. At each pit observations of the level of standing water and soil saturation (i£ any) were recorded. Additionally, general notes on irrigation water flow and direction were noted and photographs were also taken throughout the site. Ed Sewall of B- twelve conducted all of the fieldwork and used the hydrology criteria as described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification Manual ( WADOE, March 1997) to determine the presence of any wetlands on the site. This is the methodology currently recognized by The US Army Corps of Engineers, City of Union Gap, City of Yakima and the State of Washington for wetland determinations and delineations. Data points were not permanently marked as problems with cattle trampling removed any flagging on the site. Data points were plotted and mapped on several transects through the site and are readily relocated. 4.0 OBSERVATIONS 4.1.1 March 14, 2001 During the initial site visit the soil temperature in several test pits at a depth of 19.7" was 45 degrees F, indicating we were in the growing season. As previously stated, no vegetation growth was noted during this site visit. No water was flowing onto the site in either the New Schanno Ditch Company delivery ditch on the northeast corner of the site, nor the Broadgage Ditch Company tail -water ditch which enters the northwest comer of the site and crosses the site to the southeast corner. Random soil pits were excavated at this time throughout the site in the areas o INDEX • Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. • August 21, 2001 Page 9 the purported wetlands. Wetland vegetation and hydric soils were found as generally described in the Adolfson June 1999 report. However, at this time, no area on the site met wetland hydrology criteria, including the bottom of the main Broadgage tail -water canal across the site. Soils were found to be moist at a depth of 12 " -16" on much of the site and other pits were dry. No soil saturation within 12" of the surface or inundation was found at any point on the site. On the northwest portion of the site in the area described by Adolfson as Wetland B /C, dried algae on the soil surface from the previous year's flood irrigation was present as well as trampled ruts from livestock. Based upon data collected from the Yakima Airfield, rainfall for the month of March of 2001 was .47 ". Rainfall for March based upon the period from 1946 -2000 shows a mean March rainfall of .67 ". The 2001 year to date rainfall total at the end of March was 1.42 ", normal or mean rainfall at this time was 2.71 ". Therefore, the site to date was 1.29" below normal rainfall at the end of March. Although rainfall is below average for the year at this date, based upon soil observations it does not appear that if rainfall were average, the additional 1.29" of rain would bring any of the soil pits observed to a point where soil saturation would reach wetland hydrology criteria. No areas of the site met all three wetland criteria at this point. 4.1.2 April 2, 2001 • As with the previous March site visit, both the New Schanno delivery ditch and Broadgage tail -water ditch were dry with no water in them. All laterals and other ditches were also dry, on -site. Formal Data Points were established throughout the site and data collected during this site visit. As with the March visit, soils within the pits were found to be either dry or moist. No wetland hydrology was noted anywhere on the site. All pits within the proposed road extension area were dry. Vegetation on the site was starting to grow at this point. No areas of the site met all three wetland criteria at this time. 4.1.3 April 28, 2001 • At the time of this site visit, the Broadgage tail -water ditch was dry as it had been in both previous site visits. The New Schanno delivery ditch had been turned on by the lessee who was grazing cattle on the site. Water was flowing in the main ditch approximately 100' onto the property in the vicinity of the loafing sheds. The New Schanno Company ditchrider was called and informed that the ditch was to be shut off, and the ditch was shut off several days later. Water ceased flowing onto the site at this time. DCC- INDEX • • Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 10 As with all previous site visits, no soil saturation or inundation was noted within 16" of the surface in any of the Data pits. Surface soils were dry and dusty despite a slightly higher than normal April rainfall of .54 ". Vegetation on the site, particularly the stands of rush (Juncus balticus) were showing signs of stress due to lack of water, tips were starting to dry out and brown. No areas of the site met all three wetland criteria at this point. 4.1.4 May 16, 2001 The New Schanno ditch delivery and all associated laterals were dry with no flowing or subsurface water at the time of this site visit. The Broadgage Ditch Company had opened valves at the main pumping station located near the intersection of Division Street and 3'd Avenue and started water delivery to its members on May 15. On May 16 irrigation tail -water was entering the site in the Broadgage ditch and had proceeded along the north property line ditch to a point 33 feet west of the turn of the main ditch to the south. As was previously stated in this report, • repairs made to the Broadgage tail -water ditch where it enters the site have stopped the spreading of water across the west side of the site in the area described by Adolfson as • Wetland B /C. All the lateral ditches and flood irrigation ditches in this area were dry and did not receive irrigation water anymore. Data points were inspected throughout the site and again, no area meeting wetland hydrology was noted. Soils were dry to moist within 12" of the surface. Several pits were excavated extra deep down to 39" to see where the regional groundwater table actually was. In DP# 16 saturation was found at a depth of 27 ". In DP #38, soil saturation was found at a depth of 39 ". Further evidence of drying out of the site was clear as rushs in the Adolfson Wetland B/C area continued to brown and have little or no growth. No areas of the site met all three wetland criteria at this time. 4.1.5 June 5, 2001 Conditions remained identical as on May 16. No evidence of any wetland hydrology was present in any of the data points. All soil pits were either dry or only moist down to a depth of 16 ". Irrigation tail -water was flowing to the south in the Broadgage ditch and was totally contained within the ditch and not entering any laterals. , 0f NOD', Wonder Property / #A1 -139 • B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 11 Large areas within the area Adolfson delineated as Wetland B/C were totally brown, particularly the areas dominated by foxtail (Alopecurus spp. — see photos) indicating this area has dried out enough that plant mortality of the previously irrigation supported hydrophytes was occurring. 4.1.6 July 5, 2001 During my July 5 site visit, irrigation tail -water in the Broadgage ditch had slowed but was still present in most of the ditch. Some subsurface seepage was noted in the areas of DP# 9 and DP 10. Water stood within the irrigation ditch along the north side of the site and some subsurface seepage apparently occurred after the water had been continually in the ditch for 2 months now. As noted in Table 1, water table elevations within this area along the north edge of the Broadgage Ditch ranged from 16 " -18" of the surface. Although the water table was elevated in the seepage area along the ditch, it was still below the 12" depth required to meet wetland hydrology criteria. A.11 other pits on -site were either dry or moist. DP# 15 was excavated extra deep to see where the water table was in this portion of the site and soil saturation was found at a depth of 27 ". Several other deep pits were dug to depths of 24" at random points throughout the area delineated as Wetland B/C and no soil saturation was found. This indicates the regional groundwater table is at a depth >24" and, based on observations at DP #15, at a depth of approximately 27 ". Groundwater levels in this portion of the site have remained relatively stable since May with little evidence of a regional groundwater table rise. This is probably a result of the lack of irrigated agricultural land in the vicinity of the site. There are no irrigated agricultural lands left surrounding the site as most of this area has been converted to commercial/industrial uses. This may explain why there appears to be little, if any regional groundwater rise in this area related to local irrigation. The month of June 2001, had an exceptionally high rainfall of 1.03 ", whereas the normal rainfall during this month is 0.69 ". All vegetation on the site was drying out and browning as no irrigation water had been spread on the site this growing season. May areas of the site were undergoing widespread browning of vegetation, particularly the shallow rooted species such as the foxtail on the west side of the property. No areas of the site met all three wetland criteria at this time. 4.1.7 August 2, 2001 On July 30, 2001, . the City of Yakima sewer line backed up and a large volume of sewage was spread out on the southern portion of the site surrounding the "take ". On August 2, 2001, Bryan Evenson took photographs of this area. Following the sewage spill but before August 2, the City of Yakima bulldozed surface soils into piles and spread lime Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 12 over the area. Exhibit I is a copy of the letter from the City of Yakima to WADOE explaining what happened on the site. • 4.1.8 August 14, 2001 Irrigation water within the Broadgage was approximately 18 -24" below the top of the ditch through most of the tailwater canal. The ditch on the north property line had failed near the control structure. Water stains on the surface of the soil indicate water had spread out (possibly during a surge in irrigation water in the canal) in the northern 20 -30 feet near the entrance of the Broadgage onto the site. Due to the leak in this area, water was found in near the surface (- 10 " -12 ") in Data point #9. An area approximately 6,000sf near the entrance to of the broadgage met wetland hydrology criteria. However, this appears to be solely related to the failure of the ditch at this point. All other data points on the site were either dry or moist. Several of the deep soil pits on the site were observed to have a water table at a depth of -24 ". Red clover was noted as becoming more dominant on the site. Browning of most of the vegetation on the site has occurred. The area of the sewage spill was dry, although a flush of growth has occurred in this previously brown area from the nutrient laden water dispersed from the sewer line in this area. With the exception of the above noted area of the ditch failure near the northwest comer of the site, no areas of the site met wetland hydrology criteria. 4.2 Rainfall Data Rainfall for the year to date is 2.91", in 1999; rainfall at the end of June was 4.05 ". Based upon long term precipitation data (since 1946) total precipitation for Yakima in this 6 month period averages 4.4 ". Obviously, this year is dryer than a normal year, but only by a total of 1.51 "and only 1.14" from the year Adolfson collected their data. This minor amount of rainfall difference would not be enough to raise the water table from the average depth on the site of 24" to within 12" of the surface. Particularly as this past Junes 1.03" rainfall was 34% higher than normal and actually much higher than the 0.17" of rainfall that fell in June of 1999. DO 1NDE) Wonder Property/ #A1 -139 B- twelve Associates, Inc. August 21, 2001 Page 13 5.0 CONCLUSIONS Based upon our observations and monitoring of the site since the repairs to irrigation features as well as shutting off the New Schanno irrigation delivery, we have concluded that there are no jurisdictional wetlands on the site. Other than the area surrounding the recent breach of the Broadgage ditch near the north end of the site, there has been no evidence of any area of the site meeting wetland hydrology criteria since the cessation of flood irrigation last fall and the repairs to the Broadgage irrigation tail -water ditch. Additionally, data described on page 4 of Adolfsons July 2000 Conceptual Mitigation Plan further confirms the fact that wetland hydrology on this site is only present in an artificial condition when flood irrigation is directed out and across the site. This is not a naturally occurring condition and no wetland hydrology remains on the site at this time. Sincerely, ��.,a�►�� B- twelve Associates, Inc. ` -Q� ®t � $ �d a % s / �� o 11 , of 0 ;co °�!P" . , ,aft' N W # P Ed Sewall k �^' I" •43101 Senior Wetland Ecologist � o T 4 0002 1 2 ft File:Ed /A1139wa.doc 4'1 6, 441 Wete *b. CC: Bryan Evenson, consul for owners • - Steven Jones, attorney for City of Union Gap Ray Paolella, Yakima City attorney Attachments: Photographs of Wonder et al. property, April - August 2001 • Table IA: Hydrology monitoring results for Wonder site. All data is listed in inches, () indicates depth below soil surface at which soil saturation was found. All pits were excavated to a depth of -16". Several pits were excavated deeper to determine where the water table was, these are indicated by a *. DATE OF OBSERVATION Sample 3/14/01 4 /2 / 014/28/01 5 /16/ 016/5 /017/5 /018/14/01 Point #1 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #2 dry dry dry dry dry -22* moist #3 drY drY drY dry dry dry dry #4 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #5 dry dry dry dry dry -21* moist #6 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #7 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #8 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #9 dry dry dry dry dry -17* -10 #10 dry dry dry dry dry -16 -15 #11 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #12 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #13 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #14 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #15 dry dry dry dry dry -27* -24 #16 dry dry dry -27* dry dry -24 #17 dry dry dry dry • dry dry dry #18 dry dry dry dry dry moist moist #19 dry dry dry - dry dry moist moist #20 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #21._ .. dry- - dry . dry dry . dry dry dry #22 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #23 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #24 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #25 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #26 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #27 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #28 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #29 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #30 dry dry dry dry dry moist moist #31 dry , dry dry dry dry dry dry #32 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #33 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #34 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #35 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #36 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #37 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #38 dry dry dry -38* dry dry moist #39 dry dry dry dry dry moist moist #40 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #41 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry INDE . I it Table 1B: Hydrology monitoring results for Wonder site. All data is listed in inches, ( -) indicates depth below soil surface at which soil saturation was found. All pits were excavated to a depth of -16". Several pits were excavated deeper to determine where the water table was, these are indicated by a *. Note; pit #50 is in the Broadgage ditch. DATE OF OBSERVATION Sample 3/14/01 4 /2 / 014/28/01 5 /16 / 016/5/01 7/5 / 018/14/01 Point #42 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #43 moist moist moist moist moist moist moist #44 dry drY dry dry dry dry dry . #45 drY dry dry dry dry dry dry #46 drY dry dry dry dry dry dry #47 dry dry dry dry dry dry drY #48 drY dry dry dry drY dry drY #49 dry dry dry dry dry drY dry #50 moist moist moist moist inundated inundated inundated #51 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #52 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #53 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #54 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #55 dry dry dry dry dry dry dry #56 dry dry dry dry dry dry _ dry DOC. INDEX' {,1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • INQ: • • • • • Aran ■ 50503.69 SF o ' /' ^ CO 1 ' : t i�. . . 7 t. V - y p - (D l../ W � ,� I . ? 1 f 1 O) i • 1 ■ I I —+ e .t 1 f _ _._. _ _... — — � � i� 1 i ,\\ CD --% 0 g tr ".. z _i \, P1 N \ \ O t --- r ,, . - _ ^- -....-. _... - -- -.... ... - - - - . — ... - - - -�- ._ � \ f i 1 f 1. ((�� -- r / c 11 .l op 1 t • d . n _ �Fp I c p u �r w -P +r / o -+ � f l 9 1°, 0 1 z >+ o Il 1. w .. �) t 1 ? 4 Y j - • - - - -- -- — ........ .l �s :gist i • 1 o • 1 1 P g a . • .� jolt. � m ,• N :..,.. as s i ' W • i p • -- 4 - , & - • - - P ; _ i 'r z � ' . n a --1 m 1 IN, � I --- -- 471( MEET ii )�,_ , ' � 1 .�_ ,/ o Z J —' N .e. , r" ,' F � � W I .;1 ^ Z " • • • M /S . 711 t 31110-- '"I - �! A > 9 - - • 1 l / r s . N P. al P., i m; •- [ y `/ X1 - • b ll - � Arno• 1 " i` o I�-- f 1 `�� — ' >q B- twelve Associates. Inc. u . �s�A m - - * .. . `� / �,�+�`,! ' � ��n Ecological Services ya, ro w rn • 1103 W. Meeker St., Suite C - Kent, WA 98032 w 253- 859 -0515 Fax 253 - 852 -4732 c Z CITY OF UNION GAP L 4. p, DATE: n2/23/00 • • ( _ S 9 YARINA COUNTY WASHINGTON y 111:1, - o a _,a , SCALE: As Shown • f m VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD " • / ' o .IN- � �' �� DRAWN: tc , � ADDITIONAL ROW CHECKED: uAS >•IUI B1JCHER, WILDS & RATUFF RIGHT — O P— WAY P L 1 - 1 FOR BUS PULLOUT o3 /oe NAP 11 ,11/1\ comets PLAU ns ARcarEas 1 TQ'U S JULY. 30. 20001 MO, REVISION DATE APPD APPROVED: LIAP 2003 c C SEA= w.1u1Hman 95121 205- 446 -2l23 - • • • • . . . . . . • • . • . . . . . . . • ... . . . • • . . . • • • . . .._— . . . . • • . . • . . . • • .. , . . • . . . . • • . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . • • • • . • • . , • . . . . • - - •• . . • . . . . . . • • • • • . • . • . . .. . . • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • - . • • • • • . , . . . . . . . • . . • • • • • • - . • . . . . , . • . . •. .. . • • .. . • • • • . • . . . . • • . . . . . . , . . . . . . " • •••• • • ... . . • • • • • . . . . . . , . . . . • . . • . • . • . . . . . . . • • • • • • . • • . • • . . • . • . . • . • . • . • . . . , . . ••• . ..... . . • .. ' • . . . .. . . . , . . . .. . . . . . • •• . •• • . , . . . . . . . • . . •• • ••• • . , • . . • • . . • . • • • • • .• • . .. . . . . . . . . . . . • • : . • . . . . . . . . . . , . ... . . . . . , . • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . • . .. • . - . .• . . • • • • . . . .. . . . . . • .• „, . . • . • . . . . • • . . • . • • • • • . . . , . . . . . . • , . .. . . .• • - . • • . • • " .. • . . . • ... . .. . . . •• • ... . . . .. . . • .. . . . • •• • •.. • . •. . . .. • • . . • • • - • • • - • . . • . . • • • • • • • • . ., .. . • . , . - . ..... - • .. . . ... .. . .. ., . .. . ... .. • - • . . , • . . . ..• . ... . • • ' • • " , . • • . ., ., .. • • .• • ". -, • • • • ••,. • . . .. . . . . ... ... . . • • • • • . . . . . . . . . .. •• • •• • • . • - • • • • •• • • • , ..• • •• . . • •• . . . . •. . • .. . . . . . . • . . . . . ..• . .• • • .. . . . .. • • • • ., . • - . . . . . .. • • • • • . • . . • • - . • • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • : , • •• • •• • . . . ... • , .. . • . . . .• . . • , . • • • . ..- . • • .. . • • •• • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • .. . • . • . .. . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . • • . • : • . . • • . . . . . . .. . .. , . .. • - ., . ,. ... . . . .. . . . • ........ ,.• • • . • • . • . • .. • • • - • •• • . .. • . „ • . . . . .. . • •• . • .. • . . . . . ,. . . ... ... . • .. . . •• .. . . . . • . , .. . • , ... • •. .-, . •,, . . . . . . . . • , . ,. ..... . . . . . . . . • , • • - • • . ..... . .. . . . . . . • • , . .. .. . • . • •• — .. . . • . .. . • • . . . .. • .. . . • • . . • . • .. .. .• • ' .. .... . • . .. .. •• • .. , . . , . . •. .. . . . • • • .. . , .. • . • • . , •. . - • . .• . ..... .• . .. . . .,....: .. .. • ..... „ . . . .• • .• • .. • • • • : •• • •'••• .-',,'. s .. , .;. • , ••• • •• '.:•.• •• '1 • ',. : ., .• .• • .•, • • • • • • •• • - • . • • • . • - ...... ••• . . • ... . . . • • • . • . . .• , .. .• , . : .... . . ....., • .... , .,.. ..... .. • - • • • , . .. • ... . . . . . . • .... .... . . . . • , • • • • • • • . • • „ . • • • • • • • •• .. • •• .• • .. • . . • . . . .. , . , . , . . , • , . • • •• ... • • . •• • .,•; • • . , . ,• . .. . . .. • .. . . .. • • •• • • .. . • . . . . . .. . , ... ., • • • • • . . • • . . . . . • . . .• . . . . . . . . • . • • • •. .• •.:. .• . , • .. . . • ,. , . • . • . . . .. • . . ." - • •. .• . .. . .. • • • • .• • • • • .• . . . . ... . . .• . „ . . • • ... . • . . . .. • • . • . . . . . . .. • • ••• • •• . . • • . . .,•• . . ..• .•• .• . ... • • . • . .• . . • . . • • .• • • • • .. .. . .. , • •.., • •• .... . • . .• ... " . , ••• . . . , . • . . • . • • ... • • . . ...•....... . „.. .. . , . . . . , .. . . . .. • • • ••. • • • . . . , .. , . ., ., • • - .. . • . . . • • •• ' •• . ••• -• , . . • . • . •• -.••. •• . . . : .• .• . . . . .. . . - . • . .• . . • . . . , .. .• . , . .. . .. .., . . ...... . .. .. .. - . • • • . . • .• • • • .. .. .. . • . . . . „ •• ,. ... - ....; . . . • .. . • •.. . • •• .... • •••• .• • .. • . . „ . . , . . . ,.. . ... . . . . - • •.. .•• •. • • • •• . . .., . . , • . . . . • • • . •••• • .• • • . • • . • ... • „. .. • •• • ••• . • .. e .... . . .. ., , • ... . • . . . . • , • . • . . • .. . • . • • .• ,. . , . • • . ., , ,.• .. . . . .. - . • • . . • . • .. . ,. . • • • . . . • .. ..... . . .. . .., • . • • . • • • .• • . , . . •• • . . . •• • •••. • • • •• • •. . .. . • . . .. • • . • . .. . . . . ••• • . . . ... . . . , . . . .. .. .. . .. • • . . .. ... • •• . .. •.• - • - • • , • . . .• • . , ....• • . , •. .. • • - •• • • . .... . , . . • • . . Dcc EXHIBIT: B ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. JUNE 1999 WETLAND STUDY DOC, !NOD 4 14---I • JUNE 1999 VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION PROJECT WETLAND STUDY Union Gap, Washington A D O L F S O N • l,k Prepared for: Bucher, Willis & Ratliff 2003 Western Avenue, Suite 100 Seattle, Washington 98121 -2193 Prepared by: Adolfson Associates, Inc, 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, Washington 98107 DOC INDEX • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study E I EcuTIVE SUMMARY • • . At the request of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corp., Adolfson Associates, Inc. (AAI) performed . wetland delineations and prepared this technical report for the Valley Mall Boulevard Extension, located in the City of Union Gap, Washington. All rights -of -entry to the subject property for the • purpose of conducting this study were granted by the City of Union Gap. The boundaries of the study area were estimated based on plan and profile drawings provided to Bucher, Willis & • Ratliff Corporation by Gray & Osborne, Inc. The study area consisted of a 100 -foot wide corridor along the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard extension right -of -way. The Scope of Work for this project included wetlands .determinations, delineations, and a functional value assessment, all summarized in this technical report. A brief discussion of regulatory implications and permitting considerations is also included,in this report. An analysis of potential wetlands impacts and the development of a mitigation plan were not included in this • Scope of Work. • The Valley Mall Boulevard Extension project corridor, an approximately 1.44 mile long, 100 - foot wide corridor, is located west of the existing Valley Mall Boulevard, in Union Gap, • • Washington (Section 6, Township 18 East, Township 12 North) (Figure 1). The project corridor • traverses undeveloped land, commercial and industrial properties, a railroad right -of -way and pasture lands. Three wetlands were delineated within the project corridor. Each of these wetlands extend beyond the project corridor. The portions of the wetlands that extended outside the corridor were noted but not flagged.. Within the project right -of -way, Wetland A covers 1,983 square feet (0.05 acre). This is a palustrine scrub - shrub. wetland bisected by a drainage near the eastern boundary of the project. Wetland B/C covers 123,953 square feet (2.85 acre) within the project right-of- way. Wetland B/C is a palustrine scrub -shrub wetland bisected by a drainage between the eastern boundary of the project and the Burlington Northern Railroad. Wetland D covers 5,054 • square feet (0.12 acre) within the right -of -way. Wetland D is a palustrine scrub -shrub wetland • bisected by a drainage near the western boundary of the project. Wetlands in the City of Union Gap are regulated based on an assessment of the functions and values of the wetland using the Washington State Department of Ecology's Wetlands Rating System for Eastern Washington as a guideline. Wetlands A and B/C meet the criteria under this rating system for Category DI wetlands and Wetland D meets the criteria for a Category IV wetland. According to the City of Union Gap Ordinance No. 2078, a 50 -foot buffer is required for Category DI wetlands and Category IV wetlands require a 25 -foot buffer. Mitigation for impacts to wetlands and buffers is determined on a case by case basis in the City of Union Gap. • i~: = 1NDE > • page Adolf Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • ' t Wiley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study ' TABLE OF CONTENTS • • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i TABLE OF CONTENTS ii PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK - • 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 WETLAND DEFINITION AND REGULATIONS • • 1 METHODS . 2 Review of Existing Information 2 On -site Investigation • • 2 WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS 3 Vegetation 3 ' Soils • 3 Hydrology 4 Wetland Functions and Values 4 • FINDINGS 5 Existing Information 6 .. Wetlands Determinations 6 Wetland A • 6 Wetland B/C 7 • Wetland D 8 Upland Description : - 8 Wildlife Observations REGULATORYTh 9 IPLICATIONS 1 9 LIMITATIONS 10 'REFERENCES 11 FIGURES APPENDIX A: SUM,vIARY OF WETLANDS REGULATIONS A-1 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF TERMS B -1 APPENDIX C: COMMON & TAXONOMIC PLANT RY-LVE • C -1 • APPENDIX D: FUNCTIONS AND VALUES ASSESSMENT TABLES D -1 .APPENDIX E: DATA SHEETS E -1 • • DOG, INDEX # \-k--( Adotfson Associates, Inc. Page ii 6/9/99 98157 - MP Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • PROJECT AUTHORIZA'TION AND SCOPE OF WORK At the request of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corp., Adolfson Associates, Inc. (AAI) performed wetland delineations and prepared this technical report for the Valley Mall Boulevard Extension, located in the City of Union Gap, Washington. All rights -of -entry to the subject property for the • purpose of conducting this study were granted by the City of Union Gap. The boundaries of the study area were estimated based on plan and profile drawings provided to Bucher, Willis & Ratliff Corporation by Gray & Osborne, Inc. The study area consisted of a 100 -foot wide corridor along the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard extension right -of -way. The Scope of Work for this project included wetlands determinations, delineations, and a functional value assessment; all summarized in this technical report. A brief discussion of regulatory implications and permitting considerations is also included in this report. An analysis of potential wetlands impacts and the development of a mitigation plan were not included in this Scope of Work. • SITE DESCRIPTION • • The Valley Mall Boulevard Extension Project will provide a new east -west arterial corridor extending frornj-82. to the Yakima Air Terminal. This study'covers an approximately 1.44•mile long, 100 -foot wide corridor, located west of the existing Valley Mall Boulevard, in Union.Gap, Washington (Section 6, Township 18 East, Township 12 North) (Figure 1). The project corridor traverses undeveloped land., commercial and industrial properties, a Burlington Northern railroad right -of -way and pasture lands. The topography is flat and the project right -of -way contains mostly pasture grasses, with two areas of forested/shrub vegetation within the right -of -way. WETLAND DEFINITION AND REGULATIONS • Wetlands are formally defined by the Corps of Engineers (COE) (Federal Register 1982), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Federal Register 1985), the Washington Shoreline Management Act (SMA) (1971) and the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (1992) as "... those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and •that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas ", (Federal Re 1982, 1985). In addition, the SMA and/or the GMA definitions add: "Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland site, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990 that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands INDEX \-4 Adolfson Associates, Inc. ioioo OR t 57 - MP • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • may include those artificially created wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands." Numerous federal, state, and local regulations govern development and other activities in or near wetlands; at each level, there are typically several agencies charged with such powers (Appendix A). Specific regulatory implications concerning the subject property are summarized within this • report. METHODS Two levels of investigation were conducted for the analysis of wetlands on the subject property: a review of existing information and an on -site investigation. • Review of Existing Information A review of existing literature, maps, and other materials was conducted to identify wetlands or site characteristics indicative of wetlands on the subject property. Note that these sources can only indicate the likelihood of the presence of wetlands; actual wetland determinations must be . based upori data obtained from field investigations. • Several documents were available for this review: • • • U.S. Geological Survey (1:24,000) Topographic Map, Yakima East and West . quadrangles (1985). • Soil Survey of Yakima County Area, Washington. (Lenfesty and Reedy, 1985). • National Wetland Inventory, Yaldma East and West quadrangles. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1981). • Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. (Soil Conservation Service, 1991). On -site Investigation Methods defined in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997), a manual consistent with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (" 1987 Manual ") (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) • were used to determine the presence and extent of wetlands on the subject property Washington state and all local governments must use the state delineation manual to implement the SMA and/or the local regulations adopted pursuant to the GMA. The methodology outlined in the manual is based upon three essential characteristics of wetlands: (1) hydrophytic vegetation; (2) hydric soils; and (3) wetland hydrology. Field indicators of these three characteristics must all be present in order to make a positive wetland determination (unless problem areas or atypical situations are encountered). INDEX Adolfson Associates, Inc. Page 2 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • The "routine on -site determination method" was used to determine the wetland boundaries. The routine.method is used for areas equal to or less than five acres in size, or for larger areas with relatively homogeneous vegetative, soil, and hydrologic properties. Formal data plots were established in areas of relatively homogeneous vegetation, where information regarding each of the three wetland parameters was recorded. This information was • used to distinguish wetlands from non - wetlands. If wetlands were determined to be present on the subject property, the wetland boundaries were delineated.. Wetland boundaries and data plot locations were identified with sequentially- numbered colored flagging imprinted with the words "WETLAND DELINEATION." . WETLAND CHARACTERISTICS Vegetation • Plants must be specially adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic conditions to grow in wetlands. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has determined the estimated probability of each plant species` occurrence in wetlands and has accordingly assigned a "wetland indicator status" (WIS) to each species (Reed, 1997). Plants are categorized as obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC), facultative upland (FACU), upland.(UPL), not - listed (NL), or no indicator status (NI). Definitions for each indicator status are listed in the Glossary (Appendix B). Species with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered adapted for life in saturated or anaerobic soil conditions. Such species are referred to as " hydrophytic" vegetation. A ( +) or ( -) sign following the WIS signifies greater or lesser . likelihood, respectively, of being found in wetland conditions. • Areas of relatively homogeneous vegetative composition are primarily characterized by • "dominant" species (see Glossary). The indicator status of the dominant species within each vegetative strata is used to determine if the plant community of the area may be characterized as hydrophytic. The vegetation of an area is considered to be hydrophytic if greater than 50% of the dominant plant cover is comprised of species having an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC. • • Common plant names are used throughout this text. The common and taxonomic (scientific) names and wetland indicator status for each plant noted is presented in Appendix C. Scientific nomenclature of all plant species encountered follows that of Reed (1997). Where the taxonomic names of plant species have been recently changed, former names (synonymies) are included in Appendix C. Soils. Hydric soils are indicative of wetlands. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), has defined hydric soils as soils that are saturated, flooded. or ponded long. enough during_ the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (SCS. 1987). The NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, has compiled lists of hydric soils of the United `DOC, 114DEA ( page 3 Adolfson Associates, Inc. I-A- ioioo OR 157 - MP ... ---=^ Valley Mali Boulevard Wetland Study • States (SOS, 1987, 1991). These lists identify soil series mapped by the MRCS that meet hydric soil criteria: It is common, however, for a map unit of non - wetland (non - hydric) soil to have inclusions of hydric soil, and vice versa; field examination of soil conditions is therefore • important to determine if hydric conditions exist. Due to anaerobic conditions, hydric soils exhibit certain characteristics, collectively known as "redoximorphic features," that can be • observed in the.field. Redoximorphic features include: high organic content, accumulation of sulfidic material (rotten egg odor), greenish- or bluish -gray color (gley formation), spots or • blotches of different color interspersed with the dominant(or matrix) color (mottling), and dark soil colors (low soil chroma). Soil colors are described both by common color name (for example, "dark brown ") and by a numerical description of their hue, value, and chroma (for example, 10YR 2/2) as identified on a Munsell soil color chart (Munsell Color, 1988). • • Hydrology - Water must be present in order for wetlands to exist; however, it need not be present throughout the entire year. Wetland hydrology is considered to be present when there is permanent or • periodic inundation or soil saturation for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season (typically two weeks in lowland Pacific Northwest areas). Areas which are inundated or saturated for • between 5 and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years, may or may not be wetlands. Areas inundated or saturated for less than 5 percent of the growing season are non - wetlands (Ecology 1997). • Indicators of wetland hydrology include observation of ponding or soil saturation, water marks, drift lines, drainage patterns, sediment deposits, oxidized rhizospheres, water - stained leaves, and local soil survey data. Where positive indicators of wetland hydrology are observed, it is assumed that wetland hydrology occurs for a significant period of the growing season. Wetland Functions and Values Wetlands play important roles that provide valuable benefits to the environment and society. Detailed scientific knowledge of wetland functions, sometimes known as functional values, is limited, so that evaluations of the functions of individual wetlands are qualitative and dependent upon professional judgment. A methodology developed by the Corps (Reppert et al., 1979), and modified by Cooke (1996) was the primary basis for evaluating wetlands for the following wetland functions and values: (1) flood and storm water control; (2) base flow and ground water support; (3) erosion and shoreline protection; (4) water quality improvement; (5) natural biological support, (6) overall habitat functions; (7) specific habitat functions; and (8) cultural and socioeconomic characteristics. Flood and stormwater control refers to a wetland's ability to reduce or modify potentially damaging effects of storm and flood flows. This function is evaluated according to such parameters as size and category of wetland; type of outlet, amount of forested cover; and position in the drainage. DOG' • „ - T • Page 4 Adolfson Associates. Inc. 6/9/9998157 -MP - Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study Baseflow and groundwater support is defined as " ...the role which a specific wetland ar plays in maintaining the stability and environmental integrity of the entire system to which it is physically and functionally related" (Reppert et al., 1979). This function is evaluated according to parameters such as size and location of the wetland; proximity to other palustrine, riverine, or lacustrine- systems; hydroperiod; and presence of flow- sensitive fish.. • Erosion and shoreline protection refers to a wetland's ability to mitigate the effects of wave . effects and storm damage, and thus increase shoreline stability and limit erosion. This function is evaluated according to such features as type, structure, and density of vegetation; width of the vegetative. area and buffering capacity; and amount of development in the sub - catchment (see glossary).Water quality improvement refers to a wetland's ability to purify water through a • variety of physical, biological, and chemical processes. This function is evaluated according to • • such characteristics as size and type of wetland; nature and density of vegetation; hydroperiod; and proximity to pollution sources. , of Natural biological support refers to a wetland's ability such parameters as habitats ype,f diversity, and a species. This function is evaluated accordin to p of vegetation; proximity to other habitats; prevalence of invasive species; amount of organic accumulation and export; type, diversity, size, and amount of habitat features, width of buffer; and connectivity to other habitats. . Overall habitat function- r-efers.to the likelihood o the presence evaluated of according cuncommon top ant communit i s ies or associations of rare animal species. .This function size, amount of habitat diversity, and the presence or absence'of a wildlife refuge or sanctuary. Specific habitat function evaluates the wetland's capacity to provide habitat fo ers r i v ra tes, amphibians, fish, mammals, and birds. This function is evaluated by parametclud • presence of surface water, connectivity to other aquatic features, diversity of vegetative .,. communities , and proximity to other habitats. • Cultural and socioeconomic characteristics, based tunitiies for ducation or recreation, aesthetic evaluated by assessing parameters includin pp value, presence of commercially valuable natural resources, historical or archaeological value, • and proximity to open space. For purposes.of this report, wetlands were rated "LOW," "MODERATE," or "HIGH" for each wetland function. . • • FINDINGS . The following sections describe the results of the field These sections describe the wet ancis Mall Boulevard project corridor on January 11, 1999. ese of identified on the site, wetland functions and values, streams, upland habitats, and site. wildlife. Six data plots were established within relatively uniform areas of Data sheets, which correspond to formal data plots, are provided in Appendix E. DOC • 11 \00( 0....1 page 5 Adolfson Associates, Inc. (5/9/99 98157 - MP . • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • Existing Information A review of existing information was conducted. The United States Geologic Survey Topographic Maps, Yakima East and West quadrangles (1985) depict the project area as • relatively flat (Figure 2). According to the National Wetlands Inventory (1981), there are two wetlands located in the project area; a palustrine emergent wetland (PEM) east of the Burlington Northern Railroad and a palustrine forested wetland (PFO) located west of the railroad (Figure 3). The Soil Survey of Yakima County (Lenfesty and Reedy, 1985) maps the soils in the project corridor as Naches loam, Umapine silt loam and Zillah silt loam (Figure 4). Zillah silt loam is classified as a hydric soil (MRCS, 1995). Wetlands Determinations ' Three wetlands were delineated within the project corridor. All three of these ei d 1 extend foot beyond the project area; however, the wetland boundaries were only fla gg d • wide project corridor. Wetland areas extending beyond the project corridor were noted but not flagged. Figures 5a and 5b show the location of the wetlands within the project corridor from a professional survey of the wetland boundaries conducted by Gray& Osborne, Inc. (1999). A • total of two upland and four wetland data plots were established to characterize habitats within the project right-of-way.. Wetland A . Location. Wetland A covers 1,983 square feet (0.05 acre) within the project coidor. N s wetland is located near the eastern end of the project corridor and is not mapped map. Wetland A is characterized by Data Plot 1 (Fiore 5b). Vegetation. Wetland A is a palustrine scrub -shrub (PSS) wetland. White willow, reed canarygrass and velvetgrass are the dominant plant species in this wetland. See Appendix C for a complete plant list of the project area. Soils. Wetland A soils are mapped as Zillah silt loam (Figure 4). Zillah silt loam is a very deep, artificially drained soil in recent alluviums. The soils observed on the site do no avellch the mapped soil description. The on -site soils consisted of very dark gray (10YR 3/1) y sandy loam with brown (7.5YR 4/3) mottles. Hydrology. This wetland is bisected by a seasonal drainage. wever the soils in this w were saturated visit, there was no surface water in the draina however, at three inches below the soil surface. Other indicators of wetland hydrology observed during the field visit included drainage patterns, water marks and water - stained leaves. Wetland Functions and Values. Wetland A is a scrub -shrub wetland er control trol and base flow' /ground drainage. These qualities provide MODERATE flood/storm water support. Flow through the wetland is slow and the wetland contains approximately 50- S0% vegetative cover. These qualities provide a MODERATE to HIGH GH water plant diversity; i rating. However, this wetland contains only one habitat type v ;? 1 , , Page 6 Adolfson Associates, Inc. '�[) EY , .0 ../ ( 6/9/99 98157 - MP # za • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • features and disturbed buffers, thereby meriting a LOW rating for natur biological support and . habitat functions. This wetland also provides little aesthetic for value, ucteonalpcovunities a is privately owned. It therefore merits a LOW ratin f cultural and a codex no om Overall, Wetland A provides LOW -level wetland•functions and values (App D). Wetland B/C . Location. Wetland B/C is a large wetland covering 123 st eastern portion of the project corridor and project corridor. This wetland-is located between the ea the Burlington Northern Railroad (Figure 5b). Wetland B/C matches the mapped location of a palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland on the NWI map. As indicated on the NWI map, B/C extends approximately 500 feet beyond the southern boundary of the project corridor and 1000 feet beyond the northern boundary of the project or Ve _e t ation, Wetland B/C is a palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland ercent) of unvegetated ground, and 4. This wetland contains a large amount (approximately p the result of past disturbance by grazing and installation of utilities in the area. Some vegetation cover is present in this wetland and is dominated by emergent species such as reed canarygrass, bluegrass, tall fescue, curly dock, Canadian thistle and rush. • Soils. Wetland B/C soils are mapped as Naches loam (Figure 4). Naches loam is a very deep, g well drained soil formed in old alluvium and found description. he soils is o t d of very dark observed on the site did not match the mapped soil p tlon gray (2.5Y 3/1) silt loam with brown (10YR 4/3) mottles from 0-9 i c es below the su sand b y From 9 -16 inches below the surface, the soils were dark gray (1 • with brown (7.5YR 4/3Y mottles. . . is the ain source of H droloay. This wetland is a large depressional wetland. Precipitation ary field visit I-1 water to o this wetland. Indicators of wetland hydrology observed during the Jan included water marks, oxidized root channels, water - stained leaves and drainage patterns. Wetland Fun ctio ns and Values. Wetland B/C is a large, emergent, depressional round water and. This . 'wetland provides MODERATE flood/storm an�d is slow, and thea wetland contains less than 50 percent Movement of water throu the nt rating. vegetative cover. Wetland B/C therefore merits a MODERATE diversity, water few i a veme and This wetland contains only one habitat type with low plant • disturbed buffers, thereby receiving a LOW rating for natural value, few educational at p l of and habitat and is functions. Wetland B/C also provides little aesthetic , privately owned. It therefore merits a LOW rating for functions and values (Appendix D) es. Overall, Wetland B/C provides Low -level wetland fu • lliD r . - . # H page 7 Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study Wetland D . • Location. Wetland D covers 5,054 square feet (0.12 acre) of the western portion of the project ' corridor (Figure 5b). As indicated on the NWI map, this wetland is extends approximately 1000 feet north, beyond the project corridor and is characterized by Data Plot 6. . Vegetation. This wetland is the palustrine forested (PFO) wetland mapped on the NWT map (1981). However, during the field visit on Jan d 11, 1999, , AAI biologists tS d e trees were Wetland D to be a palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland t3' just outside the boundaries of this wetland. It is possible that this wetland may have been • forested at one time; however, it is currently grazed and contains a large amount of bare ground as well as some vegetation cover dominated by bluegrasses, mustard, and rushes. Soils. Wetland A soils are mapped as_Umapine silt loam, drained 0 -2% slope (Figure 4). This soil phase is a very deep, artificially drained, salt- and alkali- affected soil formed in alluvium • and found on flood plains and low terraces. The soils observed on the site did not match the mapped soil description. The on -site soils consisted of very dark gray (2.5Y 3/1) soils. • Hyd -. Precipitation is the main source of water for this wetland. At the time of the January field visit, portions of this wetland were inundated with approximately four inches of standing water, and other areas of the wetland were saturated to the surface. .Additional indicators of • . wetland hydrology . observed during the site visit include water marks, oxidized root channels, and drainage patterns. e Wetland Functions and Values. Wetland D is an emergent, depressional wetow through the MODERATE floddlstorrn water control and base flow /ground water support wetland is slow and the wetland contains less than 50 percent vegetative cover. These qualities provide a MODERATE to HIGH water quality improvement rating. This wetland contains only one . habitat type with low plant diversity, few habitat features and disturbed buffers, thereby meriting • • a LOW rating for natural biological support and habitat functions. This wetland also provides little aesthetic value, few educational opportunities and is privately owned. It therefore rates LOW for cultural and socio- economic values. Overall, Wetland D provides Low -level wetland . • ' functions and values (A.ppendix D). • • . . Upland Description ' Upland habitats within the project corridor are represented by Data Plots 2 a nd 5. bare Uplands ound project area are disturbed, consisting mainly of grazed pasture with lar ar b and some pasture grasses, thistle and mustards (Data Plot 2). It is likely that this area was seeded with a mixture of pasture grasses and grazed for a long period of time. Several corridors of shrub vegetation containing mainly Russian olive and clustered rose transect the project corridor (Data Plot 5). • 1N0 it__ JA ( Page Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP ' Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study Wildlife Observations The small shrub - dominated areas in the project corridor provide excellent habitat for birds and small mammals. During the site visit, owl, California quail, ring- tailed pheasant, black- billed magpie, American crow and bushtit were observed. Other mammal, bird, and reptile species are expected to use the habitats available in the project area. REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS • The site is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Union Gap and wetlands within the . . project corridor are regulated by the City of Union Gap Ordinance No. 2078. Impacts to wetlands and their buffers are regulated not only by the City, but also by the State of Washington and the US Army Corps of Engineers. , • Wetlands in the City of Union Gap are categorized based on an assessment of the functions and values of the wetland using the Washington State Department of Ecology' s Wetlands Rating System for Eastern Washington (1991) as a guideline. Wetlands A is a small wetland that is hydrologically connected to a seasonal drainage etland meets the criteria forts of a possible Category IlI • on the Wetlands Rating System scale. Wetland B/C is a large palustrine emergent wetland dominated by invasive species. According to the NWI map, this wetland is hydrologically connected to other wetland systems outside the • project area. However, this wetland does not rate more than 21 out of a possible 67 points on the Wetlands Rating System; therefore, it is likely to be considered a Category m wetland. Wetland D is less than two acres in size, hydrologically isolated and contains one vegetative class dominated by invasive or non- native species. This wetland meets the criteria for a Category IV wetland. According to. the City of Union Gap Ordinance No. 2078 (1998), a 50 -foot buffer is required for • Category III wetlands and Category IV wetlands require a 25 -foot buffer (Table 1). Table 1. Cowardin Class and Buffer Requirements for Wetlands in the Project Corridor I Category • Required Buffer ` Cowardin Class Wetland. A 1 50 feet • Palustrine Scrub -Shrub DI Wetland B/C IIC 50 feet Palustrine Emergent Wetland D IV 25 feet Palustrine Emergent Wetland fills are also regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under the Clean Water Act Section 404 and by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. f° (1C 1N0 page 9 Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • The Corps has authority to issue individual and general permits. Individual permits are issued for substantial impacts to wetlands and generally require an alternatives analysis.. General, or Nationwide Permits (NWPs) provide blanket authorization on a nationwide, state, or regional level for activities which have minimal adverse impacts on the environment (Washington State ' 'Department of Ecology, 1994). There are 40 separate NWPs available for activities which pose minimal impacts to wetlands. The Nationwide 26 permit is the most common, available for wetland impacts of between one -third acre and two acres. For less than one -third of an acre of impacts to wetlands, the applicant must notify the Corps within 30 days of project completion. For greater than one -third acre of impacts to wetland, Corps notification is required prior to project commencement. Under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Ecology issues Water Quality Certification (401 Certification) for all wetland fills requiring a federal permit. Mitigation for impacts to wetlands and buffers, including avoidance, minimization, restoration • and compensation, may be required by the City of Union Gap, Ecology or the Corps. The City of Union Gap may require mitigation for impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers, as determined on a case -by -case basis. The Corps typically only requires mitigation for wetland impacts greater than 1/3 acre. Additionally, Ecology will generally review mitigation plans before approving 401 Certification for wetland fills greater than 1/3 acre. Typically, the mitigation required by the Corps and Ecology is consistent with or more extensive than that required by the local jurisdiction. • LIMITATIONS It should be recognized that the delineation of wetland boundaries and functional value assessments are inexact sciences; wetland professionals may disagree on the precise location of wetland boundaries or the functional value of a wetland. The final determination of wetland boundaries is the responsibility of the resource agencies that regulate activities in and around wetlands. Accordingly, all wetland delineations performed for this study, as well as the conclusions drawn in this report, should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction activities. Further, wetlands are by definition transition areas; wetland boundaries may change with time. We therefore recommend that this wetlands study be verified with the appropriate regulatory agencies as soon as practical. • Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope -of -work, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methods section. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. \ \SERVER\ACTNE PROJE\NATURAL SCIENCES \1998\98157 Valley Mall Blvd \Deliverables \9815 7 Final WL Report.doc XVIDO SZ.. Page 10 Adolfson Associates, Inc. d/9/99 98157 - MP • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • REI EIZENCES Cooke, Sarah Spear. 1996. Wetland and Buffer Functions S Services Seattle, s s e Washington. . Methodology, Draft User's Manual. Cooke Scientific Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification Ce Wetlands P ual # and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv FWS /OBS- 79/31. 131 p. • Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Federal Register. 1980. 40 CFR Part 230: Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for Specification of Disposal Sites of Dredged or Fill Material. Vol. 45, No. 249, pp. 85352 - 85353, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. • Federal Register. 1982. Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter II, Regulatory Programs of the corps of Engineers. Vol 47, No. 138, p, 31810, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 1986.40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory U.S Govt. Printing Office, Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51. No. 219. pp. 412064 Washington, D.C. Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. of Washington • Press, Seattle. Lenfesty and Reedy. 1985. Soil Survey of Yakima•County Area, Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. • Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, MD. Reed, P.B., Jr. 1997. Revision of the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 253 pages. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigles, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetlands Values: Concepts and Methods for Wetlands Evaluation. Inst. for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Belvoir, VA. Res. rpt. 79 -R1. Soil Conservation Service. 1991. Hydric Soils of the State of Washington. U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 96 -94. ti Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Wetlands Regulations Guidebook. • Washington State'Department of Ecology, Publication No. 88 -5. Washington. State Department of Ecology. 1991. Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Eastern Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, Publication No. 91-58. • • • • • • • • • • • %DV' 14—/ Page 12 Adolfson Associares, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • • • • • • • • • • •. , • •'. ' . .w • • • Valley Mali Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • • • • FIGURES • • • • • • • • • • • DOC, INDEX 0,1 • page 13 Adotjson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP a . . 4 . . . . . • • • ... . • • . • . ' • • • • • " i 1 p a itn...,Arn 6.4,5 ... ,.. ...e.% n (.. .:,••:•• :•••:•'..\_,.... : !Tower.. 1 ? "ft •••••, M • • • 1 7. ■ . • it I ..."..*:: ••••'... 1 EZMIZraabh 5 1 i i ,,,,,,,...... i ,..,...___ !....., • .,--ut:..-7. t•• ' le „,,, .......„,„: c..,,....... , , st.......t- ••• : r ,, .., MIK ._.,.. .......- - -:,....,.:::...........:- 7 • • •v••; ••• • ..I ‘....„. , ' -, I..- ..el'a V takV . _ . Mk. Wrialr •• / • A . : k • ' - . ...,.... IS"V 7 4 1 1r ( 11M 1 9 11 ,., 1 r4T .-N-- • i \ . ...•., - 1x1•1A 01.. t Z. I V' /1 Al \),.., .NA • %.1 .1. , v • . e V ! A., : -... : "7 -...-' :.. • ' • -. i ce. ....s .. )1.1■0 L.... i. .••--. A., ..... • . .. . . elp., 51 ' I li l •' . ,,....„ .,: ,. . : “ i• ,,, _ ' ..„, . . alf•&.:751...s..Vraii.c: ...-- ly1 1-- e • • ' • . .4 ....... v • ... ''. , .. ;-?c" ) .... 4 IIA.N■ / illik■ : . .1 ''' -- 1 '! A • , . 0••0111111 • ---- - ---- I • 'if ; * a- 14geni . MP ../ dA PIP. ■ • '. , • . . CP • fi .. .,•; . :,.. . ....i•••••-- \ ,. • , 'N ' ' it, • i •••-•.,..- ..-4. ../.... .. 1 , 11 Ifakim "" ,71 0„. meal' ' ic . ..,.—._.. , . 4 .z .... .• '''"....' \ I t _ . , ‘, 1 i• „ k, ' ' - i 1 ; ,, ' .._,..."-t • -..i -. -- -- limifentiele)1., ' "•-•• ..- - --„t, 010.• „.. -c .,....,:,,,......,....,.....„._:„..„,,,,,,:\,•.. ,, .. ,•4'" I " . '-` .t.,„ , :' ) I,. .„, ...• ' 90 11. • • ti" 'Y i - 4■ "6.- %P r ." -'".`-- — - ":" .--- 4 . a - 4 4 ; : -7 447414,..... - •••.. --1‘:-----r - .r1 tA.. . ..... ....... . •••■•• / .." \ . -.....r....!..-v...— - ,,„,,S ' • ..a.V... - •■ ••••• t .... • 'Jig ..• • le .. '"'s.. I - I .' i'T : . c - . .. : ..;...,.. ,...- % 1 : Can on ! 4-'.7, ,-..1a..= tatm......., :‘ 1 • - .. - i iiir % •i• . , ::•K:_,... 1 .,47 . MBLIA.1... Haaia=r.-9pyti_It v or A ..lk ;IN / .. .e" 1 s 44116111WIr t IsCa 11, • • - VIZta ';: Z ilar l:Migl i .1= ‘ ", Ili ' " .. ' 1 ,: '• ,e ., " :1111111111hVgi . .r., - faith. tit,■142 ' ...'■-• 1 11 • . ., . issoortiumiler=„.......re.,,,,,..ut.--7.5,,_.2143,...,.........„..,..,,,.c...,....,oz,„,......italBse, ,, _ ......„ r; I % ;11 - - - 1 - : 7: --:-. 4? x. - ;`,... e , ". :::: ER A7A \ kl I : . .‘ ih ' - - - E.ftliglittilailli-_- - f- - . 1 , -- , - ,:. ---210 . 1 e4.- 1 .---0:01A 0 25 1 a .-- - 411111,10ifinnTIVERISIVPIY.rir.E 4 T-1::: - ZiiniAtAl i. ....W 0 g112.:... ei ‘ '15M.M.. ) ..- • - 1111 - 2 mil •- I glitabitigi lif - ,_ . '',4, - --- IMMINTIMETIMI.•!flfitlt:IIimilleenIM•ilnk . ' ik , NI ,.....,. • !me ..e.,, Eou,„,—,„...,,.. • z C al • "II° = •'"- • - -112"2 1iii:Vegain t il .. % .. "'' '' ....i •—" Fisaig l. r_ 44 1 - WS. 111 MI its II . n l i szfriarouliiinint. Ili g • ern. -,. I:. ''''p n • 'I . 414 1 3 0 ... ■ i s 1 2 W . I pm* o up vs , , .......... ....s ..._.. --- „ # --. HIM S I I ,ARMsr ins' -- ka ltinu .. . N . k \ i' 7 2,• ,. J f j 511kNoct 4.- OLP 4 I ..... r . iiiffl I 1 h" l'it Ahtnnu 1ill Al4raot ,,..uizazen"- lir e 16,. t • a, '1111RWAMIWZp .._, vii 56141 k ' " Ahtanurn : , —10! ity _.. ,. • 70 .. .....-- °WIVE TO t '2 -"-. 41111 IT "...-:.-. .. 1 6. ,j.I I " ........' 4. •••2r4. ;.•,..., / , •• •••e4 t .. 741 ....".....F I LI... .• . ,...1 7 ... 46..v.m.. .. ...1 ..... . • 1 , i • • \+er.r . i • • . • t / ' .1 ••• ' ''''.."..."'"'" I 4/ UnienV--- - ...., t. _ . • il i, • i ,.."' "..... , •-..-• 1 Ac,,,,,,. i ■ - t - ---„. . a .... ._,.■ 1 • ; ' • 1 4 1 l'• . ,.....,,,,,••••.. t • • . „,....--- .‘, ,,,, ,.,, . 4 • , -,4 - ', •,, ..- ...0 .... i ..,,• - ••••, 0. •• 1 ,....-._ •••.., ,, .. , " il Miler ,' 1 •.'. *-% 5,./ :/* . 1 If • • t.. „II L . ...p ....'"... l,..„_ VI...3'.. 14 .... is ..,,,•„2 ....---- "--;• - -.:,- ..../ ; --- R A 'T2 f .i:.. . • • ,74.' — - , • - ; ' 107 • •-• ^ , ' t, i . ---k r \ LL l"-.7- : -..---- . -- I a •.• • ! • I : • e i .,-. • '4.,; 1/ ... V• • .-- 1" .•-. 4 .t. ' .: • d #. iR E S E,..7VA1' r0 N .4 --::..,, i, . . 1 C ......._ ..:...; . . .... , ir `....' u i ••,-.. 1 . • • f ''` ".. 31 I • .....,....? • • ---4 i • •••••• , .. 1,/: % 1 :% Cli l,' I • - -----. , .:‘-•• ; •'•'• -''' '•--.:-.. ,..,e I :•-•: I - N.. • : , - ----_J ,.. 1 ' , : ‘.\ is , .1 . ....,. , _.....:•,- .....• p. ,. h. \ ,......., ; ••. 1 (....... • rf: .• .." . • . • \.• . 4, )0 (•) : \k 1 MO , .P' . SOURCE: DeLorme Washington Atlas & Gazette, 1995. 1 ...-----' VICINITY MAP lb VALLEY MALL BOULELVARD EXTENSION NORTH • Not to Scale UNION GAP WASHINGTON . . . . . • • • i ' t,�;`\ 7'f• ^ {� . q ' r . ' .• -r—a_ 1 •' ir • 69/-1.44 ii",1 r I4` s, . i....;,1' . ' . , \. . 111 , ,¢ • • 3eff e xs°n I �� • :. •. . . �' ::, a 1 1 b mac.` . � •`•r.� ; 1 , t .. : :. • a , ., .. • :, »• �' J ••' If � ,, 5, i }. r . , ) .r' + lsv� - , iu �1�`" . ^a+. .� r... S IC � :� lS :I : �� 1' I l C .• " ' �Sca / j . .ag i �� [��' Isar;�� x:11 \�a c t D_._ / ar � a o � • : L = L 4rK . • � 1 _9 t I( t Myl 1,• ' � },• � T` i - 41. `" : � i a r . ` •li t J O .• _ X ...1 . � �—. • ` i �ri , r l ' v t1 \„....,7.., Tan ks i ,i,.......,,,,),:,,,, „.....„.‘ 5 ii ,• ; •+ `v . ••• • ; pi ••; 1141 i • ; ,q, , . . . :. I 1 I l 1 i 4y t.J i l f q \ � • . elri ; 1 ` iltis h ► [ '"" i' • tatElMat__ _ -- i J x a � T � i fer 1 " g A ( G Cahalan 4111111\1 . � s :S P alk l K •y — _ - + IPark a J f 1c , iiY ' t t • 1030" . H ' ° ' —it r • Trailer a 1 � 13 • � • i s -• h 31 \ or • - Park i ,ii' I�'tsn(Ira. • - Tral - .:tti•f[. 1 r: ! N...., 4 . b I . . 0 s Par ',{: v ,•e — F..m HI . 1 f / )121, . • t • *.t; cla 11 . V . :� ' • ^.' pA 1 . "' -' r • J r. .. aver : 1 :, L A t,I.. • • . AIL , � ( _ 1 1 .u• . A • f i . 1. V. r \ i . \ ■ • -. •:...:. 'v@ / � w S _- to i • � ,- -- J o' _ 8r.1 �X ; 'r. lign , � :x'�_ E • • • . is fit , . . - - - -- • a •- r em ` ' "• ; I • �SITE1 991 , . � • .. p ° .. Tom' . 1 P. S; ierte Cc . ^ ' • ; } ; . .; ■ :. J O09 _j 9 _'t ` y • � •� • . •� IC E., ..,� ` J It . g . o „ !!I . �#� • , r t • / t 1 . 1 \ 1 _ 1 a : Ca Park > � , -__ 'o \ . ; . 1 Sewage a ' � ? ' OU_ � � - t1 \, k rai1er I ` • ' ''' � . \ 11p°s11 0 * . lr ,,p4, .• i .r !. • ) ' ' reef f `'?. ( '# � {{ � {� .•. t '• 'o ' C l x \.9/ 2 i•:': 7.- ,, ._ \ ri.........- ..-' fir. <0�'•5... 'a- � •i�r% • � / .a�.,.r. -*.,. �` TN •• • • : mite rroo • .._ ...,2-..,... •i - _ 4( • -r r -• • -. 1^ �"� � '• � = Scwa:l• t t •. • •..� _0 51 1 : _ : ..4.• .. r '1 • J j - ,1_,.... ,vr': ` >. _ `\ . tC ) t \ , • \ ' j r---).:;\ +` ` .// • i. Y '�.- :\ice *• ,--.--=,:,- �-,,,, _ :t :•• \_. - .., -i • SOURCE: USGS, Yakima East and West, Wash. Quadrang 1985. o:, FIGURE 2 tie U S G S '. ... V ALLEY MALL BOULELVARD EXTENSIO NORTH UNION GAP WASHINGTON I.13 O ., , O Y Not tO Scale • x a • _,, i `i't 1 • • ,5.. t _ 'r Y • e . . 1 1 _ � .. r r'T 1 -i ,RJ. " •{ � ' 7 s c. S ' y� � ` •' L, r s .' `� + •� r rte' � }' ; ? 1 , Z Y :' k ..! , + _f. , ti. ^ • 7j.•: ..tk : 't' '� `"i , . { : a. • _ _ 4 ,-..g!--4.114.611.:; :' F.. "i( ''.� { :.� - .e i • � ;� c� : .'a tY .{ .3: QI , y . . .. . S ' _ •'J ' ' 4: -• 'C� .: a n do i -S F '-: - {i, CI F.'.,•.. , _ i ...n •4 „ k ' . G l i #. 3 • + ^ � .}y'G' _ ' ` fi ' ( . : ' i ?•1J'"! y [ i _ 44 1 g +{ y, ^S .�. i.} { [ ' 7 1Y 1<': ♦. Si ,. � ( 4 i! 11` • : 3 ,..:7 . ! � Se ..'! -- ` fi h t .4---.1.,4i - YiiiI i,r Z ' : i l :•J r..... ' ? . -:,f • i ,1 Si'• '. '� . Ir } t,l •F 1 � ' , . �', i �•1t • • i , .' • : . e • ,• . • :r n l .• { • S > [ ' -'� • 'St<' # y :k • rte:! + � f r 0 1' ; .� r w' l. ,. �_ 9,, I ' !`F :;, + , ,. a} I T.!`•' r . " r i y ,. T s'• 2 1 t 4� ti 1 t? • .• 2 t ' i--- • : rY 5 • . 1 i t *�+ _ � r'.i IT... p.;.! y� .j.:C���i is L ' • �:� • l�'�r.�•.�. � i' -. Y +.F �` f � y '7 •t,,�•.'' � % � S:.' .. n �. .} - S x �f(' ' ! '1, , ;�'• 1 .7•f - i ` '° :- Ii}i :: P e.' t • a , ,^•.t A ;: i : , _ Y , f 1i a 1 �. }., r i rl;,Iyi' € y � t °,tt>':tid.v '� : 's �i':.� 8 • ' : �y ! ' �.1 - '311 - :ra•t .,i1 1-# ,r � 't ^. ii^ - z } :4F' - t. Ed{. y .. J +� 1 r y . f ai: , :J .: — r 2 IS Z1- p� � � t a t•!. ' rY, • '.�: �`. ,; ' i'� '�. : T '; t r g "`•- "'''•,'`�1 •..:' i :,t! j'.- 4-4,''F - } ti'' • > • • F yl .4.i.i -ti. _ ,,, V')' . 01•� � '(1 r..: I "- `ta Y '' k { � ''�� .a y tq ' ' 1 1 �'„' : , T u t _ �: ',I,� , l +f•E�� ' �,„},�1 �r _ .a.li =. - a y . _ .. _ • �2 ':" ' : t.,1" 7,� s ,ak • 1" �;{, i_ ,zt R I , " d + ^i r? t , ` • t x i , t ; , 7 . ` -i 3 I •r- i .': [ 77-7 v ' z ,,,, v a , ▪ 't, . f , i d e • . . •! .41:1.i'� • _i!.,1t ii: g .. „ s.. w rn.,.4.. ; k t , , r . !€ ;; ; ; „` is” .... t. .f ',••c, L :# .;0 :: , , ,'•_�y, �i ' �ri4 �. 'Y,.YS � .��; �i,i 1 1 � '�• i , � ah a ` °�- {c :��' r � y. F la : �t • �� : y i ��� •4 - �M1•� s rt� L *,. _ rt . . , r - ; b , , ti . � �, � . , ifs "' , 1 `< . ;`. - ..� n. - r : ° .. E 't �t . i „, % • 0 1 ' B '!T- • , , an y s, r 1 • 14. a 1 '' F•: •... i t =,, ' , i `+ ,� I 1 • , r1 .7, � , ; •- +�' 'i: ' . 4 .�� ` 4.:: �� . 1 , • �; e1. _ { r ; � y ,.' ,y 7 - •4,:1- t _ . :f . ,f.' , y 1.-r . ,1-;. • - 0- 4:.'.'N' •, v, J. '; -3r..Z f � d '"alg .` �.1. . " 1, 1'. -• : 3.• r1r.�l -, te � r - . r- ti !! . 1 - ..: . _, ° • }�•, . . ' � � FFEs ` y ; •'w. ° % .i � y a N . : " ' F " $'L - {'t'o>y,� - _ 'i C L �,� �: • :i.= 4' -t .Fi'' i!i . -l .lc _:.,l,u'' i li iF - y J+ f -� � .+•�k•1�:. 1 =•. ti r� r � � ' t ' ,' } . • •'• . t •~ ' t "' .s i'l +, ! `Ni 1 i v cL . rit t'r , • i s s• : t • . i . xt _ , ; , ,, . ,i % l'—' :�` i� � c ii:.:. tf :c.:`r'".f' i.• CC '�;,� ?t %. 3 {� ;i Wi t, - , •: p,�.' i ! ( . �� . 'J ' z : ' � . V ' . ,,, ,t„y :C �: �v p t s L•�' f �: ° °.c�7'�., \'� i. Y �Cli y •i . � �' i, .ki :'i ,4t.,' s : ., r : 1Z ,. y % ,, :Ga„t i fir ,�} •P.. `' • 'it ; ' l . �. Y - k}+� °o,3", r • f + s +� E' •kn _� • i � ' •,..• ".• 1. .+.x.:= ^,.P, :E• .. r.s.r -p.: ' - -l. t v -;Y' ` .,.•.. T ,•q r : ,. : `r �. : ` $ ' :�• t c ( r .;,'6 `�. {I? {:�: r :. ^:'•..• �r � ' s • r y .: : 71 , 415:111 ,n , t :-04. • : i. • • � S • ' C ••+ L . 1:',:° -i . Y 'y ?• t . 4, _ _ `` r. a _,:., C ' i_ .. a :i' ~ . k . "r = = t ms s• . • ., i +.:'.:uF . j , • :, .. m W CC • �f . a �' ' it + � ' Y : ` - : ' i : � ' • � j•'! ;� . , • 'k.���:. t i•t -�; �. �'� •• • - yg �I.•••04: + . �:: .�, ,, { },� �j R. (, s �.C:. �,� ; •��i' : �•' - �'j ' :� N 'Pei.: _ 5 { r ' ai t .' p '✓r'✓All r1 .. ! • Z S•1 . k ° ,i• . i • �{'' �!. ([ t {p�{•!,' ) • s ' refit.. •. . • �" g .' ' ,Y t ! :1 ,. Y , ., 7c ^ I . . ''4 ' ' �q Ln••3• :i . .Z ±--- !' . 1 i -x '' ; r7R' rd• .j i ..,{. :••' a' ` 1 1 ' , .: • 6• ,It' t " r. it i f . ' - _ .t t .: -' : " ' Lka ..1t` ' i!'•= . v" ,r ^i a ��tt! .: [ t a .• _ +� _t: __ r. Y` , �• �j � "y' �' pI / 1 VJ � g , � , , ,� .y •• , c • , ., •' ', r ' i� . ,,.. � y � '{`. �i � � "' '��,r�it�''' " �-�. Ti. � • , •11-.. t T ' ; � • .—� �� '}7�- •tk.Y<& _ - 7 C' 4 !" - • -4 ..¢�, , _ ''J.•. • • 1 +4 . irr ': tirtl�+ - 1. �' , p i , .,: •L: 3 .tfr # sti '' :=-4 Q `= t`�' + � f Y PI ' . i .; � , r ,,.? ` . ;.c t, t : a ft y 0' .. _ i •'"� • .V'. ie % F,=l a s. .'",- ' r • ' . 1 .: ` u . 4 "t : . .. .. ? `tom y:i 1 c � 9, t _ 7a ' ,H ` 7 T' - y _ ip j' F r i i t �-` i dy l i .:;t ax � � ' �: v' 'i� �ti 1 • I{ P a w _r' - .'�' �• . '�' • T� y 'i. `� � . J e—'� G / !1 ...-1 s , Iy .r :# 'TOI ,, : ?. 4 7, ,• r ° A. it i � `1f Fir. I� lJ d, _ {: a rsaf 1 i'. d. ¢¢ +' d'• 3i is _ } fi r;x i}t li, > l • : . y D f Y: _ i' 1: Y ; • •• ,, r < 4,',, , 4.. t,' . . V. . V',?'; • f O ❑-• [ � �+ { ;;;;911111 ' 1 tr � - yytt 'iF,. • N � • '�i � . y. r �4; !�• { } ' • C..•'•ia�.•.�: 1 ' - 2-�{ U t �{ Y .:: t „ a ; • " t - : i,.- - . 0 ,• r .,. . t � ' .': i, 1 ' 14.1. • S n ;� ,. ,. .' • • = i.. .. s O ^`+. • _ ' ' 9 kii 4.''' '-e S 1 ' zi , T r 3 .k k� . ' :.' ,. • •'= : i...- • Y•�rL • i:i . r•. id r.�.. • I 7 1.-I :..,' . • i :j d., k;i:i Ak r1 a: f gr'f F'.., . :f- .: . ? r; .fir' :: (' •. d ew - , q _ • .. E m 3 � ��� , r " y J 7 ` iR « ": 1'NS :r 'y } . vl „ r O . rt ��`R'?? f it ' +" a . :4 :.} 's-:^y'.�tr I•'%ie i r' . p -- 4 Y 1 ! y {�:• is . � ' _ . 1 2 b i { ! c = , � • " in t .13 ! '' - t . r t ' N i[S .G Rli - 'Sk tY '� � iL rw• • t •r + i $' -:` - ` . .,, . ,, i' . 4 , 1 >- W . --1 O <: x ' . i? �s f r ' ,..., k, '�-• '4",e.-$14.,.,,,- is 4"? C j�[t } . ;° .� i ~' • +Y T { • c-':' •' O Q ` 11:f.?,' - -4. . . .Y;,, firm. ! � i , 1, ?S�d 4'' - • 1 t •j " a. • ' '': . ' ''S -4l '1•f c, $'. -� Ln . t hl. • ,, l1 •` (l' .Y a � . 'a > �: 2 }� -..I: l �.T, t +, +'a � + 7 �-' ., ' 1. + " !its . 1 T' . S }r . u J ' «r " t><. , .r . '�- x ;q ' �13 r -• (. d_: , '_ J �� st7•'.. v s : • 5 • I ., ' `i.�l:` -I. j' }i 7 fi 4 :, -i: a) m D `4 : '} •t.t..... . it ''""1! r ,} gg,}x { ` ) � 'j . ,r .c . 7,;'' i' ' 3i. • ' .''r •"_ ' a . ...fir.. C ... • . t� ._ ,• z; - 1 ' 31; R i , ,jj?r , - " , . t , ✓. y .. 1;> 4 • . • : '' .o � _ � l ^ . t.c 4 . g ift ttr� • � l - ILI c ep ; ? s a + .- F , }�v "`" '( ::..' =rt {•- - t� ' ' s •� N ! :k g f . y �.{ izty. 'ca. : . • I T •� : ,400.•. - E, > ' +I . , . ii ` ',1's i ce'. ) „k 4 ... i 3 j L. �` . i ,. ; .p - n; '- }?�: -� . ._ t . ! I , 'r� . ,t.. s• ?• F 1 1� ' a..,,, � t -,y: .., -x• ,� , . :y i � �rr ' � : .j� . La{ • ` { • ' { 0 4 ),.....41 : - , ' ;, i, , • i t? , • 4 1 y . • i • r. .. 1 . 1: • • fi';' • �::k • t ;'•j' ' �if dl 1. A ` I S, , ,,, -'. tT4. ' .= of t k r r • • .1:• ii Y - .5.Z.1 .i 1 Q T ,+ r CO ; ld ='! `f.r rr3�.• ,ri n' • ” :r' i l' „ • � 1 - - •• t .. Xt . 7L f t ' •I C..: i ! 4 ry � 1' . ''• I� •i % �, 4ri ( { i: : Ca.'� 7 � ' t ' YW7 4. g e . : <+: . . • :« r ,r..!- (. :::i" •-,1-1;.:3A ( U 3 ,1t! ;� ...i:.1.;:;-; . y' 'r' t t 7�:�t i 1 - f " ..�. ". L� 't - 1.:," •'1 O C `Wi t" 1 1 � f. G. f , + , a cry �' • r V Z• • ' a `si - .y , 7 r r .. ° lcA . . 1 4 �� a i . . : _ : :i :' 1 • gb. ` . :.'• •• j: . .. i•. • - n} •i'• �. It .. r. ?4,, •r • • r{ .i, 5 ,,,, " -'":-ti ., 90 s �.l 1 r fit �.• = .'' l r y.. {, ' i } • �'i - ., 1 d n. (1 j 4 .r 4 _ .; S �f{ i�ji- i.n , t r , x l ' i•' • :" • A, ' r ' � ` ` 't 0 • N O S ..ti. aj {:,'�+Vrx' 11.1106;1.."(1;..: e. �„ >I 1 ' !'J�j1 1,il'r: :i,t > � ' t1 �..�N ' r ` i i:;i�'; ,f .iii-, 'r N i Y. It ,t� k lei. ` + P x F ~ .. � T� . f 4 7: , f c:�} r. ; :. r 1 *� :. , t4>X' . '''' .e� 1 ;=Sa - ./ _ 3�, y :(; 1 :,: s :�',i; j to C - N 1 - r {*'.1h •u. n• i iR,s ',( ..c:ii;.;-;' 1 • .t!' .p` g:?f''{i.. ~ , , Jr •�::'� '+�• ?; ti .•' s <;_�� f ,ei•'i.• _ sue' :., !' re y , T ; ;�, {; rr : T:i t • "� r '. .311•1. ' r k .r'�1• y + 3,^ r�'/�•f� �'' y: • '''''.,•,‘J--,..: ` • .loft,: _ .7 ..,,...V.:-..%7:: rj._ . V (CS R { 1 ,..• j ,. a „ . .. 1 y . _ t`` ; _ Y : i ' .: o iv "n ii � . 1 Or. X1-44, Sly • p• $ i� �, L' 7 • }I #i :i:,*s t •} a .;, iv i ) ` ,t i . • ' -1 r ) t ',�r: t Z D t V +21F- N ' •r i ll • " 'v . I1 ' . • G :.' - -• f • .'C 71rt I: i, ,.c , 1r.A. S; : , f'�S i ,. . A %ii • 1'' O Iw �a I Y :;^ 'j. jL T. t. : u. 1 . ..: rir i� • R` 1 i r k•` , •_ . 1 !- `:i %A., 0,i: ia;} G2 i• =: „• • ••' O . f)) f i F j = l r Yr, F iriRrlf -• N Z • e • , • • \\ \ . • \ \ \ \ \ o \ 10 N \ IA,ETLAN1� P \ \ 9 \ #ETLANP B/ G 6 A ti \ \ \ l i l . ,..4 - \\ kETLA19A 'i T : li'w • ' 4 '. --" - f 7,7 - 1111 t • f:L rt ..... 11 . .. r _ _ ; ' \ \• \ ?/111. I ► — \\ \ • • C ‘. WETLAND LOCATIONS. FIGURE 5a I I NORTH VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION SCALE: 1' SOURCE: Bucher, Wui9, Ratliff Corp., 1999. UNION GAP WASHINGTON . A NG • �_� -. / .1+ • • _ •• • • - �/ Syr / ,..____.... (._ 2 ...) ...---- ____ Dr....2 . • - • - . / DP-2 \ : - --\\ . . . ..... ,_ . .,,. . _ :, PLOT .••••••. f - . ---:-\.- • it gg 5.\ N . - --- - ),..k. ------ .r.' DP-1 � . 1 • ETL,NI) 8 /G • _ •• ilt\ it • • _ _- - - - - - • vegi --- t.. ' Vil \ \ DP -3 - - - -.-, .........................•.....-_-_-_•................„......-- 7, T :;\ „. \\ -.-\\ L ..Cs*: . \ \,..„ - `.-- ....,........"."..\• : • : • - • - • - . - • - ................. • • • • \................).. - r- •# 7. v WETLAND LOCATIONS FIGURE sb NORTH VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION • UNION GAP, WASHINGTON „�,,, SCALE: 1 SOURCE: Bucher, Willis, Ratliff Corp., 1999. ASSOCIATES, INC. • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF WETLANDS REGULATIONS • • • • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • Adolfson Associates, Inc. page A-1 6/9/99 98157 - • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • Federal Regulations.. The primary federal laws that regulate activities in or•near wetlands are Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899, and the "Swampbuster" provision of the Food Security Act (FSA) of 1985. All federal actions are also subject to the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and many to the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. Section 401 of the CWA mandates that federally permitted activities in wetlands comply with the CWA and state water quality standards. Under Section 404 of the CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been given the responsibility and authority to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters and adjacent wetlands of the United States (Federal Register, 1986). Under the River and Harbor Act, the Corps also issues permits for construction in or along navigable waters, including any wetlands within those waters. The "Swampbuster" provision of the FSA denies eligibility for all U.S. Department of Agriculture farm programs to farmers who convert wetlands to croplands. • Of these, Section 404 permitting is the most commonly applicable to freshwater wetlands. Two kinds of permits are issued by the Corps: General and Individual. General Permits (also known • as Nationwide Permits, or NWPs) cover proposals that would have minimal adverse impacts on the environment. The most commonly used NWP for wetland alterations is NWP 26; this NWP specifically addresses wetlands which are (1) above the headwaters of a river or stream. (that point in the watercourse at which the mean annual discharge is less than five cubic feet per second) or (2) hydrologically isolated. Such permits apply to fills and other impacts of less than one acre; although impacts of up to two acres may be covered by a General Permit. However, proposed unmitigated impacts of between one third and one acre of wetland, and mitigated ° irripacts of one'to two acres require Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the CWA from the Department of Ecology (see below). In addition, Nationwide 26 permits are not applicable to wetlands within 100 feet of any stream with a channel width at the Ordinary High Water Mark (see glossary) greater than two feet at any point along the reach of the stream . adjacent and parallel to the proposed area of fill.Nationwide 26 permits may not apply to • wetland fills within a 100 -year floodplain. ' Other NWPs allow impacts to wetlands for specific purposes. For example, a NWP 12 is used for wetland impacts due to utility installation and maintenance. Unless they may be covered by one of the NWPs, projects with wetlands impacts of more than two acres, or impacts to wetlands within 100 feet Of streams (as described above), require Individual Permits. The Corps evaluates Individual Permits based upon the probable impacts of a project on environmental quality and on a determination of whether or not the project is in the public interest. Washington State Regulations. The principal Washington State regulations that govern activities in or near wetlands are the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971 (Chapter 90.58 RCW), • the 1949 State Hydraulic Code (RCW 75.20.100 -140), State 401 (Water Quality) Certification, Coastal Zone Management (CZM) determinations, and the Floodplain Management Program. All actions are also subject to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) of 1971 (with new implementation rules adopted in 1995, Chapter 197 -11 WAC) and, in Western Washington, to the Puget. Sound Water Quality Act (Chapter 90.70 RCW). Some actions may also be subject to the Forest Practices Act (Chapter 76.09 RCW). Shoreline Use Permits are required to ensure that activities comply with local shoreline master plans, and have jurisdiction over streams with flows ' :.' -. page A- 2 Adolfson Associates, Inc. IN .. 6/9/9998157 -MP 14— • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • greater than 20 cfs or lakes larger than 20 acres and their associated wetlands. Note that the local jurisdiction typically administers Shoreline Management Plans. The State Hydraulic Code requires Hydraulic Project Approval for projects below the ordinary high water mark, or, if the project occurs in a jurisdiction without required use of Best Management Practices, those projects with 5,000 square feet of impervious surface. The Floodplain Management Program has jurisdiction over construction in floodways and floodplains that may affect flood elevations and/or flood protection. A Water Quality (Section 401) Certification and an individual CZM Determination are required by the Corps in order to qualify for the NWP 26 for over one -third acre of impacts to wetlands. The Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Eastern and Westem Washington (October 1991) provides guidelines for categorizing wetlands. The wetlands rating system is a process . that differentiates wetlands according to specific characteristics or functional attributes. Permit • decisions can then be considered in light of the wetland rating and the potential development • impact. a City of Union Gap Regulations Wetlands and streams located in the City of Union Gap are . regulated by the City of Union Gap Ordinance No. 2078. This ordinance references the Washington State* Wetlands Rating System to define wetland categories. There are four wetland categories: • . Category I Wetlands are: • • 1) Documented habitat recognized by federal or state agencies for threatened or endangered plant, animal or fish species; or 2) Documented Natural Heritage wetland sites or high quality native wetland communities which qualify as Natural Heritage wetland sites; or • 3) Documented habitat of regional or national significance for migratory birds; or • 4) Regionally rare native wetland communities; or 5) Wetlands with irreplaceable ecological functions; or 6) Documented wetlands of local significance. Category 2 Wetlands are: 1) Documented habitat recognized by federal or state agencies for sensitive plant, animal or fish species; or. • 2) Documented priority species or habitats recognized by state agencies; or 3) Wetlands with significant functions which may not be adequately replicated through creation or restoration; or • 4) Wetlands with significant habitat value of 22 or more points; or 5) Documented wetlands of local significance. Cateaory 3Wetlands are: 1) Wetlands with significant habitat value of 21 points or less; or Adolfson Associates, Inc. page A -3 6/9/99 98157 - MP lNa DC . Vat. Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • 2) Documented wetlands of local significance. • Category 4 Wetlands are: • • 1) Wetlands less than one acre and hydrologically isolated, and comprised of one vegetated class that is dominated ( >80% aerial cover) by one exotic / invasive species; or 2) Wetlands less than two acres and hydrologically isolated, with one vegetated class, and 90% of aerial cover is anv combination of exotic / invasive species. • Required buffer widths are as follows. Catesrory 1 Wetlands require a 200 -foot buffer; Category 2 Wetlands require 100 feet; Category 3 Wetlands require 50 feet; and • Category 4 Wetlands require 25 feet. • Buffer widths may be reduced or averaged'by the administrator upon recommendation of the wetland report, and consultation with affected agencies and tribes. • A Critical Areas Permit (CRP) shall be required for all development occurring within or adjacent to a wetlands, wetland buffer and within or adjacent to a stream or stream buffer. • • • • • • • . s Adolfson Associates, Inc. Page A- 4 6/9/99 98157 - MP d(." 1141 )4— • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .i: • ND f ' • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • • APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY OF TERMS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • D OC: page B 1 Adolfson Associates, Inc. i �� ' 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • agricultural wetland - areas where wetland soils and hydrology remain, but hydrophytic vegetation have been removed to allow a crop to be grown. best management practices (BMP's) - physical, structural, and/or managerial practices that, when used singly or in combination, prevent or reduce pollutant discharges. • buffer - a designated area along the perimeter of a stream or wetland which is regulated to control the negative effects of adjacent development from intruding into the aquatic resource. • emergent - a plant that grows rooted in shallow water, the bulk of which emerges from the water and stands vertically. Usually applied to non -woody vegetation. • emergent wetland - in the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), a wetland characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes, excluding mosses and lichens. • enhancement - an improvement in the functions and values of an existing wetland. • forested wetland - in the USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), a wetland characterized by woody vegetation that is six meters (20 feet) tall or taller. • 404 permit - a permit issued by the.U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act which allows an activity (filling) within a wetland. 'A 404 permit usually requires compensation or mitigation for the allowed use in a wetland. • herbaceous - with the characteristics of an herb; a plant with no persistent woody stern above grournd. • hydric soil - a soil that in its undrained condition is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic (wetland) vegetation. • hydrology - the properties, distribution, and circulation of water. • • hydrophyte - any plant,growing in water or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. hydrophytic vegetation - see hydrophyte. • in-kind. compensation - compensation for lost wetland habitat with a replacement wetland of the same habitat type. • invasive plant species - those species which become established easily in disturbed conditions, reproduce readily, and often establish monocultures. Most invasive plants are non - native species (i.e. were introduced to the northwest intentionally or unintentionally, by humans) Examples of common invasive species in the Pacific Northwest are: Scot's broom, Canada thistle, hedge bindweed, English ivy, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, and soft rush. )0C . Adolfson Associates, Inc. INDEX, Page B-2 6/9/99 - project. #98157 - MP _n�v. • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • lacustrine - in USFWS classification system (Cowardin et•al., 1979), freshwater (less than 0.5 parts per thousand ocean- derived salts) area with all of the following characteristics: (1) situated in a topographic depression or a dammed river channel; (2) has less than 30% coverage of trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, mosses, or lichens; and (3) total area exceeds eight hectares (20 acres). For areas less than 20 acres, an area is considered lacustrine if it has an active wave- formed or bedrock shoreline or is deeper than 6.6 feet in the deepest part. • mitigation (as per WAC 197 -11 -766) (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; (2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; • (3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; (5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing or providing substitute resources or environments: and/or • (6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. 100 -year floodplain - the flood with a 100 -year recurrence interval; those areas identified as Zones A, A1-30, AE„ ,6 .1H, AO, A99, V, V1-30, and VE on most current Federal Emergency Management Agency (.r.MA) Flood Rate Insurance Maps, or areas identified. as 100 -year . floodplain on applicable local Flood Management Program maps. ordinary high -water mark - the line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as: a clear, natural line impressed on the bank; changes • in the character of soil o; vegetation; shelving; or the presence of a line of litter or debris. out -of -kind compensation - compensation for lost wetland habitat with a replacement wetland of a different habitat type. palustrine - in USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), freshwater (less than 0.5 parts per thousand ocean - derived salts) area dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, . mosses, or lichens. They can be non -tidal or tidal. Palustrine also includes wetlands lacking this vegetation, but has the following characteristics: (1) area less than 20 acres; (2) no active wave - formed or bedrock shoreline; (3) water depth in the deepest part is less than 6.6 feet at low water. persistent emergents - emergents which remain standing at least until the beginning of the next growing season. page 8-3 Adolfson Associates, Inc. i�l❑EX. 6/9/99 98157 - h1P • • .Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • reach - a length of channel with uniform characteristics. • restoration - to improve a disturbed or altered wetland by returning wetland parameters which • may be missing. The restoration may return an original wetland habitat or may alter the wetland for some other desired outcome, • riverine - in USFWS classification system. (Cowardin et al., 1979), freshwater (less than 0.5 parts per thousand ocean- derived salts) areas that are contained within a channel and which are . not dominated by trees, shrubs, and persistent emergents, for example, rivers and streams. scrub - shrub - in USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979), areas dominated by • woody vegetation less than 6 meters (20 feet) tall. The species include tree shrubs, young trees, and tress or shrubs that are smaller stunted because of environmental conditions. • section 404 permit - see "404 Permit ". sub - catchment - a subdivision of a drainage basin generally determined by topography. synonymy - different scientific names for the same species. wetland- transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems, where the water.table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. Wetlands must have one or More of the following attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is non - soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year. wetland hydrology - the total of all wetness characteristics iu areas that are in11nristPr1 or have . saturated soils for a sufficient duration to support hydrophytic vegetation. wetland indicator status (WIS) - categories of plant species based upon the estimated probabilities (expressed as a frequency of occurrence) of a species occurring in a wetland or non - wetland. Wetland indicator statuses include the following: • • Obligate (OBL): species that almost always occur wetlands under natural • conditions (estimated probability >99 %). • Facultative wetland (FACW): species that usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in non - wetlands. • Facultative ltative (FAC): Species that are equally likely to occur in wetlands or non - wetlands (estimated probability 34 to 66 %). • Facultative upland (FACU): species that usually occur in non - wetlands (estimated • probability 67 to 99 %), but are occasionally found in wetlands. • Adolfson Associates, Inc. INDEX Page B -4 6/9/99 - project. 198157 - MP Li--( Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • Upland (UPL): species that almost always occur in non - wetlands under normal conditions (estimated probability >99 %). • Not listed (NL): species that are not listed and are presumed to be upland species. • No indicator status (NI): species that have not yet been evaluated. A ( +) or ( -) following the WIS signifies a greater or lesser likelihood of being found in 'wetland conditions. • • • • • • • • • • ����� page B -5 Adoi son Associates, tnc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ' INDEX. • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • • • APPENDIX C: COMMON & TAXONOMIC PLANT NAMES • • • • • • • • • • • DOG Adolfson Associares, Inc. page C -1 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • ' Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • PLANT SPECIES LIST FOR VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME • WIS . v, :• 'ti1._ t ; .h`C,.::Y"3%X:L -• "C ;`i•: :: �' �� 'ti.? "i:i••r�i��•- ',G- •1 -•`; .�N. t;�5 {�.ld �•Yatd= a' i:': , ..4_•. •� ir ..-.. „•.• J I:.. y - °6', }1 .. •::.•r:::•• ?.t. r' i; .,.. y ' +,c•w' !•' -.1 vW'�,ci'.::4Srl :t'•T4 �C"u :t5 •* ��: y i. j: i'., �. ��i: ��".+:::. f: :Y,':s�ic5.,.a�'.:Yei.:.�;rc"S: ir�'V.:.`5�:��:t�:3,k „ c�.;�:� ,sG'.:v. �w clustered rose Rosa pisocarpa • FAC S alix alba FACW white willow Russian olive Elaeagnus an, ustifolia NL • . i � icr :P :. airy,= �{.�.'�. s ? ^ L - ' �{�',� ,... Y.'F•vi �11�'.`4.%4.+ ,.; C •ce1a:• 1 �T,1 y t.. �, .-;:t • xis- Ri _.,+.� � ust• .'FASF,.i ,'” • e• •. trl � �� �+r' -.%yY r•- .,•�.rr. i �„ -'•. ..—., Cirsium arvense FAC - • Canadian thistle FAC+ curly dock Rumex crispus B spp. NL mustard . ..e,a- ..rs&xw.an „�..•� E c i�r .�nr• . '�.ru -': ���'�""�` '�•?.s � 't y��y�,•��Cr'r •. �, .J .- .",n.... -; r..rt --• ' ', tY"• trfr 7 i r x.. +i. '1•. r° .m�YMacR S •a ° ",k7���”' •'' ��1a'`r�'• -.+. wxdL�. M_.. �` il. a° �. uSi�y+�rt.:.�_�^T�'�"9^��'S =:9 � � . nr ,.swrir ` • tall fescue Festuca arundinacea FAC - H olcus lanatus FAC common velvetgrass a FAC -OBL rush fund= spp. • 1 • Phalaris arundinacea FACW reed canarygrass - blue ass Poa s • p. • • • y • t\ I ', ��1,l3 �-� J Page C - 2 Ado[fson Associates, Inc. . 6/9/99 98157 MP w : , , ,,.. -- ' "-" �,� • • • • • • • • . INDEX ✓I • • • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • • • • • • APPENDIX D: FUNCTIONS AND VALUES ASSESSMENT TABLES • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a , DOC, INDEX. _ ( page D -1 Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study ' FUNCTIONAL VALUE ASSESSMENT • Project Wetland A . Criteria Function Group 1 1 pt I Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts Flood/ 1 Size < 5 acres Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres • Depressions, headwaters, bogs, Storm Water Riverine or lakeshore wetland 2 Mid - sloped wetland flats • Control 1 < 10% forested cover 10 - 30°k forested cover > 30% forested cover Unconstrained outlet Semi - constrained outlet 3 Culvert/bermed outlet Points: 9 Located in middle 1/3 of . (Max 15) Located in lower 1/3 of drainage 2 drainage Located in upper 1/3 of drainage' g 1 Size <5 acres • Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres • Flow/ Depressions, headwaters, bogs, Ground Riverine or lakeshore wetland, 2 Mid - sloped wetland flats Water Located in middle 1/3 of Support Located in lower 1/3 of drainage 2 drainage Located in upper 1/3 of drainage Permanently flooded or Temporarily flooded or 2 Seasonally or semi - permanently saturated, or intermittently. • saturated flooded or saturated exposed High flow- sensitive fish Points: 8 1 No flow - sensitive fish Low flow-sensitive fish contiguous with site (Max 15) populations on -site or populations on -site or ' populations downstream downstream ° in highly permeable struts Erosion/ N/A Sparse grass/herbs or no veg Sparse wood or veg along Dense wood or veg along Shoreline along OHWM OHWM Protection N/A Wetland extends < 30 m from Wetland extends 30 - 60 m from Wetland extends > 200 m from OHWM OHWM OHWM . Points: N/A N/A Highly developed shoreline or Moderately developed shoreline Undeveloped eledt shoreline or (Max 9) subcatchments or subcatchment Water I Rapid flow through site Moderate flow through site 3 Slow flow through site Quality < 50 To veg cover 2 50 - 80% cover >80% veg cover Improve- Upstream in basin from wetland < 50% of basin upstream from 3 > 50% of basin upstream from men undeveloped is undeve wetland is developed ' wetland is developed . Points: 10 Holds < 25% overland runoff 2 Holds 35 - 50% overland runoff Holds > 50% overland runoff (Max 12) I N/A = Not Applicable: N/I = No information available • DO ,. Adolfson Associates, Inc. INDEY, 0 Page D-2 6/9/99 98157 - MP Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study Criteria . 1. pt Group 2 2 pts ' 'Group 3 • • 3 pt Function Group 1 � Size 5 - 10 acres Size � 10 acres Size < 5 acres Natural 1 Hi h veg structure Biological Ag land. low veg structure 2 Two level veg g Open water pools through Support • 1 Seasonal surface water Permanent surface water summer • 1 One habitat type Two habitat types • >_Three habitat types pp.B POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST plant lant diversity (7 - 15 High plant diversity (> 15 1 Low plant diversity (< 6 species) species) species) 1 > 50°lo invasive species 10 to 50% invasive species <10% invasive species • 1 Low primary productivity Moderate primary productivity High primary productivity btoderate or � is accumulation High organic accumulation 1 Law organic accumulation e 1 Low organic export Low organic export High organic export Some habitat features Many habitat features . 1 Pew habitat features Buffers not disturbed Points: 13 1 Buffers very disturbed Buffers slightly disturbed (Max 36) 1 Isolated from upland habitats Partially connected to upland Well connected to upland Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Overall 1 Size < 5 acres Hi h habitat diversity Habitat I Low habitat diversity Moderate habitat diversity g Functions 1 Low sanctuary or refuge Moderate sanctuary or refuge High sanctuary or refuge • Points: 3 . - (lvtax 15) -- Moderate invertebrate habitat High invertebrate habitat Specific 1 Low invertebrate habitat High amphibian habitat • Moderate amphibian habitat o P Habitat 1 Low amphibian habitat erate am P Hi h fish habitat Functions 1 Low fish habitat Moderate fish habitat ' g Moderate mammal habitat High mammal habitat Points: 5 1 Low mammal habitat Hi h bird habitat • (Max 15) 1 Low bird habitat Moderate bird habitat I g I Moderate educational ' ' Cultural High educational opportunities 1 Low educational opportunities opportunities Socio- High aesthetic value economic 1 Low aesthetic value Moderate aesthetic value o Moderate commercial fisheries, High commercial fisheries, • 1 Lads commercial fisheries, culture, renewable resources agriculture, renewable resources - agriculture, renewable resources a L'nkn Lacks historical or archeological lmportanf historical or • own archeological site resources Historical or archeological site Some passive and active Many passive and active 1 Lacks passive and active P recreational a opportunities recreational opportunities recreational opportunities PP Privately owned, some public • Points: 6 1 Privately owned access Unrestricted public access (Max 31) 1 Not near open space Some connection to open space Directly connected to open space TOTAL 54 (out of possible 128) N/A. _ Not Applicable: Nil = No information available DO C, Adoifson Associates, Inc. 1NDE 1 page D-3 fl....- 6/9/99 98157 - MP • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study FUNCTIONAL VALUE ASSESSMENT Project Wetland B/C • Criteria I pt ` Group 2. 2 pts Group 3 3 pts . Function Group t Size 10 acres Flood/ Size <5 acres 2 Size 5 - 10 acres 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, • Storm • flats Water Riverine or Lakeshore wetland Mid - sloped wetland . > 30 % forested cover Control I < 10% forested cover 10 - 30% forested cover • 1 Unconstrained outlet Semi- constrained outlet Culven/bermed outlet Points: 9 2 Located in middle 1/3 of (Max 15) Located in lower 1/3 of drainage drainage' • Located in upper 1/3 of drainage Base Size < 5 acres 2 Site 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Flow! • 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, Ground Riverine or lakeshore wetland Mid - sloped wetland flats Water 2 Located in middle 1/3 of Located in upper 1/3 of drainage Support Located in lower 1/3 of drainage drainage Permanently flooded or • Temporarily flooded or 2 Seasonally P ermanent Salt or semi-permanently saturated, or intermittently • ased saturated flooded or saturated ex P Low flow - sensitive fish High flow- sensitive fish Points: 10 t No flow - sensitive ash ulations contiguous with site (1;1= 15) populations on -site or ° populations on -site or pop downstream downstream • in highly permeable strata ' I WM ( Sparse wood or veg along I Dense wood or veg along Erosion/ N/A Sparse grass/herbs or no veg I OHW OHWM along OHWM Shoreline Wetland extends > 200 m from Wetland extends 30 - 60 m from Protection N/A Wetland extends < 30 m from OHWM OHWM OHWM ly developed shoreline or Moderately developed shoreline Undeveloped shoreline or Points: NIA Hlgh subcatchment (Max 9) subcatchments or subcatchment 1 Water Rapid flow through site 1 1 I 1 Moderate flow through site 3 Slow flow through site Quality 1 < SO To veg cover 50 - 80% cover 1 >80% veg cover Improve- Upstream in basin from wetland • 50% of basin upstream from ' 3 > 50% of basin upstream from P wetland is developed wetland is developed Meat is undeveloped Points: 10 Holds < 25% overland runoff • I Holds 35 - 50% overland runoff I 3 Holds > 50% overland runoff Hol 1 1 (Max 12) • N/A = Sot Applicable; N /1= No information available • iN[)E�C; Page D -4 6/9/9 9 Associates, 157 - v1P- Inc. # IA — ( .. 6/9/99 981 �7 -1v1P� . Valley Mali Boulevard Wetland Study • Criteria 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 P� Function Group 1 Size > 10 acres Natural Size < 5 acres 2 Size 5 -10 acres High veg structure Biological 1 Ag land, low veg sm Two level veg rcture o ' Support summer Open water pools through 1 Seasonal surface water Permanent surface water Two habitat types >_ Three habitat types 1 One habitat type PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST High OW diversity (> 15 1 Low plant diversity (< 6 • Moderate plant diversity (7 - 15 High plant • species) species) species) 10 to 50% invasive species <10% invasive species 1 > 50% invasive species Hi h rim 1 Low primary productivity Moderate primary productivity g primary productivity Moderate organic accumulation High organic accumulation, 1 Low organic accumulation High organic export export . Low organic export P 1 Low organic ex P Many habitat features 1 Few habitat features Some habitat features , Points: 14 . 1 Buffers very disturbed Buffers slightly disturbed Buffers not disturbed . Partially (Max 36) Isolated from upland habirars 2 Y connected to upland Well connected to upland 'Overall Site < 5 acres 2. Size 5 - 10 acres Size > 10 acres Moderate habitat diversity High habitat diversity Habitat 1 Low habitat diversity High sanctuary or refuge Functions 1 Low sanctuary or refuge Moderate sanctuary or refuge Points:4 • (Kaz15)`° - -- `I = Moderate invertebrate habitat High invertebrate habitat Specific 1 Low invertebrate habitat � High amphibian habitat • Moderate amphibian habitat ° P Habitat 1 Low amphibian habitat P Iii h fish habitat Functions 1 Low fish habitat Moderate fish habitat g Moderate mammas habitat High mammal habitat Points: 5 1 Low mammal habitat Ktah bird habitat (Max 15) 1 Low bird habitat Moderate bird habitat Moderate educational Cultural High educational opportunities 1 Low educational opportunities opportunities Socio- Hi h aesthetic value Economic 1 Low aesthetic value Moderate aesthetic value g Moderate commercial fisheries, High commercial fisheries, 1 Lacks commercial fisheries, agriculture, renewable resources agriculture, renewable resources agriculture, renewable resources a mport tur renew le or Unkn Lacks historical or archeological own a rcheological site resources Historical or archeological site ° Some passive and active I Many passive and active 1 Lacks passive and active P recreational opportunities recreational opportunities recreational opportunities PP Privately owned, some public Points: 6 t Privately owned access Unrestricted public access (Max 21) I Not near open space Some connection to open space Directly connected to open space TOTAL 58 (out of possible 123) N/A = Not Applicable: N /1= No information available ;�, :\, � du�...�s page D -S Adolfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study FUNCTIONAL VALUE ASSESSMENT . Project Wetland D Criteria 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pt • Function Group 1 5ize> 10 acres ' St ' Size < 5-acres Size 5 - 10 acres Storm or n 1 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, • Water flats Riverine or lakeshore wetland Mid-•sloped wetland > 30% forested cover 1 < 10% forested cover 10 - 3090 forested cover Control Culvett/bermed outlet 1 Unconstrained outlet Semi- constrained outlet 2 Located in middle 1/3 of (Max s: 15) Located in lower 1/3 of drainage Points: 8 drainage Located in upper 1/3 of drainage x Base 1 Size <.5 acres Size 5 - 10 acres Size> 10 acres Flow/ flats 3 Depressions, headwaters, bogs, • Ground Riverine or Lakeshore wetland Mid-sloped wetland Water • 2 Located in middle 1/3 of • Located in upper 1/3 of drainage Support Located in lower 1/3 of drainage drainage permanently flooded or Seasonally or semi - permanently saturated, or intermittently I Temporarily flooded or exposed saturated flooded or saturated Low flow - sensitive fish High flow - 'sensitive fish • Points: 8 1 No flow - sensitive fish populations contiguous with site (Max 15) - populations on -site or populations on-site or - downstream downstream in highly permeable strata I Sparse wood or veg along Dense wood or veg along • Erosion/ N/A Sparse grass/herbs or no veg OHWM along OHWM 01iWM ShareIiae Wetland extends > 200 m from Wetland extends 30 - 60 m from Protection N/A Wetland extends <30 m from Wetland OHWM OHWM Undevelo ed shoreline or Points: N/A Highly developed shoreline or Moderately developed shoreline P or subcatchment subcatchment • (Max 9) subcatchmenrs I Moderate flow through site 3 Slow flow through site Water Rapid flow through site Quality >80% veg cover ' . I < 50 % veg cover MI 50 - 80% cover Improve- ® m rove- Upstream in basin from wetland < 50% of basin upstream from > 50% of basin upstream from Ment m P ■ wetland is developed wetland is developed v is undeveloped wet Holds > 50% overland runoff Points: 10 1111111111 Holds <^5% overland runoff 111111 Holds 35 - 50% overland runoff 3 (Max 12) N/A = Nor Applicable; N/1= No information available Y al Page D -6 Adolfson Associates, Inc. y l .....\ • 6/9/99 98157 - MP I • Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study . • Criteria • • Function Group 1 • 1 pt Group 2 2. pts Group 3 3 pts Natural - 1 Size < 5 acres Size 5 -10 acres Size> 10 acres Biological • 1 Ag land. low veg structure Two level veg • High veg structure Open water pools through . Support 1 . Seasonal surface water Permanent surface water summer • Two habitat es > Three habitat types • 1 One habitat type •• � PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST • 1 Low plant diversity (< 6 Moderate plant diversity (7 - 15 High plant diversity (> 15 • species) species) species) 1 > 50% invasive species 10 to 50% invasive species <10% invasive species 1 Love P rimary productivity Moderate primary productivity High primary productivity 1 Low organic accumulation Moderate organic accumulation High organic accumulation' • Low organic export High organic export 1 Low organic expos o P 1 Few habitat features Some habitat features Many habitat features .Points: 12 .1 Buffers very disturbed Buffers slightly disturbed Buffers not disturbed . (Max 36) Well connected to upland 1 Isolated from upland habitats Partially connected to upland I Size 5 • 10 acres Size > 10 acres Overall 1 Size < 5 acres Hig$ habitat diversity • Habitat 1 Low habitat diversity Moderate habitat diversity ' Functions 1 • Low sanctuary or refuge Moderate sanctuary or refuge High sanctuary or refuge • Points:3 • _t_ • -- (Max - 15) I • Specific 1 • Low invertebrate habitat Moderate invertebrate habitat High invertebrate habitat Moderate am hibian habitat High amphibian habitat Habitat • 1 Low amphibian habitat P Hi h fish habitat Functions 1 Low fish habitat Moderate fish habitat g Low mamrnnal habitat Moderate mammal habitat High mammal habitat • ' • Points: 5 1 (Max 15) 1 Low bird habitat Moderate bird habitat • High bird habitat I . Cultural Moderate educational . High educational opportunities ' Socio- • 1 Low educational opportunities opportunities Hi h aesthetic value • Economic 1 I Low aesthetic value ' Moderate aesthetic value g High commercial fisheries, l Lacks commercial fisheries, Moderate commercial fisheries, • agriculture, renewable resources • agriculture, renewable resources agriculture, renewable resources a Unkn Lacks historical or archeological • Important historical or own resources Historical or archeological site archeological site 1 Lacks passive and active Some passive and active Many passive.and active recreational opportunities recreational opportunities recreational opportunities Privately owned, some public access I • Unrestricted public access Points: 6 I Privately owned Directly conneced too open ace (Max 21) 1 I Not near open space I I Some connection to open space ( p TOTAL 5 2 (out of possible 128) N/A = Not Applicable: N/1 = No information available 1NDF > Ado _ page D -7 lfson Associates, Inc. 6/9/99 98157 - MP �� �} • • . ' �,I k • • • • . Valley Mall Boulevard Wetland Study • • • • • ' APPENDIX E: DATA SHEETS • • • • • • page E-1 Adolfson Associates, Inc. INDEX � ( 6/9/99 98157 - MP , • • . DATA FORM 1. ' l .,-3'� 0-4"- a A Routine Wetland Determination ' • . (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or • • 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Om on P Date: i - I 1 —.9• 9 . • Applicant/owner • , . ' . County: • Y k r 1 State: L--"-^4 Invesa�ator(s): fJ1 QYal 1%� {� f e 0...14'G Ct YY 14i • Sfr/R: • Do Normal CircumstIces exist on the site? ,ci' no Community ID: P S-s • Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes Transect ID: _ Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes• o Plot ID: A - J • VEGETA.T'ION Dominant Plant Species Stratum - '70 - Indicator -. Dominant Plant Species Stratum " • Indicator \a.r;5 a , Yur crCcc.. I '- Ri... /. 1 • \a 1Gus \ Q hp.. .c� --'- - — • 1 . 11 -1 1 ---- A - - .. . HYDROPHYTIC VEGET.TIbN INDICATORS: _ • . To-of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: I b° �o C 2 4i z) ' '` ^. • • .(-\ • Check all indicators that apply & explain below: - . • Regional knowledge of.plant communities V Wetland plant list (nat'l or regional) ,✓ OTHER Physiological or reproductive adaptations _ _ Morphological adaptations Technical Literature .Wetland Plant Data Base Hydrophytic vegetation present? no Rationale for decision/Remarks: HYDROLOGY . • Ls it the growing season? yes no Water Marks: �. no Sediment Deposits: yes no Based on: ,ct.)-e Drift Lines: yes ") 1 Drainage Patterns: res) no Dept. of inundation: 0 inches • . Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yes no r 1 1 Channels <12 in. yes no Depth to free water in pit: . 71 c inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water- stained • ' Leaves: y no Depth to saturated soil: inches Check all that apply & explain below: Other: • Stream, Lake or !age data: Aerial photosrraphs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? % ves ; no Rationale for decision/Rernarxr: . . A ND .X : • : , ., _. LI / • . SOILS • • Map Unit Name : IA rn r. � Q 5 t`1"' ' C I A Y / • CAva t VII � \ Dr zinaae Class (Series & Phase) O Z 5 �` , A 1 �•� • • t Field observations confirm No Taxonomy (subgroup) _1 _ y ► 0 'r�'� GO ''7 mapped type? • • Profile Description 1 • Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Morrie abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil • (inches) (Mumscll (Munsell size & contrast stricture, etc. profile moist) moist) (match description) • • v —) G H6' H/' • • . Hydric Sod Indicators: (check all that apply) - • Ilistosol Concretions - iiistic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer of-Sandy Sots • ,/ Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils • Agar Moisture• Regime Listed on Local Hydtic Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List • Gleyed or Low- Chroma Colors Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? no ' " Rationale for decision/Remark • Wetland Determination (circle) • • • Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no • Hydric soils present'? i yes r • no ryes\ 110 • Is the sampling point no Wetland hydrology present? ; within a wetland? . Rationale/Remarks: NOTES: • • DOC. .iNDEX . )4 - ( • • • - DATA:FORM I ' Routine Wetland Determination • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project/Site: VC. /lc 7 Ma 1I - 1 u d • Date: 1 11 ) -- r i g • Applicant/owner: LA..,7 f Lvr c )° ' • • County: • Ye., h - � Investisator(s): (c�x- 1 i'e tr`t Q) .Z. Li Al r 6_ y�r S tare: Yti7�l . r l S,T/R: Do Normal Circtimst:ances exist on the site? ` 07• no Community ID: t- 1 p . Is the site simificantly disturbed (atypical situation)? yes CD (4 J ei c •) Transact ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes • -104 Plot ID: ^o• • :VEGETATION " Dominant Plant Species Stratum' —' 'Indicator' Dominant Plant Species Stratum . Indicator Pow. 5 1 " _ I _ _ 1 7 ir�t 1ari - rN r t. c1 . H 11" W _ ' . ' dP.s cc- _s . N • - P - 4 t° _. . G YCl�'� C . • HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: • • . To of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: iOD �G 1 2-1 �`'I.) ' Check all indicators that apply & explain below: . _ ... ,, : i • • Red.onal knowledge of.plarit communities - 1/ Wetland plant list (nail or regional) i/ OTHER 1 Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptations Technical Literature -- Wetland Plant Data Base Hydrophy vegetation present? no . • Rationale for decision/Rernarks: " HYDROLOGY . r Is it growing season? yes the a no f Water Marks: yes n�o Sediment Deposits: yes no)1 Based on: ,/.� Drift Lines: yes 4�.0 � Drainage Patterns: yes noj 1 Dept. of inundation: inches . Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yes no Channels <12 in. yes no Depth to free water in pit: 1 e inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water - stained • Depth to saturated soil: 16 inches Leaves: yes no Check all that apply & explain below: Other: • . Stream, Lake or gage data:. Aerial photoaohs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? yes �'m I Rationale for iecision/Rernarks: `-J _) y \......\ • , SOILS . • Map Unit Name 1l1v G 9 /;e ti )()°\4 0,ra►nvC Drainage Class (Series & Phase) 1 0 s ` • ..-- % 1 I 1 Field observations confirm. 'Yes No Taxonomy (sub ou 21 C- I aY Y I cY " - r Y-L' mapped type? • • Profile Description 1 • Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, 1 Drawing of soil (inches) (Munsell (MunselI size & contrast structure, etc. profile moist) moist) (match description) • rav{•11,, �G: r a[� .. . b- \b N M01 ____ • • • . . . . . \ • . Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) • -. - 1-Estosol Concretions Histic Epipedon Ed"a Organic Cdntent.in Surface Layer of-Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils • . Aquic Moisture RePime , Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ,- Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List • Gleved or Low- Chroma ors • Other (explain in remarks) Hydric soils present? yes / • - Rationale for decision/Remarks: , • . yi ?9 hG/ 6 Y 1 'a -) e9 2`:0 .1 aG- s Wetland Determination (circle) . Hydrophydc vegetation present? . yes no • Hydric soils present? yes ' ) ' Is the sampling point yes • no Wetland hvdrolo • present? es • no within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: V7 iG , . C -I • NOTES: • • INDEX • DATA FORM I Routine Wetland Determination L-r_, 7' art d • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: vex. y ti. 1 Alt 11. 1ud , Date: } _ 1 _ 4 t Applicant/owner. V in I �-•'- f -. County: .a k 1 ^'La Invesdsator(s): C Co 14 4 l It n4 . P, S 4_,,, State: LtJY4 • Do Normal Circumstances exist tin the site? S��' Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? no Community ID: P. yes t: ` 4- , Transect ID: Is the area a potential Problem Area? yes • -�•n't Piot ID: 17' • VEGETATION 74. Dominant Plant Species Stratum"' . - Indicator' Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator �0 I •mil l _ - rc ! inn a Yl:lrt ,1-) ,=-,,q, -- / .-" fi c n, e u• c y 5 17 us /--) I -t= I • HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: -247•.,7 ; • • % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: 46 "6 • - . ' Check all indicators that apply & explain below:. r 1 Regional knowledge of.plant•cornmunities k" :Wetland plant list (nat'l or regional) OTHER Physiological or reproductive adaptations . _ Morphological adaptaions Technical Literature • - Wetland Plant Data Base Hydrophytic vegetation present? (fes— no •• Rationale for decision/Remarks: - a.) 7 h 4,1, h ti ► s p y s d, - 4.. r t )ld- �''o- - ) , f f'r C . ...1.- t V A. re. 'fZrs�t c '7 �n r rr q �c 7 f r fi HYDROLOGY - • Is it the growing season? � yes (rib) Water Marks: e� no no Based on: cJ/a :••.. Sediment Deposits: yes D Dept. of inundation: C inches Drift Lines: ' yes (o) C Draina :e Patterns: yes no Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yes no • Channels <12 in ve no Depth to free water in pit: 7 i & inches FAC Neutral: yes no Water- stained • Depth to saturated soil: c•— inches — Leaves: yes no Check all that apply & explain below: Other. Stream, Lake. or sage data:. Aerial Dhotos-saohs: Other: Wetland hvdrolo°y present? no Rationale for decision/Remarks: • B J • Eons , . • . . • Map Unit Name Ni n ( ,( ( ba Drainage Class (Series & Phase) \ ' Field observations confirm Yes No Taxonomy (suberouo) •101 U ji C? 1 \ . mapped type? • • • • Profile Description 1 • Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Motile abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil • (inches) (Munsell (Mansell size & contrast structure, etc, profile moist) moist) (match descritDti on) • lt�� R 4/3 • ■-•,-,. Yri 5t1 r . rya_ c i`tic , v S \ • . •r \ . • ' . . ' . Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) . Istosol Concretions - Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer of-Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils . Aquic Moisture Regime ' . Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ✓ Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List l - Gleyed or Low- Chrorna Colors Other (explain in remarks) • Hydric soils present? aallo no Rationale for decision/Remarks: • . . • Wetland Determination (circle) • • Hydrophytic vegetation present? yes no Hydric soils present? yes no Is the sampling point yes no Wetland hvdrolo present yes • no within a wetland? Rationale/Remarks: NOTES: INDEX - # \ — ( ' • � DATA FOR 1 • • Routine Wetland Determination L Ia• •) - ZCtivt al Cj • (WA. State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project/Site.: Ua ) )• (.) //VOL 1 - 73 )1.-' d • Daze; 1 - •- 11 --4e Applicant/owner: M._ ,mot 1 b-vt G'- • p • . County: Y6- k'l• Investi�•ator(s): C .0 - c ' , ) (� S tate: LAP Do Normal Circumstances exist on th8 site? no • Community ID: P. Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation potential Problem Area? ) yes no ` Plot I : ID: Is the area a yes • - � Plot ID: "3 • VEGETATION • c' Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum"' • 'Indicator' Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum Indicator 6 e ) h4, .k,,fifs � -1 e �., �F ,.(/ ' ' I • • .1-.) D t.,y -, c e , 4 c)• • y I — - [ . • . --- - 1 • I • 1 HYDROPHYTIC 'VEGETATIONINDICATORS: I �.. ' • dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: f' • / 4 ' •% of dom ' Check all indicators that apply & explain below: .----\ • . ,,. - .: • . \ • Regional knowledge of.plant communities `r - Wetland plant list (nat'I or regional) t� •O Physiological or reproductive adaptations - Morphological adaptations • Technical Literature _ Wetland Plant Data Base • Hydrophytic vegetation present? • �l1 no Rationale for decision/Remarks: i/ • aG..•u .., cr'J , a ) 71 ^ril c.)o -Y) arLy -1. c 1l t'pa d;8' - le'A. -Y C) Cam% r--►C) r 'h-i ••yf $ -- - . HYDROLOGY ` • nr Is it the growing season? yes o. Water Marks: es no Based on: ��, Cis Deposits: yes (nod B a of inundation: C7 inches Drift Lines: yes no Drainage Patterns: ) no Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: yes no _ Depth to Free water in pit: > i inches Channels <12 in.�� no FAC Neutral: yes no Water - stained • Depth to saturated soil: 0 inc Leaves: ye no inches . Check all that apply & explain below: Other. Stream, Laid or sage data:. Aerial ohotograohs: e a) G•')-\ G•')-\ s L7 •�G -e Oth.: Wetland hvdrology present' 0 no Rationale for decision/Remarks: d v .) r �i • •-4 L7)/".4.':' CC . 11/"- 6 E4 . / P I C ' G L i er v - -r ✓7 C!•`'e ,-'I ci 'v T i / L�L • N DE> t.4 _ / il • S OILS • ` • Map Unit Name I `EAd e 7 \CO . Drainage Class . rr) (Series & Phase) . . Field observations confirm Yes No Taxonomy (subaroun) Ili( CO1 IL P'et 1 `4 011 mapped type? • • Profile Description 1 ' Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil . . (inches) (Munsell (_Munsell size & contrast structure, etc. profile • moist) • moist) • (match description) • ) • . D—cr A e . 2 ,)\(/. . ' .9 -'�o 0 l D1 / i � ` • ° L fo ot �) l � • f Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) • . ° Histosol - - -- - --- ° ' Concretions • Histic Epipedon I-Egh Organic Content in Surface Layer cf-Sandy Soils Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aauic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List. ' ° • ___Z---.1.r. ci Conditions — ma '/e•5 Listed on National Hydric Soils List • 1,./ Gleyed or Low- Chroma Colors x nark_) r Hydric soils present? es no . Rationale for decision/Remarks: • /47 r,�.. 4.. r, r',e-r -%-at... • , : • — 're c�iu ei.1u• c- c� �vr�. J Wetland Determination (circle) Hydrophytic vegetation present? a no Hydric soils present? a no Is the sampling point y es no Wetland hvdrology present? yes • no within a wetland? . Rationale/Remarks: . NOTES: • Doc: INDEX ki — 1. • DATA FORM 1 — , SS • • Routine Wetland bete V • (WA State Wetland Delineation : • • 1987 Co .s Wetland Delineation Manua or Project/Site: Va \4 \/ I ` et 1' v Daze: 1 —I I— 9e • • Applicant/owner: \Avrx t7VX a G, P . County: U k)m°1.. • • Investisazor(s): '}-A c a ' 't eik..4ni• c, -14r State: •M-r Do Normal Circutnstaes exist on the site? S/I•/R: Is the site si II Community 1D:55 1.,{7 a )\ _,:( gnincantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ' yes Is the area a •otential Problem Area? yes - may,., Plot Plot ID: D ID: VEGETATION ID: �j • Dominant plant l Species Stratum - -Indicator' Dominant Plant Species Stratum `` Indicator • • _ ' J a "arassica z ' . °�i - Ilimum • HYDROPETTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominanrs OBL, FACW, & FAC: • - 3'3 r • • Check all indicators that apply & explain below: - • Regional knowledge of plant communities �/ We*�Iand plant list nat ✓- • • •�' • • • • • • • . •r...: «; . - ( 'I or re • ow= _ Technical Literature - _ _ orp • o ogical adaptations . Wetland Plant Data BYE ophytic vegetation present? yes Y r„ E Base - Rationale for decision/Remarks: • • YDROLOGY ^1 - H •••1.-e Is it the b owing season? • yes no Water Marks: ves no Based on: GU - Sediment Deposits: yes no Dept. of inundation: Drift Lines: es no Dtainaae Patterns: ves no inches Oxidized Root live roots' ( ) Local Soil Survey: yes no Depth to free water in it inches Channels <12 in. yes no pit: ) f/- , inches FAC Neutral, yes no Water- stained • Depth to saturated soil: �j inches Leaves: yes no Check all that apply & explain below: Stream. Lake or gage data:. Other: • Aerial Photozraphs: Ocher: Wetland hydrology present? v es Rationale for decision/Remarks: iNDBc • 1 • • rte• • SOILS _ Map Unit Name _ ... 111 a \ t' 1 4 71 \ \ ei 'C^ Drainage Class (Series & phase) • ' I l Field observations conm Yes No Taxonomy(submouo) -‘- 11)V fu 1)V a g ll L etaD °l maupedtype? • • Profile Description Depth Horizon Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil - (inches) (Mansell (Mansell • size & contrast structure, etc. profile • moist) moist) (match description) - 0 lf A- • \ 01 -,c4‘tL96 . , . (oyfirnoy) ‘OC1 rt . . • Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) . mstosol Concretions . Histic Epipedon • • High Organic Content in SL-face Layer cfSazdy Soils 3 Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Soils . Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List • , Listed on National Hydric Soils List NV Gleved or Low r.ma Colors Ot er exp in • Hydric soils present? GO no Rationale for dedisionlRernarks. „ • Wetland Determination (circle) • Hydrophytic vegetation present? v no - Hydric soils present? no Is the sampling point yes no Wetland hvdrolosy present? es • no within a wedand? Rationale/Remarks: • NOTES: . iiO,.= FNDE ;x. 4' --/— ( • • • • • • • .. is N (.; - • • NDE EXHIBIT: C ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. JULY 2000 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN DOG- 1NDE • Valley Mall Boulevard Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan • • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff (BWR), Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) prepared this conceptual wetland mitigation plan for the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard project in the Cities of Union Gap and Yakima, Washington. This report addresses wetland and buffer impacts and presents a mitigation plan intended to meet the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Washington State Department of Ecology. The City of Union Gap is proposing to extend Valley Mall Boulevard from south Third Avenue :. to South First Street/Main Street (Figures 1 and 2). The road is approximately 1.5 miles in length and averages approximately 90 feet in width, except for an above -grade bridge where the right -of -way ranges from 100 feet•to 220 feet in width. • • Three wetlands were delineated within the project corridor in January 1999. Of these three wetlands, portions of two wetlands (Wetlands A and B /C) occur within the road prism and will be permanently impacted by construction of the road. Both of these wetlands occur along the. eastern portion of the alignment. Approximately 2.1 and 0.05 acres of Wetlands B/C and A, respectively, will be impacted for a total of about 2.15 acres of permanent wetland impacts due to construction of the road. Wetland D, located near the western portion of the alignment, will • not be affected by the project. The goat of this mitigation plan is to dompensate for the lost wetland and buffer area and • functions from construction of the road. The objectives include enhancing a portion of the degraded pasture wetland (Wetland 3 /C) north of the proposed road and create scrub /shrub wetland from upland areas. In addition, the mitigation areas will be fenced off to prevent cattle from grazing and trampling vegetation. The proposed mitigation is intended to improve water quality and wildlife habitat functions. • • The mitigation plan will create approximately 2.15 acres ofwetland, enhance 5.05 acres of • wetland, and enhance approximately 1.7 acres of wetland buffer. On -site mitigation is proposed . • as the mitigation site is immediately north of the proposed road. • • • • • • DOC Adolfson Associates, IncI ge Ili July 2000 - 20010 • • Valley Mall Boulevard Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan . • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • • TABLE OF CONTENTS i • PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 • EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 DELINEATION WITHIN ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY (JANUARY 1999) 4 DELINEATION FOR POTENTIAL WETLAND MITIGATION AREA (APRIL 2000) • 4 WETLAND IMPACTS 7 • • GOALS AND OBJEC'T'IVES. 7 • MITIGATION 7 AVOIDANCE 7 MINIMIZATION • 9 ' COMPENSATION • 9 Wetland Creation 10 Wetland Enhancement • 10 Wetland Buffer Enhancement • • 10 • PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 10 MON MONITORING SCHEDULE • 12 DATA COLLECTION • 12 REPORTING 13 • MAINTENANCE 13 CONTINGENCY PLAN 14 LIMITATIONS 14 • APPENDIX A WETLAND DETERMINATION'FIELD DATA SHEETS • A -I. List of Figures • Figure 1. Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2. Project Area Map 3 . Figure 3. Mitigation Site Map 5 Figure 4. Wetland Delineation/Mitigation Site 6 Figure 5. Wetland Impacts . 8 Figure 6. Wetland and Buffer Mitigation 11 • Adolfson Associates, Inc Page, TOC -i July 2000 - 20010 L.);,),<.) INDEX. • • Valley Mall Boulevard Conc. al Wetland Mitigation Plan PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK At the request of Bucher, Willis & Ratliff (BWR), Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) prepared this conceptual wetland mitigation plan for the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard project in the cities of Union Gap and Yakima, Washington. Adolfson was authorized to delineate . wetlands on two parcels totaling more than 40 acres. These parcels are located immediately • north of the proposed road corridor, near the eastern portion of the alignment. • The Scope of Work for this project includes preparing a conceptual mitigation plan for agency review. This report addresses wetland and buffer impacts and presents a mitigation plan intended to meet the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Washington State Department of Ecology. A final mitigation plan will be prepared based on agency comments. Wetlands along the proposed road corridor were delineated in January 1999. Wetland delineation results are described in the Valley Mall Boulevard Extension Project Wetland Study report (Adolfson 1999). • • . PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Union Gap is proposing to extend Valley Mall Boulevard from south. Third Avenue to Sout7i. First Street/Main Street (Figures 1 and 2). The road is approximately 1.5 miles in length and is about 90 feet in width. As part of the road construction project, a bridge will be constructed for the railroad crossing, a storm drainage system will be installed, and existing. utility lines will be relocated. This project will be an extension of the existing Valley Mall - Boulevard and will alleviate traffic congestion by providing another east -west thoroughfare between Washington Avenue to the north and Ahtanum Road to the south. • • The proposed roadway consists of four 12 -foot travel lanes (two in each direction), a.raised . • landscaped 12- foot -wide center median or left. turn lanes (at designated intersection/access points), 4- foot -wide bicycle lanes on each. side, 1.5 -foot -wide cement concrete barrier curbs and gutters, and 6 -foot sidewalks on each side of the road. The total road right -of -way is 90 feet, including fill material placed to match existing grades. • Fill material will be used to construct the bridge, with the right -of- -way of the bridge approach . ' sections (to east and west of railroad tracks) ranging from about 100 feet to 220 feet in width. Much of the right -of -way for the bridge approaches includes. fill material.placed at a 2:1 slope. At the railroad tracks, the right -of -way is 82 feet wide and includes four travel lanes (two in each direction), inside shoulders, a bike lane in each direction, and a sidewalk along the edge of the road in each direction. • The project includes the construction of a storm drainage system that will collect road runoff and allow the water to infiltrate back into the subsurface water table. Catch basins will include drops so that oils and solids are separated from the discharged water. In addition, infiltration trenches will be located beneath the sidewalks and center median to control discharge. • Adolfson Associates, Inc • Page 1 July 2000 -20010 .Valley Mall Boulevard Conceptu,._ Netland Mitigation Plan EXISTING CONDITIONS Wetlands within the proposed road construction right -of -way were described in a wetland study report prepared. by Adolfson (June 1999). �A„ eation of wetland boundaries'wi:tbinthgi • potential mitigation area was„completed by,,..Adolfson in" April 20, 0 andrisdescribed this' • e .ort. The following sections summarize the results of the delineation conducted within the "-r ad right -of -way and proposed mitigation site. ' he wetland- boundarieszoccuzrin .on.�the . tigationsiteas ;well::£s th :wetlands:.wrthut'the road right -of -way hav'e'b'een.verified byDebbi�'e, K�uauh;�o£the.;,Corps'of Engineers, and ; Cathy Reed. wit the Washington Department' of Ecology :7i • Delineation Within Road ,Right -of -Way' (January 1999) • The following summarizes information on wetlands found with the road right -of -way, as . presented in the June 1999 report. For more detailed information please see that report. Three wetlands were identified and delineated within the proposed road corridor in January 1999. All three wetlands extend beyond the project corridor, but only the portions of the' wetlands within. . the project corridor were delineated. Of the three wetlands identified, two will be impacted by construction of the road. These wetlands are highly disturbed by grazing and, at the time of the delineation, supported limited emergent vegetation. Wetland hydrology in these wetlands is supplied by water flowing through irrigation ditches during the summer months. Oxidized root channels were observed as an indicator of wetland hydrology at the time of the delineation. Delineation for Potential Wetland Mitigation Area (April 2000) . • The following summarizes Adolfson's findings during the field delineation of wetlands within • the potential mitigation area (Figure 3). Adolfson wetland biologists conducted a wetland delineation on. April 4, 2000 on the approximately 40 -acre property located north of the proposed road corridor and just west of the end of the project area (i.e., near the eastern portion of the • proposed road segment). The wetlands delineated on this property are contiguous with the wetland areas delineated within the road right -of -way in January 1999. In addition to the preliminary information used during the January 1999 delineation, Adolfson biologists had an aerial photograph of the mitigation site which was used during the April 2000 wetland • delineation. • • Approximately' 18 acres of the proposed mitigation were delineated as. wetland (Figure 4). The entire property is characterized by grazed pasture crossed by a network of irrigation ditches. The wetlands are found in the areas that are topographically lower than the upland areas, although the difference may be measured in inches. The wetlands are characterized by hydric soils and wetland vegetation. During the field visit, wetland hydrology was indicated by the oxidized root channels and wetland drainage patterns. Wetland hydrology exists in the wetlands on this site due to water flowing through the irrigation ditches, mainly during the summer months. Please refer to the delineation data sheets in Appendix A for more details on the wetland indicators. Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 4 July 2000 - 20010 1 -1— • • • ]:.�'• •4 -� : :�.i • Mr w = \� it '• .._�!! �' � �_ • . • 1•I � • fI` �. <''. I •:•.•. 'j 1'I h;',+• :J' . 'r• `� f. •• • r•. • r. • • • • • . �1 .•.. ? . . .,• , •,! vf: ,., h•• ^s- : ? Y�r'.. . : d'`�,' Y 11 . .i' i ...r....a: . • • •'.29 1 �,. , a.•. � ` `4-‘,,,-;....:---1.1- J LIi:: : .. = d'C�ri� -. ' , r • , • r . f ° • I .1, Am, < :_ . �. .. , i• q n, Jai :4,- r, P . {�i IE I � I . • • • • i 1 • h • • • D i :• ..• o•• • \ • ; •,4:I ' ,• j, ' = h ,-" ':•:f"1 " '4 i, � * ; A. , • deffetaon ..:v . • • • - i , •I ° {� ^ ■ r .'i... ;' •1• �:11: f• •, U ••••• •••i ••,, •.. ••• .1• � �: • ; • •• • .'r.3 f leg t..' ; j 1 •.w•.. •• •••.•• • 1 1 . • r a S •10 • . ' ' •4 i ^y ••./...:; ,:. f ;� : � \ „ � _ —_' n Park ' c oH i : § L:% :','ti ' �. d _ • ....I•••.:J6 • - S .....« • . . — ' I�� • ' a. `� j Tanks. in , �,. • }1' • r1 �'� `tI Q:'L S.;.r'oi#..• '"`• �; ' 1' I S , ,` ` #� • • • : ` ii . • • ' I. • :.• ~ • e • • e :iii i v!� !c'q'..r iii.. 9 l x'41 ` ♦ � B - • • ' ;v .. . �c . --- * .I \ ti>� 1 - ildseich i 1 i A -- cc [it Trailer i ram : \ • • •• • I - -- s ■ _�''' `.. Br ' s 7 Park I '` Kn.�Q ..' M ITIGATION SITE•alan ' . !� 1030• . : • .. ,. T.... • .. .. • 'fir Te \ - •• I •.1 � ,� : . •� :, r 1 • _ . 3I. \ • Traile a i � • : 411„ — ''' PROJECT AREA' 'Tra► ' ` '. Pa :- • • k.'1• .' :: ::,. i Wi ` t+ x II w �m • �. e.h• 7 : • :: ~Par Si•••'' O 4 • e `•" \' .s z �x ' ` 1 ' � 12 9t y e i ii ti : •.:` �� �� ;�: c. 3 \ � '� • : 1! '' 7? ar i v ter ,I•• • � ` — tea �r . , I g a ` .• • . 5111§ ........,r. , I II .11' I \ 1 It 7 1 ` - L -- • u: a'et.6' I : . a i . tt • � • •. • i oo9 • - - `• 4,,,.....‘••• l ,� 1L - ionee' Ce • • • • 988 ..• . IE7 "4 : r z r.)-. 1 , 1 . 4 2' po.. 's •2 1 b . • °' I County Park ' A «, :: yy • eo _ x fa manse' , . a 1 } . ; • • ■• J reek • ...4 121, ....- , . V Cr A 1 A • ,./2"...\L-... /-4, .. '/----\ ./... g],s if - • ,-, , •�.. ` l.. .. :`� . I / —.. -r r• T rnej r • �i rico •~-- -- V. - • — 1 ,~ 1' • � �r� ..7. P at c o ) • . • '-�.r% � 1 • :.a ,' -,n 1 J tt•� ..... . • . .,. ?� A tan, . • � - . • A I - Jir 1 ,�a. X • ?- _ l a 1 I �� � - S _ , _ � ', i� /Mr • • File name: 20010miLpGS FIGURE 3. NORTH Original graphic by:ACT k '� No Scale Date: 7/19'00 MfT1GAT1ON SITE MAP ._ ,••, � � Source: USGS Yakima East & W�• VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION -'. -., WasninglmOtadrany1e,19eS. UNION GAP, WASHINGTON 14-1 J • • -•- -• — -- .L _._ J • . . • : . - : . . , . ___ •:-_-_- ,. .- -. ..- ; • , ..... - p• . • -- . - • . • ..:- - - _ _ - ;• . - . ...._. . ,:.7.G , . . • . - ...; • . . _. _ . ' `,. '40,194 SF _.„; ... • --- : - . • • ' - , - - : . . i ! E= ... . . . ! . : I 478,971 SF . • i - 1 3 LI' 1 — — 1 • L i ,. . • ...• I . r - •-■ I • . / , • ; \ i ( \ 1 I I. P . • . • . - ---. .,. . ., . . • - ....._ . r - - --4. , ' .. I ‘ i : \ • . • \ ., .... 2 1 I • i • \ • ... ---. r 7 1 1 v '• \ 1 ; •• \ • . f s. % • • S. 1 e ...... ' i I. • . ' •. ' 1 .', ' . t • . : ; • '.. . - - -... ..-- . % • . : *-. • •• 1 1 • .... ' .,.. e . . • ' , .'• • , .. ; . . . . — 7 n ". . • - . ."'->::-. — . .'"-- --- T...." ., ,„ ---•• . --r' ::-:•:-:•-....•-•-•••::%••-.. —.-.... - • •••• . .."r ..‘ ' . — v :•'1,..... • . ..,_ ; • • - • - •:•:• • •:::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:*:•:-:•:•:•:::•:•-•:•:•:•:•:•:-.•:•:•:•:•:"...0.• . . . . .„,,,..,..-=%%. •%-:-•''' -, ..* - ' - -----.' f-....' •• a ,...._ ....„ E au ' .. -- - . . _..- .,.._ __...- • -. - — - - -- - • - • ..... . - . . _____ . j. — • :-: . ... -- --- :.• .- E . –--- .......... •-- _...... ..---..44 ... • -- • — -- • • ' • • - • - * ....- • ..........:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:::•:•••••:":•. : --.F ----- r ' 1 — - 1 - ' - - '--- -- ..` • . . . .- • 1 ::-.:, • • . t • • . . - Fle name: 20010detineaUon.p65 " • • FIGURE 4. . . II NORTH OdrOnal graphk by: ACT • No Scale WETND DELINEATION/MITIGATION Edits by:. .... - LAON/MITIGAT1ON SITE , ,.. . Date:7/19/00 • MAN • Source: Bucher, Willis and Ratliff; 4T7100. • VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION UNION GAP, WASHINGTON i - • Valley Mall Boulevard Co. ;tual Wetland Mitigation Plan • • • WETLAND IMPACTS ' • Portions of two of the delineated wetlands occur within the proposed road prism and will be . permanently impacted by construction of the road. As shown in Figure 5, approximately 2.15 acres of wetland will be impacted by the proposed project. Most of the wetland impacts are associated with Wetland B/C (91,594 square feet or 2.1 acres), while impacts to Wetland A are 2,117 square feet. (0:05 acre). Wetland D will be avoided. • The wetlands within the project corridor occur in pastures and have been degraded by current land use practices. These wetlands are part of larger wetland systems extending to the north of the project area. Although the wetlands are degraded, they provide such functions as flood/ stormwater control, water quality improvement, biological support, and habitat for wildlife. The potential to provide these functions is limited by on -site conditions. • • GOALS AND OBJECTIVES • The goal of this mitigation plan is to compensate for the loss of wetland 'area and functions. The objective is to enhance degraded pasture wetland habitat occurring immediately north of the proposed road and to create an emergent/scrub -shrub wetland. In addition, fencing will be used • to prevent cattle from grazing and trampling the mitigation area. The enhanced and .created wetland will improve the potential.for the wetlands to function in water quality improvement and • as•wildlife habitat. • • MITIGATION • • Agencies with regulatory.authority will require wetland impacts to be avoided or minimized to the extent practicable. Wetland mitigation will be required for any unavoidable wetland impacts. Typically, mitigation for impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers must be addressed in the following sequence: • 1. avoidance of impacts; 2. minimization of impacts; • 3. restoration of impact area to preconstruction condition; 4. enhancement and creation of additional wetland or buffer area to replace lost functions and • values; and • 5. monitoring the impact and taking corrective actions, if necessary. Avoidance Project design plans have been revised to avoid Wetland D. The proposed road right -of -way width was reduced so that this wetland will no longer be affected by the proposed project. Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 7 July 2000 - 20010 ;. .. I • . • . . - - • • . . • .......— — -- --- — -- • , . . , - L.-. ' • . . - . . i •••- .f.. - ....-• - • . . , . .. • ... . . ...• ... . . • . - . • .-- --* • - --- -....... , . 3 • • _ 2 '-... : 40,1 94 SF' .. _ .. • ,- -' • .-. , _ . - ,..--- • . , . , • I. 1 I , EE • • I . '. . • • 478,971 SF - - • I • - • 1 i , ,,,....... . • ' L. .' , ••. . - .- . 1 , /......_ ....,. • . ( • ( ;.:) ' : . 4. • 1. .3 , \ • . • 7;52 SFr 1 r \ 1 ' '''■ , t . ,,. . ' - • ' -- ,, - .. . .,. ..... i st ..."-- '-‘. • r --- .. ..., .. \ • , .. ..„ ; • • ,_ ....: • s„ , I N : s. ■ . ' i I v •_. __...- - , . 1 - ..,. \ • : : ,: , t. • " ‘ .. . : ' .1 . • ''.. ... • % , WETLAND A • . • I - . , .... __...... -- ., • • ‘. 2,117 SF • - .. , • , ..2 • • ... .. , / . . .. ... . — • _ — . - 7. :.• - • 4.......,_:..•„...;-:•:•1 • • - -- -- •.• • • ....-:•:.:•:•:•:•:-:::::::::/•:::-:•:•:•:-:-:-.•:-:•:., . . . • 1 T ..................:.":.....:..*:.-.•:.. .............X .. ........: , :'. • : . ........:'. * : . ..... " ... i. ... ‘.. - - 1 • ...I '''';''.- .-. ."'-'--. •-•:.:.:::..:•:•:• :: :•:.: : iLf•: : -. .. : : :.:•: : : : : ::: . ... : :':".................Z....:::::: •. : . .. d ..........::: : : : :1 . 3... • ......... e .,• -:-: -.:-.:.:-:.:....%-::....,,,,:.:::.::„...,. .- :, .::.:• ...: E - I - - • . --::::::::.:::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::.:,..:::.:::::.:.:...,:-:-:+-.. . . .. ..... ,_ .-, _ ,,-_-i ..--.---:- i- ,•'_' -. 2 • , - : • ,_er- •. an -- -___ • MiggiEMZEOMESakinMaliiffink .... • ...... .../1=1_ ..; .::,....-=..R...:: .1j...r...Z.Z7Z,.. . • __ .. .. .- 7 ' /..........••• j : ..: ..V...........1..M.1.. . ..., i ..,.....:.: ...:. gg 4 ,1 - - •• . . )4. - - ..„ ______. alir --- _L.-. --7--- ......- -.. • _ ' :-....-:-:::-:-:-:-:-:-:.:-:.:-:•:.:.-.:-:.:-:,: 33.- --' ---- - •...-1.: - 7 - _-..._.. .7., ,__. ... ,........: :.: ,.... . _ . ... _._...\. ', , _ -- ,..,...2...:1.w.• . 'it-- —.•-•................. .. . . ... —... . — . ... ... • WETLAND B/C - • I .7-- , - .,... , • 91,594 SF. . . . . Fla name: 20100delneallon.p65 IEL j a NORTH Original graphic by: ACT ' . • FIGURE 5. Edits y: I 4*, :.:_.:;; r ,, ,, ,p,..„In • No Scale Dale:7/19,00 • WETLAND IMPACTS i r19...ciailla ‘,..., Source: Bucher, Vil • Vlis. and Ratliff; 4/7/00. VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD EXTENSION . • • - UNION GAP , WASHINGTON .... . . • - ( • . . . . -.......„ • . - . 1 I 1/1111111MOIMMENOCC=Neet • • - • • • • Valley Mall Boulevard Con, .ual Wetland Mitigation Plan 'Minimization 'Minimization. of impacts to Wetlands A and B/C will involve construction of culverts under the roadway to allow flow of water under the road between the wetland areas to the north and to the south of the proposed roadway. • Measures to minimize impacts during construction of the proposed roadway include: • • A pre - construction meeting on -site with the construction contractor, City of Union Gap personnel, and a professional biologist to discuss the construction sequence. • Clearly marking the limits of the right -of -way with orange barrier fencing such that no fill material inadvertently enters the adjacent wetland habitat. This type of barrier also reduces the potential for heavy equipment to damage vegetation and soil outside the project area boundaries. • Establishing temporary, erosion and sedimentation control measures and BMPs, including silt fences and straw bales to prevent suspended particles from leaving the construction zone. The contractor will be responsible for inspection of all erosion control measures and will repair any damage to the erosion control structures, as needed. • • Staging areas and stockpile sites will be located outside the wetlands and wetland buffers. • Maintaining erosion controlmeasures throughout the site until bare soils have been successfully vegetated and approved by a professional biolbgist. Compensation . As compensa•rnn for the lost wetland and wetland buffer, the following mitigation is proposed. • Mitigation is based on impacts to 2.15 acres of wetland.' Wetland creation and enhancement is proposed at a 1:1 and 2.35:1 mitigation ratio, respectively. Compensatory mitigation is proposed in the vicinity of Wetland BB because water flows through a culvert (at the north property boundary) into this wetland.. This portion of the mitigation plan assumes that water will continue to flow through the culvert (i.e., water to the mitigation area will not be shut off). • 2.15 acres of wetland creation in the upland areas between the wetlands delineated on the • property north of the road corridor (i.e., a portion of the area between Wetlands BB and EE); • 5.05 acres of enhancement of Wetland BB along the west side of the wetland and within 100 feet north of the proposed road right -of -way; • 1.7 acres of wetland buffer enhancement along the north side of the road and along the east edge of the created and enhanced wetland; and . • Fencing will be installed to exclude cattle from the mitigation area. • Adol son Associates, Inc f Page 9 N n ci July 2000 - 20010 H-1/ Valley Mall Boulevard Cc ptual Wetland Mitigation Plan Wetland Creation Creation of 2.15 acres of wetland (as shown in Figure 6) will be accomplished by. grading to the level of the summer water table. Grading will be conducted that the elevation of the created wetland approximates that of the existing wetlands. 1V1'onitonng of Well :'water depth ;will.be ;, :_ � conducted;:dunng'the wettest Times of the year,' which' for. this project; is suminer:when irrigation ate0;collect m'the pastuie the actual extent the grading will be based primarily on results of that monitoring effort. The graded area will be seeded with native emergent vegetation such as grasses, rushes and sedges. Plant species to be used in the seeding mix includes Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), • American bulrush (Scirpus americanus), water foxtail (Alopecurus geniculatus), and alkali cordgrass (Spartina gracilis). Scrub -shrub islands within the created wetland area will be planted with native shrubs. Shrubs to be planted include Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), black hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii var. douglasii), bristly Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana var. hispida), and shiny -leaf spiraea ( Spiraea betulifolia). The shrub islands will provide habitat cover. for small mammals and birds and will increase the diversity of the wetland. • Wetland Enhancement • • Approximately 5.05 acres of Wetland BB will be enhanced. Portions .of the wetland to be enhanced are shown on Figure 6. The area to be enhanced includes a 100 -foot corridor on the • north side of the proposed roadway and the western portion near the property boundary: These areas will -be- planted with trees and shrubs to enhance the wildlife habitat valueof the wetland and provides. visual and physical buffer between the wetland and the road. Native tree and shrub species such as Sitka willow (SalEc sitchensis), black hawthorn ( Crataegus douglasii var. • douglasii), bristly Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana var. hispida), and shiny -leaf spiraea.(Spiraea • betulifolia) will be planted in the enhancement areas. Wetland Buffer Enhancement . . Approximately 1.7 acres of wetland buffer will be enhanced (Figure 6). Buffer mitigation areas include 50 -foot swath immediately adjacent to the road right -of -way and along the east side of the created and enhanced wetland. To increase the habitat value of the mitigation area, trees and shrubs will be, planted in areas shown in Figure 6. Species to be planted include western snowberry ( Symphoricarpos occidentalis), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), western serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), and blue elderberry (Sambucus cerulea). • • PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Performance standards have been established to meet the mitigation goals. For this project, the mitigation plan will be considered successful if the wetland meets the following criteria: • after the first growing season, installed plant survival of at least 90 %; • Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 0 July 2000 - 20010 1 z;::., ,_( • • Valley Mall Boulevard Concept Wetland Mitigation Plan • • . at least 85% survival of planted species after the second growing season; • at least 60% native tree and shrub cover during the third through tenth growing season; • at least 60% native herbaceous vegetation cover during the third through tenth growing season; • less than 30% cover of non -native species; • • water in the wetlands -.must be at or near the soil surface for at least 12.5% of the growing season. • MONITORING • • • Site monitoring will begin before construction and continue for 10 years post - construction. Monitoring will be conducted by a qualified wetland biologist. Random site visits during. • construction will ensure that the mitigation plan is being imnplemented as designed. It will also ensure that sediment control devises such as silt fences and straw bales are in working order. • The main objective for wetland monitoring is to document the level of success in meeting the performance standards. Wetland monitoring will begin the first full growing season after construction is complete and the plants have been installed. At that time, permanent sampling points will be established. The size and number of sampling points will be determined by the biologist during the initial wetland site visit. • Monitoring Schedule • • • The created and enhanced wetland, as well as the enhanced wetland buffer, will be monitored for • 10 years post-construction: Monitoring data will be collected for six of the 10 monitoring years. For the other four years, a brief site visit during the growing season will be conducted. During these site visits, overall observations of the wetland vegetation and hydrology will be made to . • verify that wetland conditions are continuing to develop: Photographs will be taken to document the conditions during that monitoring year. . More detailed monitoring including detailed data collection will be .obtained during monitoring years 1, 2, 4; 6, 8, and 10.. The following section addresses the monitoring activities for the six years of detailed monitoring and data collection. Data Collection The following will be recorded during the detailed monitoring site visits: • percent cover or survival rates of vegetation; • • general plant health assessment; DOC Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 12 July 2000 - 20010 f-4— • Valley Mall Boulevard Con `ual Wetland Mitigation Plan • • • sketch map of dominant plant communities; - - • • documentation of the presence of undesirable plants (weedy and/or non - native species) with estimated percent cover; • description of wetland hydrology; • photo documentation of site conditions; and recording of any wildlife use of the area. One site visit during the detailed monitoring years will be conducted to collect the above -listed information. The site visit will be conducted in mid- summer when direct observations of wetland hydrology would likely be present. This is also the best time of year to assess the vegetation growth and health of the planted species. Plant survival rates will be determined in monitoring years 1 and 2 by physically counting the species present and comparing them with the as -built drawings. Subsequent vegetation monitoring will be based on percent cover of the plant species occurring at each of the sampling points. Reporting A total of six annns1 reports (one report for each year of detailed monitoring) will be prepared for the City of Union Gap. The first two reports will compare the as -built to the field • • observations and recommend species replacements, if necessary (see Maintenance section below). All.reports will present percent cover data collected, as well as document successes and problems. Photographs will beincluded to document site conditions. Monitoring reports will also be submitted to the Corps and Ecology. • Maintenance Maintenance of the mitigated wetlands will begin after completion of the project and continue as needed for up to 10 years. After the initial planting acceptance by the professional biologist, the landscaping contractor will be responsible for plant survival for a period of one year. After that, maintenance will be performed by a qualified professional contracted out by the City of Union Gap. Maintenance could include, but may not be limited to: • • • installing supplemental plantings as needed; • • • watering or providing irrigation during unseasonable dry periods or when the soils are . unusually dry; • • • removing non -native or invasive plant species as needed; • providing fencing around ground plants to prevent animal damage; and • providing fencing to prevent vandalism or damage caused by humans. • • Ado son A ssociates, Inc i 1 L2 l Pa 13 July 2000 - 20010 ...... ( Valley Mall Boulevard Con& ual Wetland Mitigation Plan • CONTINGENCY PLAN - If any portion of the mitigation is not successful, a contingency plan will be implemented. Such plans are prepared on a case -by -case basis to remedy any aspects of the mitigation that does not meet the performance standards. The plan, if required, would be developed in cooperation with the City of Union Gap, Ecology, and the Corps. LIMITATIONS It should be recognized that determining the success of restored wetlands is an inexact science as individuals often disagree on the functional level or value of a restored wetland. Typically, • wetland success is "demonstrated" by achieving the success criteria proposed in the restoration • plan. However, functionally valuable wetlands may be created, restored, or enhanced that do not meet some or all of the success criteria outlined therein. Likewise, wetlands may be created, restored, or enhanced that meet all approved success criteria but are nocfunctionally valuable. The final determination of the success of a wetland restoration plan is the responsibility of a qualified wetland scientist familiar with regional wetland functions and values. Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope of work, we warrant that this restoration • • plan was prepared in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this plan was prepared. The • recommendations represent the author's best professional judgement, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty; expressed or implied, is made. • • • • • • DOL Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 14 IN , E ; July 1000 -10010 • • . . • , • . . .. • • • ••• . .• • • • . . • • • . • • . • • . • . . . .• • . . ' . • • , , . . . . . .• .• • . . ' • • • • • • • , . ..., , • • • • . • . . ... • ' • • •• . • • . . • . . ,•.. ' . , . . . ..... . . . , • • •• . • • • . • • • . • • . . . . • • ... . • : . • • • . . . • • . . . • . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . ... ,..... . ... • .. . • •• • . . .; • • . , . • • . . • , . . . . , . . . . . • .. . • . • • . . . . . ... • • • . " • • • • . • .. . . . • . .. : •• . .. .." ,. • . . . • • . • . . . ... .' • • , • • . " •• ...• . . . . , • . . ' . • •.' .. • .• • • •'• • • . . . • ... . • . . . .. . . . . .. .•. • . • .. . .. • • . : • •• • .••• • • . • • : •• • . . • . . . .. . .... . . . . ... ... . • .. • ......., • . .. ... • • • • • • • . • . .. . . . • . . • . • • • • • • . . . . i .• ... . . • ... • . • . .. . • . . . . • • • • , • • • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . .. • • . • . • • • • • . , . . . . . . • • • • • .. , .. . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . .. •:.• • • . . . :. • .. • . .. ... .. • . • .... ...• .. • . . 0 • . . • • • • ..• . • ,•.' • ... " • . • • , , • ..• . . • •• • .: • . ,• . . , . • . • . ' ' •• ' ' • .• ' . . ••• . . . , . ...• • ' . • . .— •• • . : ' •• .•• .. • • • ' .'' '• • • ' ' ••• • • • •• • • . .. ' • • . ". • .' ' • . . . . • . ., • ' • . , • .. . ' . . • . . •" '. • ' • • " . , . . . . • . .. .....• .. . . •• ... . .. . . . . • . ' •••• • • . . , • • . . . • • • •, . . • ' . . . . • •• . . . .. . • , . . . . •• • : . , . . . . . . ' . , ••• • • . , • • • . . . . . • .. ;' • .. • . •. , . . • .• ", - • . ' •. • • ' . •'. • •• • • • ' . ' ' • ' • • . . • • '. • ' • . , . ' • . . . . . ., , . ..• .. ' ' ' • •.•.. • ' ••' ' . •' ••• . ''' .• . .- . •. . • . •• • — • ' • . . . . . . . . •• . . .• , • • •.. . • ...., , . . . . . . . • .. ., . • . • • . • • ' • . • • • , • '. • , • . •. .• . •... .. ' .• .•, , . . • • • • • .... • • • ••• . • • •• , . ' . : • • . .• .. ' •- .. . . ... . • • - • • ' " . . • • • • . • • . .. . ' . . .• • . • . . . . . . , . • .. • . , • . . •• • .' . • • • • . • .. . ,. . ', • • , • . . . .., .•• „ , . .. . ... . . .... . ' . • . .. , .,. . % e • • • • • • ,... ". • . .. •••••• . • • • ' • • • • • ' • . ' . . • • - . • . • • • • ' • .. . • . ' . ' ' ' • , . ' • , . .. . .. ' . ' •••• - • • : ' - . . • . • . .• ,. . . , • • • • • , • • . '. .. ,. , . . • . . . ' . ' .• ' . • ... ' . '. . • . • • . . . . . . . • .. • • .• . .• • •. , . • • • ' • . •• . • ' ' •• ,. • • . ., . • .. • . •• . . . . • . . . •.. •. • ... ...... ' . ... • :. • . . . . . . . . . . . ' • . . ' . . . . . . . ., • . ' • • • • . . .• . .. , • • • • •• . • .. . . . .. , ,• . . • , • . , .. .. ... .• . . . ..., . . , .• . . • . • . . • . . . • . . . • • .... . , . . ' . . . . „, . „ • .... , , -• . , • . . . • . . , ... •.. . . . . . • , • • ..... . . .. • • . • ' •' • . . . , . , . .. . .' ... . . • • • .•„. • .., ....' • .. .. . . . • , . • • • ' .. : . • . • • . . ..• • • . , .. • •.• • . • • • . . . . . . • , . ' . . . . . • . . • • • • . . • .• • • • . . . • .. •• . . .. . •.. . . . . . • • • • • • •• . • • • . . . . . • . •, . . . . . . . .. . .. ,. . . • . , . . . • • • 1 . . . - , , • . . . . . . . • " . , • ' • • •• . •• • ' .: •.- • , . . • . . . , . . . . . : - . • . • . ' ' . :. , . . .,.. • . . •.. .. • . . . • . . ' .. • • . , . ' • • • , • '• • . . . . . . , . . .. . . ' . . • • • • ..:. • . . . 1 . ' . . • . . ' '• . , .. . . . • .. . . .• , ' . • . . .. . . . • , . . . . .. .. . , • , • • . . • .. ' , .. • .. . . . . • •.. -• . ........ . • • . . ... . . • .; . . .. . . . . . . • .. . • • • . . . • • . . . . . . . • • • • • . . . • . . . . . . . •. „ . , .. . ' . • ' • . • • . . . . . . ' ' • • . . • ' • • • . . • . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . • • • . ' ." . ' . . . .. . . . . . . . . ' . . • • • • • . . • • . • . . . , . . .. . • . . '' •• ' ' • • - • • • • • • . . . , . . . . , .- . . • . • . . . . , • .. . . . . . • . • • • • • • • • ' • • . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . • • ' • • • • . . . . . . . . • • • • . • ' . • ' . . ' . ....-.. . . . • • • . . .. , . . . . . , • • • • • • . . . . . . . . , ' • ' • • . . . . '- DOC - ,. • • - - • • • • • .. . • .. . . . . . - • • . . • . . . . . , • . . - • • • .. • . . . . . . . . . • . • • . • . • .. .. . . . . , . .. • . INDEY-; • . • • • . • . . . . - • • • • .. . . . • • • • . • • . . . . . . • • . . . • • • . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . • • • • . . . . . . • • • • . • • . • . . . . • • . • • • . . . . . • ‘ . , , . . . • - • . . • Valley Mall Boulevard Co 7tual Wetland Mitigation Plan • • APPENDIX • WETLAND DETERMINATION FIELD DATA SHEETS • • • • • • • • Adolfson Associates, Inc Appendix A • July 2000 - 20010 11��,;. 4 /4._ • • • • DATA FORM 1 • Routine Wetland Determination . (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or • 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • • Project Site: \fowl }Hun eIVd.• Date: /1/y I Applicant/Owner: o ( LkL i 6 ..e County: `I' rr� 1 ' State: WP. InvestiQator(s): p'1 ?,,0 J,-,_,,-, b cr f JA S/T/R: Do normal circumstances exist on the site? illr No Community ID: a_ lard CG-G- Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Yes Transect ID: . Is the area a potential problem area? • Yes Nei Plot ID: pp 1 ' VEGETATION . Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator cover cover • t(o p u r us s t u t L i 1 . loo O &v . i . •. HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: , % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: Check all indicators that apply & explain below: • Regional knowledge of plant communities Wetland Plant List (Natl or regional) OTHER. Physiological-or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptations • Technical literature • Wetland plant data base • • Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No • Rationale for Decision/Remarks: ('J /fir grcSC C UPI i cLefrL ¢'i Pi l'2(1-- ,a.- h f n) � r, .r ., •c.LJ1 L - HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season:` Yes No Water Marks: Yes c No ' I Sediment D.e.osits:.'. Yes (..Nii Based on: Drift Lines: Yes (No ) 1 Drainage Patterns: Yes ) No Dept. of inundation: inches . Oxidized Root (live .o s) Local Soil Survey: es cto• Channels <12 in. 0 No Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained • • Depth to saturated soil: inches Leaves: Yes No , Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream. lake or gage data,: • Aerial photographs: Other: -. Wetland hydrology present? Yes; No Rationale for decision/remarks: - HOOD / , , ‘ , . . . . • ' _. .DATA FORM 1 .... -- - • . • Routine Wetland Determination • • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or ' 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) ' Project Site: '40 . . a Va. , /1 Date: h //q 10 "Applicant/Owner: 0'' li.ln_I ZTA County: (- 1 3 2- 1,1 -01 - %i:' • • (J S tate: W A Investigator(s): ill Pre 4-Jn z' I Frulj-zntAn•--■ . STY/R: • Do normal circumstances exist on the site? 7es) No Community ID: ..) . () S 4 6 Cr&- Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Yes ® Transect ID: - Is the area a potential problem area? Yes Fo Plot ID: (Vs.. - VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator cover cover Choris �cLl��l,C� N too N I--- • . v b o 1..0 e (.,Ln.le-lei. t'- .e.. . � vp.t... : .u.:4 -4S.) 1-•� 3O 1JS P X1 ?S \Aire_ �e_S 0 zk c.-.r, O, f-• 30 . g.nunculdt4 45hc.- u(aius l S NI L • • • HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: of dominants OBL. FACW, & FAC: O Check all indicat that apply & ex lain blow: e To ors PP Y P Regional of plant communities Wetland Plant List (Natl. or regional) OTHER Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphological adaptations Technical literature Wetland plant data base - /"---.., Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes `No • Rationale for Decision/Remarlcs: HYDROLOGY • Is it the growing season:" Yes No Water Marks: Yes (1■o� 1 Sediment Deposits: Yes (No Based on: • Drift Lines: Yes (No) Drainaze Patterns: Yes Dept. of inundation: inches . Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: Yes Co) Channels <12 in. Yes 6 Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: Yes Na Water- stained Depth to saturated soil:. inches Leaves: Yes to) Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: Other: r. Wetland hydrology present? Yes �� . Rationale for decision/remarks: - INDE • • DATA FORM 1 .. . Routine Wetland Determination - - • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or ' 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project Site: 'Ia /, -� (Yd . Date: talc//ctu Applicant/Owner: "' 1LM - sM County: mcc ' • State: WP Investigator(s): 'M 'ere�' u— £ `D F+vt -l-\, A'm S/ZYR: • Do normal circumstances exist on the site? C No Community ID: we cl znd& E E- Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Yes g Transect ID: . Is the area a potential problem area? Yes Plot ID: Op 3 VEGETATION • Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator cover cover -r,-Lc .„, r-� Yom 95 AZ_. • • S 1 vm -Sp . H • • t • • • • • • HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: • Check all indicators that apply & explain below: - Regional knowledge of plane communities Wetland Plant List (Nati or regional) OTHER Physiological or reproductive adaptations Morphoingical Technical literature ' Wetland plant data base • Hydrophytic vegetation present: ` Y es: No • • Rationale for Decision/Remarks: • L • . ln. HYDROLOGY • Is it the growing season: -• Yes No Water Marks: Yes (61o/ Sediment Deposits: Yes (No Based on: Drift Lines: Yes (o ' Drainage Patterns: Yes (No) Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live o`t 5 Local Soil Survey: Yes 6 Channels <12 12 in. L es No • • • Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Depth to saturated soil: inches ' Leaves: Yes No Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream, lake or gage data: ' Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present'? El'esi No Rationale for decision/remarks: • . 1.4— ( • . •• DATA FORM I . __. • . xtoutine Wetland Determination (WA State:Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project Site: a(t V vc Date: c)l p /GO Applicant/Owner: C c,� L1 .LO - County: yAk cry �� State: W {'l Investiczator(s): Yh Qre c' O Fru� •yr--. S/T/R: Do normal circumstances exist on the site? e No Community ID: t�l1 GI, n¢ar Z., Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? - es a. Transact ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes • it: Plot ID: )9p q . VEGETATION ' • Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator cover Chori L •,, - hevitd,l.u... So P L • cover If, v nc v1JS 4 411S y _ • (U,1t ai ntifaa q� • ' .cg :lyre c t. c•..r3 • • • HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: - • % of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: I ' Check all indicators that apply & explain belo - : • Regional knowledge of plant communities Wetland Plant List (Nati or regional) OTHER Morphological adaptations . Technical literature _ Wetland plant data base Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes o • Rationale for Decision/Remarks: • HYDROLOGY Is.it the growing season:,, Yes No Water Marks: Yes (No) Sediment Yes `w . Based on: Drift Lines: Yes ( Drainage Patterns: Yes I`o Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live roosl, Local Soil Survey: Yes Channels <12 in. Yes t t) Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: Yes No . Water- stained Depth . to saturated soil: inches • • Leaves: Yes To Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream. lake or gage data: Aerial photographs: Other: Wetland hydrology present? Vas o j • Rationale for decision/remarks: �� 4 14-.....,/ • .. DATA FORM 1 . Routine Wetland Determination • • (WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or . • 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) • Project Site: Y4it p IN Vci , Date: t�)c/ f • ApplicandOwner: 0- by..\ -; \ cs- Cour►ty: 'A.Yt .- a.. - State: W ' • Investigator(s): m pre.)n.y $ 0 Fry ' n xr■ • SIT/R: Do normal circumstances exist on the site? .es No " Community ID: C * U el l5a Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? Yes �t o Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes Plot ID: op - 5 • VEGETATION . 4 • Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Percent Indicator cover cover \ i a•c ) : , o t1 Ct-s 1-a- � ( - t&) - 1 10� r a Q►.CIlCS- H . 3o dSL .. t • • . • • • . HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: • To of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: j 00 ° A : - .) • . Check all indicators that apply & explain below: • Regional knowledge of plant communities Wetland Plant List (Nati or regional) OTHER • • .. ; _ _ - - • , • . • ••• __. Morphological adaptations Technical literature Wedan.d plant data base . Hydrophytic vegetation present: Yes No . Rationale for Decision/Remarks: • HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season:. Yes No Water Marks: Yes No Sediment De.osits: • - • Based on: Drift Lines: Yes MEM Drainage Patterns: Yes No Dept. of inundation: inches Oxidized Root (live ro. ) Local Soil Survey: Yes (No) Channels <12 in. (9 No . Depth to free water in pit: inches FAC Neutral: Yes No Water- stained Depth to saturated soil: () inches Leaves: Yes Check all that apply & explain below: Other: Stream. take or gage data: Aerial photographs: • Other. Wetland hydrology present? Yes No Rationale for decision/remarks: , ;NDE> if R .-.... ( • • •.y .y.✓ ' �rF *�. •r5 "� 1 �r ri I r.- ' •■• ' . ... : A. . • • • • • • • • • • • • • lt ( • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • � . • • • • • • • • • EXHIBIT: D ADOLFSON ASSOCIATES INC. FINAL MITIGATION PLAN OCR. q\IDE"' L I. Conceptual December 2000 Revised Conceptual Plan February 2001 Finalized May, 2001 VALLEY MALL BOULEVARD FINAL MITIGATION PLAN CITY OF UNION GAP, WASHINGTON Prepared for Bucher, Willis & Ratliff 2003 Western Avenue, Suite 100 Seattle, Washington 98121 Prepared by Adolfson Associates, Inc. 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW Seattle, Washington 98.107 Nf E: 4 H • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS • • PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 WETLAND DETERMINATION SUMMARY 1 • WETLAND IMPACT EVALUATION 2 • COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN • 3 Mitigation Site Selection 3 Streams 3 Wetlands • 4 Mitigation Goals 4 Mitigation Elements • 5 Preservation 5 Riparian Wetland Enhancement 5 Riparian Wetland Creation 5 Channel Wetland Restoration 6 Channel Wetland Creation 0 6 Open Water Marsh Restoration and Creation 7 Riparian - 7 CONSTRUCTION PLAN • ' 8 • Pre - Construction Meeting 0 8 Staking of Mitigation Area Boundaries • 8 Implementation of TESC,Measures 8 Excavation and Contouring of Mitigation Areas 8 Spoils Disposal 9 Plant Installation 9 Post Construction Monitoring 9 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 9 MONITORING PLAN 10 Monitoring Schedule 10 • Data Collection 10 Reporting • 11 Maintenance 11 CONTINGENCY PLAN 12 APPENDIX A FIGURES AND SITE PHOTOS A -1 - APPENDIX B MITIGATION PLAN DRAWINGS B -1 Adolfs•on Associates. Inc Page TOC -i LJ'•- 20010 - 05/04/0/ 4\10 1••• • Valley Mall Boulevard Final tVeticrnd Mitigation Plan PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK At the request of Bucher, Willis &Ratliff (BWR), Adolfson Associates, Inc. (Adolfson) prepared this final wetland mitigation plan for the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard project in the cities of Union Gap and Yakima, Washington. The Scope of Work for this project included preparing a conceptual mitigation plan and final mitigation plan for review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE), and other agencies in support of environmental permitting for this project. This report addresses wetland impacts,' associated with the proposed Valley Mall Boulevard project and presents a mitigation concept intended to meet the requirements of the COE and WDOE during the Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting process. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Union Gap proposes to extend Valley Mall Boulevard from South Third Avenue to South First Street/Main Street (Figures 1 and 2). This project will extend the existing Valley Mall Boulevard for approximately 1.5 miles and will alleviate traffic congestion by providing another east -west thoroughfare in 'the City of Union Gap between Washington Avenue and Ahtanum Road. The new road will cross an existing railroad right -of -way via an above -grade bridge. The project also includes the installation of a storm drainage system and the relocation of existing utility lines. The proposed roadway will consists of four 12 -foot travel lanes (two in each direction), a raised landscaped 12 -foot center median or left turn lanes (at designated intersection /access points), 4- foot bicycle lanes on each side of the road, and 7.5 -foot barrier curbs, gutters, and sidewalks on each side of the road. The rights -of -way for the project will extend approximately 45 feet from the centerline of the proposed alignment, except in the vicinity of the new railroad overcrossing. The overcrossing will require the construction of a new bridge and two new bridge approach • ramps. The approaches will be constructed using fill material placed at a 2:1 slope to obtain the necessary clearance over the railroad. The wider approach ramps will increase the right -of -way width to from approximately 100 feet to 220 feet in width. WETLAND DETERMINATION SUMMARY Wetlands within the proposed new rights -of -way for the Valley Mall Boulevard project were described in a wetland study report prepared by Adolfson (1999). Wetlands along the proposed road corridor were delineated in January 1999. The wetland boundaries occurring within the proposed rights -of -way were verified by Debbie Knaub with the COE and Cathy Reed with the WDOE in July 2000. Three grazed seasonal wet pasture wetlands are located along the proposed project alignment (Figure 3). These wetlands were identified in the wetland report as Wetland A, Wetland B /C, and Wetland. D. All three wetlands extend beyond the project corridor, but only the portions of the wetlands within the project corridor were delineated. Wetland areas within the proposed Aclalfsan Associates, Inc Page / 20010 05/04/01 11 U Tt .` • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan alignment of the Valley Mall Boulevard extension project are summarized in the following table. A detailed discussion of wetland characteristics may be found in the Valley Mall Boulevard Extension Project Wetland Study report (Adolfson 1 999). Characteristic , • Wetland A Wetland B/C Wetland D Soils Mapped as Zillah silt loam. Mapped as Naches loam. Soils are mapped as Umapine The soils observed did not Wetland soil did not match silt loam. The wetland soil match the mapped soil the mapped soil did not match the mapped soil description. The on -site soils description. The on site description. The on -site soils were very dark gray (1OYR soils consisted of very dark, consisted of very dark gray 3/1) gravelly sandy loam. gray (2.5Y 3/1) silt loam. (2.5Y 3 /I) loam soils. • Vegetation white willow, reed reed canarygrass, bluegrass, bluegrasses, mustard, and canarygrass and velvetgrass tall fescue, curly dock, rushes with large amounts of Canadian thistle and rush. exposed soils. Wetland contained large amounts of unvegetated • exposed soils. Hydrology Seasonal soil saturation. Depressional wetland fed Depressional wetland fed by Wetland is bisected by a by precipitation. precipitation. seasonal drainage fed by irrigation runoff. Size in ROW .. 1,9.83 square feet 123,953 square feet 5,054 square feet (0.05 acre) • (2.85 acre) . (0.12 acre) .. - . • City Category III III • IV Class Palustrine Scrub -Shrub Palustrine Emergent Palustrine Emergent (PSS) ' (PEM) (PEM) WETLAND IMPACT EVALUATION The proposed roadway alignment intersects portion of Wetland A and Wetland B /C. Wetland D will be avoided. Most of the proposed impacts will occur to Wetland B /C. Road and overcrossing construction will impacts 91,594 square feet (2.1 acres) of Wetland B /C. ,A small amount of Wetland A will be affected by construction. Construction will impact 2,117 square feet (0.05 acre) of Wetland A. In total, the proposed extension of Valley Mall Boulevard will impact (fill) 2.15 acres of low quality, grazed pasture wetland and disturbed scrub -shrub wetland. Wetland impacts resulting from road construction are shown on Figure 3. Wetland impacts are summarized as follows: Characteristic Wetland A Wetland B/C Wetland D Total Area (within ROW) 0.05 acre 2.85 acres • 0.12 acre Proposed Impact Area 0.05 acre 2.10 acre None (Avoided) City Category III 1II IV Class PSS PEM PEM Adnlfson Associates. Inc Page 2 20010 05/04/01 ;` "" Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan • • • COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN • The actions proposed by this mitigation plan will compensate for the loss of wetland functions • and values resulting from filling 2.15 acres , )f low quality wetland. These impacts are necessary to complete the construction of the 1.5 -mile extension of Valley Mall Boulevard within the Cities of Union Gap and Yakima, Washington (Figure 1). The elements of the mitigation plan include a summary of the mitigation site selection process, a statement of mitigation goals, a • discussion.of the mitigation types and construction, a statement of performance standards, a . • monitoring plan, a maintenance plan, and a contingency plan. • Mitigation Site Selection The City of Union Gap initiated the wetland mitigation site selection process in the summer of 2000. Three potential mitigation sites were initially identified to compensate for the loss of wetland functions and values as a result of the proposed road construction project After review of each of the three potential mitigation sites available for use by the City, the City has elected to proceed with the acquisition of the present mitigation site is located north of the confluence of Ahtanum Creek and Bachelor Creek approximately 0.9 mile south of the proposed alignment (Figure 4). This potential mitigation site is an approximately 25 -acre parcel bisected . _ _ by Ahtanum Creek, a Category 1 stream as defined by City code. Prior to acquisition by the • City the site was used for cattle grazing and has been in this use for many years. Streamside riparian woody vegetation is lacking and stream banks have been significantly degraded by grazing impacts. Streams Ahtanum Creek winds eastward through the site following.a series of large meanders (Figure 4). Within the proposed mitigation site, the channel varies from approximately 25 feet to 100 feet in width. Stream banks range from between one foot and seven feet in height. In many areas, stream banks art, steep, and sloughing has occurred as a result of livestock trampling and the lack of riparian vegetation. Debris, which includes abandoned car bodies and large chunks of • concrete, are present along the stream channel (Photo 1). A bridge spans Ahtanum Creek near the midpoint of the property (Figure 4). Stream substrates are generally gravel with deposits of silts in some areas (Photo 2). Exposed gravel bars, riffles, and pools are present. Riparian vegetation is largely limited to grasses and (orbs offering little value for shading, bank stabilization, floodwater attenuation, or large woody • debris recruitment. • Bachelor Creek forms the eastern boundary of the mitigation site (Figure 4). Conditions are similar to those described for Ahtanum Creek, with the exception of the presence of areas of riparian trees and shrubs along the banks, particularly along the northern half of this stream reach. Adnlfvon Associates, Inc Page 3 20010 05/04/01 . • l • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Pleat • Wetlands Seven wetlands areas were identified during the wetland reconnaissance conducted on the site in early December 2000. Six of the wetlands on the mitigation site are small isolated depressional' wetlands located within remnant stream channels (Photo 3). These wetlands have been significantly affected by current and past Levels of cattle grazing. Vegetation in these wetlands is generally limited to:reed canarygrass, sedge, and redtop. The soils are typically black (10 YR 3 /1), moist, loans containing numerous oxidized rhizospheres. Near- surface groundwater and soil saturation was identified in all six of these depressional wetlands during the December 2000 • site visit. The seventh, and largest, wetland on the mitigation site occurs in the south - central portion of the property (Figure 5). Unlike the degraded depressional wetlands described above, this wetland contained areas of standing water (1 -3 inches in depth) on the day of the field reconnaissance. . The western portions of the wetland are vegetated with American great bulrush, American brooklime, common cattail, red -osier dogwood, and willow. Eastern and northern portions of the wetland are degraded and similar to the depressional areas described above, dominated by similar non - native vegetation. This large wetland complex extends off -site to the south: • . • The mitigation site also includes several areas of riparian wetland adjacept to Ahtanum and Bachelor Creeks (Photo 4). Most of these areas are dominated by reed canarygrass, rushes, and non - native pasture grasses. Soils are commonly gravelly; these wetlands appeared to have _ ___ formed on old gravel bars and alluvial deposits adjacent to the stream. Most of these areas are small and were eneralTy located within the tops of banks of Athanum and Bachelor Creeks. • Mitigation Goals A total of 2.15 acres of low quality grazed pasture and scrub -shrub wetlands will be filled by the proposed roadway construction project. The goal of this mitigation plan is to increase and improve wetland and stream functions and values within the project vicinity through a combination of preservation, wetland enhancement, wetland restoration, wetland creation, and stream buffer enhancement on the proposed wetland mitigation site. The mitigation concept described in detail in this plan will accomplish these objectives through the following goals: • Preserve existing habitat by excluding cattle from the site. This is a necessary step in assuring the success of other task elements. The mitigation plan will not be successful unless cattle are entirely precluded from the mitigation areas. • Enhance approximately 0.2 acre of riparian wetland. • • Create approximately 0.7 acre of riparian wetland. • • Restore approximately 0.6 acre of degraded palustrine wetlands formed in remnant stream channels. • Create approximately I acre of new palustrine channel wetlands.. Adolfson Associates. Inc Page 4 1 , 4 ; 6. 20010 05/04/01 1,4 • • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigatian Plan • Restore approximately 0.8 acre of open water marsh habitat. • Create approximately 0.4 acre of open water marsh habitat • Stabilize approximately 800 linear feet of degraded stream bank. • Enhancement approximately 1 acre of streamside upland area. . • Mitigation Elements Eight types of wetland and riparian mitigation will be undertaken to improve wetland functions and values in the project vicinity. These include: 1) Preservation; 2) Riparian wetland enhancement; 3) Riparian wetland creation; 4) Channel wetland enhancement; 5) Channel wetland creation; 6) Open water marsh restoration; Open water marsh creation; and 8) Upland riparian enhancement. These mitigation elements are briefly discussed below and are summarized on Figure 6. • Preservation The 25 -acre site bisected by Ahtanum Creek be retained as public open space. Cattle grazing will be excluded from the site. The entire parcel is a remnant pasture located within an area of mixed residential and commercial use. The entire parcel is currently fenced. The parcel „was leased for grazing by the previous private property owner. The City of Union Gap has acquired the parcel and will not lease the land for grazing. No additional steps will be necessary to exclude cattle from riparian areas since cattle will be completely excluded from the site. This • action is anticipated to provide a significant benefit to the long term functions and values within the Ahtanum Creek watershed by reducing the potential of further degradation from livestock use of the site. Riparian Wetland Enhancement • The wetland mitigation concept is to enhance approximately 0.2 acre of on -site riparian wetland within the mitigation site. Degraded riparian wetland areas are located in many locations along the stream channel as shown on the planting plan drawings (Appendix B). These areas are generally located within one foot in elevation above the normal winter base flow elevation of the stream. All' these areas are currently located within the stream channel below the ordinary high water mark. Enhancement will include replanting these areas with species adapted to compete within this type of environment. Detailed species Iists are included on the enclosed planting plan. Riparian Wetland Creation • • This mitigation plan proposes to create approximately 0.7 acre of riparian wetland from degraded non - wetland riparian areas. Areas proposed for riparian wetland creation are located below the ordinary high water mark of the stream but do not currently support hydrophytic wetland vegetation. Neither do these areas maintain saturated soil conditions within one foot (12- inches) of the soil surface for extended periods, us required for jurisdictional wetlands. Riparian areas Page .5 : :1\ 4 Acluljsun Associates. Inc , ' 20010 U i /U4 /(J ! • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan • suitable for wetland creation occur between about one foot to two feet in elevation above the normal winter base flow elevation of the stream. Wetlands will be created in these areas by grading existing soils to within one foot of the normal winter baseflow elevation of the stream. This will create hydrologic conditions similar to those • that occur within existing riparian wetland areas. Hydrology will be provided to these areas by groundwater and periodic flooding when stream levels rise each spring. Planting specifications are included on the enclosed planting plan. Channel Wetland Restoration • • The site currently contains approximately 2 acres of degraded wetlands located in remnant • stream channels. These areas have been significantly impacted by grazing. Grazing has not only altered the vegetative composition of these areas, but repeated trampling by cattle has • eliminated the defined banks of the old stream channels in many areas. .This has resulted in the creation of shallow swales with degraded wetland hydrology and soils. There is currently one small area where livestock use has not degraded the bed and banks of the remnant stream channel to a large degree. This are is located within the large wetland complex in the south - central portion of the site (Figure 5) and currently contains seasonal standing water and .a wider variety of wetland species than found in more degraded habitats on site. This area will serve as a reference wetland for the proposed channel restoration and creation areas. Restoration of existing channel wetlands will include minor grading to remove accumulated soils, debris, and matted non - native plant material. Grading will also occur to restore a deeper open water channel that will support seasonal open water. The banks of the restored channels • will be replanted. Planting specifications are included on the enclosed planting plan. • Channel Wetland Creation • • Several remnant stream channels occur on the proposed mitigation site. Many of these areas have been degraded by cattle use and currently only occur as poorly defined swales (Photo 3). Many of these swales contain areas of wetlands as described above; however, most remnant swales no longer support wetland hydrology or vegetation. The topography of these areas and • • their location within the Ahtanum Creek floodway and/or in proximity to areas of existing channel wetland make them excellent locations for wetland creation. • Grading will create deeper open water channels within degraded swales that will support seasonal open water and wetland plantings. Approximately 0.6 acres of new channel wetlands will be created to reestablish connections between existing wetlands as well as to restore the remnant channels hydrologic connection to Ahtanum Creek. Although these areas will not be directly connected to the stream during times of normal flow, it is expected that they will become seasonally inundated during the spring when high runoff rates commonly inundate the entire floodway. Replanting will be similar to that proposed for restored channel wetlands. Planting specifications are included on the enclosed planting plan. Adolfson Associates, Inc Page 6 '# 20010 05/04/01 _ • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetlanc! Mitigation Plan • Open Water Marsh Restoration and Creation Large areas of the southeastern corner of the site are currently grazed wet pasture lacking little diversity and having low functions and values as wildlife habitat. As with most other areas on • site, this wetland has been impacted by grazing and livestock use.. Restoration of openiwater marsh habitat will include excavation within existing wetlands and adjacent uplands to create areas with depths ranging from one to three feet. Open water marsh areas will be seeded with the species noted above, and the banks of the restored channels will be replanted with dogwood, willows, black cottonwood, and other species. Open water areas will be seeded with both deep water and shallow water emergent species. Planting specifications are included on the enclosed planting plan. Riparian Enhancement • The long -term use of the site by cattle has resulted in the almost complete removal of woody • vegetation along the banks of Ahtanum Creek within the proposed mitigation site (Photo 5). Off -site areas where cattle have been excluded by fencing have retained significant riparian vegetation and provide a much higher level of biological support to the stream than on -site areas. To restore lost functions within the riparian area, the City proposes to restore native vegetation within portions of the Ahtanum Creek corridor. Riparian enhancement will consist of two primary elements: regrading and replanting degraded stream banks to reduce erosion and sedimentation within the stream; and replanting several streamside areas with a mix of shrubs, deciduous, and coniferous trees to begin the process of natural succession within the stream • corridor. • • • Bank stabilization was included into this mitigation proposal at the request of the local WDFW habitat biologist to reduce sedimentation and the degradation of downstream spawning habitat from eroding banks (Photo 6). The City proposes to restore approximately 800 linear feet of stream bank on -site. Stream bank restoration will occur at 9 separate Iocations as shown on the planting plan (Appendix B). Bank restoration will include regrading existing vertical stream banks to approximately 2:1 slopes, stabilizing the new toe of slope with bioengineered revetments and replanting the toe of the slope with woody vegetation and low growing herbaceous cover. It should be noted that two areas of vertical banks are proposed to remain. One bank supports a colony of bank swallow nests. A second area is an undercut bank that is vegetated and provides overhead cover to the adjacent pool. These two areas are also identified on sheet 1 of the planting plan (Appendix B). • Replanting will occur within approximately 1 acre of upland areas adjacent to the stream. Replanting will include a mix of species common to the site and other species to add diversity. Planting specifications are included on the•enclosed planting plan. Coniferous vegetation is largely lacking from the Ahtanum Creek corridor, even beyond the grazed mitigation site. It should be noted that because these coniferous trees are strictly upland species, the placement of coniferous trees have been limited to areas that area not regularly flooded. Adotfsnm Associates, Inc Page 7 r �l Y` i: , 20010 05/04/ I • • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan • • CONSTRUCTION PLAN Five tasks have been identified as necessary for implementing the construction plan for the mitigation areas. These tasks should be implemented sequentially and include: 1) pre- construction meeting; 2) staking of mitigation area boundaries and soil disposal areas; 3) implementation of temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) measures; 4) contouring and excavation of mitigation areas; 5) plant installation; and 6) post - construction monitoring. • Pre - Construction Meeting A pre - construction meeting will be held on site with the City of Union Gap, the construction • contractor, the project engineer, and the project biologist or environmental designer. During this meeting, site conditions and the final mitigation plan and planting plan drawings will be reviewed. This will ensure that all involved parties understand the intent of the plans, specifications, plan details, and the construction schedule. Staking of Mitigation Area Boundaries The boundaries of the mitigation areas will be located in the field by a professional land surveyor or the construction contractor based on the final wetland mitigation design plans. Boundaries will be marked with wooden lathe at approximately 25 -foot intervals. Prior to the start of construction, the field staking will be reviewed by City of Union Gap personnel and a biologists or environmental designer. This may occur concurrently with the pre - construction meeting. . • These measures will assist with proper earthwork, planting locations, and plant materials layout. Implementation of TESC Measures Prior to any grading or other earthwork, TESC measures will be initiated on site as specified in the final wetland mitigation plan. TESC measures will include the following: The installation of sedimentation and erosion control fencing between areas of exposed soils and Ahtanum Creek; seasonal restrictions on earthwork as defined by the WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval necessary for this project; and stabilizing soils left exposed for over 15 days. • Excavation and Contouring of Mitigation Areas Typical grading cross sections are included on the final mitigation drawings for each mitigation area. The excavation depths and procedures to construct each area will occur as follows: 1) Riparian wetland enhancement -- No grading or excavation will be required. 2) Riparian wetland creation -- Grade areas from one to one -half a foot of the normal winter baseflow elevation of Ahtanum Creek. Adolfvon Associates, Inc Page 8 20010 05/04/01 • • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Welland Mitigation Plan • 3) Channel wetland enhancement -- Grade areas to remove invasive vegetation (non - native vegetation which out - competes natives, and tends to establish monocultures). Contour edges to establish one- to two -foot high banks. 4) Channel wetland creation -- Excavate channels to match elevations of existing channel wetlands and establish a deeper thalweg to .re- connect channel wetlands and establish • seasonally inundated hydrology (late winter and early spring). • 5) Open water marsh restoration -- Grade to remove existing invasive vegetation, and grade areas from one to three feetdeeper than the current wetland surface elevation to establish areas of seasonally inundated open water. • • • 6) Upland riparian enhancement -- No grading or excavation will be required for replanting areas. Vertical stream banks will be graded to no more than. 2:1 slopes and stabilized with bioengineered revetments. • • Spoils Disposal Spoils from the graded mitigation areas will be deposited on -site in upland areas as determined during the pre - construction meeting. Spoils will be deposited in mounds along the northern portion of the property at least 100 feet from the top of bank of Ahtanum Creek. Spoil piles will . _ be contoured so that no side slopes exceed 2:1 vertical run over rise. All soil disposal areas will be subject to TESCP measures as specified above for other areas of the site. • Plant Installation • • A final planting plan is appended to this report (Appendix B). The plan includes species, quantities, and details necessary to bid and implement the plan. An as -built drawing will be prepared within 30 days of final plan implementation. • Post Construction Monitoring Post construction monitoring is discussed in detail in the following Monitoring Plan. • PERFORMANCE STANDARDS • A set of specific performance standards has been established that corresponds to the stated ' mitigation goals. These standards serve as the benchmarks that will be used to evaluate the success of the mitigation project. By monitoring the project and comparing monitoring results to performance standards, a determination can be made as to the need for implementing a contingency plan. The performance standards are as follows: • Provide 0.9 acre of enhanced and created riparian wetland (0.2 acre and 0.7 acre, respectively) and ensure 70 percent coverage by woody vegetation after five years. fb. Adolfson Associates. Inc Pct,Ke 9 H,( 20010 05/04/01 • • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plun ' • • Provide 1.6 acres of restored and created channel wetland (1 acre and 0.6 acre, respectively) and ensure the establishment of seasonal open water channels and stable banks. Vegetative cover will cover 70 percent of the edges of the channels. • Provide•1.2 acres of restored open water marsh. Since open water marsh areas will be seeded but plant materials will not be installed, success for these areas will be the establishment of coverage of at least 70 percent hydrophytic emergent species after five years. Presence of wetland hydrology for at least two weeks during the growing season will be monitored during the spring. • Provide 1 acre of enhanced riparian upland areas and ensure 70 percent survival of installed tree plantings after 10 years. • Ensure less than 15 percent cover of non - native invasive species after 10 years. MONITORING PLAN Site monitoring will begin before construction and continue for'10 years post - construction. Monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist or environmental designer. Random site visits during construction will ensure that the mitigation plan is being implemented as designed. • Construction monitoring will also ensure that sediment control devises such as silt fences and straw bales are in working order. The main objective for mitigation monitoring is to document the level of success in meeting the " performance standards. Monitoring will begin the first full growing season after construction is complete and the plants have been installed. At that time, permanent sampling points will be established. The size and number of sampling points will be determined by the biologist during the initial wetland site visit. Panoramic photos will be taken to document overall site conditions. Monitoring Schedule Post construction monitoring will begin upon the completion of constructs ^n (Year 0). In addition to the initial site visit, presence of wetland hydrology, plant survival, and percent cover will be monitored from Years 1 through Year 10. An initial stem count of the installed plant material will be conducted following construction (an as -built count). A second stem count of installed plantings will be conducted during Year 1 to evaluate survival during the first critical year. Data Collection Shrub and tree cover will be evaluated quantitatively during Years 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 using line intercept transects that will be established during the Year 0 post construction site visit and Year I stem counts. A minimum of two transects in each mitigation habitat type will be used. Transects will be located to represent a general profile of the stream corridor and will also i =r :. Adulfson Associates, Inc Page 10 �< 20010 05/04/0/ R • Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan • include portions of stabilized bank, created, restored, and enhancement areas, and undisturbed existing vegetation. To further assist in the evaluation of the site, permanent photo points will be located throughout the mitigation area to provide a panoramic documentation of plant cover, species present, and general health. The following will be recorded during the detailed monitoring site visits: • percent cover or survival rates of vegetation; • general plant health assessment; • • sketch map of dominant plant communities; .• documentation of the presence of undesirable plants (weedy and /or non - native species) with estimated percent cover; 1 • documentation of wetland hydrology; • photo documentation of site conditions; and recording of any wildlife use of the area. • Reporting • A total of six annual reports (following Years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10) will be prepared for the City • of Union Gap. The first two reports will compare the as -built to the field observations and recommend species replacements, if necessary (see Maintenance section below). All will present percent cover data collected, as well as document successes and problems. Panoramic photographs will be included to document site conditions. Monitoring reports will also be • . submitted to the COE and WDOE. . • Maintenance Maintenance of the mitigated wetlands will begin after completion of the project and continue as . needed for up to five years' After the initial planting acceptance by the project biologist, the landscaping contractor will be responsible for plant survival for a period of one year. After that, maintenance will be performed by the City of Union Gap. Maintenance could include, but may not be limited to: • installing supplemental plantings as needed; • watering or providing irrigation during unseasonable dry periods or when the soils are unusually dry; • removing non - native or invasive plant species as needed: • providing fencing around ground plants to prevent animal damage; and Adolfson Assuciatcs, lnc Page 11 •• 20010 05/04/0/ Valley Mall Boulevard Final Wetland Mitigation Plan • providing fencing to prevent vandalism or damage caused by humans. • Non- native invasive plants include, but are not limited to: Himalayan blackberry, purple • loosestrife, nightshade, Italian thistle, tansy, reed canary grass, knapweeds, mustards, and /or other species identified on the state list of Class A noxious weeds (WAC 16-750-005). CONTINGENCY PLAN If any portion of the mitigation is not successful, a contingency plan will be implemented. Such plans are prepared on a case -by -case basis to remedy any aspects of the mitigation that does not meet the performance standards. The plan, if required, would be developed in cooperation with • the City of Union Gap, COE, and WDOE. • • • • • • • • • • �l•,i4_ Adolfsan Assncicues. Inc Page 12 20010 05/04/0/ / '