Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-26-20 YPC Packet111011119 M DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director 11 PlOTY I° YAKIIMA anning Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning�yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning City of Yakima Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday February 26, 2020 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. YPC1VTPmhPra- Chair Jacob Liddicoat, Vice -Chair Leanne Hughes -Mickel, Al Rose, Bill Cook, Robert McCormick, Philip Ostriem, and Mary Place Council Liaison: Kay Funk (District 4) City Planning Staff: Joan Davenport (Community Development Director), Rosalinda Ibarra (Community Development Administrative Assistant), Joseph Calhoun (Planning Manager), Eric Crowell (Associate Planner), Trevor Martin (Associate Planner), Colleda Monick (Community Development Specialist), and Lisa Maxey (Planning Technician) AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Introduction of New YPC Member - Mary Place IV. Staff Announcements V. Audience Participation (for items not listed on the agenda) VI. Approval of Meeting Minutes of February 12, 2020 VII. Opening of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Process VIII. *CONTINUED* PUBLIC HEARING - Plat of "Rainier Court - Phases 2,3 & 4" Applicant: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC File Numbers: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Site Address: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave Request: Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 78 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. IX. Other Business X. Adj ourn Next Meeting: March 11, 2020 MIS 094 City of Yakima Planning Commission (YPC) Meeting Minutes City Hall Council Chambers February 12, 2020 Call to Order Chair Liddicoat called the meeting to order at approximately 3:00 p.m. Roll Call YPC Members Present: Chair Jacob Liddicoat, Vice -Chair Leanne Hughes -Mickel, Al Rose, Robert McCormick, Bill Cook YPC Members Absent: Philip Ostriem (excused) Staff Present: Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager; Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist; Sara Watkins, Senior Assistant City Attorney; Lisa Maxey, Planning Technician Council Liaison: Kay Funk, District 4 Others: Sign -in sheet in file Staff Announcements — Planning Manager Joseph Calhoun announced that the formal opening of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments process is scheduled for the next Planning Commission meeting on February 26tH He also informed the Commission that the public participation plan for the Housing Action Plan is being finalized by the City's consultants. There is a kick-off meeting tentatively scheduled for the beginning of March. Audience Participation — None noted. Approval of Meeting Minutes — It was motioned by Commissioner Rose and seconded by Commissioner Cook to approve the meeting minutes of January 22, 2020; the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING — "Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3 & 4" (PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19) — Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist, summarized staff's findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendation pertaining to a preliminary long plat in the vicinity of N 92nd Ave and Summitview Ave proposed by Columbia Ridge Homes LLC. Tom Durant, PLSA Engineering & Surveying Inc. (applicant's representative/surveyor), explained that based on staff's suggestions and the public comments received, the applicant has revised the proposed plat. Copies of the memo outlining the changes and copies of the revised plat were provided to the Commission and staff and offered to audience members. Public Testimony John Andring, 215 N 93 d Ave, asked when soil testing would be done since an orchard used to occupy the land. He explained that the height of the new housing would disrupt his and his neighbors' view. Michele Hauff, 420 N 92nd Ave, also shared concerns about soil testing and disagreed with the City recommending soil testing but not requiring it. Hauff spoke on the mitigation that was done at the nearby Apple Valley Elementary school in response to results from soil testing. She voiced her concern that dust mitigation would not be handled during hours that the Department of Ecology (DOE) is closed. Lastly, Hauff spoke on the danger of traveling up and down the hill on N 92nd Ave in icy conditions and that the new sharp turn onto Lincoln Ave will create more of a hazard. -1- Candie Turner, 206 N 93,d Ave, spoke on the 14 -foot -tall height restriction for the Reed's Addition subdivision and her desire for the new houses to be built to preserve the neighbors' views. Turner said that she will speak to the developer to further address her and her neighbors' concerns. Jamie Evans of Evans & Son Inc. Earthmoving (2206 Terrace Heights Dr.), spoke in favor of the proposal, countered some of the concerns expressed by the neighbors, and emphasized the need for more housing in Yakima. Chair Liddicoat closed the public testimony portion of the hearing. Calhoun clarified that staff's request is for the public testimony to be left open and for the hearing to be continued to February 26th, at which time the Commission can make their decision after having sufficient time to review the revised plat and consider the public testimony. Per the Commission's request, staff indicated they will look into whether the City can make it a requirement for the developer to have the soil tested and notify potential homeowners of contaminants. Chair Liddicoat re -opened the public testimony portion of the hearing. Brian Mauch, 216 N 90th Ave, mentioned that the orchard has been pulled up so there is already open soil. Mauch asked what dust control measures will be in place in the meantime, to which the Commission advised that neighbors can contact DOE or the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency. Councilmember Funk discussed that lead exposure is measured through blood tests and that the Apple Valley Elementary report does not specify the levels that were found. She would like the Health District to share this data. Chair Liddicoat stated that the public testimony will remain open and the public hearing is continued to February 26th Monick shared that the City is working closely with DOE to support the creation of a regional workgroup that will address protocol and criteria for the sampling, documentation, and potential mitigation of lead and arsenic in new residential developments. She added that DOE provides soil testing for free, and that it has been the City's practice to take the exact language from DOE's comments and put it in staff's recommendation. Other Business — None noted. Adjourn — A motion to adjourn to February 26, 2020 was passed with unanimous vote. This meeting adjourned at approximately 4:26 p.m. Chair Liddicoat Date This meeting was filmed by YPAC. Minutes for this meeting submitted by: Lisa Maxey, Planning Technician. -2- COLUMBIA RI1GE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Yakima Planning Commission Open Record Public Hearing February 12, 2020 *Continued to February 26, 2020* EXHIBIT LIST Applicant: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC c/o Justin Hellem File Numbers: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Site Address: Vic. of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave Staff Contact: Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist Table of Contents CHAPTER A Staff Report CHAPTER B Maps CHAPTER C Site Plan CHAPTER D DST Review & Agency Comments CHAPTER E SEPA Checklist CHAPTER F Applications CHAPTER G Public Comments CHAPTER H Public Notices CHAPTER I Supplemental Information CHAPTER J Exhibits Submitted At or After Public Hearing COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER A Staff Report DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'oda ' ZW Joan Davenport, AICP, Director AN Planning >[)Ms'on CITY C) t "YAK I AJoseph Calhoun, Manager anning 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIVISION'S FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION for REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT APPLICANT: APPLICANT ADDRESS: PROJECT LOCATION: NAME OF PLAT: TAX PARCEL NUMBERS: DATE OF REQUEST: DATE OF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF CONTACT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC 404 S 51St Ave., Yakima, WA 98908 Vicinity of N 92"d Ave & Summitview Ave Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, & 4 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 December 3, 2019 February 12, 2020 Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: On December 3, 2019, the City of Yakima Department of Community Development received an application to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 78 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Administrative Official recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat, subject to conditions. III. FACTS: A. Statement of Cause: Pursuant to YMC Ch. 14.20, the applicant's statement in the Preliminary Long Plat application dated December 3, 2019 — This proposed plat will subdivide approximately 26 acres into 78 Single -Family lots. Lot sizes will range from approximately 7,839 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. The lots will have frontage on a public roadways which will be improved as part of this project. B. Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as suitable for Low Density Residential development. Single-family detached dwellings are the predominant dwelling type. Other dwelling types may be allowed under certain circumstances, such as accessory dwellings and cottage housing. The permitted density Yakima tm 010C. 111114 114DEX 2015 ii. is up to seven net dwelling units per acre for infill development. On larger sites (over two acres), more flexibility in lot sizes and layout are envisioned, provided overall density standards are met. Permitted maximum densities on large sites is up to seven gross dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses allowing up to six gross dwelling units may be allowed subject to conformance with traditional neighborhood design concepts. Generally, the proposed preliminary plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's other provisions which encourage infill, recognize the need for public water and sewer, encourage disposal of surface drainage on-site, and encourage development consistent with the general land use pattern in the area. The Goals and Policies that apply to this designation and proposed land use are as follows: Goal 2.3. Residential uses. Preserve and enhance the quality, character and function of Yakima's residential neighborhoods. Policy 2.3.1.B. Standard single family. Continue to allow for detached single family dwellings in residential districts. Policy 2.3.3 Create walkable residential neighborhoods with safe streets and good connections to schools, parks, transit, and commercial services. Policy 2.3.3.A Construct sidewalks along all new residential streets. Policy 2.3.3.0 Promote small block sizes to ensure good connectivity and reduced walking distances between residences and schools, parks, and services. Specifically: • Low density residential: Blocks between 400- 800 feet long are appropriate. • Mixed residential: Blocks between 300-660 feet long are appropriate. • Provide for through public through block connections for large residential blocks. ■ Commercial and mixed-use designations: Configure development to provide pedestrian connections at 300 to 660 feet intervals. Configure development to provide vehicular connections at 600 to 1,320 feet intervals. Allow flexibility for private internal streets to meet connectivity objectives. Goal 5.2. Preserve and improve existing residential neighborhoods. Policy 5.2.1. Invest in and improve quality of life in existing neighborhoods. Goal 5.4. Encourage design, construction, and maintenance of high quality housing. Policy 5.4.3. Encourage development of well-designed new housing in coordination with population growth employment growth, and transportation goals. C. Urban Area Zoning Ordinance. The main purpose of the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) Title 15 (UAZO) is to implement the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and promote the general health, safety and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Yakima Urban Area. YMC § 15.01.030 describes the purpose and intent to promote the purpose of the UAZO. Subsection 15.03.020(B) of the UAZO indicates that the intent of the Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning district is to: 1. Establish new residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses except those which are compatible with, and serve the residents of this district, which may include duplexes and zero lot lines if established during the subdivision process; 2. Preserve existing residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses to ensure the preservation of the existing residential character, and serve the residents of this district; and 3. Locate moderate -density residential development, up to seven dwelling units per net residential acre, in areas served by public water and sewer system. Detached single-family dwellings are the primary use in this district. The district is characterized by up to sixty percent lot coverage; access to individual lots by local access streets; required front, rear and side yard setbacks; and one and two-story structures. The density in the district is generally seven dwelling units per net residential acre or less. This zone is intended to afford single-family neighborhoods the highest level of protection from encroachment by potentially incompatible nonresidential land uses or impacts. Nonresidential uses within these zones are not allowed; except for public or quasi -public uses, which will be required to undergo extensive public review and will have all necessary performance or design standards assigned to them as necessary to mitigate potential impacts to adjacent residences. Development exceeding seven dwelling units per net residential acre may be allowed in accordance with Table 4-1. D. Environmental Review. This project (SEPA#041-19) underwent a State Environmental Policy Act review and a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on January 16, 2020. No appeals have been filed with the City of Yakima. E. Processing. 1. The application for a Preliminary Long Plat was received on December 3, 2019, 2. The proposed plat is larger than nine lots, and is therefore being processed under the provisions of YMC Ch. 14.20 & 6.88. 3. The application was deemed complete for processing on December 11, 2019. 4. A SEPA MDNS was issued for this plat on January 16, 2020, no appeals have been filed. 9 3 ro 5. Pursuant to RCW Ch. 58.17, YMC § 1.42.030 and YMC § 14.20.100, the City of Yakima Planning Commission (Planning Commission) is authorized to make a recommendation for approval or disapproval, with written findings of fact and conclusions to support the recommendation to the City Council on preliminary plats. Within ten working days of the conclusion of a hearing, unless a longer period is agreed to in writing by the applicant, the Planning Commission shall render a written recommendation which shall include findings and conclusions based on the record. 6. Public Notice: Public notice for this application and hearing was provided in accordance with: YMC Title 14, Subdivision Ordinance; YMC Title 15, Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and YMC Title 16, Development Permit Regulations and include the following actions and dates: a. Date of Application: December 3, 2019 b. Date of Developer's Notice of Complete Application: December 11, 2019 c. Date of Notice of Application: December 19, 2019 d. Date of Posting of Land Use Action Sign on the Property: December 19, 2019 e. Date of Mailing of Notice of MDNS: January 16, 2020 f. Notice of Public Hearing December 19, 2019 7. Public Comment: The twenty -day public comment period for this application occurred from December 19, 2019, to January 8, 2020. At the conclusion of the public comment period, the City of Yakima received 17 public comments addressing the environmental impacts and compatibility of the proposed development. Public Comments Analysis (staff response in italics): This list identifies the nature of the comments received from parties of record, based on frequency: • Required Height Restrictions/View Obscuring/Limit to one-story only (12): YMC § 15.05.030 Table 5.1 allows for a maximum building height in the R-1 zoning district of 35 ft. • Decreases Property Value (9): The property is zoned R-1, which allows Single - Family Residential as a Type (1) permitted use. • Restrictive Covenants (existing) (8): The City of Yakima does not have the authority to enforce private covenants. • Required Dust Abatement Mitigation (6): The YRCAA is the primary agency responsible for regulating air pollution in Yakima County and should be contacted directly if there exists concerns for fugitive dust. On January 16, 2020, a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignficance was issued with the following required mitigation measure: "Applicant shall file a Dust Control Plan with the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency (YRCAA) and get approval, prior to the start of any work. " • Required Design Standards/Aesthetics (6): Design standards enforced by the city of Yakima include; lot size, lot coverage, setbacks, and building height. The city does not have standards related to style or materials. • Stormwater Drainage/Water Runoff Concerns/Locations (5): Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations off, Ex 4 supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. • Net Residential Density is too Great/ Lot Sizes Should be Bigger (5): Minimum lot size requirements for the R-1 zoning district is 6, 000 sq ft and the maximum density is 7 units/acre. This development includes lot sizes in a range from 7,839 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. Additionally, the proposed 78 lots on 26 acres equates to 3 units/acre. • Concerns Regarding Heavy Traffic/ Traffic Control Measures for Summitview Ave Access (9): Summitview Ave is a 4 lane minor arterial with approximately 10, 000 Average Daily Trips and has an operational level of service "A" for reserve capacity. The proposed 78 homes do not negatively impact level of service. Traffic calming measures are recommended along the straightaways of Rainier Drive, N. 90th and N. 89th Ave. The application has been reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity management Ordinance. • Concerns Regarding Available Irrigation/Water Flow (5): Historically, this land was once all orchards that were supported by Tieton Irrigation; they would be responsible for assuaging irrigation flow concerns. Tieton Irrigation was notified of this proposal and did not submit comments. Nob Hill water has capacity to serve this development. • Concerns Regarding Environmental Toxins/Soil Testing (4): On January 16, 2020, a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignficance was issued with the following required mitigation measure: "Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. " The Department of Ecology is the primary agency responsible for managing the MICA, the City of Yakima does not have permit authority over soil testing. • Vacating N 92nd Ave (4): A Right-of-way vacation application will need to be applied for which includes a public process. If any portion (or all) of N. 92nd is approved for vacation, alternate public access must be provided. • Do not want a change of address (3): At this time, there are no proposed address changes to existing residences within city limits. • Lack of privacy (3): Proposed use and residential density meets city standards. • Fire Hazard Mitigation RequestlWeed Control (2): A code compliance case can be started should hazardous vegetation exist. "Hazardous vegetation" means vegetation that is dry and combustible exceeding twelve inches in height which may cause a fire hazard to the immediate and surrounding areas. Hazardous vegetation includes, but is not limited to, trees, shrubs, grass, weeds, )'` 5 bushes, vines and other plant materials, including but not limited to clippings, fallen leaves or branches. • Property lines drawn incorrectly; Lot 99 (1): Preliminary plans do show inconsistent lot lines; an updated site plan will be required. • Maintenance of lots around roundabout (1): City staff recommends a Development Agreement or HOA for long-term maintenance of drainage swells and undevelopable parcels. • Requesting access to Rainier Drive via proposed drainage swell (1): Access is provided via N. 92"d Ave. Property owner would need to work with the developer to obtain alternate access. • Requesting access to city utilities (1): Current property owner(s) wishing to gain access to utilities, will need to work with developer regarding extension or access easements. • Road construction timeline (1): The applicant has 5 years to complete the preliminary plat requirements which may include road construction, water, sewer, etc., and has indicated the following timeline: Phase 2 is to be completed first with plat completion in 2020 or 2021, followed by Phases 3 & 4 in the five years allowed for preliminary plats. Phase 5 by separate application. • Requesting Information Regarding Telephone/Internet Connections/Providers (1): These are not city utilities, so the city has no oversight. • Noise Control (1): Sounds created by construction are allowed from six a.m. to ten p.m. weekdays and from eight a.m. to ten p.m. Sundays and legal holidays. A code compliance case can be filed with the city for non-compliance of ordinance YMC 6.04.180. • There is Not a Demand for This Much Housing (1): The city's 2020 comp plan estimates a need of 320 units be built annually to support the current growth projection. This is based off an average house hold size (2.68 people) divided into our projected population growth (17,167) over a 20 year timeline. • Designated School Bus Loading/Unloading Zone (1): West Valley School District was notified and did not submit any comments. • Comment Period/Notice Timeline Rushed (1): Applications shall be reviewed for completeness within twenty-eight days after receiving an application in accordance with YMC 16.04.010; if accepted as complete, the division shall begin processing the application in accordance with this chapter, and Title 16, Administration of Development Permit Regulations. As per code, appropriate comment periods and notices were followed. Loss of Nesting Habitat (1): The city did not receive any comments during the 20 -day comment period from the Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding a concern for habitat loss due to this project. Speed Bumps (1): In 2018, the Yakima City Council updated the policy for reviewing and prioritizing neighborhood requests for traffic calming, including the development of traffic control plans. Funding and implementation of specific G� . 6 projects by the City is dependent upon traffic conditions meeting minimum threshold requirements. Initiation of the traffic study process requires submittal of a petition by the neighborhood representing thirty percent (3091o) of the addressed parcels along the section of road where traffic calming is requested. Petition forms can be found at these links or the neighborhood may create their own but the same basic information is required. (htt s:.//www. akimawa. ov/services/streets/nes hborhood-traffic- ro ram() Additionally, Streets & Traffic are recommending redesign to provide for traffic calming features. • N 92nd Ave is too Close to Newly Created Road (1): City Engineering and Streets & Traffic did not have the same concern. • Oppose Roundabout Location (1): Phase 5 of this development includes a gated community to the northwest of the roundabout, therefore serving as a turnaround point for vehicles who do not have access to Phase 5 or the parcels to the north. • Concerned About Tieton Irrigation Access Road (1): Tieton Irrigation was notified of this project and did not submit any comments during the comment period. • Wouldn't Have Purchased Home if I had Known They Were Building More (1): The RCW allows subdivision of any parcel that meets local and state regulations. • Suggests the City Review Submittal and Provide Findings (1): The city reviews all projects including findings, which are included in this report. • Concerns about Lot 39 (1): Lot 39 is shown as a flag lot which will most likely include a utility easement and will be the lot's driveway access point. Concerns related to conversations previously had with the developer about future lot development should be directed to the developer. 8. Development Services Team (DST) Review: The proposal was reviewed by the DST team on January 7, 2020. Final comments of the DST members are summarized below. a. Codes: i. Preliminary addressing for the Plat can be found in Exhibit "A". ii. Pursuant to the International Fire Code, fire hydrants will be required along streets at a maximum of every 500 feet to provide required fire flow coverage for proposed structures. iii. These findings are not intended to be an exhaustive review of this proposal. b. Engineering: i. An ENG permit will be required for all civil work to be done on site, and a right of way permit will be required for all work done within the city right of way. ii. YMC 8.60 and 12.05 — New curb, gutter and sidewalk, including associated pavement widening and storm drainage, shall be installed along the site's frontage on Summitview and all site access streets. New sidewalk shall be constructed per standard detail R5, including approved ADA ramp at v, 0 0 . IWIE' ���.A w�w C. D intersection. 7' sidewalk along Summitview frontage and 5' sidewalk along all site access streets. Street section shall conform to standard detail R3. iii. YMC 8.64 — A residential driveway approach is required which meets the requirements of this chapter and standard detail R4. Driveway width shall be a max. of 20'. iv. YMC 8.67 and 12.05 —Existing curb and gutter along frontage that is unfit or unsafe shall also be repaired/replaced. New sidewalks shall be constructed per standard detail R5. v. YMC 8.72 — An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for all work within the public right of way. vi. YMC 12.02 — Easements shall be established per this chapter. vii. YMC 12.06.020 — Right of way — Summitview is classified as a Minor Arterial requiring a total of 80' of right of way (40' half width). Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to provide for 40' width along frontage. All interior roads is classified as a Local Access, requiring a total of 50'of right of way. viii. YMC 12.06.080 - Street lighting - Street lights shall be installed and shall meet the design and placement standards of the city engineer. Lighting improvements shall become the property of the city of Yakima upon installation and will thereafter be maintained by the city. ix. YMC 15.06.065 - No driveway approach on a local access street may be located closer to the street intersection corner than thirty feet as measured from the property line at the corner. x. All improvements and shall be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. xi. Turnarounds are to be provided during each phase of the construction at the ends of all roadways. xii. No private roads are to be sole access to public roads, all public roads are to adhere to city standards. xiii. Drainage swales and other community storm drainage are to be maintained by the community and are not to reside within city right of way. Nob Hill Water i. Nob hill water can serve Rainier Court phases 2, 3, 4, and 5. ii. Developer will need to submit finalized engineered plans for development. iii. Nob Hill Water will supply cost estimate at time of finalized plans. Surface Water i. As this project involves clearing or grading one acre or more, a Large Project Stormwater Permit shall be required from the applicant. The requirements of a Large Project Stormwater Permit are: • Drainage plan(s) and calculations • Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan • Proof that the maintenance agreement was recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office • Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosivity Waiver. The Construction SWPPP (or Erosivity Waiver Certificate Statement) shall be reviewed and approved by the Surface Water Engineer prior to any grading or construction. • In lieu of turning in a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, the applicant can satisfy this requirement by obtaining a Construction Stormwater General Permit through the Washington State I�,. M1� ry" w ', '��a��m�uwmrvw� �i'� mmmmMw�wmr.auu�nm. Department of Ecology. A copy of the signed General Permit shall be delivered to the Surface Water Engineer. • A narrative explaining how Core Elements 1-8 are being satisfied. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hillside that appears to drain through Rainier Court. The applicant's Drainage Report will need to address this per YMC 7.83.140.b(14) The overflow of runoff in excess of the design storm quantities must be situated or directed to where it would have overflowed under the conditions existing prior to proposed development. The capacity of the drainage course downstream of the development may be required to be evaluated. iii. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. iv. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. v. As UIC Registration - Stormwater In accordance with the August 2019 edition of the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SMMEW), Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells constructed on or after February 3, 2006 are considered new and must be registered with the Department of Ecology (DOE) 60 days prior to construction. UIC wells that receive polluted runoff shall retain the larger of the 100 -year 3 -hour and 100 -year 24-hour storms and shall be designed for treatment using Table 5.23 of the SMMEW. e. Streets and Traffic i. The overall development shows 99 lots with 3 access points to Summitview. The three roads are significant downhill grades on straight or nearly straight alignments, two of which pass through existing neighborhoods. The developer should be required to design in or otherwise provide for traffic calming features on these roadways to limit probable speeding issues. ii. In addition, this is a large number of new homes in close proximity to Apple Valley School on 88th Avenue across Summitview Avenue. The developer should be required to contribute towards a HAWK or similar pedestrian signal on Summitview to provide for safer crossing by school aged children. f. Wastewater i. Sewer is available. Sewer will need to be constructed to serve entire site per YMC Title 12 and City Engineering standards. g. Yakima Clean Air Agency i. Contractors doing demolition, excavation, clearing, construction, or landscaping work must file a Dust Control Plan with YRCAA and get approval, prior to the start of any work; and ii. This project is located within Yakima's Urban Growth Area; therefore, burning is prohibited at all times; h. Washington State Department of Ecology i. Based upon the historical agricultural use of this land, there is a possibility the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these Toxics Clean-up comments, please contact Valerie Bound at 509-454-7886 or email at valerie.bound@ecy.wa.gov. ii. If the project anticipates disturbing ground with the potential for st01 mwater discharge off-site, the NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit is recommended. This pet mit requires that the SEPA checklist fully disclose anticipated activities including building, road construction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit may take 38-60 days. The permit requires that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) shall be prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface water and storm drains by stormwater runoff. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. In the event that an unpermitted St01 mwater discharge does occur off-site, it is a violation of Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control and is subject to enforcement action. More information on the stormwater program may be found on Ecology's stormwater website at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stonnwater/construction/. Please submit an application or contact Lloyd Stevens, Jr. at the Dept. of Ecology, 509-574-3991, with questions about this permit. IV. APPLICABLE LAW: A. YMC § 15.05.020 (H): Site design requirements and standards: Access Required: All new development shall have a minimum of twenty -feet of lot frontage upon a public road or be served by an access easement at least twenty feet in width. The purpose of this standards is to provide for vehicular access to all new development; provided, the construction of single-family on existing legally established lots is exempt from the requirements of this section. B. YMC § 15.05.030 (A): Creation of new lots — Subdivision Requirements: Table of Subdivision Requirements: • Establishes basic development criteria for lot size and width that must be met when reviewing an application for a new subdivision. For single-family dwelling construction in the R-1 zoning district, the required minimum lot size is 6,000 square feet. C. YMC § 15.05.055(1) New Development Improvement Standards Fire apparatus access roads for multiple -family residential developments and one- or two-family residential developments shall be subject to the provisions of Sections D106 and D107, respectively, of Appendix D of the International Fire Code (2009 Edition). Additionally, such residential developments shall be subject to the requirements of Section D105 of Appendix D, International Fire Code (2009 Edition), pertaining to aerial fire apparatus roads, as applicable. All provisions of the International Fire Code referenced above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference, as now existing or as hereafter amended and adopted by the city. Minimum requirements for the primary and secondary access will be at least twenty feet wide, unobstructed, paved lanes. D. YMC § 12.02.010 Establishment of Easements: Public utility easements shall be established for the location of new and proposed public utility lines serving new land divisions and land development. Public utility easements shall also be established across the front of new lots and redeveloped lots to provide for future utility access as determined necessary by the city engineer. Public utility easements shall be dedicated (granted) at the time that subdivision and/or land use approval is granted. E. YMC § 12.02.020 Easement location and width: Eight -foot -wide utility easements shall be dedicated along the front of each lot in subdivisions and short subdivisions. Easements for new and/or future utility lines shall be a minimum of eight feet in width, or twice the buried depth of the utility, whichever is greater. F. YMC § 12.03.010 Sewer service required: All new lots and development shall be served by a sanitary sewer line located adjacent to the lot or development site. G. YMC § 12.03.040 Minimum sewer line size: The minimum size for public sewer lines is eight inches in diameter. H. YMC § 12.03.070 Side sewer service: Each building containing sanitary facilities shall be served by a separate private side sewer line from a public main. I. YMC § 12.04.010 Water service required: All new lots and development shall be served by a public water supply line maintained by the city of Yakima, Nob Hill Water Company, or other water purveyor, and located adjacent to the lot or development site. The water line shall be capable of providing sufficient flow and pressure to satisfy the fire flow and domestic service requirements of the proposed lots and development as approved by the city Engineer in cooperation with the code administration manager and water irrigation division manager. J. YMC § 12.04.020 Water line extension required: Water lines shall be extended to the point where the adjoining property owner's responsibility for further extension begins. This typically requires extension across the street or easement frontage of the developing property. In some cases it will require dedication of on easement and a line extension across the property or extension along two or more sides of the developing property. Extensions will be consistent with and implement the City's adopted water comprehensive plan. K. YMC § 12.04.040 Minimum size and material standards: New water lines in the city of Yakima water system shall be constructed of Class 52 ductile iron and shall be a minimum of eight inches in diameter. Improvements and additions to the Nob Hill Water Company system shall conform to the requirements of Nob Hill Water Company. L. YMC § 12.05.010 Sidewalk installation required: "Sidewalks shall be installed along both sides of all new, improved, and reconstructed streets... " M. YMC § 12.06.020 Right-of-way and pavement width standards: Right-of-way shall be dedicated and street surfacing provided in accordance with West Valley Neighborhood plan and Table 5-1 of the Yakima urban Area Transportation Plan. N. RCW 58.17.280 and YMC Ch 14.15.090 — Naming and numbering of short subdivisions, subdivisions, streets, lots and blocks: Any city, town or county shall, by ordinance, regulate the procedure whereby short subdivisions, subdivisions, streets, lots and blocks are named and numbered. A lot numbering system and a house address system, however, shall be provided by the municipality for short subdivisions and subdivisions and must be clearly shown on the short plat or final plat at the time of approval. O. RCW 58.17.110 and YMC 14.20.120: The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. V. FINDINGS: 1. The majority of the subject properties are currently vacant, with the exception of a single family home, which will be separated from the plat. 2. This proposed preliminary plat is approximately 26 acres in size and has been designed for single-family residences. Tract A to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. 3. The Preliminary Long Plat is occurring as a single action and thus the density calculation is based upon a single action of dividing 26 acres in to 78 residential lots. uQA 12 4. The density calculations are listed below: Density for the proposed development as a whole: Square footage for total lots = -876,950 square feet 4 -876,950 square feet / 43,560 square feet per acre 4= 20 acres 4= 78 dwelling units / 20 acres 4= 3.95 Dwelling Units Per Net Residential Acre 5. The preliminarily platted right-of-way of Rainer Dr., Hawthorne Ave, Lincoln Ave, No. 90th Ave, and No. 89th Ave., are classified as residential access streets, requiring a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. 6. A right-of-way vacation will be required for the proposed vacation of the north half of No. 92nd Ave. and a public access street will need to be provided for the parcels to the north, should the right-of-way vacation be approved. 7. Full street improvements will be required for the proposed extensions of No. 90th Ave, and No. 89th Ave. 8. Summitview is classified as a Minor Arterial requiring a total of 80' of right of way (40' half width). Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to provide for 40' width along frontage. All interior roads is classified as a Local Access, requiring a total of 50'of right of way. 9. All drainage swells and parcels too small for development shall be indicated on the plat as individual tracts out of city right-of-way, and be included in a maintenance and development agreement. 10. Environmental Review was completed for this development, and a MDNS was issued on January 16, 2020. 11. URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE UAZO Zoning: The subject property is zoned Single -Family Residential (R-1). a. Lot Coverage: The maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-1 zoning district is 60% and all lots will comply with that limitation. b. Lot Size: The preliminary plat indicates lot sizes that range from 7,389 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. Table 5-2 of Chapter 15.05 of the UAZO provides that the minimum lot size for single family construction is 6,000 square feet. c. Lot Width: Table 5-2 of Chapter 15.05 of the UAZO prescribes a minimum lot width of 50 feet for detached single family dwelling units. All proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum requirement. d. Density: With a density of about 3 dwelling units per net residential acre (3.95 du/nra), the proposed preliminary plat complies with YMC § 15.05.030(B) and �� XIIII) . Table 4-1 of Chapter 15.04 of the UAZO which prescribe a maximum of seven (7) dwelling units per net residential acre in the R-1 zone. 12. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: As proposed, and with the recommended conditions, this preliminary plat meets all the design requirements of YMC Ch. 14.30 of the City's subdivision ordinance and the development standards of YMC Title 12. The recommended conditions are intended to ensure consistency with the provisions of the City's subdivision ordinance and that appropriate provisions are provided for the following: a. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the provisions of the urban area zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the city of Yakima's comprehensive plan; c. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the provisions of this title; and d. As required by RCW Chapter 58.17, the proposed subdivision must make appropriate provisions for: i. Public health, safety, welfare: The construction of new single-family dwellings will complement adjacent uses will promote the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as there is a need in this community for additional housing and insofar as this proposed preliminary plat would be required to comply with all applicable City development standards, and all conditions of approval specified by the City of Yakima Planning Commission. ii. Open spaces: The proposed lots are larger than minimum sizes required in the R-1 zoning district. Lot coverage of 60% or less in the R-1 zoning district will provide adequate light and air for future residents in accordance with the standards in the zoning ordinance without additional open spaces. iii. Drainage systems: Drainage system facilities will be provided in accordance with state and local regulations including the City of Yakima Municipal Code and the eastern Washington Storm Water Manual. iv. Streets, alleys, and other public ways: The subject property has frontage upon Summitview Ave., designated as a Minor Arterial street which requires 60 -feet of right-of-way. The subject property also has frontage upon Rainier Dr., Hawthorne Ave., No. 91St Ave., and No. 89th Ave., which are designated as a Residential Access streets, requiring a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. V. Transit Stops: Yakima Transit Route 1 passes the proposed subdivision along Summitview Ave. vi. Water supplies: Public water is required to be used for domestic and fire flow purposes. An adequate water supply for this development is available from Nob Hill Water Company. vii. Sanitary waste disposal: Public sewer is required to service all lots. A City of Yakima sewer main lies within Summitview Ave., south of the proposed development, and is capable of being extended to handle the 00� � e4 D -X 14 41 demands of this development. viii. Parks and playgrounds: Open space, parks, recreation, and playgrounds are located approximately within 2.5 miles of this subdivision due to the proximity of West Valley Park. The proposed preliminary plat is not located in a planned parks and recreation area. Provisions for parks and recreation areas are not necessary within the proposed preliminary plat due to the size, number and location of the proposed lots and provisions for playgrounds exist at the schools which children within the proposed preliminary plat would be attending, and could also be individually provided on the lots themselves which are of a size which would allow for playground areas as needed or desired. ix. Sites for schools: Apple Valley Elementary School is located approximately within 0.4 miles, West Valley Middle School is located approximately within 2.9 miles, and West Valley School is located approximately within 2.0 miles of this subdivision. x. Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required and will be provided along this developments frontage. xi, Other planning Features that Assure Safe Walking Conditions for Students Who Walk to and From School: Future plans for a Hawk crossing system at No. 88th Ave is required. 13. Based upon standards above, a finding that the public use and interest will be served by the approval of this subdivision: This proposed 78 -lot residential subdivision is consistent with neighboring land uses and better serves the needs of the City of Yakima than the undeveloped status of the property. 14. TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY: This application was reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance on February 4, 2020. The proposed development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review does not include any site development or safety issues which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. 15. TIME LIMITATION: Upon preliminary plat approval the applicant has five years from the date of preliminary approval to submit the final plat. Thereafter, 30 days prior to the expiration of preliminary approval the applicant must submit to the City Council a written request asking to extend the approval period for a maximum period of one year (YMC § 14.20.160 YMC). Before the final plat can be recorded all required infrastructure must be engineered, completed and inspected or engineered and financially secured and receive final plat approval from the City Council. VI. CONCLUSIONS: 1. This Preliminary Plat complies with the general requirements for subdivision approval as specified by YMC Ch. 14.20 and Ch. 15.05. 15 2. The proposed subdivision meets the density standards of the R-1 zoning district having 3 dwelling units per net residential acre (3.95 du/nra). 3. The proposed Preliminary Long Plat has primary access via Summitview Ave and new interior local access streets. 4. Affected streets have sufficient capacity for this proposal, 5. This proposed plat serves the public use and interest and provides for the possibility of creating new additional housing within the City of Yakima. 6. The Planning Commission has jurisdiction to review a recommendation to City Council. (RCW Ch. 58.17, YMC § 1.42.030, and YMC § 14.20. 100) 7. This recommendation is based upon a project narrative and site plan received December 3, 2019, and additional materials that have been secured from the applicant, their consultants, and other agencies. 8. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on January 16, 2020. 9. This preliminary subdivision complies with the goals and objectives of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the intent and purpose of the R-1 zoning district, the provisions of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Title 12's Development Standards and Chapter 12.08 the Traffic Concurrency Ordinance. 10. During project review it has been found that this request is in compliance with YMC §16.06.020 (B) for making a Determination of Consistency as follows: a. The proposed use is permitted within the R-1 zoning district. b. The proposed development is consistent with densities deemed appropriate for the R-1 zoning district by the Yakima Municipal Code, and is similar to densities of surrounding subdivisions. c. This proposal is consistent with existing development regulations for this location. 11. The proposed plat complies with the provisions of RCW 58.17.110 and YMC 14.20.100, providing appropriately for: the public health, safety, and general welfare, open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for citizen of the neighborhood. VII. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the 78 -lot subdivision known as "Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, & 4" be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. A Right -of -Way Vacation shall be applied for, for the vacation of the northern most portion of N. 92nd Ave. If approved, public access must be provided for the lots using the ROW to be vacated. !1"4117), 111 11, I 'u9 .)0 16 Vr 2. The applicant shall submit and gain approval of civil engineered plans which provide for design of all Title 12 development standards, including but not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting, stormwater, and street design. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, all approved improvements shall be constructed or financially secured according to the standards and requirements of the City Engineer and YMC Title 12. 4. All lots shall be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Company. No individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from Nob Hill Water must be submitted to the Planning Division indicating that all construction required to provide each lot with domestic water has been completed and the fees paid. 5. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service according to YMC Title 12 standards. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from the City of Yakima Engineering Department must be provided to the Planning Division indicating that all sewer extensions have been completed and inspected or financially secured. 6. A minimum 8 -foot wide public utility easement must be provided adjacent to all public road rights-of-way. 7. Easements for new and/or future utilities shall be a minimum of 16 -feet in width, provided that the width of easements for buried utilities will be twice the depth of the planned excavation. 8. All public and private utilities shall be located underground, with the exception of telephone boxes and such similar structures. 9. Turnarounds shall be as approved by the City Engineer, and provided during each phase of the construction at the ends of all roadways.. 10. No private roads are to be sole access to public roads, all public roads are to adhere to city standards. 11. The developer shall be required to design in or otherwise provide for traffic calming features on Rainier Drive, N. 90' and N. 89th roadways to limit probable speeding issues. 12. Prior to final plat approval, all drainage swales and other land not dedicated to the City of Yakima for rights-of-way shall be maintained and held by an HOA created by the developer. In the event an HOA is not created, or is disbanded, each and every property owner within the Plat shall be equally responsible for all drainage swales, land on the plat not dedicated to the City of Yakima for rights-of-way or part of any lot, or any other common area or property indicated on the Plat. 13. All public and private utilities to be located within public road rights-of-way must be constructed prior to the start of road construction. [111(1>�Co . �''w'w. "' 17 14. The developer shall contribute towards a HAWK or similar pedestrian signal on Summitview to provide for safer crossing by school aged children. 15. Fire hydrants shall be placed at the locations specified by the Building Codes and Planning Division and the Yakima Fire Department. All lots must be provided with adequate fire flow. 16. All permits required by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority shall be obtained and a copy provided to the City of Yakima Code Administration prior to commencement of site preparation. The developer shall designate during working hours a responsible party to serve as contact for suspected air quality violations. 17. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. 18. A NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology is required. The permit requires that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be made at least 30 days prior to construction. These Plans and control measures must be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima's engineering Division prior to construction. 19. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hillside that appears to drain through Rainier Court. The applicant's Drainage Report will need to address this per YMC 7.83.140. 20. A final binding stormwater and drainage control plan for the entire property shall be submitted and approved by the City's Engineering Division prior to construction of improvements for any area of the development. 21. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. 22. All addresses shall be as specified in Exhibit "A" of this report. All addresses must be clearly shown on the face of the final plat as required by RCW 58.17.280. 23. This plat shall be subject to the following notes, which must be placed on the face of the plat: a. The addresses shown on this plat are accurate as of the date of recording, but may be subject to change. The City of Yakima Building Codes Division is responsible for the confirmation or reassignment of addresses at the time of building permit issuance. b. The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby covenant and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site. CI m ,WPB p 18 c. Drainage swales identified on the Plat shall be clearly labeled "unbuildable" for future development, and shall be used solely for drainage swale and maintenance thereof. 24. Irrigation approval, if any is required, shall be shown on the face of the final plat. 25. Lighting shall be provided to illuminate any off street parking or loading spaces used at night. When provided, lighting shall be directed to reflect away from adjacent properties. 26. During project construction, all contractors shall adhere to the City of Yakima noise regulations regarding hours of construction. 27. All other requirements of the zoning and subdivision ordinance, although not specifically set forth herein, shall be complied with in their entirety. 28. Upon preliminary plat approval, the applicant has five years to submit the final plat. Thereafter, 30 days prior to the expiration of said approval the applicant must submit to the City Council a written request asking to extend the approval period for a maximum period of one year. � and INU J. 19 Exhibit A Preliminary Addressing for the Plat of Rainier Court — Phase 2, 3, 4 and Future Phase 5 (UPDATED FEBRUARY 18, 2020) 2/18/m2o Ut R R u4flier CoUilit Rhasies 2, 914. 1 202 Rainier Dr 2 204 Rain ief Dr 3,206 Rainier Dr 4J 208 Rainier Dr 51209 Rainier Dr 6 207 Rainier Dr 7 211 Rainier Dr 8 213 Rainier Dr 9 210 Rainier Dr 10 21.2 Rainier Dr 11 217 Rainier Dr 12 215 Rainier Dr 13 219 Rainier Dr 14'221 Rainier Dr 153214 Rainier Dr 161216 Rainier Dr 17'300 Rainier Dr 18'302 Rainier Dr 19 304 Rainier Dr 20 3O6 Rainier Dr 2-111400 Rainier Dr 22 401 Rainier Dr / 9105 Hawthorne Dr 239103 Hawthorne Dr 24 305 Rainier Dr / 9106 Hawthorne Dr 25 9104 Hawthorne Dr 26 9102 Hawthorne Dr 27 9101 Hawthorne Dr / 400 N 91st Ave 28; 402 N 91st Ave 29 404 N 91st Ave 30 9007 W Lincoln Ave 31 9005 W Lincoln Ave 329003 W Lincoln Ave 33 9004 W Lincoln Ave J 403 N 91st Ave 34 401 N 91st Ave 35309 N 91st Ave 36 307 N 91st Ave J 9003 Hawthorne Dr EX 20 Lot 4 Rainier Court - Phases 2, a & 4 37 9004 Hawthorne Dr 38 302 N 90th Ave 39 304 N 90th Ave 40 306 N 90th Ave / 9002 Hawthorne Dr 41'9001 Hawthorne Dr / 308 N 90th Ave 42 402 N 90th Ave 43 404 IN 90th Ave 44,'406 N 90th Ave / 9002 W Lincoln Ave 451405 N 90th Ave / 8904 W Lincoln Ave 46 403 N 90th Ave 471401 N 90th Ave . . . .... ........ ........ 48 309 N 90th Ave 49 307 N 90th Ave 50 305 N 90th Ave 51 303 N 90th Ave 52 301 N 90th Ave 53 302 N 89th Ave 54 301 N 89th Ave 55 305 N 89th Ave 56 304 N 89th Ave 57 306 N 89th Ave 58 308 N 89th Ave 59 309 N 89th Ave 60 �313 N 89th Ave 61 j 3 10 N 89th Ave 621402 N 89th Ave 631317 N 89th Ave 64 403 N 89th Ave 65'404 N 89th Ave 66406 N 89th Ave 8902 W Lincoln Ave 67 409 N 89th Ave 68 X415 N 89th Ave 69 8901 W Lincoln Ave 412 N 89th Ave 70 4 16 N 89th Ave 71422 N 89th Ave 72 419 N 89th Ave 21 Lot # Rain ter Court - Phases 2. 3 & 4 0 C - D'S x 22 DEPA._fMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELL_ .✓LENT idly, jrM a lk 16% Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning � Division lITT of YAKIMA, Joseph Calhoun, Manager anning 129 North Second Street, 2°d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIVISION'S FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION for REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT APPLICANT: APPLICANT ADDRESS: PROJECT LOCATION: NAME OF PLAT: TAX PARCEL NUMBERS: DATE OF REQUEST: DATE OF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF CONTACT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC 404 S 51 It Ave., Yakima, WA 98908 Vicinity of N 92"d Ave & Summitview Ave Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, & 4 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 December 3, 2019 February 12, 2020 Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: On December 3, 2019, the City of Yakima Department of Community Development received an application to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Administrative Official recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat, subject to conditions. III. FACTS: A. Statement of Cause: Pursuant to YMC Ch. 14.20, the applicant's statement in the Preliminary Long Plat application dated December 3, 2019 — This proposed plat will subdivide approximately 26 acres into 79 Single -Family lots. Lot sizes will range from approximately 7,839 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. The lots will have frontage on a public roadways which will be improved as part of this project. B. Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map designates the subject property as suitable for Low Density Residential development. Single-family detached dwellings are the predominant dwelling type. Other dwelling types may be allowed under certain circumstances, such as accessory dwellings and cottage housing. The permitted density Yakima 1994 is up to seven net dwelling units per acre for infill development. On larger sites (over two acres), more flexibility in lot sizes and layout are envisioned, provided overall density standards are met. Permitted maximum densities on large sites is up to seven gross dwelling units per acre. Density bonuses allowing up to six gross dwelling units may be allowed subject to conformance with traditional neighborhood design concepts. Generally, the proposed preliminary plat is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's other provisions which encourage infill, recognize the need for public water and sewer, encourage disposal of surface drainage on-site, and encourage development consistent with the general land use pattern in the area. The Goals and Policies that apply to this designation and proposed land use are as follows: Goal 2.3. Residential uses. Preserve and enhance the quality, character and function of Yakima's residential neighborhoods. Policy 2.3.1.B. Standard single family. Continue to allow for detached single family dwellings in residential districts. Policy 2.3.3 Create walkable residential neighborhoods with safe streets and good connections to schools, parks, transit, and commercial services. Policy 2.3.3.A Construct sidewalks along all new residential streets. Policy 2.3.3.0 Promote small block sizes to ensure good connectivity and reduced walking distances between residences and schools, parks, and services. Specifically: • Low density residential: Blocks between 400- 800 feet long are appropriate. • Mixed residential: Blocks between 300-660 feet long are appropriate. • Provide for through public through block connections for large residential blocks. • Commercial and mixed-use designations: Configure development to provide pedestrian connections at 300 to 660 feet intervals. Configure development to provide vehicular connections at 600 to 1,320 feet intervals. Allow flexibility for private internal streets to meet connectivity objectives. Goal 5.2. Preserve and improve existing residential neighborhoods. Policy 5.2.1. Invest in and improve quality of life in existing neighborhoods. Goal 5.4. Encourage design, construction, and maintenance of high quality housing. Policy 5.4.3. Encourage development of well-designed new housing in coordination with population growth employment growth, and transportation goals. C. Urban Area Zoning Ordinance. The main purpose of the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance Yakima Municipal Code (YMC) Title 15 (UAZO) is to implement the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and promote the general health, safety and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the Yakima Urban Area. YMC § 15.01.030 describes the purpose and intent to promote the purpose of the UAZO. Subsection 15.03.020(B) of the UAZO indicates that the intent of the Single -Family Residential (R-1) zoning district is to: 1. Establish new residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses except those which are compatible with, and serve the residents of this district, which may include duplexes and zero lot lines if established during the subdivision process; 2. Preserve existing residential neighborhoods for detached single-family dwellings free from other uses to ensure the preservation of the existing residential character, and serve the residents of this district; and 3. Locate moderate -density residential development, up to seven dwelling units per net residential acre, in areas served by public water and sewer system. Detached single-family dwellings are the primary use in this district. The district is characterized by up to sixty percent lot coverage; access to individual lots by local access streets; required front, rear and side yard setbacks; and one and two-story structures. The density in the district is generally seven dwelling units per net residential acre or less. This zone is intended to afford single-family neighborhoods the highest level of protection from encroachment by potentially incompatible nonresidential land uses or impacts. Nonresidential uses within these zones are not allowed; except for public or quasi -public uses, which will be required to undergo extensive public review and will have all necessary performance or design standards assigned to them as necessary to mitigate potential impacts to adjacent residences. Development exceeding seven dwelling units per net residential acre may be allowed in accordance with Table 4-1. D. Environmental Review. This project (SEPA#041-19) underwent a State Environmental Policy Act review and a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on January 16, 2020. No appeals have been filed with the City of Yakima. E. Processing. 1. The application for a Preliminary Long Plat was received on December 3, 2019. 2. The proposed plat is larger than nine lots, and is therefore being processed under the provisions of YMC Ch. 14.20 & 6.88. 3. The application was deemed complete for processing on December 11, 2019. 4. A SEPA MDNS was issued for this plat on January 16, 2020, no appeals have been filed. 0C. 3 5. Pursuant to RCW Ch. 58.17, YMC § 1.42.030 and YMC § 14.20.100, the City of Yakima Planning Commission (Planning Commission) is authorized to make a recommendation for approval or disapproval, with written findings of fact and conclusions to support the recommendation to the City Council on preliminary plats. Within ten working days of the conclusion of a hearing, unless a longer period is agreed to in writing by the applicant, the Planning Commission shall render a written recommendation which shall include findings and conclusions based on the record. 6. Public Notice: Public notice for this application and hearing was provided in accordance with: YMC Title 14, Subdivision Ordinance; YMC Title 15, Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and YMC Title 16, Development Permit Regulations and include the following actions and dates: a. Date of Application: December 3, 2019 b. Date of Developer's Notice of Complete Application: December 11, 2019 c. Date of Notice of Application: December 19, 2019 d. Date of Posting of Land Use Action Sign on the Property: December 19, 2019 e. Date of Mailing of Notice of MDNS: January 16, 2020 f. Notice of Public Hearing December 19, 2019 7. Public Comment: The twenty -day public comment period for this application occurred from December 19, 2019, to January 8, 2020. At the conclusion of the public comment period, the City of Yakima received 17 public comments addressing the environmental impacts and compatibility of the proposed development. Public Comments Analysis (staff response in italics): This list identifies the nature of the comments received from parties of record, based on frequency: • Required Height Restrictions/View Obscuring/Limit to one-story only (12): YMC § 15.05.030 Table 5.1 allows for a maximum building height in the R-1 zoning district of 35 ft. Decreases Property Value (9): The property is zoned R-1, which allows Single - Family Residential as a Type (1) permitted use. Restrictive Covenants (existing) (8): The City of Yakima does not have the authority to enforce private covenants. Required Dust Abatement Mitigation (6): The YRCAA is the primary agency responsible for regulating air pollution in Yakima County and should be contacted directly if there exists concerns for fugitive dust. On January 16, 2020, a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignficance was issued with the following required mitigation measure: "Applicant shall file a Dust Control Plan with the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency (YRCAA) and get approval, prior to the start of any work. " Required Design Standards/Aesthetics (6): Design standards enforced by the city of Yakima include; lot size, lot coverage, setbacks, and building height. The city does not have standards related to style or materials. Stormwater Drainage/Water Runoff Concerns/Locations (5): Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations N10"" �aP D EX 4 supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. • Net Residential Density is too Great/ Lot Sizes Should be Bigger (5): Minimum lot size requirements for the R-1 zoning district is 6, 000 sq ft and the maximum density is 7 units/acre. This development includes lot sizes in a range from 7,839 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. Additionally, the proposed 79 lots on 26 acres equates to 3 units/acre. • Concerns Regarding Heavy Traffic/ Traffic Control Measures for Summitview Ave Access (9): Summitview Ave is a 4 lane minor arterial with approximately 10, 000 Average Daily Trips and has an operational level of service "A" for reserve capacity. The proposed 79 homes do not negatively impact level of service. Traffic calming measures are recommended along the straightaways of Rainier Drive, N. 90th and N. 89th Ave. The application has been reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity management Ordinance. • Concerns Regarding Available Irrigation/Water Flow (5): Historically, this land was once all orchards that were supported by Tieton Irrigation; they would be responsible for assuaging irrigation flow concerns. Tieton Irrigation was notified of this proposal and did not submit comments. Nob Hill water has capacity to serve this development. • Concerns Regarding Environmental Toxins/Soil Testing (4): On January 16, 2020, a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignficance was issued with the following required mitigation measure: "Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. " The Department of Ecology is the primary agency responsible for managing the MTCA, the City of Yakima does not have permit authority over soil testing. • Vacating N 92nd Ave (4): A Right-of-way vacation application will need to be applied for which includes a public process. If any portion (or all) of N. 92nd is approved for vacation, alternate public access must be provided. • Do not want a change of address (3): At this time, there are no proposed address changes to existing residences within city limits. • Lack of privacy (3): Proposed use and residential density meets city standards. • Fire Hazard Mitigation Request/Weed Control (2): A code compliance case can be started should hazardous vegetation exist. "Hazardous vegetation" means vegetation that is dry and combustible exceeding twelve inches in height which may cause a fire hazard to the immediate and surrounding areas. Hazardous vegetation includes, but is not limited to, trees, shrubs, grass, weeds, Ill,' 1 N D F.X 5 bushes, vines and other plant materials, including but not limited to clippings, fallen leaves or branches. • Property lines drawn incorrectly; Lot 99 (1): Preliminary plans do show inconsistent lot lines; an updated site plan will be required. • Maintenance of lots around roundabout (1): City staff recommends a Development Agreement or HOA for long-term maintenance of drainage swells and undevelopable parcels. • Requesting access to Rainier Drive via proposed drainage swell (1): Access is provided via N. 92nd Ave. Property owner would need to work with the developer to obtain alternate access. • Requesting access to city utilities (1): Current property owner(s) wishing to gain access to utilities, will need to work with developer regarding extension or access easements. • Road construction timeline (1): The applicant has 5 years to complete the preliminary plat requirements which may include road construction, water, sewer, etc., and has indicated the following timeline: Phase 2 is to be completed first with plat completion in 2020 or 2021, followed by Phases 3 & 4 in the five years allowed for preliminary plats. Phase 5 by separate application. • Requesting Information Regarding Telephone/Internet Connections/Providers (1): These are not city utilities, so the city has no oversight. • Noise Control (1): Sounds created by construction are allowed from six a.m. to ten p.m. weekdays and from eight a.m. to ten p.m. Sundays and legal holidays. A code compliance case can be filed with the city for non-compliance of ordinance YMC 6.04.180. • There is Not a Demand for This Much Housing (1): The city's 2020 comp plan estimates a need of 320 units be built annually to support the current growth projection. This is based off an average house hold size (2.68 people) divided into our projected population growth (17,167) over a 20 year timeline. • Designated School Bus Loading/Unloading Zone (1): West Valley School District was notified and did not submit any comments. • Comment Period/Notice Timeline Rushed (1): Applications shall be reviewed for completeness within twenty-eight days after receiving an application in accordance with YMC 16.04.010; if accepted as complete, the division shall begin processing the application in accordance with this chapter, and Title 16, Administration of Development Permit Regulations. As per code, appropriate comment periods and notices were followed. • Loss of Nesting Habitat (1): The city did not receive any comments during the 20 -day comment period from the Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding a concern for habitat loss due to this project. Speed Bumps (1): In 2018, the Yakima City Council updated the policy for reviewing and prioritizing neighborhood requests for traffic calming, including the development of traffic control plans. Funding and implementation of specific E�r)c. 73E,q 6 projects by the City is dependent upon traffic conditions meeting minimum threshold requirements. Initiation of the traffic study process requires submittal of a petition by the neighborhood representing thirty percent (3094o) of the addressed parcels along the section of road where traffic calming is requested. Petition forms can be found at these links or the neighborhood may create their own but the same basic information is required. (httgs://www.vakimawa.gov/services/streets/nei.ghborhood-traff ic-ro ram/) Additionally, Streets & Traffic are recommending redesign to provide for traffic calming features. • N 92"1 Ave is too Close to Newly Created Road (1): City Engineering and Streets & Traffic did not have the same concern. • Oppose Roundabout Location (1): Phase 5 of this development includes a gated community to the northwest of the roundabout, therefore serving as a turnaround point for vehicles who do not have access to Phase 5 or the parcels to the north. • Concerned About Tieton Irrigation Access Road (1): Tieton Irrigation was notified of this project and did not submit any comments during the comment period. • Wouldn't Have Purchased Home if I had Known They Were Building More (1): The RCW allows subdivision of any parcel that meets local and state regulations. • Suggests the City Review Submittal and Provide Findings (1): The city reviews all projects including findings, which are included in this report. • Concerns about Lot 39 (1): Lot 39 is shown as a flag lot which will most likely include a utility easement and will be the lot's driveway access point. Concerns related to conversations previously had with the developer about future lot development should be directed to the developer. 8. Development Services Team (DST) Review: The proposal was reviewed by the DST team on January 7, 2020. Final comments of the DST members are summarized below. a. Codes: i. Preliminary addressing for the Plat can be found in Exhibit "A". ii. Pursuant to the International Fire Code, fire hydrants will be required along streets at a maximum of every 500 feet to provide required fire flow coverage for proposed structures. iii. These findings are not intended to be an exhaustive review of this proposal. b. Engineering: i. An ENG permit will be required for all civil work to be done on site, and a right of way permit will be required for all work done within the city right of way. ii. YMC 8.60 and 12.05 — New curb, gutter and sidewalk, including associated pavement widening and storm drainage, shall be installed along the site's frontage on Summitview and all site access streets. New sidewalk shall be constructed per standard detail R5, including approved ADA ramp at C. D intersection. 7' sidewalk along Summitview frontage and 5' sidewalk along all site access streets. Street section shall conform to standard detail R3. iii. YMC 8.64 — A residential driveway approach is required which meets the requirements of this chapter and standard detail R4. Driveway width shall be a max. of 20'. iv. YMC 8.67 and 12.05 —Existing curb and gutter along frontage that is unfit or unsafe shall also be repaired/replaced. New sidewalks shall be constructed per standard detail R5. v. YMC 8.72 — An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for all work within the public right of way. vi. YMC 12.02 — Easements shall be established per this chapter. vii. YMC 12.06.020 — Right of way — Summitview is classified as a Minor Arterial requiring a total of 80' of right of way (40' half width). Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to provide for 40' width along frontage. All interior roads is classified as a Local Access, requiring a total of 50'of right of way. viii. YMC 12.06.080 - Street lighting - Street lights shall be installed and shall meet the design and placement standards of the city engineer. Lighting improvements shall become the property of the city of Yakima upon installation and will thereafter be maintained by the city. ix. YMC 15.06.065 - No driveway approach on a local access street may be located closer to the street intersection corner than thirty feet as measured from the property line at the corner. x. All improvements and shall be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. xi. Turnarounds are to be provided during each phase of the construction at the ends of all roadways. xii. No private roads are to be sole access to public roads, all public roads are to adhere to city standards. xiii. Drainage swales and other community storm drainage are to be maintained by the community and are not to reside within city right of way. Nob Hill Water i. Nob hill water can serve Rainier Court phases 2, 3, 4, and 5. ii. Developer will need to submit finalized engineered plans for development. iii. Nob Hill Water will supply cost estimate at time of finalized plans. Surface Water i. As this project involves clearing or grading one acre or more, a Large Project Stormwater Permit shall be required from the applicant. The requirements of a Large Project Stormwater Permit are: • Drainage plan(s) and calculations • Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan • Proof that the maintenance agreement was recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office • Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosivity Waiver. The Construction SWPPP (or Erosivity Waiver Certificate Statement) shall be reviewed and approved by the Surface Water Engineer prior to any grading or construction. • In lieu of turning in a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, the applicant can satisfy this requirement by obtaining a Construction Stormwater General Permit through the Washington State C"C' N; ,[' 1 Department of Ecology. A copy of the signed General Permit shall be delivered to the Surface Water Engineer. • A narrative explaining how Core Elements 1-8 are being satisfied. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hillside that appears to drain through Rainier Court. The applicant's Drainage Report will need to address this per YMC 7.83.140.b(14) The overflow of runoff in excess of the design storm quantities must be situated or directed to where it would have overflowed under the conditions existing prior to proposed development. The capacity of the drainage course downstream of the development may be required to be evaluated. iii. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. iv. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. v. As UIC Registration - Stormwater In accordance with the August 2019 edition of the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SMMEW), Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells constructed on or after February 3, 2006 are considered new and must be registered with the Department of Ecology (DOE) 60 days prior to construction. UIC wells that receive polluted runoff shall retain the larger of the 100 -year 3 -hour and 100 -year 24-hour storms and shall be designed for treatment using Table 5.23 of the SMMEW. e. Streets and Traffic i. The overall development shows 99 lots with 3 access points to Summitview. The three roads are significant downhill grades on straight or nearly straight alignments, two of which pass through existing neighborhoods. The developer should be required to design in or otherwise provide for traffic calming features on these roadways to limit probable speeding issues. ii. In addition, this is a large number of new homes in close proximity to Apple Valley School on 88th Avenue across Summitview Avenue. The developer should be required to contribute towards a HAWK or similar pedestrian signal on Summitview to provide for safer crossing by school aged children. f. Wastewater i. Sewer is available. Sewer will need to be constructed to serve entire site per YMC Title 12 and City Engineering standards. g. Yakima Clean Air Agency i. Contractors doing demolition, excavation, clearing, construction, or landscaping work must file a Dust Control Plan with YRCAA and get approval, prior to the start of any work; and ,ii. This project is located within Yakima's Urban Growth Area; therefore, burning is prohibited at all times; h. Washington State Department of Ecology 00C. {� R l 9 i. Based upon the historical agricultural use of this land, there is a possibility the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these Toxics Clean-up comments, please contact Valerie Bound at 509-454-7886 or email at valerie.bound@ecy.wa.gov. iia If the project anticipates disturbing ground with the potential for st01 mwater discharge off-site, the NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit is recommended. This pet mit requires that the SEPA checklist fully disclose anticipated activities including building, road construction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit may take 38-60 days. The permit requires that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) shall be prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface water and storm drains by stormwater runoff. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. In the event that an unpermitted St01 mwater discharge does occur off-site, it is a violation of Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control and is subject to enforcement action. More information on the stormwater program may be found on Ecology's stormwater website at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stonnwater/construction/. Please submit an application or contact Lloyd Stevens, Jr. at the Dept. of Ecology, 509-574-3991, with questions about this permit. IV. APPLICABLE LAW: A. YMC § 15.05.020 (H): Site design requirements and standards: Access Required: All new development shall have a minimum of twenty -feet of lot frontage upon a public road or be served by an access easement at least twenty feet in width. The purpose of this standards is to provide for vehicular access to all new development; provided, the construction of single-family on existing legally established lots is exempt from the requirements of this section. B. YMC § 15.05.030 (A): Creation of new lots — Subdivision Requirements: Table of Subdivision Requirements: Establishes basic development criteria for lot size and width that must be met when reviewing an application for a new subdivision. For single-family dwelling construction in the R-1 zoning district, the required minimum lot size is 6,000 square feet. C. YMC § 15.05.055(1) New Development Improvement Standards Fire apparatus access roads for multiple -family residential developments and one- or two-family residential developments shall be subject to the provisions of Sections D106 and D107, respectively, of Appendix D of the International Fire Code (2009 Edition). Ic,,O. I IN D Ex 10 Additionally, such residential developments shall be subject to the requirements of Section D105 of Appendix D, International Fire Code (2009 Edition), pertaining to aerial fire apparatus roads, as applicable. All provisions of the International Fire Code referenced above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference, as now existing or as hereafter amended and adopted by the city. Minimum requirements for the primary and secondary access will be at least twenty feet wide, unobstructed, paved lanes. D. YMC § 12.02.010 Establishment of Easements: Public utility easements shall be established for the location of new and proposed public utility lines serving new land divisions and land development. Public utility easements shall also be established across the front of new lots and redeveloped lots to provide for future utility access as determined necessary by the city engineer. Public utility easements shall be dedicated (granted) at the time that subdivision and/or land use approval is granted. E. YMC § 12.02.020 Easement location and width: Eight -foot -wide utility easements shall be dedicated along the front of each lot in subdivisions and short subdivisions. Easements for new and/or future utility lines shall be a minimum of eight feet in width, or twice the buried depth of the utility, whichever is greater. F. YMC § 12.03.010 Sewer service required: All new lots and development shall be served by a sanitary sewer line located adjacent to the lot or development site. G. YMC § 12.03.040 Minimum sewer line size: The minimum size for public sewer lines is eight inches in diameter. H. YMC § 12.03.070 Side sewer service: Each building containing sanitary facilities shall be served by a separate private side sewer line from a public main. YMC § 12.04.010 Water service required: All new lots and development shall be served by a public water supply line maintained by the city of Yakima, Nob Hill Water Company, or other water purveyor, and located adjacent to the lot or development site. The water line shall be capable of providing sufficient flow and pressure to satisfy the fire flow and domestic service requirements of the proposed lots and development as approved by the city Engineer in cooperation with the code administration manager and water irrigation division manager. J. YMC § 12.04.020 Water line extension required: Water lines shall be extended to the point where the adjoining property owner's responsibility for further extension begins. This typically requires extension across the street or easement frontage of the developing property. In some cases it will require DOC. N, 10 EX11 dedication of on easement and a line extension across the property or extension along two or more sides of the developing property. Extensions will be consistent with and implement the City's adopted water comprehensive plan. K. YMC § 12.04.040 Minimum size and material standards: New water lines in the city of Yakima water system shall be constructed of Class 52 ductile iron and shall be a minimum of eight inches in diameter. Improvements and additions to the Nob Hill Water Company system shall conform to the requirements of Nob Hill Water Company. L. YMC § 12.05.010 Sidewalk installation required: "Sidewalks shall be installed along both sides of all new, improved, and reconstructed streets..." M. YMC § 12.06.020 Right-of-way and pavement width standards: Right-of-way shall be dedicated and street surfacing provided in accordance with West Valley Neighborhood plan and Table 5-1 of the Yakima urban Area Transportation Plan, N. RCW 58.17.280 and YMC Ch 14.15.090 — Naming and numbering of short subdivisions, subdivisions, streets, lots and blocks: Any city, town or county shall, by ordinance, regulate the procedure whereby short subdivisions, subdivisions, streets, lots and blocks are named and numbered. A lot numbering system and a house address system, however, shall be provided by the municipality for short subdivisions and subdivisions and must be clearly shown on the short plat or final plat at the time of approval. O. RCW 58.17.110 and YMC 14.20.120: The city, town, or county legislative body shall inquire into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication. It shall determine: (a) If appropriate provisions are made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and (b) whether the public interest will be served by the subdivision and dedication. V. FINDINGS: 1. The majority of the subject properties are currently vacant, with the exception of a single family home, which will be separated from the plat. 2. This proposed preliminary plat is approximately 26 acres in size and has been designed for single-family residences. Tract A to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. 3. The Preliminary Long Plat is occurring as a single action and thus the density calculation is based upon a single action of dividing 26 acres in to 79 residential lots. I11r) C . NE)EX 12 A�� 4. The density calculations are listed below: Density for the proposed development as a whole: Square footage for total lots = -876,950 square feet 4 -876,950 square feet / 43,560 square feet per acre -->= 20 acres -->= 79 dwelling units / 20 acres 4= 3.95 Dwelling Units Per Net Residential Acre 5. The preliminarily platted right-of-way of Rainer Dr., Hawthorne Ave, Lincoln Ave, No. 90th Ave, and No. 89th Ave., are classified as residential access streets, requiring a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. 6. A right-of-way vacation will be required for the proposed vacation of the north half of No. 92nd Ave. and a public access street will need to be provided for the parcels to the north, should the right-of-way vacation be approved. 7. Full street improvements will be required for the proposed extensions of No. 90th Ave, and No. 89th Ave. 8. Summitview is classified as a Minor Arterial requiring a total of 80' of right of way (40' half width). Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to provide for 40' width along frontage. All interior roads is classified as a Local Access, requiring a total of 50'of right of way. 9. All drainage swells and parcels too small for development shall be indicated on the plat as individual tracts out of city right-of-way, and be included in a maintenance and development agreement. 10. Environmental Review was completed for this development, and a MDNS was issued on January 16, 2020. 11. URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE UAZO Zoning: The subject property is zoned Single -Family Residential (R-1). a. Lot Coverage: The maximum lot coverage permitted in the R-1 zoning district is 60% and all lots will comply with that limitation. b. Lot Size: The preliminary plat indicates lot sizes that range from 7,389 sq ft to 34,802 sq ft. Table 5-2 of Chapter 15.05 of the UAZO provides that the minimum lot size for single family construction is 6,000 square feet. c. Lot Width: Table 5-2 of Chapter 15.05 of the UAZO prescribes a minimum lot width of 50 feet for detached single family dwelling units. All proposed lots meet or exceed the minimum requirement. d. Density: With a density of about 3 dwelling units per net residential acre (3.95 du/nra), the proposed preliminary plat complies with YMC § 15.05.030(B) and Table 4-1 of Chapter 15.04 of the UAZO which prescribe a maximum of seven (7) dwelling units per net residential acre in the R-1 zone. 12. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: As proposed, and with the recommended conditions, this preliminary plat meets all the design requirements of YMC Ch. 14.30 of the City's subdivision ordinance and the development standards of YMC Title 12. The recommended conditions are intended to ensure consistency with the provisions of the City's subdivision ordinance and that appropriate provisions are provided for the following: a. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the provisions of the urban area zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the city of Yakima's comprehensive plan; c. The proposed subdivision must be consistent with the provisions of this title; and d. As required by RCW Chapter 58.17, the proposed subdivision must make appropriate provisions for: i. Public health, safety, welfare: The construction of new single-family dwellings will complement adjacent uses will promote the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as there is a need in this community for additional housing and insofar as this proposed preliminary plat would be required to comply with all applicable City development standards, and all conditions of approval specified by the City of Yakima Planning Commission. ii. Open spaces: The proposed lots are larger than minimum sizes required in the R-1 zoning district. Lot coverage of 60% or less in the R-1 zoning district will provide adequate light and air for future residents in accordance with the standards in the zoning ordinance without additional open spaces. iii. Drainage systems: Drainage system facilities will be provided in accordance with state and local regulations including the City of Yakima Municipal Code and the eastern Washington Storm Water Manual. iv. Streets, alleys, and other public ways: The subject property has frontage upon Summitview Ave., designated as a Minor Arterial street which requires 60 -feet of right-of-way. The subject property also has frontage upon Rainier Dr., Hawthorne Ave., No. 91St Ave., and No. 89th Ave., which are designated as a Residential Access streets, requiring a total of 50 feet of right-of-way. V. Transit Stops: Yakima Transit Route 1 passes the proposed subdivision along Summitview Ave. vi. Water supplies: Public water is required to be used for domestic and fire flow purposes. An adequate water supply for this development is available from Nob Hill Water Company. vii. Sanitary waste disposal: Public sewer is required to service all lots. A City of Yakima sewer main lies within Summitview Ave., south of the proposed development, and is capable of being extended to handle the C,��.. IN viµ EX 14 N4 demands of this development. viii. Parks and playgrounds: Open space, parks, recreation, and playgrounds are located approximately within 2.5 miles of this subdivision due to the proximity of West Valley Park. The proposed preliminary plat is not located in a planned parks and recreation area. Provisions for parks and recreation areas are not necessary within the proposed preliminary plat due to the size, number and location of the proposed lots and provisions for playgrounds exist at the schools which children within the proposed preliminary plat would be attending, and could also be individually provided on the lots themselves which are of a size which would allow for playground areas as needed or desired. ix. Sites for schools: Apple Valley Elementary School is located approximately within 0.4 miles, West Valley Middle School is located approximately within 2.9 miles, and West Valley School is located approximately within 2.0 miles of this subdivision. X, Sidewalks: Sidewalks are required and will be provided along this developments frontage. A, Other planning Features that Assure Safe Walking Conditions for Students Who Walk to and From School: Future plans for a Hawk crossing system at No. 88th Ave is required. 13. Based upon standards above, a finding that the public use and interest will be served by the approval of this subdivision: This proposed 79 -lot residential subdivision is consistent with neighboring land uses and better serves the needs of the City of Yakima than the undeveloped status of the property. 14. TRANSPORTATIONCONCURRENCY: This application was reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance on February 4, 2020. The proposed development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review does not include any site development or safety issues which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. 15. TIME LIMITATION: Upon preliminary plat approval the applicant has five years from the date of preliminary approval to submit the final plat. Thereafter, 30 days prior to the expiration of preliminary approval the applicant must submit to the City Council a written request asking to extend the approval period for a maximum period of one year (YMC § 14.20.160 YMC). Before the final plat can be recorded all required infrastructure must be engineered, completed and inspected or engineered and financially secured and receive final plat approval from the City Council. VI. CONCLUSIONS: 1. This Preliminary Plat complies with the general requirements for subdivision approval as specified by YMC Ch. 14.20 and Ch. 15.05. D 0 C - 15 2. The proposed subdivision meets the density standards of the R-1 zoning district having 3 dwelling units per net residential acre (3.95 du/nra). 3. The proposed Preliminary Long Plat has primary access via Summitview Ave and new interior local access streets. 4. Affected streets have sufficient capacity for this proposal. 5. This proposed plat serves the public use and interest and provides for the possibility of creating new additional housing within the City of Yakima. 6. The Planning Commission has jurisdiction to review a recommendation to City Council. (RCW Ch. 58.17, YMC § 1.42.030, and YMC § 14.20.100) 7. This recommendation is based upon a project narrative and site plan received December 3, 2019, and additional materials that have been secured from the applicant, their consultants, and other agencies. 8. A Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on January 16, 2020. 9. This preliminary subdivision complies with the goals and objectives of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the intent and purpose of the R-1 zoning district, the provisions of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Title 12's Development Standards and Chapter 12.08 the Traffic Concurrency Ordinance. 10. During project review it has been found that this request is in compliance with YMC §16.06.020 (B) for making a Determination of Consistency as follows: a. The proposed use is permitted within the R-1 zoning district. b. The proposed development is consistent with densities deemed appropriate for the R-1 zoning district by the Yakima Municipal Code, and is similar to densities of surrounding subdivisions. c. This proposal is consistent with existing development regulations for this location,. 11. The proposed plat complies with the provisions of RCW 58.17.110 and YMC 14.20.100, providing appropriately for: the public health, safety, and general welfare, open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for citizen of the neighborhood. VII. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the 79 -lot subdivision known as "Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, & 4" be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. A Right -of -Way Vacation shall be applied for, for the vacation of the northern most portion of N. 92nd Ave. If approved, public access must be provided for the lots using the ROW to be vacated. o .,)C. 'N44 1" 16 2. The applicant shall submit and gain approval of civil engineered plans which provide for design of all Title 12 development standards, including but not limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting, stormwater, and street design. 3. Prior to approval of the final plat, all approved improvements shall be constructed or financially secured according to the standards and requirements of the City Engineer and YMC Title 12. 4. All lots shall be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Company. No individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from Nob Hill Water must be submitted to the Planning Division indicating that all construction required to provide each lot with domestic water has been completed and the fees paid. 5. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service according to YMC Title 12 standards. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from the City of Yakima Engineering Department must be provided to the Planning Division indicating that all sewer extensions have been completed and inspected or financially secured. 6. A minimum 8 -foot wide public utility easement must be provided adjacent to all public road rights-of-way. 7. Easements for new and/or future utilities shall be a minimum of 16 -feet in width, provided that the width of easements for buried utilities will be twice the depth of the planned excavation. 8. All public and private utilities shall be located underground, with the exception of telephone boxes and such similar structures. 9. Turnarounds shall be approved by the City Engineer, and provided during each phase of the construction at the ends of all roadways. 10. No private roads are to be sole access to public roads, all public roads are to adhere to city standards. 11. The developer shall be required to design in or otherwise provide for traffic calming features on Rainier Drive, N. 90' and N. 89' roadways to limit probable speeding issues. 12. Prior to final plat approval, the developer shall submit a Development Agreement for all drainage swales and other community storm drainage, which shall be maintained by the community, and are not to reside within city right of way. 13. All public and private utilities to be located within public road rights-of-way must be constructed prior to the start of road construction. 14. The developer shall contribute towards a HAWK or similar pedestrian signal on Summitview to provide for safer crossing by school aged children. UI,�3 r ��� 17 15. Fire hydrants shall be placed at the locations specified by the Building Codes and Planning Division and the Yakima Fire Department. All lots must be provided with adequate fire flow. 16. All permits required by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority shall be obtained and a copy provided to the City of Yakima Code Administration prior to commencement of site preparation. The developer shall designate during working hours a responsible party to serve as contact for suspected air quality violations. 17. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. 18. A NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology is required. The permit requires that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be made at least 30 days prior to construction. These Plans and control measures must be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima's engineering Division prior to construction. 19. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hillside that appears to drain through Rainier Court. The applicant's Drainage Report will need to address this per YMC 7.83.140. 20. A final binding stormwater and drainage control plan for the entire property shall be submitted and approved by the City's Engineering Division prior to construction of improvements for any area of the development. 21. Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. 22. All addresses shall be as specified in Exhibit "A" of this report. All addresses must be clearly shown on the face of the final plat as required by RCW 58.17.280. 23. This plat shall be subject to the following notes, which must be placed on the face of the plat: a. The addresses shown on this plat are accurate as of the date of recording, but may be subject to change. The City of Yakima Building Codes Division is responsible for the confirmation or reassignment of addresses at the time of building permit issuance. b. The owners shown hereon, their grantees and assignees in interest hereby covenant and agree to retain all surface water generated within the plat on-site. c. Drainage swales shall be identified as tracts a, b, c..., and shall be noted as "unbuildable". 24. Irrigation approval, if any is required, shall be shown on the face of the final plat. [3(1.)I IN, IDEX 18 ';Z 25. Lighting shall be provided to illuminate any off street parking or loading spaces used at night. When provided, lighting shall be directed to reflect away from adjacent properties. 26. During project construction, all contractors shall adhere to the City of Yakima noise regulations regarding hours of construction. 27. All other requirements of the zoning and subdivision ordinance, although not specifically set forth herein, shall be complied with in their entirety. 28. Upon preliminary plat approval, the applicant has five years to submit the final plat. Thereafter, 30 days prior to the expiration of said approval the applicant must submit to the City Council a written request asking to extend the approval period for a maximum period of one year. 04 C i i, w^ 19 Exhibit A Preliminary Addressing for the Plat of Rainier Court — Phase 2, 3, 4 and Future Phase 5 12/30/2019; Lot # 'Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 1202 Rainier Or 2 204 Rainier Dr 3206 Rainier Or 4e208 Rainier Dr 5209 Rainier Dr 76207 Rainier Or 211 Rainier Or 8 213 Rainier Dr 9 210 Rainier Or 10 212 Rainier Or 11.'217 Rainier Or 12 215 Rainier Or 13 219 Rainier Or 14 221 Rainier Or 15 214 Rainier Or 16215 Rainier Or 17 300 Rainier Or 18 302 Rainier Or , 9 304 Rainier Or 20 306 Rainier Or 21400 Rainier Or 22 401 Rainier Or / 9105 Hawthorne Or 23 9103 Hawthorne or 24305 Rainier Or / 9104 Hawthorne Or 25 9102 Hawthorne Dr 26'9100 Hawthorne Dr 27 9101 Hawthorne or / 400 N 91st Ave 28 402 N 91st Ave 29'404 N 91st Ave 30 406 N 91st Ave 31 ^9007 W Lincoln Ave 329005 W Lincoln Ave 33 9003 W Lincoln Ave 34 9002 W Lincoln Ave / 403 N 91st Ave 35 401 N 91st Ave 36 309 N 91st Ave floc. Lot # Rainier Court Phases 2, 3& 4 37 307 N 91st Ave / 9003 Hawthorne Dr 381,9042 Hawthorne Dr 39`300 N 90th Ave 40'4302 N 90th Ave 41 304 N 90th Ave / 9000 Hawthorne Dr 42 9001 Hawthorne Dr / 308 N 90th Ave 43 400 N 90th Ave 44 402 N 90th Ave 45'404 N 90th Ave / 9000 W Lincoln Ave 46 405 N 90th Ave / 8902 W Lincoln Ave 471403 N 90th Ave q 48,401 N 90th Ave 49 309 N 90th Ave 50 307 N 90th Ave 51 305 N 90th Ave 52 303 N 90th Ave 53 301 N 90th Ave 54 ^.300 N 89th Ave 55 301 N 89th Ave 56 303 N 89th Ave 57,302 N 89th Ave 58 304 N 89th Ave 59+306 N 89th Ave 60 305 N 89th Ave 61 307 N 89th Ave 62308 N 89th Ave 63 400 N 89th Ave 641309 N 89th Ave Z401 N 89th Ave 402 N 89th Ave 67{404 N 89th Ave / 8900 W Lincoln Ave 681403 N 89th Ave 69 405 N 89th Ave 70;8901 W Lincoln Ave / 406 N 89th Ave 71'408 N 89th Ave 72 410 N 89th Ave OC Lot # {Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 Z407 N 89th Ave 409 N 89th Ave 75411 N 89th Ave 76413 N 89th Ave 77 412 N 89th Ave 78414 N 89th Ave 79.415 N 89th Ave 80 407 Rainier Dr 81, 405 Rainier Dr 82 403 Rainier Dr 83 407 Rainier Dr 84 409 Rainier Dr 85,502 R'ainler Dr 86 504 Rainier Dr° 87 506 Rainier Dr 88 508 Rainier Dr 891510 Rainier Dr 90512 Rainier Dr 91 514 Rainier Dr 921516 Rainier Dr 93 1518 Rainier Dr 94520 Rainier Dr 95 541 Rainier Dr 96533 Rainier Dr 97 52.5 Rainier Dr 98 517 Rainier Dr 99 509 Rainier Dr it 22 COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER B Maps 111F i I R! 11 LTA 11111111101, 1111 lllli File Number: #003- #041-1 Project Name: COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC - " - PHASES 2,3 & 4" Site Address: VIC. OF N 92N1 AVE & SUMMITVIEWAVE Proposal: Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. Contact the City of Yakima Planning Division at (509) 575-6183 Map Disclaimer: Information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, m Fgc I,on hill l:akr I'iy h -w wc,r lre I1I of I wif/ 'flrl%` il" 1J C'Y provi(h d 1wi'In /--juNING MAP File Number: -SEPA#041-19 Project Name: COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC —" — PHASES 2,3" Site Address: 603 N 47TH AVE R-9 Map Disclaimer: information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, -- omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the use, in reliance upon any maps or information provided herein_ Yakima Urban Area Zoning SP. Suburban Resident.a; R -t Sine'e � rr.�!y — R-2 Two Farn lv R-3 Mul--Fara ;y B-1 Process:onal Business B-2-ocal Business �) H3 Historical Business SCC Small Convereice Certer LCC Large Conver ence Cer:er CBD CenL-al Business D -strict GC Gerera; Commercial M-1 _ghtlncustria: Pv3-2 Heavy Industrial K) Regione, Developrner,7 AS A sport Su por- Map Disclaimer: information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, -- omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the use, in reliance upon any maps or information provided herein_ FUTURE LAND USE MAP File Number: -SEPA#041-19 Project Name: COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT PHASES 2,3 & 4" Site Address: VIC. OF N 92 ND AVE & SUMMITVIEW Yakima Future Land Use Designations Low Derz-n/ ResAental h,',ixed Residerj--al Cartral Business Core Commercial Commercia, .,.lixec Use I�FMEI, Reconat Com,merc a! Community Mixeci Use Industrai Map Disclaimer: Information shown on this map is for planning and illustration purposes only. The City of Yakima assumes no liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided or for any action taken, or action not taken by the user in reliance upon any maps or information provided herein. Date Created: 12/3/2019 KAWN 9 "A LAI File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Project Name: COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2,3 & 4" Site Address: VIC. OF N 92" AVE & SUMMITVIEW AVE COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EX:HIBIT LIST CHAPTER C Site Plan PRELIMINARY PLAT OF -,u, RAINIER COURT - PHASES 2, 3 & 4 --____. IN THE NW 114, SEC. 19, T-13 N R-18 E,WM TYPICAL INTERIOR ROADWAY SECTION LT s uoTs t^r� x -— T -c r \� r� I L k � E ��.;.� �`s I Lp w i ��" -n✓ I � `� � 6�` �0 1 j T I PurcamaxawA�ia"�nGu�xsPd,wxS�,.rxL,�aN�,.. , a'�{.m«wnx..wn�wti'wr°��xrr,wWa«wnanx,xroWa,"�aa„xmvt,w.mwW.,n,aeaw„xro,_ n,oaa.rer waaoo ,��x�wwsttawm.xwmx°ae„amm,,,xnxn�w�,xuwu�iK,.,v„„,r,ro�.rurax.°awn�m�zar w�n.m��,a bm� ,wwww„ eswc�<,mw�uu.,,®,e�awam ax+aawxmmwaax.rowwmmek m.M°°x:�mrrwmx„a,a:m.u� aa�.a�:ns,>,�a,w,xwn,r,°en � I�I(•LF , ''__���.r, . _—_ / �. 1+(� T �- _... ���,I I, �� �I own, a apa�t W6yy" \ \ V , TICropJriw�TuY ` ar_ tE LOTA�P NTES tt IL- 1=1 ..Ts m am 3ma w� 1�ses,� wfa.+e.\\ n rn re .n rommw««ZWwCa,~c uzraal +Ew[noTM. �- ' IRs �. ._ '— .— � mss. raePnosE oo-s�x>no s s,xns I �os1oa.PoPrwxe�w,1 E . re­�o1 wroroex .oEfn IL- P .+„Hnu�nott Iu um¢ nxww ua,xusa zseao rzs* msxc xmm s°mre �r mwz xsw vwm� usr ,mw mT ntxc xxm o -r [ ae creno[o r[ axuntst[ Lois m, m„ncearawmx ow sac cs un mrnxuw, iar. r'° °v,ar vn waw wx °wm urz,,xae rsrrowc ws uz � ( .. me wn`irr s'a;wsxgxx ttww o,.ar xra*..,s«s sw uar a x ou att -LL >wa.sEH on +,; wI_ _E(1 ` 2f119'an*° ncm..PLATnwouswax'wrzs�wcuu� _„j .wx vwn ac xum,°wo — a nr. xxx raxm mn a xxmrtzr au,w a PHA9E 2 me w,ivwr wum, a nsa xwmZT” a wo acnw,e ��}}-- nNG — wsrne wutaauxrr m, xow. o. I f I 4AT un , y,ar IIr / forst tHRU 6 4n3� w r � 6NG6JEEN3,! VEYOfl uo [wan, m¢ mnw,rc wvnon j� I E /•x ( tExUE UFx 9 N m PAxoa No. 18,3fl-z3.w2 ! k I m IW(d yy' ,o CN 9B9o2 1 _ x u v�fl6 „aaar .,a�wa Wa aa,” « , .nE «. —� �9n �,n , tl6 g a r ,w — PHASE d ' OWt�flIDEVELOPEfl a H m �— H �rs �, rsxx r WIT N SEs MOT PLAT) _ E WITH9Y PNA 0 .oio���nrcwuc TFC PPELII,WYAflT PLAT) pn saa WeSS WGrou saeae � � � - - A 9UMMITV[B5Y AA- T -__ �w TMJ VENUfi "� "� ......... .. l .. l V.0 un W°MnGiax seeoe _ COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER D DST Review & Agency Comments D-1 DST Request for Comments 12/18/2019 D-2 Comments from Hasan Tahat, Yakima Regional Clean Air 12/20/2019 ...e.._.e�� A enc ,e,..............................................m... ....re.... .� �..........1'............................................ __dada .. ........... _....................... D-3 Comments from Carolyn Belles, Permit Project Coordinator 12/30/2019 D-4 mm mComments from Gwen Clear, Department of Ecology 01/03/2020 D-5 mComments from _....uu_ __......�� .�........ .... ..._ ..... �W.�ww__� m Randy Meloy, Surface Water Engineer �..._,,,......_A.W 01/06/2020 D-6 i Comments from Dana Kallev� g, Utility Manager 01/08/2020 D-7� .................. Comments from Kirsten McPherson, Nob Hill Water .- —_ 01/09/2020 D-8 Comments from m Glenn Denman, BuildingOfficial ........... 01/10/2020 D-9 ......................... .......... m._.....s...fro.m...Tyler Witthuhn, Design .................................... CommentEngineer�g 01/13/2020 2020 2"d Comments from Tyler Witthuhn Design Engin.......... � � y Engineer 2 01/28/2020 __.......... _ D-11 _ .................u__. Comments from -Joe Rosenlund Streets & Traffic Operations 30/2020 .,�.. .Mandger . .....�. ... � .... .....-w _�._ . D-12 3rd Comments from Tyler Witthuhn, Design Engineer 01/31/2020 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIVISION DST COMMENTS Project Name: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainer Court — Phase 2, 3 & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Note Type Note Code Text Created By Begin Date DST COMMENTS Turnarounds are to be provided during each TY11 ERAITTHU 01)31120 phas,e of the construction at the ends of all H1lq@YAKtMAWA roadways. -GOV No private roads are to be sole access to public roads, all public mads are to adhere to city standards. Drainage swales and other oommunity storm drainage are to be maintained by the community and are not to reside within city right of way - INDEX CAST COMFITS Project Name: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainer Court — Phase 2, 3 & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Note, Type Note Code "ext Created By Begin mate 6-9� .. i�EIVTS -- � —shows g4 L�.Is with -3 ....... � . —OV30120 access points to Surnmitview, The three rads slIgov are significant downhill grades an straight or nearly straight alignments, two of which pass through existing neighborhoods, The developer should be requlred to design in or otherwise provide for traffic calming features on these roadways to limit probable speeding Issues- In ssue s In addition., this is a large number of new homes in close proximity to Apple Valley School can 88th Avenue across Summltview Avenue. The developer should be required to contribute towards a HAWK or similar pedestrian signal on Summitview to provide for defer crossing by school aged children. Doc'. INDEX D—II DATE: January 28, 2020 TO: Colleda Monick, Assistant Planner FROM: Tyler Witthuhn, Development Engineer RE: PLP#003-19 — Summitview and 92nd– Columbia Ridge Homes - "Rainier Court" Project Description – Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. This project requires Title 8 and 12 improvements, including but not limited to the following: YMC 8.60 and 12.05 – New curb, gutter and sidewalk, including associated pavement widening and storm drainage, shall be installed along the site's frontage on Summitview and all site access streets. New sidewalk shall be constructed per standard detail R5, including approved ADA ramp at intersection. 7' sidewalk along Summitview frontage and 5' sidewalk along all site access streets. Street section shall conform to standard detail R3. YMC 8.64 – A residential driveway approach is required which meets the requirements of this chapter and standard detail R4. Driveway width shall be a max. of 20'. YMC 8.67 and 12.05 –Existing curb and gutter along frontage that is unfit or unsafe shall also be repaired/replaced. New sidewalks shall be constructed per standard detail R5. YMC 8.72 – An excavation and street break permit shall be obtained for all work within the public right of way. YMC 12.02 – Easements shall be established per this chapter. YMC 12.06.020 – Right of way – Summitview is classified as a Minor Arterial requiring a total of 80' of right of way (40' half width). Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to provide for 40' width along frontage. All interior roads is classified as a Local Access, requiring a total of 50'of right of way. YMC 12.06.080 - Street lighting - Street lights shall be installed and shall meet the design and placement standards of the city engineer. Lighting improvements shall become the property of the city of Yakima upon installation and will thereafter be maintained by the city. YMC 15.06.065 - No driveway approach on a local access street may be located closer to the street intersection corner than thirty feet as measured from the property line at the corner. An ENG permit is required for all civil work to be performed on site. All improvements and shall be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Tyler Witthuhn — Development Engineer (509)576-6605 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIVISION ISS" COMMENTS ENTS Project Name: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainer Court — Phase 2, 3 & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Note Type Nate Code rasa Created By Begin Date DST COMMEN,rs ain ENG permit skill be requked requiredfor afi obvill work TY11...r.R.WITTHU 01113120 to be done an s ke., crud a. right of way permit Will II 1N as YAiQMAWA, be required for all work done within the ckty right GOV of way. 1300, INDEX COMMUM, i' 'II ', " " " .,"N ". "PA4EN YaUrna, Washington 98901 Phone (501j!) 5 75-6126 Fax ('5010) 576-6576 January 10, 2020 Colleda Monick City of Yakima Planning Division 129 N 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 From: Glenn Denman, Building Official Re: DST Comments: PLP#003-19 N 92nd Ave & Summitview Pursuant to the International Fire Code, fire hydrants will be required along streets at a maximum of every 500 feet to provide required fire flow coverage for proposed structures. These findings are not intended to be an exhaustive review of this proposal. CITY OF YAKIMA VIA PLA IINING DIVISION Project Name: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainer Court — Phase 2, 3 & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Note Type Note Coda Tart Created By Begin Date DST COMMENTS DEVELOPER WILL PEED TO SUBMIT kirsteim.a'ncphema O V03420 FINALIZED ENGINEERED PLANS FOR n@yaMrnawa..ga,v r:DIEVEI...OP ENT. NOB Hill WATER RLL SUPPLY COST ESTIMATE AT THAT TIME. N01 HILL WATER IS AVAILABLE1'0 'SERVE RAINIER CO,.JRT PI••IA E 2,3,4, AND 5. CITY OF YAMMA PLANNING DIVISION ST COMMENTS Project Name: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainer Court — Phase 2, 3 & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Note Type Note, Codo Text w DST COMMENTS Sewer wW med �o The cornstrud d to serve darm.kall vig@Pf'yaa OV08120 entire sRe per YMC 1CWe 12 and Cky klrnawa.gov Engineedng slandarids. City of Yakima Stormwater Memorandum Date: January 6, 2020 To: Colleda Monick Community Development Specialist From: Randy Meloy Surface Water Engineer Subject: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3 & 4 Colleda, As this project involves clearing or grading one acre or more, a Large Project Stormwater Permit shall be required from the applicant. The requirements of a Large Project Stormwater Permit are: • Drainage plan(s) and calculations • Stormwater maintenance agreement and plan • Proof that the maintenance agreement was recorded in the Yakima County Auditor's Office • Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) or Erosivity Waiver. The Construction SWPPP (or Erosivity Waiver Certificate Statement) shall be reviewed and approved by the Surface Water Engineer prior to any grading or construction. • In lieu of turning in a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, the applicant can satisfy this requirement by obtaining a Construction Stormwater General Permit through the Washington State Department of Ecology. A copy of the signed General Permit shall be delivered to the Surface Water Engineer. • A narrative explaining how Core Elements 1-8 are being satisfied. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hillside that appears to drain through Rainier Court. The applicant's Drainage Report will need to address this per YMC 7.83.140.b)14 The overflow of runoff in excess of the design storm quantities must be situated or directed to where it would have overflowed under the conditions existing prior to proposed development. The capacity of the drainage course downstream of the development may be required to be evaluated. DOC. INDEX Grading and/or building permits shall not be issued without the project site first passing an erosion control inspection. Complete stormwater design plans, specifications and runoff/storage calculations supporting the stormwater design are required pursuant to the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual and City of Yakima standards. These plans and control measures must be completed by a licensed Professional Engineer and then be reviewed and approved by the City of Yakima Surface Water Engineer prior to construction. UIC Registration - Stormwater In accordance with the August 2019 edition of the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SMMEW), Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells constructed on or after February 3, 2006 are considered new and must be registered with the Department of Ecology (DOE) 60 days prior to construction. UIC wells that receive polluted runoff shall retain the larger of the 100 -year 3 -hour and 100 -year 24-hour storms and shall be designed for treatment using Table 5.23 of the SMMEW. Randy Meloy Surface Water Engineer City of Yakima (509) 576-6606 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 1.2.59 W AId r Sl a Union Gap, WA 91190.3-0009 * (509) 575�249 January 3, 2020 Colleda Monick City of Yakima 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Re: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 Dear Colleda Monick: Thank you for the opportunity to comment during the optional determination of nonsignificance process for the subdivision of approximately 26 into 79 lots, proposed by Columbia Ridge Homes, LLC. We have reviewed the documents and have the following comments. TOXICS CLEAN-UP Based upon the historical agricultural use of this land, there is a possibility the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these Toxics Clean-up comments, please contact Valerie Bound at 509-454-7886 or email at valerie.bound@ecy.wa.gov. .wa.gov. WATER QUALITY project witli potential to limbi har it 'bite If the project anticipates disturbing ground with the potential for stormwater discharge off-site, the NPDES Constriction Stoimwater General Permit is recommended. This permit requires that the SEPA checklist frilly disclose anticipated activities including building, road constriction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit may take 38-60 days. The permit requires that a Stoimwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) shall be prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface water and storm drains by , uR INDEX COMMUNITY Office qf'Gep&� Adinimheraflon 129 Mirth Ser ond,19Ire ig, 2111 Floor Yahinia, ff"ashim0nit 9,8901 (309) 575, 61,26 Var () 576-6576 www. bulliffirgioakimet com December 30, 2019 To: Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist From: Carolyn Belles, Permit Project Coordinator Parcels: 181319-21003, 181319-22005, 181319-23402 and 181319-24009 Refer to enclosed excel document and development plat. DOC. INDEX 12/30/2019 Lot # Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 1 202 Rainier Dr 2 1204 Rainier Dr 3 206 Rainier Dr 4 208 Rainier Dr 51209 Rainier Dr � 6..207 Rainier Dr 71211 Rainier Dr 8 213 Rainier Dr 9 210 Rainier Dr 10 212 Rainier Dr 111217 Rainier Dr 12 215 Rainier Dr 13 219 Rainier Dr 14 221 Rainier Dr 15 214 Rainier Dr 16 216 Rainier Dr 1 17 300 Rainier Dr 18 302 Rainier Dr 19 304 Rainier Dr 20 306 Rainier Dr 21 400 Rainier Dr 22 401 Rainier Dr / 9105 Hawthorne Dr 23 9103 Hawthorne Dr 24 305 Rainier Dr / 9104 Hawthorne Dr 25 9102 Hawthorne Dr 26'9100 Hawthorne Dr 27 9101 Hawthorne Dr / 400 N 91st Ave 28 402 N 91st Ave 29 404 N 91st Ave 30 406 N 91st Ave 31 9007 W Lincoln Ave 32 9005 W Lincoln Ave 33 9003 W Lincoln Ave 34 9002 W Lincoln Ave / 403 N 91st Ave 35 401 N 91st Ave 36309 N91stAve Lot # Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 37 307 N 91st Ave / 9003 Hawthorne Dr 38 9002 Hawthorne Dr 39 300 N 90th Ave 40 302 N 90th Ave 41 304 N 90th Ave / 9000 Hawthorne Dr 42 9001 Hawthorne Dr / 308 N 90th Ave j 43 400 N 90th Ave 44 � 402 N 90th Ave 45;404 N 90th Ave / 9000 W Lincoln Ave 46 405 N 90th Ave / 8902 W Lincoln Ave 471403 N 90th Ave _1 481401 N 90th Ave 49 309 N 90th Ave 50 307 N 90th Ave 51 305 N 90th Ave 52 303 N 90th Ave 53 301 N 90th Ave 54 300 N 89th Ave 55 � 301 N 89th Ave 56 303 N 89th Ave 57 302 N 89th Ave j 58 304 N 89th Ave 59 , 306 N 89th Ave _ a 60 305 N 89th Ave 61 307 N 89th Ave 62 308 N 89th Ave 63 400 N 89th _Ave 64 309 N 89th Ave 65 401 N 89th Ave 66 402 N 89th Ave 67 404 N 89th Ave / 8900 W Lincoln Ave 68403 N 89th Ave 69 405 N 89th Ave 70 8901 W Lincoln Ave / 406 N 89th Ave 71A08 N 89th Ave 72 410 N 89th Ave Lot # I Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 73 407 N 89th Ave 74 409 N 89th Ave 75 411 N 89th Ave 76 413 N 89th Ave 77'412 N 89th Ave 78 414 N 89th Ave 79 415 N 89th Ave 80',402 Rainier Dr 81405 Rainier Dr 82 403 Rainier Dr 83 407 Rainier Dr 84 409 Rainier Dr 85'502 Rainier Dr 86 504 Rainier Dr 87 506 Rainier Dr 88,508 Rainier Dr 89 510 Rainier Dr 90 512 Rainier Dr 91514 Rainier Dr 92 516 Rainier Dr 93 518 Rainier Dr 94�520 Rainier Dr 951541 Rainier Dr 96 533 Rainier Dr 971525 Rainier Dr 98!517 Rainier Dr 99509 Rainier Dr IDOC. I tlqll ID EX I -4A Yakima Regional Clean 4 it ,dtgejrr ,y EANA`7 186 Iron Horse,. urt, w vile 101. Vookinue IT,4 98901 Phone: (ivy) 834-2050 Fax: (509) 834-2060 ?akitnaeleanyinor 0 December 20, 2019 ReC,% Joan Davenport, Community Development Director' City of Yakima Planning DivisionCITY OF 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor� Yakima, WA 98901 PLANNING RE: Subdivision of 26 Acres into 79 single-family residential lots - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Dear Ms. Davenport: Thank you for providing the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency (YRCAA) the opportunity to review and comment on subdivision of 26 Acres into 79 single-family residential lots - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19. In the vicinity of N 92nd Ave. and Summitview, Yakima. Following review YRCAA has the following comment(s): 1. Contractors doing demolition, excavation, clearing, construction, or landscaping work must file a Dust Control Plan with YRCAA and get approval, prior to the start of any work; and 2. This project is located within Yakima's Urban Growth Area; therefore, burning is prohibited at all times; Thank you for the opportunity to connect with the county's continued support in protecting the air quality in Yakima County. Best regards, Hasan M. Tahat, Ph.D. Engineering, Compliance and Planning Division Supervisor City of Yakima Development Services Team Request For Comments December 18, 2019 To: City of Yakima Development Services Team From: Subject: Applicant: Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist Request for Comments Columbia Ridge Homes LLC - "Rainier Court- Phases 2, 3, & 4" File Number: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19, & TCO#010-19 Location: Parcel Numbers): DST MEETING DATE: vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 1/7/2020 Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single- family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. Please review the attached application and site plan and prepare any written comments you might have regarding this proposal. This project will come up for discussion at the weekly DST meeting to be held January 7s 2020 at 2:00 p.m. As always, should you have comments, but find you are unable to attend, please submit your comments prior to the meeting. My email address is colleda.monick@yakimawa.gov and the Planning Department's fax number is (509) 575-6105. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me at (509) 576-6772. Contact Person Department/Agency COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER E SEPA Checklist LAND USE APPLICATION !I-EC-Eryrzt) CITY OF YAKIMA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 PlT �,�YAKIMA 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, YAKIMA, WA 98901 PHONE: (509) 575-6183 EMAIL: ask.planning@yakimarva.gov INSTRUCTIONS -• PLEASE DEAD FIRST Please t ^ e or arlut our answers cic,arty. Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this form or the application process, please ask a Planner, Remember to bring all necessary attachments and the required filing fee when the application is submitted. The Planning Division cannot accept an application unless it is complete and the filing fee paid. Filing fees are not refundable. This application consists of four parts. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV -- CERTIFICATION are on this page, PART Iland Ill contain addition d information specific toa your ro osal and musTbe attached to this page to eom )Ictc the application. PART I — GENERAL, INFORMATION 1. Applicant's Name: �J(Siq Ileilem �Olum%Icl Ii e I-IOmeS Information: MailingAddress] Ann o. ;i Qf Ava t� < A �lw � YIMIir1�1'1�.�' r w �1 � � • . . 2. Applicant's Interest in Property: Check Oncw ® Owner ❑ Agent 1 ❑ PurchaserEE]Other 3, Property owner's Name: Patsy Valentine -Wilcox Information (If other than Applicant): Mailing Address: 308 N. 88tH Ave City: Yakima ist; I WA ip: 9 08 Phone,' ) E -Mail: 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 181319-21003, 22005, 23402, 24009 5. Legal Description of Property. (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) See preliminary plat 6. Pmperty Address: N. 89th, 90th, 92nd Avenues, Summitview Ave 7. Property's Existing Zoning: ❑ SR ® R-1 ❑ R-2 ❑ R-3 ❑ B -I ❑ B-2 ❑ HB ❑SCC ❑LCC ❑CBD ❑ GC ❑ AS ❑ RD ❑ M -I ❑ M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All That Apply) ® Preliminary Long Plat ® Environmental Checklist (SEPA Review) ❑ Planned Development ® Transportation Concurrency ❑ Othcr ❑ Other:_ PART If — SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION & PART III — REQUIRED A`I"TACHMEN'T5... ._. SEE ATTACHED SHEETS PART IV —CERTIFICATION I certify that the information on this application and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Y .. ._. l y 's Signature Date 1 p g Date FILE/APPLICATION(S)# E _ DATE F E'P I RE w,.PAID RECEIPT NO J CEIVED3'. DA AI4IOI9N I P . .,, Revised 4/2019 IN EXE X 19 " IRWW% . ENVIRONMENTALCHECKLIST TPX STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) CITY OF YAKIMA (AS TAKEN FROM WAC 197-11-960) anning YAKIMA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 6.88 Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental im act statement will be EreRared to further analyze the proposal. ,, , , .,� Vii;. t ME "., This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not a p 1i aro ' or "does not apply" only -when ) tin aw!39t when the answer is unknown. wn. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all, parts of youL4Lqposai, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help you describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there %ke icant /adverse inact. For non -project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project", "applicant", and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B — Environmental Elements — that do not contribute meanin fully to the anal sis of the proposal. 777177-7/771111 A° B ' � KGIIx(QUNB �l iF RMATibl i (To a off ', ay lit 1. Name Of Proposed Project (If Applicable): Rainier Court -- Phases 2, 3, 4 & 5 2. Applicant's Name &Phone: Justin Hellem, Columbia Ridge Homes 949-6557 3. Applicant's Address: 404 S. 51 st Ave Yakima, WA 98908 4. Contact Person & Phone: Thomas R. Durant, PLSA Engineering & Surveying 575-6990 5. Agency Requesting Checklist: City of Yakima The entire proposal consists of 4 Phasing, If Applicable): 6. Proposed Timing Or Schedule (Including ' Mases. Three phases (2 through 4) under the current preliminary plat application. Phase 2 is to be completed first with plat completion in 2020 or 2021,followed by Phases 3 & 4 in the five years allowed for preliminary plats. Phase 5 by se arate application. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: Development of Phase 5 (see the previous response), and as described by 'A.11' below. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal: Environmental review was conducted for Rainier Court - Phase 1 with a determination of non- significance issued on September 28, 2015. Other preliminary plats have been approved in the area, all of which presumably went through SEPA review. Revised 4/2019 Page 15 - rii;..l. .,/ /,,..r ar/,,,//iitc !fr //Op /,/ r, ',o%...... 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known: Preliminary and final plat approval for Phases 2, 3 and 4; separate application for Phase 5 to be made later. Building permits, utility hookups, etc. for the platted lots. Review for concurrency under City of Yakima Transportation Capacity Ordinance Lot line adjustment to segregate existing house parcel from Phase 4 Grading permit. NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit may be required. Right-of-way vacation of part of unopened right-of-way through the site. 11. Give a brief, but complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.): Subdivide four parcels totaling 39.26 acres into 99 lots ranging in size from 7,839 square feet to 3.86 acres and 3 drainage swale tracts, served by residential streets with connection to and extension of sanitary sewer, domestic water and other utilities. Phases 2 through 4, the subject of the current preliminary plat application consists of 79 lots ranging in size from 7,839 to feet to 34,802 square feet. Phase 5 consists of 20 lots ranging in size from 8,013 square feet to 3.86 acres. Part of Phase 5 is to be gated with 16 lots served by private roads. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist: The site spans an area generally from N. 88th to N. 96th Avenues and north from Summitview Avenue for about 1,700 feet in the NW quarter of Section 19, T. 13 N., R. 18 E.W.M. Phase 2 is on the north side of Summitview Avenue across from the intersection of N. 92nd Avenue and includes the northerly extension of that street. Phase 3 is the northerly extension of N. 90th Avenue about 600 feet north of the intersection with Summitview Avenue. Phase 4 is the northerl extension of N.89th Avenue about 130 feet north of the intersection with Kail Drive and 670 feet north of Summitview Avenue. Phase 5 is northwest of Phase 3 and would continue N. 92nd Avenue as a private street. u f ffw. " KIM/,ut PLAMVJW IV' Revised 4/2019 Page 16 err rTH 1. General description of the site (✓ one): ❑ flat ❑ rolling ® hilly ® steep slopes ❑ mountainous ❑ other: 2. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Slopes of 80% or more in the sides of a natural draw in Phase 5 3. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Soils on the site identified by the Yakima County Area Soil Survey are Cowiche loam and Simcoe silt loam. Neither are classified as prime agricultural soils and the site is not designated agricultural land of long-term commercial significance due to its location in the City limits and urban growth area. No removal of soil is expected. 4. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. 5. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading and excavation for streets and utilities. Grading of approximately 120,000 cubic yards for homesites in Phases 3 and 4. Cuts and fills are expected to balance. 6. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Some erosion potential during construction that can be addressed through commonly used construction practices. 7. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Streets cover less than 18% of the total site. City lot coverage standard for individual lots is 60% in the R-1 zone. 8. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Best management practices used to control erosion during construction. A11I. 1. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Some dust emissions during construction. Vehicle exhaust emissions from the completed development. Reopilos 2. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. Gtr P"Z" 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Dust control measures as specified by dust control plan such as application of water and controlling vehicle track -out. Vehicle emissions controlled at the source by the State -DOC, Revised 4/2019 Page 17 il 101 /,�.,,,/r,/ r/., /a„, o/� //iii%.�✓ ri,i i r//�/� imp SURFACE WATER 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. No. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A. 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. N/A. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Irrigation water is available from the Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 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. GR'OUND'WATI* 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Domestic water is available from Nob Hill Water. 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. C None. City sewer service is available. W � aFP Revised 4/2019 Page 8 r , 1101/1.3/1"M //jai rr'/�Ii r%Sl�:!(� // r ✓ � r! r ,:!/I //+/ o// �/ rr,✓r//i // r// ,� �/�� r % r //�i, l // �/�,/ l ,% l�r /%G ll�/ WATER RUNOFFJ(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 this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Impervious surfaces including hard surfaced streets, parking and roofs are sources of run-off. Retention of storm water generated by new impervious surfaces on-site. Areas to be set aside for drainage swales shown on the preliminary plat. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? if so, generally describe. No. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Storm drainage improvements may retain and infiltrate some off-site runoff from upslope draws. 4. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Approved stormwater plan for drainage including swales and other measures as appropriate. PLANTS 1. Check (✓) types of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous Trees: Evergreen Trees: Wet Soil Plants: Water Plants: Other: ❑ Alder ❑ Fir ❑ Cattail ❑ Milfoil ® Shrubs ❑ Maple ❑ Cedar ❑ Buttercup ❑ Eelgrass ® Grass ❑ Aspen ❑ Pine ❑ Bullrush ❑ Water Lily ❑ Pasture ❑ Other ❑ Other ❑ Skunk Cabbage ❑ Other ❑ Crop Or Grain Other ❑ Orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops ❑ Other types of vegetation 2. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Site to be cleared of vegetation in each phase for development. 3. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None 4. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Typical residential landscaping. 5. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.nn x Not aware of any. �Ni Revised 4/2019 Page 19 �if �y, /0./%'i.%/ //%/( ., !!„1�i '' , ,;�" /,' i�/rieo! �/r/�„;�fri �:, /%/ ('", !, l /.' / /�/ / /i /.i % I /7 I.�� /„rl.e/!</ i//,/ ,r/!JJlr� ,/ire/I ,rr� ; 1�.. �,.,i ,//ir, /,i // . r.”'�J, i�i ! /,,.1�,,�1/�,y,�(J.,��.,.!'�eJl/%, r ,r l,l/,%,'/�/i !f ,'rl ,� n��/%/ �/// /'i/ //,l,�✓i./,rr�;l�!� /i l r „lrr'��f,'�, �/�i/i�i'!„� ! a1/%���/1!/ ///r%/ //a//i�r/!dii % ! i / 1/�� a r! �,/,!; /,!,/,�//l,l / /,/�: //r! ��'/�6/ 1�1 ��/���o��//,r ✓/. 1//r/��! 1, List any birds or other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: Song birds, small mammals, hawk, coyotes 2. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. 3. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Washington State is within the Pacific Flyway. 4. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 5. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None. 1. 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. Electricity and natural gas for residential heating, lighting, for street lights and other energy needs, 2. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. 3. 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: RECD ” None. DEC 2019 DOC, T' OFYAK U ' DIV , Revised 4/2019 Page 110 121MM / �/ WWI��/�i/J/ / '21 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 1. 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. 2. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 3. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None, 4. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Chemicals used for cleaning, maintenance and landscaping but nothing out of the ordinary for a typical residential land use. 5. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 6. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. NOISE: 1. What types of noise exist in the area, which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 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. Short term equipment noise during construction and traffic noise from development. Construction is typically during day time hours. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: 7 "U None proposed. �' 11,1,9 „x Revised 4/2019 Page 111 LAND AND', 64E ME, 1. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent firopei-ties? If so, describe. he subdivision site is mostly vacant. There is an existing residence on the east end of the property to be segregated by lot line adjustment. Surrounding land uses include mostly urban density residential to the south, vacant hillsides with a few residences on large lots to the north. Three large residential lots and a large vacant parcel will have reconfigured access through the site. 2. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? Much of the site has been in agricultural production in the past. The site is not designated agricultural land of long-term commercial significance due to its location in the City limits and urban growth area so none would be converted by this proposal. None of the property has current use tax status. 3. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. 14. Describe any structures on the site. A single family residence that is proposed to be excluded from the subdivision by using a lot line adjustment to separate it from the rest of the site. 5. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. 6. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-1, Single -Family Residential 7. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Low Density Residential 8. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A. 9. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. No. 10. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? About 158 to 198 residents on build-out of Phases 2 through 4. Phase 5 would add 40 to 50 residents for a total of about 198 to 248 residents on full build-out. I 11. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? CEf None. V'Ec 2012 DOC . WDEX I Revised 4/2019 Lot I Y OF, yAR'llviij -#A — I RANAUN6 DIV. ' Page 112 r /r � //r/..,,/r/�// 'r, /%/ i!,a ,✓..i, � �%//r "7:J JJ r rrr„r/ /i,///f..,t �o,/ / /,� rr//,�,.. ,r/i /. r �,J �i / lr//r/�%i, 11 1 r%� /I✓/�i//� /,/�r/r//(a/�o/%////,/ r1 sir'/,( , „>/ /�i/ .%/%�ii/��/ �rr% //rGy�//��/>/�/C ,�j,�, /� ////,../io �ir //, / ,O/ ,/�/,�ri,.�/�I/ /-„ii/ rG P/���,r�//i,,9%„/�j/, f�//I/r��/��r;/�✓l�G,rr%'<, �� i LAND AND SHQRELINE USE 12. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. N/A. 13. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Proposed use and density are consistent with zoning and future land use designations. Adjacent residences that are not in existing urban density residential developments either have separate legal and physical access to the City street network or they will be provided with access through the proposed development. 14. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: None. No agricultural or forest lands of long term commercial significance in the immediate vicinity. HOUSING. 1. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing, 79 middle income units in Phases 2 through 4, 20 units in Phase 5 for a total of 99 units. 2. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None, AESTHETICS w.. ... 1. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Conventional home construction. The maximum building height standard in the R-1 zone is 35 feet. 2. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Most of the lots are upslope from existing residences and they are generally far enough in both vertical and horizontal distance from residences that are above them that there should not be any substantial view obstruction. Appearance of the hillside will change from open to developed. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: No specific measures proposed. The development will be qq 'stent in type and style with that of surrounding areas. w"V Revised 4/2019 f,.J t�� Page 113 rr n r / /, /„ r ,,r, ,r,, it � � .r r � it ' ✓i / ,, c J ��// , , ,,. rr,./ //,. ,,. / / i / /ice; ✓�/.,,,r,,,/i , ,,, � / // r,. / l,f o ri/,. , li ,��/r r l r� r %. / /// �� � //„ / c// LIGHT AND GLARE 1. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Street lights, residential outside lighting. During hours of darkness. 2. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. 3. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None, 4. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None, RECREATION 1. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? West Valley and Galleon Parks. Apple Tree Golf Course. Cowiche Canyon and trail access. 2. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None, HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION 1. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. There are nearby structures that are over 45 years old, including the residence on the site, but none are shown to be listed or eligible for listing. Rrt-n - 010 INDEX IVI I Revised 4/2019 V, Page 114 Revised 4/2019 Page 115 2. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. d xx Vel Not aware of any. " a� ipt 3. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None, 1. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the site is from 89th, 90th and Summitview Avenues, all City of Yakima streets. The proposal will extend 89th and 90th into the site and extend 92nd Avenue from Summitview. Phase 5 served mostly by private streets. Part of unopened right-of-way into the site is to be vacated, with the parcels it serves provided with alternate access. 2. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. There is a bus route on Summitview. 3. How many parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Off-street parking for 2 or more vehicles as typical for each dwelling. None eliminated. 4. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Construction of interior streets with sidewalks in the subdivision. All streets are to be public except for a private gated street proposed in Phase 5 and a 25 foot wide access road providing continuous access from the North end of N. 92nd Avenue in Phase 2 to the portion of the unopened right-of-way off of the site and the properties to the north that it serves. 5. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. 6. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? 990 trips per day based on commonly used estimate of 10 vehicle trips per day per unit for single family residential. Broken down by phase: Phase 2: 250 trips; Phases 3 and 4: 540 trips; Phase 5: 200 trips. Peak volumes expected to coincide with typical morning and late afternoon peak hours for the area. The percentage of trucks, commercial and non -passenger vehicles not d Vf14 'ndd but expected to be as typical in single-family residential areas. Revised 4/2019 Page 115 „,r or r ,, ,/ //.,/ /r r / /. r ,,/.; /,,, / i �.. r//, ,/, 1 ,.1, r✓ r� ,�i✓„ ,r//,r�r/.��//,/ l /i.�,,,. 1� r.�//,� / � f�� TRANSPORTATION 7 Wt lets n the area? It so ere generally affect describe: or affected b the movement of agricultural and forest products or proposal � Y g � oduets on roads air No. � � Q 201 OF VAMP, 8. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: w Did The street improvements described under'B.4' above provide for circulation and pedestrian access. Streets stub out to property lines providing for reasonable connectivity given the constraints of slope and surrounding lot configurations. Properties accessed by unopened right- of-way proposed for vacation to be provided with alternate access through the subdivision. PUBLIC S""II�ES 1. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Increase in these public services as would be expected from residential development. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. No measures proposed. Proposal is consistent with single family residential and population growth planned for this area and the City. It will provide housing for population growth helping to prevent the reduction of impacts on public services that result from lack of or substandard housing UTILITIES 1 Check (✓) utilities currently available at the site: ® electricity El natural gas ® water ® refuse service ® telephone ® sanitary sewer ❑ septic system ® other ... ]rdgatlon .____mm,. 2. 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. Sewer service from City of Yakima, domestic water from Nob Hill Water, Electric power from Pacific Power, natural gas from Cascade Natural Gas. Irrigation provided by Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District. Construction would be trenching for installation of underground utility lines. A pump station may be needed for water service to Phase 5. , �., ;. r , „ , , / r / o r i , or/!, r� li;/�./o%/=,//:/,/,//r/rl,-,/.r/or�,Dii///,rr,✓/./i:r,,�iJ/��/// r/���/r.�,�///ir�rr.�����/i//��.,i%////��r�/,.Ji//%/�i� The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make ' ecision. Property Owner or Agent ignature Date Submitted Name of Signee Position and Agency/Organization i����%//�%��J�//�%%,f�' /y%/i'r y ,✓ ,t ! f � ltd,. /1 ' /�f�l /rl r/ %/;� /i f�i,%j��r �/%ir/ i ,rr0 1��/��/ ��E i//” // /rr Revised 4/2019 Page i .gip COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EX:HCIIT LIST CHAPTER F Applications C A,i15 City of Yakima, Washington TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY ANALYSIS ' ?01 PEANNIAIG The Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.70) requires all new development to be consistent with the existing or planned street system capacities. The City of Yakima adopted YMC Ch. 12.08 to implement this local requirement. The information you provide with this application will be used to estimate the impact of your development upon the PM Peak Hour traffic on the City of Yakima arterial streets. APPLICATION INFORMATION Applicant Name: _Columbia .Ridge-Homes- Contact i ..HoContact Person: ,itstll]-Hettem. — Mailing Address: ..AO.- ., 1— t...Av/ FEE: $250 (Receipt # "M&I q - 00-71% 1 Project Address Ph,as .2.92ndL attmmi. vlow Phase 3: 90th N. of Summitvlew Phase 4: 89th N. of Kail mDr. Parcel No(s): 181319-21003, 23402, 24009 rtion of 22005 Preliminary Plat, 4 phases RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL Housing Type* Single Family Res (Single -Family, Apartments, etc) Special Population" (Nursing Homes, etc) Other' (Group Home, Daycare, Church, etc) Number of Units 79 * Uses must match up with YMC Ch. 15.04, Table 4-1 Describe Use* Gross Floor Area Parking Spaces (Required/Provided) Number of Employees Describe Use* Gross Floor Area Parking Spaces_,_ (Required/Provided) Number of Employees Residential P ,. lots Phase 3: .�.. phases. Phase 2: 25 Project Description: esl entla subdivision in 4 ha m.. 28 lots, Phase 4: 26 lots Submit this form with a site plan, the application fee, and any attachments to the City of Yakima, Permit Center, Yakima City Hall, 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. You will receive a Notice of Decision explaining the Findings of the resulting analysis. Please review the Decision when it is sent to you, as you only have 14 days to file a Request for Reconsideration or an Appeal. Questions? Contact the City of Yakima, Planning Division, 1299 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901 - (509) 575-6183 Revised 01/2017 I EX Page 12 - —t- is a a AVC*L LAND USE APPLICATION , "1 X p-1014 DEC CITY OF YAKIMA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ®'� �9 1r r t s1, s"' V HY�"fir YAKI A 129 NORTH SECOND STREET, 2ND FLOOR, YAKIMA, WA 98901 CITY OF y Planing ninAKI PHONE: (509) 575-6183 EMAIL: ask.planning@yakimarva.gov AW [)I INSTRUCTIONS -PLEASE READ FIRST Please type ar mint your aatswers clearly. Answer all questions completely. If you have any questions about this form or the application process, please ask a Planner, ReinctrtbiN to bring all necessary attachments and the required filing fee when the application is submitted. The Planning Division cannot accept W application unless it is complete and the filing fee paid. Filing fees are not refundable. This application consists of four parts. PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION AND PART IV -•• CERTIFICATION are on this; page. PART 11 and III contain additional infbi-mat:on :, )ccifie to your proposal and MUST be attached to This page to complete the 2 a Latiarwsa PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Applicant's Name: Just II Hellern Columbia Rid_ge Flornes Information: w- -�•-- Mailing Address: i Cky:: m iia 9 08 lit<an :509) 949-6557 E -Mail: 2. Applicant's Interest in Property: Check One: ® Owner ❑ Agent ❑ Purchaser ❑ Other - 3. Property Owner's Name: Patsy Valentine -Wilcox Information (If other Mailing Address: 308 N, 88th Ave than Applicant): city Yakima Vit: I WA ip: 98(8 Pltwnc. ) E -Mail: 4. Subject Property's Assessor's Parcel Number(s): 181319-21003, 22005, 23402, 24009 5. Legal Description of Property, (if lengthy, please attach it on a separate document) See veliminary plat 6. Property Address: N. 89th, 90th, 92nd Avenues, Summitview Ave 7. Property's Existing Zoning: ❑ SR R -I ❑ R-2 ❑ R-3 0 B -I ❑ B-2 ❑ HB ❑ SCC ❑ LCC, ❑CBD ❑ GC ❑ AS ❑ RD ❑ M -I ❑ M-2 8. Type Of Application: (Check All That Apply) ® Preliminary Long Plat ® Environmental Checklist (SEPA Review) ❑ Planned Development ® Transportation Concurrency ❑ Other ❑ Otlacr: PART11 - SUPPLEMENTAL AP'PLiC:ATION & PART III - REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS SEE ATTACHED SHEETS PARI" IV - CERTIFICATION I certify that the information on this application and the required attachments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Propert waw ne r'sSignature �m �LL Dat.. ..-... l�ica�nt s Sin � Lure Date FILE/APPLICATION(S)# DATE FEEPAIS: RECEIVER BY.- AMOUNT PAIR: , i1�CEIVir NO::., Revised 4/2019 a a U % 1WV Supplemental Application For: PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT P in (A I 1Y , Or YAK IMA CITY OF YAIGMA, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, TITLE 14 0 anning PLA OF y NNINii" PART 11 - APPLICATION INFORMATION 1. PROPERTY OWNERS (attach if long): List all parties and financial institutions having an interest in the property. Columbia Ridge Homes Patsy Valentine -Wilcox 404 S. 51st Avenue 308 N. 88th Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 2. SURVEYOR AND/OR CONTACT PERSON WITH THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION: PLSA Engineering & Surveying Contact: Thomas R Durant 521 N. 20th Ave, Suite 3, Yakima, 575-6990 Surveyor: Rick Wehr 3. NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4 4. NUMBER OF LOTS AND THE RANGE OF LOT SIZES: 79 lots, 7,839 to 34,802 square feet 5. SITE FEATURES: A. General Description: C] Flat Z] Gentle Slopes 99 Steepened Slopes B. Describe any indication of hazards associated with unstable soils in the area, i.e. slides or slipping? None C. Is the property in a 100 -Year Floodplain or other critical area as mapped by any local, state, or national maps or as defined by the Washington State Growth Management Actor the Yakima Municipal Code? No 6. UTILITY AND SERVICES: (Check all that are available) Electricity 0 Telephone X Natural Gas [K Sewer [E Cable TV [91 Water kJOILHift_ Do Irrigation Yakima -Tilton 7. OTHER INFORMATION: A. Distance to Closest Fire Hydrant: 73 to 1,200 feet B. Distance to Nearest School (and name of school): Apple Valley School — 1/2 to 3/4 mile C. Distance to Nearest Park (and name of park): Galleon Park 1 3/4 to 2 miles D. Method of Handling Stormwater Drainage: Stormwater plan, drainage swales, on-site retention. E. Type of Potential Uses: (check all that apply) X Single -Family Dwellings El Two -Family Dwellings El Multi -Family Dwellings (:] Commercial E] Industrial PART IH - RE2UIRED ATTACHMENTS 1. PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUIRED: (Please use the attached City of Yakima Preliminary Plat Checklist) 2. TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY: (if required, see YMC Ch. 12.08, Traffic Capacity Test) 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (required): I hereby authorize the submittal of the preliminary plat application to the City of Yakima for review. I understand that conditions of approval such as dedication of right-of-way, easements, restrictions on the type of buildings that may be constructed, and access restrictions from public roads may be imposed as a part of preliminary plat approval and that failure to .,e h se onditions may result in denial of the final plat. 4'o I LO� Proper I er Signature (required) Date Revised 4/2019 DOCMe 14 INDEEX I'Veo 2019 411W�4 01V LAS" PLAN CHECKLIST Please complete this checklist and include it with your preliminary plat. Preliminary plats shall be prepared by a land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. ® The plat plan shall be legibly drawn in ink on paper that is at least 18 x 24 inches in size ® All plat plans shall be drawn at a scale of 1"=100' or larger. The scale shall be noted on the plat. ® All existing lots or parcels included in the proposed subdivision. The proposed name of the subdivision. This name shall not duplicate any name used on a recorded plat or subdivision in Yakima County, including the municipalities of Yakima County. ® An accurate and complete legal description of the proposed subdivision. ® Date the plat was prepared. ® North Arrow Boundary lines based upon a recent land survey of the land proposed to be subdivided and boundary lines of all proposed lots and streets. ® Location and size of water and sewer lines, utility easements, and drainage system proposed to serve the lots within the proposed subdivision and their point(s) of connection with existing services. Location, size, purpose, and nature of existing roads, streets, rights-of-way, and easements adjacent to, or across, the land. Location of any streets, rights-of-way, or easements proposed to serve the lots within the proposed subdivision with a clear designation of their size, purpose, and nature. ® Parcels of land intended or required to be dedicated for streets or other public purposes. Contour lines at two -foot elevation intervals for slopes less than ten percent and five-foot elevation ® intervals for slopes more than ten percent. Elevations shall be based upon city of Yakima datum if available. Note: Planning Division or reviewing official may require additional information to clarify the proposal, assess its impacts, or determine compliance with the YMC and other laws and regulations. Revised 4/2019 `' Page 119 .u. COLUMBIA RI11GE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER G Public Comments G-1 Comment Letter from Brian & Megan Mauch 01/03/2020 G-2 Comment Letter from Dean & Jan Bass O1/06/2020 _...... G-3.��.......�_w ...Letter from Melissa Paul Comment 01/06/202Ommmmmmm ..�..............G_4.������................ Comment Letter from Ken & Karen S anton 01/07/2020 G-5...... Comment Letter from Wayne & Bette_.. _................... m Morrison 01/07/2020 G-6 Comment Letter from James & Laura Turner 01/07/2020 G-7 ................ ...... - .......... ........_._... w Comment Letter from Jennifer Wyle & David Smith 01/08/2020 G-8 Comment Letter from John & Rita Andring 01/08/2020 G-9 Comment ................... ....m._ .m.__._ _. Letter from Dale & Julie Turner ��_....._....._.__��......._ .. 01/08/2020 G-10 Comment Letter from Sangeetha & Biju Kunhiraman� 01/08/202 ......wm. 0 G-11 Comment Letter from Jerry & Debby �Runge 01//08/2020 08/ G-12 _ Comment Letter from Neil &Miche. Michele Hauff � 01/08/2020 G-13 Comment Letter from Barbara Boutaine 01/08/2020 _A .. .. G-14 .......... Comment Letter from David Brush 01/08/2020 -.G-.15.........���Comment Letter from Maricella Benfiet�....................�.�.�.�.�.�................01/08/2020 G-16 ......... ������ .................. Comment Letter from Diana Alvarez & Noe Guizar 01/08/2020 G-17 Comment Letter from Ronnie & Bonnie Bloxham 01/08/2020 G-18..... Comment Letter from Robin G ravbrot 01/13/2020 G-19mmmmmm Email Comments from Neil & Michele Hauff 01/24/2020 G-20 Follow -Up Email from Neil & Michele Hauff 01/28/2020 mm with staff response) G-21 Additional Email Comments from Neil & Michele Hauff 02/03/2020 G-22 . ........................ Comme.............. ... _....._.__��. nt Letter from Neil & Michele Hauff, Marchal Tyler, Noe �.� 02/12/2020 Guizar Baraias & Diana Alvarez February 12, 2020 Office of the City Clerk 129 North Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 iu FEB 12 X G V YAKIMA CITY CLERK RE: Objection to the vacation of N 92nd Ave Per FILE NUMBER PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 "According to RCW 35.79.020 Notice of hearing—Objection prior to hearing ---- PROVIDED, That if fifty percent of the abutting property owners file written objection to the proposed vacation with the clerk, prior to the time of hearing, the city shall be prohibited from proceeding with the resolution." We are writing this letter in opposition to the vacation of N 92nd avenue. As property owners Neil & Michele Hauff parcel 18131922001, Marchal Tyler parcel 18131922002 and Noe Guizar Barajas & Diana Alvarez parcel 18131922004 we object to the vacation of N 92 Ave. Marchal Tyler Noe Guizar Barajas Diana Alvarez � VAAWA -VEL. DOC., I D ..,ow., Maxe , Lisa From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 4:16 PM To: Maxey, Lisa; Monick, Colleda Subject: FW: Soil Testing on the Columbial Ridge Homes Development Parcels 18131922005, 18131924009,18131923402 From: michele hauff [mailto:shelleyhauff@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 03, 2020 4:13 PM To: Davenport, Joan <Joan.Dave nport@yakimawa.gov> Subject: Soil Testing on the Columbial Ridge Homes Development Parcels 18131922005, 18131924009, 18131923402 Thank you for your response to my email. Going forward I am pleased that the City of Yakima and Department of Ecology will be address sampling of lead and arsenic soils. I realize that the historic orchard lands were not in the city limits but as the City of Yakima continues to annex land for their tax base, you now have the responsibility to protect land owners form contaminated soils. Your due diligence to this issue as the lead agency is expected, required and appreciated. Any wavering from what is right is not being a steward of the land. So that brings us to the big question.... Are you going to require sampling of the soil for this project on the historical orchard land? Your last email was unclear and vague to our original question and request. In other words, could you answer the question without smoke and mirrors? Neil and Michele Hauff Monick, Colleda From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 5:33 PM To: 'michele hauff' Cc: Monick, Colleda; Calhoun, Joseph; 'valerie.bound@ecy.wa.gov'; james.pendowski@ecy.wa.gov' Subject: RE: Second Request, Email dated January 24, 2020 Attachments: NOTICE OF MDNS_ Rainier Ct Ph 2-4 - PLP SEPA.pdf Hello Michele and Neil Hauff! Thank you for taking the time to inquire about this proposed new plat of 26 acres creating 79 new lots in the vicinity of Summitview Avenue and N 92 d Ave within the City of Yakima, Washington. I am enclosing a copy of the Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) the City of Yakima issued for the environmental review of this development. As you are aware, on the bottom of page 3 of the MDNS, the City has included (verbatim) the comment from Department of Ecology related to investigations of lead and arsenic contamination for this project. The City of Yakima is working closely with our South Central Region office of Department of Ecology to support the formation of a regional work group that will address protocol and criteria for the sampling, documentation and potential mitigation of lead arsenic in new residential development. The result of the collaborative process may result in new standards and requirements for new residential development. Initially, Department of Ecology will provide sampling at no cost for property owners, they will document and create public maps of sampling results, DOE will provide guidance , education and outreach for this issue. Department of Ecology is working to create a one-stop shop for individuals searching for information on potential exposure to lead and arsenic in soils. Should you want to find out more about the updating of the regional approach to lead and arsenic, I would encourage you to contact Department of Ecology. Of course, the City of Yakima would be happy to participate in a conversation on this topic as well. Joan Davenport, AICP Director of Community Development City of Yakima 129 North 2nd St Yakima, WA 98901 Joan,dav np_91 _@ kirnawa ry (509)576-6417 From: michele hauff [mailto:shelleyhauff@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 4:56 PM To: Davenport, Joan <Joan.Dave nport@yakimawa.gov> Subject: Second Request, Email dated January 24, 2020 Joan, Just checking in to see if you received my email dated January 24, 2020 regarding your letter dated January 16, 2020 Washington State Environmental Policy Act Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance City of Yakima, Washington. Once again I need clarification regarding sampling the soil as recommended oy Ecology.Will Columbia Ridge Homes be required to sample the soil. Neil and Michele Hauff Maxey, Lisa From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 1:46 PM To: Maxey, Lisa; Calhoun, Joseph; Monick, Colleda Subject: FW: WA State Environmental Policy Act Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance City of Yakima Fyi- Did we get a comment from DOE including a recommendation on Lead and Arsnic? Joan From: michele hauff [mailto:shelleyhauff@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 1:42 PM To: Davenport, Joan Subject: WA State Environmental Policy Act Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance City of Yakima Joan, In your letter dated January 16, 2020 you stated in the required mitigation measures: Ecology recommends that the soil be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminates are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. Are you going to require Columbia Ridge Homes to take soil samples? If not please explain why you are not. On the notice of application, environmental review & public hearing, Columbia Ridge Homes plans on grading 120,000 cubic yards of soil. With the historic orchard footprint and use of lead and arsenic on these lands, I am very concerned about the extensive excavation of the land and exposure to lead and arsenic in the dust. Being the lead agency, I think it is prudent that you step up to the plate and take the necessary steps to avert a poor development for the neighborhood and the city of Yakima. Informing the potential homeowners at the time of purchase is not a good solution to a known problem. Neil and Michele Hauff 0 IN10'r-X January 2, 2020 Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N. 2nd St. Yakima, WA 98908 Re: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 Columbia Ridge Home Application Joan, The major concerns with this proposed development that seem to arise are: --small lot sizes proposed that aren't consistent with home subdivisions to the west of 92nd and north of Summitview Ave. (93`d, 96tH, 9811, 1001h etc); the proposed development creates a "high density" feel. Does Yakima need this type of subdivision when Columbia Ridge Homes has already provided these smaller lots on 90th Ave and Summit Crest has provided duplexes on 89th Ave, all north of Summitview? --what happens to landowners north of this proposed development when they want to subdivide their lands? It seems this proposed development "blocks" parcels such as 18131922002, 18131922001, 17132411001, and myself 17132411002 from an opportunity to connect to public road extensions if Phase 5 is a gated community and the road layout for Phases 2,3, and 4 make potential access extremely difficult to engineer a road extension compatible_ with required slopes and width needed for City or County requirements. --how is Columbia Ridge Homes proposing the extended road access for the parcels north of this proposed development at the termination of the roundabout? It's very difficult to determine what the plans are, which factors into the concerns for any future development potential for us landowners above and to the west of this proposal. Currently, it seems very "exclusive" and not "user friendly" for any other landowners who would like to have the opportunity to connect to this future public road. --How is Columbia Ridge Homes addressing the existing landowners on the current 92nd Ave (that are below the extension and to the east on Hawthorn Ave.) and their road access so there's not 2 entrances onto Summitview so close together, which could create greater hazards entering onto Summitview Ave. It seems that this proposed application needs some revisions to address the needs of the existing landowners who desire to have a quality of life that won't be achieved with the proposal as it is, and who would like Columbia Ridge Homes to consider working with us landowners affected by his plan. Sincerely, 11104 w �bDY� 171324 II Poz To: Department of Community Development 1/08/2020 Subject: We would like to express our concerns regarding the subdivision and development proposal (vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave) that Applicant, Columbia Ridge Homes LLC, has filed with your department. (PLP#003-19 SEPA#041-19) We recently purchased a home from Justin Hellem "Columbia Ridge Homes". If we had known they were in the works of building over 100 homes including our own, we would have considered a different area. With that being said, we have great concerns with traffic with that many houses. We are on a shared irrigation system. With that many people watering, I doubt that anybody would have any water pressure. There are concerns with water runoff. We had a puddle of water in our front yard the duration of building our house. Then, when they put our grass in, our water flooded the development behind us on 89th Ave. Justin was notified about the water from his development flooding that area. They dug a big hole and small open trench to contain the water making a swamp and a haven for swarms of bees. It was left like that instead of being fixed properly. We already had an issue with Justin refusing to finish off the bank. It was left in a mess. They had moved dirt to finish off the lots but didn't bother to clean up and finish the banks. There are sticks, rocks, and rough terrain. We, as property owners, are responsible for maintaining the bank, which is fine. We just wanted Justin to finish it off like the covenants requires. We finally got him to fill in the big hole with gravel which was dangerous for us or anybody that ventured back there. He said that was all he was going to do with it. (See attached: Protective covenant number 3.23) So, we have concerns with his lack of compassion and lack of concern for peoples' safety. Justin's attitude concerning the unstable bank and mess behind the fence of our back yard was ".out of sight, out of mind". The people living off of 89th Ave. and dealing with that kind of eye sore from their properties have a different opinion. Property needs to be maintained which at this time is almost impossible on our own because of the safety issues of the bank. We moved from our country home to our retirement home here at Rainier court feeling we were settling in to a safe and desirable neighborhood that would suit our retirement needs. We now are faced with wondering if this was the right choice. Concerns: Heavy traffic Dirt, dust, garbage, building material left to blow around Water runoff with excess rain or heavy snow melt. We would be engulfed in mud Lack of irrigation water Heavy truck traffic Over building, our home's value? Lack of compassion and concern of people's safety over profit Not conforming to protective covenants Safety in our neighborhood and upkeep of properties Respectively yours, Ronnie and Bonnie Bloxham 211 No. 90th Ave. Yakima, WA 98908 509-952-7301 o, At INDEX #-E-L7 �. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3.19 3.20 mainf�! I ` ie . No illegal activities are permitted. "en . There shall,, be no antenna of „airy„ g 3,21 Sightliness. Lot owners shall screen, conceal and/or wall in all clotheslines, garbage cans, equipment, and storage piles to conceal them from the direct view or Zine of sight of the neighboring lots and streets. tot owners shall screen ear,iim i�V4 ik"t r y oris or drlced front f . or i o as o reasonablyconceal such recreational vehicles from the direct viaw or line of sight of nei hborin N ) garage f �'r�r�, ru/�y�� r �,,,��, 9,ONk1p frrnt fade o or I J d,,,/,%i i j it»i1' l?ro the public ".�treef, 3.22 Fires. There shall be no exterior fires whatsoever, except for barbecues and built-in outdoor fireplaces with chimneys, subject to county approval. R4L4Lkqd-=" , Removal and disruption of vegetative cover shall be minimized to protect the existin ve etabori to the fullest extent possible reas Disturbed a��rall be reseeded or landscaxied. tl�ttlW 3.24 y,',. At the time a structure is built on a lot, adequate off-street parking for at least two (2) cars shall be provided on the lot. All driveways shall be constructed of ,asphalt paving, concrete or pavers, unless approvalfor use of other material is granted in advance in writing by the Architectural Control Committee. 3.25 T ck , No trucks larger than one (1) ton, construction type equipment or mobile or stationary trailers shall be permitted on any lot, except for the purpose of construction of Improvements within the subdivision unless approved in advance by the Architectural Control Committee.. 3.26 Ovefnight Rentals. With the exception of short term occupancy pursuant to a pending sale of a completed single family home to buyer, short-term rentals for periods less than thirty (30) days shall be prohibited,: 4.1 Aesthe ! ticil. No building, including outbuildings, shall be erected, placed or altered on any lot until construction plans and specifications and a plan showing the location of the structure, have been approved by the Ar itectural Con trtttlg appointed by the 'Board' of Directors as to quality materials, harmony of external design with existing structures and the intended nature of the plat, conformance with these covenants and location with respect to topography and finished grade elevation, Harmony is to be maintained through use of earth -tone colors and natural building materials where possible, Bright colors and reflective materials are to be avoided. The Architectural Control Committee shall have the right to reasonably require placement of the homes, ,garages or shops on the lots. PROTECTIVE COVENANTS XPi` ya PDage 5 w✓. Jt2(els, llaek4Y". Sue" d Ar1"8f0, CS. Ananrys al law 2600 Cl..m Klmm Xom / 1. () 1" 1688 WCV410M. WA 98807.1688 1$091662•.1685 / IS091662Q452 FAX RECEIVED Date 1-8-2020 JAN 0 8 2020 Good afternoon Colleda, GI' YAKIMA I'ING DIV. We had spoken last week when I went into the planning department and you had let me know that I could email my comments concerning the proposed planning developmen of N. 92n and Summitview. The File number is PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19. The following are my comments. How will issues of dust be addressed. It is very windy at our location of 406 N. 92nd Ave. my 4 year old has breathing issues that are being addressed with the ENT and Children's hospital visits the dust will impact her health as well as my allergies. Will the dirt be wet consistently? As it was addressed this area that is going to be developed was used in agriculture in the past has there been environmental test for toxins used such as lead, or other chemicals that were used on the property, how will this be addressed for health reasons? We at 406 N. 92nd Ave oppose vacating our road. We would like to continue using our road of N. 92nd. The proposed change will interfere not only with our privacy, and the following: the new proposed road that would have us drive through the round -about would have us make a sharp right turn off a round about to then make a sharp 180 degree left turn into our property is more than inconvenient it is also dangerous. How are we to have a 53 foot moving truck through these turns. As well as a 40 foot hauling trailer attached to the back of dually truck? How are we going to be able to fit working machinery as a buckle through these entrances and drive through the new, heavily populated area? The corner exit of my property (end of my driveway) that connects with 92nd ave is slopped and with snow it is very difficult if not impossible at times to move up the road, and the new proposed road will have homes surrounding this area from out driveway that we would have to make 180 degree turn, and what ever else machinery we use. Have any of you driven on this road during these conditions and with hauling machinery? I have the city of Yakima garbage tell me that they do want to go up this corner because of how slick it is, and it's a constant battle for them to pick my garbage up. With the new proposed road this corner area of my driveway will worsen as it will turn to a 180 degree turn for anyone coming up this way. Now there will also be the safety of the homes around this corner. How will this be addressed? Moving on, our area will change to a highly populated area through the new proposed road, how will traffic control be addressed as people leave to work and take kids to school/bus in the morning. There will be enormous amount of congestion in the area below. Which brings me to my next point. On the left- hand, south corner of my property there is a proposed round -about being built. This makes no sense as the gated development phase 5 will have a very low density of people than phase 2. It would make more sense for the round- about to be down below in the highly populated area of phase 2. Having a round -about essentially in front of my home is going to devalue my property, which will also lower revenue for the city. There could be a normal unobstructed road that would not lower my property. Having a busy road as that one is also dangerous for my small children. There's essentially two new roads that will be in front, and on the right side of my home. This will devalue my property; how will this be addressed? It is not fair for our property to devalue to have others profit from that. The proposed plan also addressed the buildings could be up to 35 feet. Our property was bought for the view. This limit of 35 feet that is propose will cover my view and we oppose. The residencies should not be more than one-story high. Any landscaping or street lighting should not obstruct, block, cover partially or completely our view. We also have a make -shift parallel drive -way a couple feet below from our driveway for Nob hill irrigation water to check the pumps and turn around. It is an agreement with only them, no one else. There is no one else allowed on our parallel drive -way and it is not a right -away for anyone else to use to connect to other homes. I have the documented agreement. This drive -way/ or any part of it will not be used to make the 25' proposed road coming of the round -bout to the right. Also, what is going to become of the irrigation pump, and canal for the well water that the Nob hill irrigation comes to check? Concerning the map of the proposed development my property lines are incorrectly stated. Lot 99 has inverted my line as the letter "V". I am hoping this was a mistake as I have not agreed for my property to taken away to be used for the developers' lot 99. I would hope that our concerns are looked into as a serious manner. I would not want my property to decrease as we all have worked very hard to have our homes in nice, private, quiet areas. I would not like my home to devalue because of the new proposed roads, or have other homes or objects block my beautiful view which is the reason we bought this property. I would like more transparency on the population increasing as I feel it is going to be closer to 400 people with that many units. I am concerned with the traffic as well. Again I would like to stress that we at 406 N. 92nd Ave oppose vacating our road, and having the inconvenience of having to change our address with everything. Thank you for your time, Diana Alvarez & Noe Guizar j,1 ,qq (� r iO�Po o q), , (p [ANNA t�j 1 _V --j _ � . Dept of Community Development January 8, 2020 Joan Davenport, AICP Director Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, 2nd floor, Yakima, Wa 98901 Dear Joan Davenport, This letter is concerning file # PLP#1 10-19 & SEPA# 041-19 I live at 212 N 93`d Ave Yakima and live next to the new development going in. I have concerns over losing my view and losing property value. Privacy is also an issue. For these reasons and others, it would not be in our best interest to have two story homes built. I am also concerned about environmental issues, wildlife in the area. Please take our 93`d association, my neighbors concerns into consideration. Thank you, Maricella Benfiet °1 w�. January 8, 2020 To: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director i ^� I From: David Brush, owner/resident at 215 N. 90th Ave., Yakima, WA r(4111, ANNI''t Subject: Columbia Ridge Homes Development File numbers: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 This is in reference to the area north of the developed properties on 89th, 90th, and 92nd Avenues. My home is located at the current north end of 901h Ave., directly adjacent to the proposed development. Since moving in last May we have seen some practices that must be addressed in this current proposal. Weed control. The Spring rains brought on a large number of weeds and tall grasses on the former orchard area. Nothing was done about them for many months, and they dried out and became a potential fire hazard, as well as releasing seeds onto adjacent properties. I had to cut some of them that bordered on my property to keep them from spreading onto my new lawn. Wildfire hazard. The trees were also not irrigated all year and they dried out as well. Finally in late summer a single worker with a mower showed up to cut the weeds down. The cuttings were not removed, simply left on the ground to dry out even further. A few weeks later they began removing the trees, a process that lasted for over a month. We worried all summer about the possibility of a grass/wildland fire starting on this hill side. We now have a large empty lot next to us covered in grass, and it appears it will remain this way for a minimum of two years during the Phase 2 construction, and at least part of it will remain undeveloped for as much as the 5 -year period proposed for Phases 3 & 4. During this time, rains will come, more weeds will grow and then dry out, becoming a potential fire hazard every summer. I would like to see this addressed in the proposal with a weed control and fire hazard mitigation plan. The road construction timeline is not mentioned. Will the road system be built over the entire area at the onset of construction, or only the roads within each phase when that phase is started? On several occasions there have been construction trucks blocking our road while they deliver materials (usually cement) to the lots to our south, preventing us from leaving to take care of our business, and potentially blocking emergency vehicles (fortunately there were no incidents that I'm aware of). All but one of the lots in our area are finished now, so we shouldn't have any more trouble with this, but if the same method is used on 92"d Ave. (Phase 2) there could be more problems there if 92"d is left as a dead end street until the next phase begins. Stormwater drainage. The nearest drain to my property is about 150 feet south in the roadway. There are several swales in the proposal, but none on 901h Ave. I can't tell if there is a stormwater drainpipe in the street passing my property. The rainwater from further up the hill will need to be routed down the hill. Can it be verified that there is a pipe to connect to before construction? Telephone connections. The proposal indicates that there will be telephone service available, but does not name the provider. When we moved in, I called Century Link to have my phone service moved from our previous residence. The company sent out two people to check into it and they told me that they could not provide us with a landline. Not only was there no phone cable to our new house, but there is no conduit in the street to install it in. And since above ground cabling is prohibited by our covenants, that is also not an option. We ultimately chose to use a cable TV telephone service, but in the event of a power outage, it will not work. If any home buyer to the north of us on the extended 90th Ave. wants a landline, it will not be available since the conduit is not there. Their only option would be to pay for cable TV or a wireless internet service that they may not want, or cellular service that is also vulnerable to power and internet outages. I don't know about cable access on 89th or the new 92nd Ave., so I can't comment on those. Thank you for consideration of my comments, David A. Brush 215 N. 90th Ave. Yakima, WA 98908 (509) 952-3283 � � o J4/v 0 PtOF A Div" To: Department of Community Development 1/07/2020 From: Barbara Boutaine 215 Summit Crest Way' Yakima, WAS (509)952-7829 P44 I would like to express my concerns regarding the subdivision and development proposal (vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave) that the Applicant, Columbia Ridge Homes LLC, has filed with your department. PLP#003-19 SEPA#041-19 I recently moved into the new townhouse development that is off of 89th and Summitview and have watched the progress of the construction of the homes built on 90th and surrounding areas. I have met and talked with several of the folks that recently had homes built in that area by Columbia Ridge Homes LLC and I am very concerned about the "quantity and quality" of additional homes that are proposed to be built in that area. I am familiar with a couple of families that have recently moved into their new homes built on 90th and have seen how the "ball has been dropped" on them once they move in. Safety issues or concerns, even ones under contract are not addressed (just pretty much ignored). Covenants and ordinances violations ignored. There have been water runoff issues that have been shrugged off. If that is the attitude (lack of abiding by the contract, covenants, ordinances, and planning for the safety of clients, I hate to think about how much of this lack of professionalism and lack of concern for clients would be like on a much larger scale such as the projected building project of "79" homes in the area. If the covenants, ordinances, and the safety of the home buyers (at this time) are being ignored and not enforced, then I doubt very much if this will change later on with "79" newly added homes. What a mess that would be. Questions: What will happen with water issues? Will there be enough water, water pressure? Waste - disposal problems? High energy consumption problems? Is it the plan to have all "cookie - cutter" homes or will there be a variety of different building designs to make it more appealing? Will there be road congestion, more pollution in the air? What impact will it have on the visual character "sense of place" that make the region/area unique and desirable? How will it affect Infrastructure and the safety or convenience of street/road users? Thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns and thoughts. Barbara Boutaine DOC. ararx O -I January 6, 2020 Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima 129 N. 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 File Number (PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19) Columbia Ridge Homes Joan Davenport: IT'Y OF YAKIMA (',,"ODE AUTNL P' V! q `,,X)N .SAN 0 8 20 3C V0 MAID AID We would like to respond to your notice of application, environmental review & public hearing with the following concerns. We are all stewards of the land and we should act accordingly. Total integration of the plan for the land should incorporate all necessary inputs from the vested and unvested participants for the correct and future meshing of the gears. Proposed density — In your Determination of Consistency the level development states approximately 3 units/acre. We calculate phase 2 of actual homes to actual acres is 4.7754 acres for 25 homes which is 5.235 units per acre non inclusive of the roads. We calculate phase 3 of actual homes to actual acres is 6.8598 acres with 28 units which is 4.08 units per acre non inclusive of roads. Why are you exceeding 3 units per acre which you stated? Per your letter dated December 19, 2019 "The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impact and expects to issue a Determination of Non significance (DNS) per WAC 197-11-355." It appears that the author of the environmental check list A 8 (Background Information) has not taken into consideration previous known problems with historical orchard. Attached is a historic orchard footprint of parcels 18131922005, 18131924009 and 18131923402. These parcels were historically orchards prior to 1947. Orchards prior to 1947 used lead arsenic in the control of codling moth insects. Per the Department of Ecology Apple Valley School site description "Due to their chemical structure, lead and arsenic tend to bond with soil particles and often remain at or near ground surface level for decades, creating an exposure pathway through inhalation and /or ingestion." Environmental Health —The report asked if any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. The answer is none known. How can this be with the previous uses of this site. Since the lead arsenic remains at or near ground level for decades and in the Environmental Elements in B5 (Earth) the applicant is seeking to grade 120,000 cubic yards of dirt. Word on the street is historic practices have been to dump excess pesticides on the land. This should be taken into consideration when borings are taken on the land. Could this pose a real problem? Have environmental studies been done including but not limited to site borings on the land for evaluation of the actual levels and for use in comparing to acceptable levels. These borings are site specific to the parcels listed above. Attached for your perusal Evaluation of Soil Contamination Apple Valley Elementary School, Department of Ecology Apple Valley School, Department of Ecology Historic Orchard Footprint. Doc. INDEX Environmental Elements on the application B3 (Earth) state "the site is not designated agricultural land of long-term commercial significance due to its location in the City limits and urban growth area. Obviously the applicant did not do his due diligence with the purchase of the proposed land. This land has been of commercial significance for decades producing apples and pears. Environmental Elements B1 (Air) Some dust emissions during construction. I beg to differ with the grading of 120,000 cubic yards of dirt during construction. There will be significantly more than some dust emissions especially when the wind is present which happens frequently in this area. Remember this soil has not been tested for lead arsenic. What type of dust abatement will be done once the land excavation has been done and prior to home completion on the lot? Will there be an after hour number we can call for dust control, or are we SOL? Environmental Elements B3 (Air) Not knowing the concentration of suspected lead arsenic in the soil and not knowing the initial dust control plan and vehicle track out plan one can't surmise the migration of suspected lead and arsenic into the local sewer system. Other current construction site have exit vehicle tracks for .25 of a mile. Is this site going to have similar activities in relation to dust and dirt on the road? Could you address these issues? Environmental Health — Noise Construction typically during daytime hours. Need to be more specific and need to hold to city noise ordinances laws/codes. Should provide "noise control plan". During the summer daytime hours. Is that sun up to sun down? What's the plan? Environmental Health B1 The area has a history of lead arsenic and subject property have yet to be determined the actual levels of same. Lead is known to attach to nervous system and arsenic is a known carcinogen. Environmental Elements - Aesthetics We object to the maximum building height of 35 feet. Homes should not be over 1 story. Existing homes in the neighbor hood should not have their views blocked by someone's home. Future landscaping should also not be allowed to block the views of existing home owners. What ordinances if any will be in place for the home development? If one is planned who will maintain it? Environmental Elements —Land and Shoreline use. Three large residential lots and a large vacant parcel will have reconfigured access through the site. With the deed we were given ingress and egress to our land. We are not land locked and we have used this access for over 20 years. Other neighbors have used this access for 67 years. We object to this right away going on vacation (being vacated). The proposed access to our property is ensued with a sharp left turn going north with an immediate elevation gain. The elevation gain is over 12.5% which is a 25 foot rise in a run of less than 200 feet. After the corner is made we have another elevation gain of 73 feet in 825 foot run. Which is over an 8.8% elevation gain. By comparison the current 92nd Ave has a rise of 114 feet in 1284 feet run which is 8.8% incline. To summarize DoCi INDEX traveling north on 92nd Ave from Summitview Ave we go 1284 feet at an upward 8.8% incline. Then we hit the section of 12.5% incline for 200 feet. After words we travel upward at 8.8% incline. You asking us to stop at the bottom of the 12.5% slope take an immediate left to go home. During inclement weather going north is not going to be feasible due to the slow speed of travel and the elevation gain. Going south we will have the same issues especially if the city does not maintain the road. In fact going south will be a safety issue on an icy snowy road because the stopping is limited due to traction, and slope. I suggest you walk the road so you can see for yourself how steep it is. I have included Google maps for your perusal. You need the momentum of the straight stretch on 92nd Ave to get up the hill especially during inclement weather. Conversely you need the straight stretch to slow down before you hit Summitview Ave. during inclement weather. With the proposed road changes, the only way we may stop is by running into the house on the abutting property. This change poses several problems. They are safety, ability to get home during inclement weather, servicing the needs of our operation, delivery of goods by UPS and FedEx, propane delivery, garbage trucks, moving of equipment on trailers and trucks, to include 53 foot tractor trailer and even a 53 foot Bekins moving van. The agriculture product that we plan to grow has to go through that bottle neck. The drawing that was provided inadequately detailed to the movement of those vehicles especially with the placement of an island in the roundabout. We can only surmise what is not detailed to us in the print. 92nd Ave has been indelibly marked by the city for decades and now you want to change it. One suggestion from a neighbor on 92nd Ave, has said he does not want to lose 50 feet of his property for a road. do not want my addressed changed nor my mail box relocated. We recently installed a security mail box and if it has to be moved I expect the applicant see that it is done properly. Another issue is we want to grow hazelnuts on our property which means the proposed roundabout with its island limits the turning off the proposed 92nd Ave and transportation of trucks and equipment I suggest you move 91St Ave to the current 92nd Ave to allow us to have a straight run up the hill. This would alleviate a lot of issues. = FOW 0-1411,11 MP/ Neil & Michele Hauff Parcel Number 18131922001 420 N 92nd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 kciv,fi no � � � Vim, 71 Health Consultation Evaluation of Soil Contamination Apple Valley Elementary School 7 North 88th Avenue Yakima, Washington 98908 November 3, 2006 Prepared by The Washington State Department of Health Under a Cooperative Agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry �4 ealth DOH 334120 November 2006 Foreword The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) has prepared this health consultation in cooperation with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). ATSDR is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and is the principal federal public health agency responsible for health issues related to hazardous waste. This health consultation was prepared in accordance with methodologies and guidelines developed by ATSDR. The purpose of this health consultation is to identify and prevent harmful human health effects resulting from exposure to hazardous substances in the environment. Health consultations focus on specific health issues so that DOH can respond to requests from concerned residents or agencies for health mforrnation on hazardous substances_ DOH evaluates sampling data collected from a hazardous waste site, determines whether exposures have occurred or could occur; reports any potential harmful effects. and recommcuds mons to protect public health. The f ndi gs in this report are relevant to conditions at the site during the time of this health consultation, and should not necessarily be relied upon if site conditions or land use changes in the future. For additional information or questions regarding DOH or the contents of this health consultation, please call the health advisor who prepared this document: Joan Hardy Washington State Department of Health Office of Environmental Health Assessments P.O. Box 47846 Olympia, WA 98504-7846 (360) 236-3173 1-877-485-7316 Website: www.doh.wa.gov/consults For people with disabilities, this document is available on request in other formats. To submit a request, please call 1-800-525-0127 (TTY/TDD 711). For more information about ATSDR, contact the ATSDR Information Center at 1-888-422-8737 or visit the agency's Web site: www.atsdr.cdc.gov/. 4. Glossary The amount of a substance to which a person is exposed over some time period Dose is a measurement of exposure. Dose is often expressed as Acute Occurring over a short time [compare with chronic]. Dose milligram (amount) per kilogram (a measure of body weight) per day (a (tor chemicals that are not measure of time) when people eat or drink contaminated water, food, or radioactive) soil_ In general, the greater the dose, the greater the likelihood of an effect. "exposure The principal federal public health agency involved with hazardous waste An dose" is how much of a substance is encountered in the "absorbed Agency for Toric issuesresponsible for preventing or reducing the harmful effects of , environment An dose" is the amount of a substance that Substances and Disease exposure to hazardous substances on human health and quality of life. actually got into the body through the eyes, skin, stomach, intestines, or Registry (ATSDR) ATSDR is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. lungs. -------- -blood Environmental Media A concentration in air, soil, or water below which adverse non-cancer Is the amount of a substance entering the a particular route of Evaluation Guide s health effects are not expected to occur. The EMEG is a comparison value Absolute bioavailability exposure (e.g., gastrointestinal) divided by the total amount administered (EMEG) used to select contaminants of potential health concern and is based on ATSDR's minima[ risk level (MRL1. (e.g., soil lead ingested). ` Environmental Protection The fraction of lead or arsenic that is absorbed and enters the blood by Agency (EPA) �_... United States Environmental Protection Agency. Bioavailability whatever portal -of -entry compared with the total amount of lead or arsenic ----. .... -....... ----. ..---. .-...... ----. ----. acquired Exposure Contact with a substance by swallowing, breathing, or touching the skin or eyes. Exposure may be short-term [acute exposure], of intermediate The concentration of a chemical in air, soil or water that is expected to , duration. or long-term(chronic eaposprel. Cancer Risk Evaluation cause no more than one excess cancer in a million persons exposed over a _ A mapping system that uses computers to collect, store, manipulate, Guide (CREG) lifetime. The CREG is a comparison value used to select contaminants of potential health concern and is based on the cancer slope factor (CSF) Geographic information ' analyze, and display data. For example, GIS can show the concentration of system (GIs) a contamination within a community in relation to points of reference such _ . ----. ---_ _-as streets and homes. Cancer Slope Factor A number assigned to a cancer causing chemical that is used to estimate its ability to cause cancer in humans. Any material that poses a threat to public health and/or the environment. Hazardous substance Typical hazardous substances are materials that are toxic, corrosive, Carcinogen Any substance that causes cancer. ignitable, explosive, or chemically reactive. Chronic Occurring over a long time (more than 1 year) [compare with acute]. The act of swallowing something through eating, drinking, or mouthingIngestion objects. A hazardous substance can enter the body this way [see route of - Calculated concentration of a substance in air, water, food, or soil that is exposure]. unlikely to cause harmful (adverse) health effects in exposed people. The - - --- - - -- - Comparison value CV is used as a screening level during the public health assessment The be ingested process. Substances found in amounts greater than their CVs might s. amount of an environmental medium that could typically selected for. further evaluation in the public health assessment process. Ingestion rate on a daily basis. Units for IR are usually liter/day for water, and mg/day for soil. Contaminant A substance that is either present in an environment where it does not belong or is present at levels that might cause harmfid (adverse) health Inhalation The act of breathing. A hazardous substance can enter the body this way ----. ---_ ---- ---- ---- - [see route of exposure]. Dermal Contact Contact with (touching) the skin (see route of exposure), Inorganic Compounds composed of mineral materials, including elemental salts and metals such as iron, aluminum, mercury, and zinc. 2 I Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) The lowest tested dose of a substance that has been reported to cause harmful (adverse) health effects in people or animals. A drinking water regulation established by the federal Safe Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Act. It is the maximum permissible concentration of a contaminant in water Level (MCL) that is delivered to the free flowing outlet of the ultimate user of a public water system. MCLS are enforceable standards. Media Soil, water, air, plants, animals, or any other part of the environment that can contain contaminants. Evaluation Guide An ATSDR estimate of daily human exposure to a hazardous substance at or below which that substance is unlikely to pose a measurable risk of Minimal Risk Lvv€l harmful (adverse), noncancerous effects. MRLs are calculated for a mute (MRL) of exposure (inhalation or oral) over a specified time period (acute, intermediate, or chronic). MRLs should not be used as predictors of harmful (adverse) health effects [see reference dose]. Model Toxics Control Act The hazardous waste cleanup law for Washington State. (MICA) No Observed Adverse The highest tested dose of a substance that has been reported to have no Effect Level (NOAEL) harmful (adverse) health effects on people or animals. No apparent public health A category used in ATSDR's public health assessment documents for sites hazard where people have never and will never come into contact with harmful amounts of site -related substances, Oral Reference Dose An amount of chemical ingested into the body (i.e., dose) below which (RID) health effects are not expected. RfDs are published by EPA. Organic Compounds composed of carbon, including materials such as solvents, oils, and pesticides that are not easily dissolved in water, Units commonly used to express low concentrations of contaminants. For Parts per billion example, 1 ounce of trichlomethylene (TCE) in 1 million ounces of water (ppb)/Parts per million is 1 ppm. 1 ounce of TCE in 1 billion ounces of water is 1 ppb. If one drop (ppm) of TCE is mixed in a competition size swimming pool, the water will contain about 1 ppb of TCE. 3 Reference Dose Media A concentration in au, soil, or water below which adverse non -cancer . Evaluation Guide health effects are not expected to occur. The EMEG is a comparison value (RMEG) used to select contaminants of potential health concem and is based on EPA's oral reference dose (RfD). The way people come into contact with a hazardous substance. Three Route of exposure routes of exposure are breathing [inhalation], eating or drinking [ingestion], or contact with the skin [dermal contact]. Purpose The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) prepared this health consultation at the request of the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) for Apple Valley Elementary School. The purpose of this health consultation is to evaluate whether contaminants found in school playground soils pose a health concern to children and residents in the nearby community. DOH prepares health consultations under a cooperative agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Background and Statement of Issues Elevated concentrations of arsenic (As) and lead (Pb) exist in soil from historical (pre -1948) use of lead arsenate pesticide, particularly in apple and pear orchards in Eastern Washington. Elevated levels of lead and arsenic have been observed in soils of Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Yakima County, Washington. Apple Valley Elementary School is located in a residential area on the western perimeter of the city of Yakima (igurc i).' The school is in West Valley School District and sits on nearly nine acres. A total o654 students attend Apple Valley Elementary School (kindergarten through fifth grade, corresponding to ages 5 to 12 years old). Although historical aerial photographs do not indicate whether or not this site was used as orchard land prior to 1947, the site was included in an area -wide lead and arsenic sampling program which involved collecting samples from schools where soil is suspected to have a history of past pesticide contamination. The school yard at Apple Valley Elementary School consists of several play areas, sport fields, landscaped grounds, and parking/access areas. Play areas are generally well-maintained with good grass cover, gravel, or other barrier to native soil. Parts of the sport fields, surrounding fences, and areas near portable classrooms contain patches of exposed soil (Figures 2 — 7). Subsurface soil sampling (0-6 inches) at Apple Valley Elementary School was conducted by Ecology on March 9, 2005, with additional samples taken on June 24, 2005. Soil samples were analyzed for lead and arsenic using field portable x-ray fluorescence (FPXRF). FPXRF performance was checked twice with calibration, blank and reference readings during sample collection. All calibration readings were below detection limit. Arsenic levels from 52 soil samples ranged from 11.6 — 124.2 mg/kg. Almost all samples exceeded the ATSDR comparison values for arsenic (20 mg/kg for non -cancer and 0.5 mg/kg for cancer values) and cleanup values for unrestricted land use in Washington State's cleanup law, the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method A (20 mg/kg). Five of 52 arsenic samples exceeded Ecology's interim action level for arsenic (100 mg/kg), the concentration used to trigger prompt action to reduce exposure to the soil. Ecology's interim action levels apply to low -to -moderate level soil contamination dispersed over a large geographic area covering several hundred acres to many square miles. For schools, childcare centers, and residential land uses, Ecology considers total arsenic concentrations between 20 and 100 mg/kg to be within the low - to -moderate range. NP Lead concentrations ranged from 21.9 — 1082.9 mg/kg. Twenty-five of $3 maples exceeded -` MTCA Method A cleanup level for unrestricted land use for lead (230 mg, g), Nine of 53 leaQ samples exceeded Ecology's interim action level of 500 mg/kg. Ecology considers total lead concentrations between 250 and 500 mg/kg to be within the low -to -moderate range for schools, childcare centers, and residential land uses. Interim Remedial Actions In general, the grass cover is in good condition and well -watered during the summer months which helps reduce exposure to contaminated soil. The irrigation system operates during the spring and summer; there is no irrigation during winter months because of low water flow. During the fall and winter months an increase in moisture is expected. Despite irrigation efforts, many areas of bare soil remain at the school throughout the school year. A few larger, well-worn areas were fenced or cordoned off from use (Figures 2 and 3). Most areas around playground equipment are covered with gravel up to 12 inches deep, and access areas surrounding the playgrounds are paved. Elementary school play areas Most of the school grounds are used as play areas by children who attend the school, and children from different grades use separate parts of the play fields during recess. The school yard is open to the public and members of the community use the fields for various activities. Soils are exposed in the elementary school play area along the perimeter fence, and children dig in some of these soils (Figures 4 and 5). Soils with high levels (above Ecology's Interim Action Levels of 500 mg/kg for lead and 100 mg/kg for arsenic) of lead and arsenic still remain on-site, and although grass has grown on top of most of the contaminated soils, the effectiveness of this grass cover in reducing exposure has not been evaluated, While grass cover is expected to reduce exposure compared to bare soil, some exposure to the contaminated soil is stilt likely to Occur.Z Historical use of lead and arsenic Lead arsenate was the primary insecticide used to control the codling moth and other tits in Washington deciduous tree fruit orchards between 1905 and 1947.3 Atter 1948, lead arsenate use dropped drastically and was replaced by DDT.' No sampling for DDT has occurred at this site. According to the Washington State Department of Ecology DDT was used only for a short period of time, and studies in temperate climates show that half of the DDT initially present usually disappears in about -5 yearn, By the mid -19606, DDT was found to cause can t and eventually was banned from use in the United States in 19777,` Lead and arsenic are expected to remain in the top of the soil for centuries, and very little leaches through the soil,° Most schools in Eastern and Central Washington were built on historic orchard lands shortly after farmers ended the use of lead arsenate. Contaminant levels can vary greatly between orchards and from location to location within a single orchard. The highest levels are often found in the ground where chemicals were mixed. While soils on some properties have been tested, a comprehensive study to find the level and extent of contamination throughout central and eastern Washington has not been conducted. I Increased concern for human health risks arises when old orchard lands are converted to other land uses such as schools or residential areas where children are likely to be exposed to contaminants in the soil. DOH has not found any reliable studies that have investigated whether or not health problems increase in people who live in areas with past lead arsenate pesticide use. Site visit On March 20, 2006, staff from DOH Office of Environmental Health Assessments and Ecology conducted site visits at some of the schools scheduled for cleanup during the summer of 2006. One site visited was Apple Valley Elementary School, where staff observed conditions and evaluated potential for exposure to lead and arsenic in soils. In general, DOH found well -watered lawns on most school grounds; this helps to reduce exposure to the contaminated soil. The current irrigation system has helped to keep a healthy grass cover over contaminated soil during spring and summer months. Although small patches of exposed soil remain in the baseball and soccer fields, most of the field has a good grass cover. The primary area of exposed soil is fenced offwith a temporary barrier and some other areas of exposed soil are fenced or cordoned offto limit access (Figures 2 and 3). However, many smaller areas in the school playgrounds, near portable buildings, and around fences still remain with exposed soil. Small patches of soil are exposed in the baseball, soccer, tetherball and dodge ball areas, near portable school rooms, and along playground fences (Figures 6 and ). School officials told DOH that they emphasize the need for children to wash hands before snack and lunch to reduce exposure to contaminated soils. They discussed with DOH the need for outreach and education about soil -safety guidelines. These safety and preventive measures can help teachers, parents, and community members minimize potential health risks from elevated lead and arsenic levels that may be present at the schools and their yards at home. Discussion This discussion focuses on potential health impacts from exposure to lead and arsenic in soil at Apple Valley Elementary School (Figure 1). Since several areas at the school remain with bare soil throughout the school year, estimates of health risk in this document refer to risks that are currently present at the school if the exposed soil is not replaced with clean soil or to risks that can occur if soil covers are not well maintained. Lead and arsenic are the contaminants of concern at the Apple Valley Elementary School. At many locations on the property, levels of arsenic and lead exceeded the ATSDR health comparison values for arsenic (i.e., 20 mg/kg for non -cancer and 0.5 mg/kg for cancer values), the MTCA Method A cleanup levels for unrestricted land use (i.e., 20 mg/kg for arsenic and 250 mg/kg for lead) and Ecology's interim action levels for schools (i.e., 100 mg/kg for arsenic and 500 mg/kg for lead) (Table 1). Contaminant concentrations exceeding these comparison values do not necessarily pose health threats but are evaluated further to determine whether they are at levels ofhuman health concern. No comprehensive study has been undertaken to find the levels or extent of contamination in soil on properties currently and formerly used as orchards in Yakima. Studies to correlate health ioa problems in children with lead and arsenic exposure from old orchard lands have not been = 1 conducted. AR Current exposures to lead and arsenic at Apple Valley Elementary School The presence of chemicals above cleanup levels and comparison values does not necessarily represent a threat to public health. People must be exposed to the chemicals which must enter the body before they can cause harm. Potential exposure pathways are inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption (through the skin). Metals are not readily absorbed through the skin, so dermal absorption of lead and arsenic is not a significant concern at the concentrations found at Apple Valley Elementary School. Ingestion of contaminated soil is expected to be the primary route of exposure for metals, particularly with young children. Metals in dust or soil can be ingested incidentally by hand-to-mouth activity. Pica behavior, the intentional eating of non-food items, may increase this exposure for some children. Pica is most common in children 1 to 2 years old, but some older children and adults also have the behavior. The potential for high levels of lead and arsenic in dust from old orchard land is not limited to the school property but is also possible at residences in the area. Ingestion and inhalation of wind-blown soil/dust are additional pathways of exposure to lead and arsenic in the Yakima area. Children are considered a sensitive population because they tend to ingest more soil and dust than adults and because they tend to absorb more of the lead they ingest. The risk of harm depends on the amount and type of exposure people have to the lead and arsenic. At Apple Valley Elementary School, exposures are difficult to estimate because they are influenced by children's behaviors and by the levels of contaminants at areas where children spend time, neither of which have been characterized very well. When such uncertainties exist, it is common practice to estimate exposures using the 95h percent upper confidence limit (95", percent UCL) of the mean of the measured sample concentrations in order to protect public health. An alternative is to use the mean of the measured sample concentrations, but that may not reliably reflect the Lail extent of exposure for many childrene For Apple Valley Elementary Schoot, risks will be calculated for both the mean and the 95* percent UCL of lead and arnic. Using the more conservative 95`' percent UCL instead of the mean value is appropriate in this case because of uncertainty regarding arsenic and lead levels surrounding school fields. There are many areas of exposed sail in time sports fields, along the fence areas, and around the portable classrooms. The 95`s percent UCL is the most appropriate estimate of soil lead and arsenic levels to ensure protection of the health of children from current and past exposures. While grass cover cannot be considered an adequate long-term barrier to exposure, it is expected to provide some exposure reduction until a long-term solution is implemented for this site (i.e., removal of most of the contaminated soil). Past exposures at Apple Valley Elementary School Incidental ingestion of contaminated surface soil is the predominant lead and arsenic exposure pathway at contaminated playgrounds in the school. An additional exposure pathway of lead and arsenic is the inhalation of wind-blown soil or dust from school playgrounds. It is unknown whether past exposures (incidental or inhalation) have occurred at Apple Valley Elementary School. Nonetheless, if past conditions were similar to those of today or worse, past exposure could have occurred. DOH is not aware of past school playground conditions to determine whether past exposure has occurred. Lead Lead as a naturally -occurring element normally found in soils. Background soil lead concentrations in the Yakima Basan range between 2 mg*g and 17 m.- kg.' However, the widespread use of certain products (such as leaded gasoline, lead -containing pesticides, and lead- based paint) and emissions from certain industrial operations have resulted in substantially higher levels of lead in many areas of the state. Elimination of lead in gasoline and solder used in food and beverage cans has greatly reduced people's exposure to lead. Currently, the main pathways for lead exposure in children are ingestion of chips and dust from leaded paint, contaminated soil and house dust, and drinking water in homes that have plumbing materials containing lead. Table 1. Range values of contaminants detected in soil and their respective comparison values (CV) at Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington. j Lead 41 1 21.9- 1 359.7 297.9 NA NA` 1 250 500 1 1082.9 100 I 1 1 124.2 1 1 1 1 a- EIMEG-ATSDR'3 Reibreatce Dmc Modia Evaluation Guide (chitdj b- CREG - ATSDR's Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide (child) c- Lead and lead compounds are reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens' NA - Not applicable Children six years old and younger are particularly vulnerable to the effects of lead. Compared with older children and adults, they tend to ingest more dust and soil and absorb more of the lead they swallow. Because children's brains are developing rapidly, they may be more sensitive to neurological effects of lead than adults. Pregnant women and women of childbearing age should also be aware of lead in their environment because lead ingested by a mother can affect her unborn fetus. Health effects Lead poisoning can affect almost every system of the body and often occurs with no obvious or distinctive symptoms. Depending on the amount of exposure a child has, lead can cause behavior 10 71 and learning problems, central nervous system damage, kidney damage, reduced growth, heann impairment, and anemia. Exposure to lead can be monitored by measuring the level of lead in the blood. One estimate sugg"ts that blood lead (PbB) rises 3-7 micrograms of lead per deciliter (µg/dL) for every 1,000 ppm lead increase in soil or dust concentration. k0 For children, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has defined an elevated blood lead level (BLL) as greater than or equal to 10 + 'dL (10 µg/dL is deed as a toxicological level of concern by the CDC).'' However. evidence is growing that damage to the central nervous system resulting in learning problems can occur at blood lead levels less than 10 µg/dL. Deficits in cognitive and academic drills associated with lead exposure occur at blood lead concentrations lower than. 5 ggldt,'13 12,14 About 2.2 % of children in the United States have blood lead levels greater than 10 µg/dL. In adults, lead can cause health problems such as high blood pressure, kidney damage, nerve disorders, memory and concentration problems, difficulties during pregnancy, digestive problems, and pain in the muscles and joints.9 These symptoms have usually been associated with blood lead levels greater than 30 µg/dL. In the I lth Report on Carcinogens (2004), the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the U.S. National Institutes of Health concluded that "lead and lead compounds are reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens." 3 In arriving at its conclusion, the NTP relied upon studies on laboratory animals and workers exposed to high levels of lead. Exposed laboratory animals developed brain, kidney, and lung cancer. Workers inhaled high levels of lead fumes or accidentally ingested lead dust and were exposed to lead at 50 W 5000 micrograms per cubic meter (ug'm�) in air, with 40 to 100 micrograms lead per deciliter (u 'dl) in blood. Although the worker studies did not account for diet, smoking, or exposure to other cancer-causing agents, they showed weak evidence for increased risk of lung, stomach, or bladder cancer. The above exposures do not fit the types and amounts of exposures for school children or nearby residential users of school playgrounds. Lead can be stored in bone for many years because it is chemically similar to calcium. Even after exposure to environmental lead has been reduced, lead stored in bone can be released into the blood where it can have harmful effects. Normally this release occurs relatively slowly. However, certain conditions such as pregnancy, lactation, menopause, and hyperthyToidism can cause more rapid release of lead, which could lead to a substantial rise in blood lead level.15 Understandably, most of these conditions would not apply to elementary school children or the majority of nearby residents who use the playground. Health risk evaluation - The IEUBK model To evaluate the potential for hams, public health agencies often use a computer model that can estimate blood lead levels in children younger than seven years of age who are exposed to lead - contaminated soil. This model (developed by EPA and called the Integrated Exposure Uptake Baokinetic Model, or IEUBK model) uses the concentration dflead in soil to predict blood lead levels :ill children." It is intended to help evaluate the risk of lead poisoning for an average child exposed to lead in his or her environment. Lead poisoning refers to a blood -lead level that exceeds 10 micrograms of lead per deciliter of blood. Levels above 10 micrograms of lead per deciliter is toxic according to the CDC. The IEUBK model can also be used to determine what concentration of lead in soil could cause an unacceptable risk of elevated blood lead levels in an average group of young children. It is often used in this way to set lead soil cleanup levels for lead. It is important to note that the IEUBK model may not (or, is not expected to) predict accurately the blood lead level of a child (or a small group of children) at a specific time. In part, this is due to differences in the behavior of an individual child (or group of children) when compared to the average behavior of the group of children used by the model to calculate blood lead levels resulting in a different exposure to contaminated soil and dust. For example, the model does not take into account reductions in exposure that could result from community education programs. Despite this limitation, the IEUBK model is a useful tool to help prevent lead poisoning because it can provide reasonable estimates of the hazards of environmental lead exposure. For children with regular exposure to lead -contaminated soil, the IEUBK model can estimate the percentage of young children who are likely to have blood lead concentrations that exceed a toxicological level of concern, such as the CDC guideline of 10 µg/dL. Soil lead concentration and estimated Blood Lead Levels (BLLs) The EEUBK model was used to estimate the percentage of children that could have elevated BLLs if they play frequently in areas that have lead contamination and exhibit typical behaviors that result in soil ingestion. For the reasons described in the section on exposure (page 10), two different percentages were calculated- one using the 95h % UCL of the mean soil lead concentrations measured at the school and one using the mean concentration. The 95`h % UCL may overestimate risks because most children in the community are likely to have regular exposure to soil levels at school that am less than the 95' % UCL. On the other hand, potential exposure of the same children at homes with lead arsenate -contaminated soil is not considered, so the model could underestimate BLLs. Nonetheless, these estimates are useful in determining the potential hazard for children who may be exposed to contaminated areas. The IEUBK model was designed to estimate the distribution of BLLs in children 0 to 84 months of age, based on these assumptions: • Intake of all potential sources of lead including air, water, diet, soil, and indoor air dust at the school added to incremental intakes of lead at home. Uptake of lead from those media into the bloodstream. Distribution of lead to tissues and organs. r Excretion of lead. The maximum concentration of lead detected in subsurface soil (0-6 inches) was 1082 9 mg: g. The calculated mean and 95h % UCL soil lead concentration (0-6 inches) were 297.4 mgwlk- and 359.7 mg/kg, respectively (Table 1). DOH used a school exposure scenario to account for lead intake resulting from exposure to soil and dust. The following assumptions were considered as reasonable to run the IEUBK Model: 12 1. Children may be exposed to lead in soil and dust at the school facility as well as at h.. (located outside the site). For exposure at home, DOH used the default value (200 mg of lead/kg soil) that is built into the model for use when there are no site-specific data. 2. A child plays at school 5 days per week and stays at home 2 days per week.a The IEUBK model is recommended for exposure durations that exceed a minimum flrequenqy of one day per week and a duration of 3 cons utive months 17 "$ Three months is considered as the minimum duration of exposure that is appropriate for modeling: exposures that occur no less than once every 7 days. 19 Exposure to lead in soil at Apple Malley Ekincutary School is expected to occur more than three months and more than once a day every 5 days. 3. Concentrations of lead in at the school facility are 359.7 mg/kg (95% UCL) and 297.9 mg/kg (mean value). Based on the percentage of time spent at school, these were converted to weighted soil lead concentrations of 265.5 mg/kg and 240.2 mg/kg respectively (Appendix A). The soil lead concentration by apportioning total exposure (exposure at home and during school) is 232.8 and 220.1 mg/kg, respectively. These levels are below the state cleanup level of 250 mg/kg. 4. For soil and dust ingestion, the IEUBK default bioavailability values of 30% were used. Bioavailability is not constant The values cited apply for low lead intake rates. Absolute bioavailability decreases as lend intake increases and uptake saturation is reached.s zo Using these assumptions, the model predicts an approximate 0.3 percent risk that a child (school- age range of 60 to 84 months) exposed to the lead -contaminated soil with a concentration of the 95th °A UCL sell have a blood lead level greater than 10 p&1dL (Appendix A, Table AI). For comparison, the model predicts 0.3 percent (age range 60 — 84 months) will have a blood lead level greater than 10 iig/dL when exposed to the state cleanup level of 250 mg/kg. Using the mean lead value as opposed to the 95h % UCL, the model predicts similar BLLs for children within the school-age range of 60 to 84 months, with about 0.3 percent exceeding 10 µg/dL. The predicted percentages of school-age children (72 to 84 months) with BLLS exceeding 10 µg/dL are about 0.1 (using the both the 95`h % UCL and the mean value) (Appendix A, Tables Al and A2). The health risks from the level of exposure at this school are very low. The IEUBK model uses the school-age range of 60 — 84 months; however, many children attending Apple Valley Elementary School are older than 84 months. Under similar environmental conditions with similar lead exposures, the IEUBK model tends to predict lower blood lead levels with increasing age. DOH assumes that lead levels are not a health risk to either age group and that a Exposure to lead in soil at Apple Valley Elementary School is assumed to occur for 5 full days/week for 9 months (for a total of 180 days, which equals 6 months that corresponds to the instructional school calendar). However, the IEUBK Model was not designed to model exposures that may occur only part of the year; therefore, the modeled exposure frequency was set at 5 days/week, year around. school-age children at Apple Valley Elementary School (K - 5h grade) are unlikely to get sick when they are exposed to soil contaminated with lead at the levels observed at the school. As mentioned previously, there is much uncertainty associated with estimating the true average concentration w the site; therefore, the most appropriate estimate of soil lead levels to ensure protection ofthe health of the children is the 95h % UCL 23 The 95-- a UCL provides reasonable confidence that the true site average will not be underestimated. Arsenic Arsenic is a naatut-ally-occurring element in the earihh7s soil. Background soil arsenic concentration in the Yakima Basin ranges from 0.9 mgfkg to 29 =kkg.t EPA classifies the inorganic form of arsenic as a human carcinogen. Ingested arsenic is typically absorbed by the intestines and enters the bloodstream where it is distributed throughout the body. Inhaled arsenic is quickly absorbed by the lungs and enters the bloodstream. Arsenic is poorly absorbed through the skin, so skin contact with contaminated soil is not normally an important pathway for harmful exposure. Noncancerous effects Long-term exposure to arsenic has been shown to increase people's risk of developing several types ofhealth problems, including mrdiomascular disease, diabetes mellitus, lung disease and liver disease. To evaluate possible noncancerous effects from ingestion exposure to the 95h% UCL or the mean level of arsenic in site soil (Table 1), an exposure dose was calculated and compared with ATSDR's minimal risk level (MRL) and EPA's oral reference dose (RM). Res and MRLs are doses below which adverse noncancerous health effects are not expected to occur. A level of uncertainty exists when defining an MRL or RM because of uncertainty about the quality of data on which it is based. To account for this uncertainty, "safety factors" are used to set RfDs and MRLs below toxic effect levels that have been measured (e.g., Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level [LOAEL]). This approach provides an added measure of protection against the potential for adverse health effects to occur. For acute oral exposure to arsenic, the MRL is 0.005 milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day). For chronic oral exposure to arsenic, the MRL is 0.0003 mg/kg/day. The maximum concentration of arsenic (124.2 mg/k#) in the soil exceeds the ATSDR health comparison values of 20 nWkg for children. The 95' % UCL subsurface soil (0-6 incites-) arsenic concentration is 56 mg/kg. The mean soil arsenic concentration is 48 mg/kg. An exposure scenario of five days a week at the site with exposure to 56.4 mg/kg and 48.2 mg/kg was used in dose calculations in Appendix B (Table B1). A child (5 to 12 years old) would receive an esi matedexposure dose of 0.000142 (95`h % UCL) or 0.000122 (mean value) arsenic tngikgrday, which are lower than the acute MRL of 0.005 rnkday and the chronic 1V'IRL of 0.0003 trm .-Wday for both the 95`h% and the mean value (Appendix B, Table B2). An adult teacher or nci borhood adult playground user would be exposed to approximately 0.000025 mg sg'day (95' % UCL) or 0.0000214 mg/ g `day of arsenic (mean value), both of which are lower than the acute MRL (0.005 mg/kg/day) and chronic MRL (0.0003 mg/kg/day). e It Estimated doses for children and adults are below the acute MIL, an short -terra nein-canorous health effects are unlikely to occur from exposures at Apple Valley Elemnemary School. Exceeding an MRL or RfD does not necessarily indicate that harmful effects are likely but suggests that further toxicological evaluation should be conducted. This involves comparing the estimated doses at the site with occupational andior environmental exposures know to cause harmful effects. For a child (95h % LTCL), the estimated expostue dose is approximately six times below the NOAEL (e.g., No Observed Adverse Effect Level [NOAEL]) (0.0008 mg/kg/day) identified in chronic studies and about 100 times below the LOAEL (0.014 mg/kg/day).z Studies have not found non -cancer effects in people exposed to arsenic in drinking water at chronic doses of 0.0004 to 0.01 mg/kg/day, doses which exceed those estimated here. Also, most studies of arsenic toxicity have examined people exposed to arsenic in water which is usually better absorbed than arsenic in soil. Non -cancer effects are, therefore, unlikely to occur in children or adults exposed to arsenic on soil at Apple Valley Elementary School. Cancerous effects This document describes cancer risk that is attributable to site -related contaminants in qualitative terms like high, low, very low, slight and no significant increase in cancer risk. These terms can be better understood by considering the population size required for such an estimate to result in a single cancer case. For example, a low increase in cancer risk indicates an increased risk of about one cancer case per ten thousand persons exposed over a lifetime. A very low risk is about one cancer case per several tens of thousands exposed over a lifetime, and a slight risk would require an exposed population of several hundreds of thousands to result in a single case. DOH considers cancer risk to be not significant when the estimate results in less than one cancer per one million exposed over a lifetime. The reader should note that these estimates are for theoretical excess cancers that might result in addition to those normally expected in an unexposed population. EPA classifies arsenic as a Group A (known human) carcinogen by the oral and inhalation routes. The 95th % UCL for arsenic to the soil (56 mg'kg) exceeds the ATSDR Cancer Risk Evaluation Guide (CREG) of 0.5 mg/kg. An exposure dose was calculated for a child over an eight-year exposure period with five -days -a -week exposure at the site (180 days per year). The calculated increased cancer risk for such an exposure is estimated at about 9 additional cancers in a population of 100,000 persons (Appendix B, Table B3). DOH considers this to be a low increased cancer risk over a short period of time (180 days — six months — corresponding to the school instructional calendar). The cancer risks resulting from exposure to arsenic in soil using the mean arsenic concentration results is approximately 7 cancers in a population of 100,000 (Appendix B, Table B4), which is also considered a low risk. The cancer risk for an adult teacher or neighborhood adult playground user would be approximately 3 cancers in a population of 100,000 persons, considered a low increased cancer risk. The true cancer risks at this site cannot be determined due to variability and uncertainty in several parameters. The calculated risks are estimates based on available information and could be higher or lower than the true risk. Uncertainty Although there is some uncertainty surrounding the magnitude of the carcinogenic potential of arsenic, there is a strong scientific basis for choosing a slope factor that is different from the current IRIS value (i.e., 1.5 per mg/kg -day). Several recent reviews of the literature have evaluated bladder and lung cancer endpoints instead of skin cancer (which is the endpoint used for the current IRIS value): • National Research Council (200 1) 23 • EPA Office of Drinking Water (2001) 24 • Consumer Product Safety Commission (2003) 25 • EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (2003) 26 • California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (2004) 27 • EPA IRIS Review Draft for the SAB (2005) 21 Information provided in these reviews allows the calculation of slope factors for arsenic which range from 0.4 to 23 per mg/kg -day (but mostly greater than 3.7). The recent EPA IRIS review draft presented a slope factor for combined lung and bladder cancer of 5.7 per mg/kg -day. The slope factor calculated from the work by the National Research Council is about 21 per mg/kg - day. These slope factors could be higher if the combined risk for all arsenic -associated cancers (bladder, lung, skin, kidney, liver, etc.) were evaluated. For this Health Consultation, DOH used a slope factor of 5.7 per mg/kg -day, which appears to reflect EPA's most recent assessment. Exposure reduction actions The use of a sprinkler system to promote better grass cover in some areas has likely helped reduce exposure. However, grass may not be a reliable or permanent barrier to prevent contact with soil contaminated with lead and arsenic. While grass cover seems to limit or reduce exposure compared to bare soil, some studies indicate that exposure to contaminated soil may occur even when grass is present 21n terms of exposure redaction activities, DOH believes that interim remedial activities such as maintenance of grass and gravel cover and irrigation systems are do not provide an effective, permanent barrier to limit exposure. Risks may arise if the covers are not well maintained over the long-term. Child Health Considerations Children's school and residential exposure scenarios were evaluated in this document to determine if a child's exposure is of public health concern. ATSDR and DOH recognize that infants and children are susceptible to developmental toxicity that can occur at levels much lower than those causing other types of toxicity. Infants and children are also more vulnerable to exposures than adults. The following factors contribute to this vulnerability at this site: • Children are more likely to play in contaminated outdoor areas. • Children often bring food into contaminated areas, resulting in hand-to-mouth activities. 16 `. 03 • Children are smaller and receive higher doses of metals exposure per body weight. • Children are shorter than adults; therefore they have a higher probability to breathe in dust and soil. • Fetal and child exposure to lead can cause permanent damage during critical growth stages. These unique vulnerabilities of infants and children demand special attention in communities with contamination of their water, food, soil or air. Children's health was considered in the writing of this health consultation and the exposure scenarios treated children as the most sensitive population being exposed. It is expected that children will be present throughout the school year and may use outdoor playgrounds and other facilities even when school is not in session. Children's activities on the school property and residential homes may result in frequent, significant exposure to soil contaminants. Implementation of interim remedial actions at the site will help reduce or prevent children from making contact with contaminated soil that remains on site. However, children, who are most susceptible to the contamination, may also be exposed at home where potentially high levels of lead and arsenic may be present in the soil. Conclusions Based on available information contained in this health consultation, DOH has reached the following conclusions: 1. Concentrations of arsenic and lead in soil at Apple Valley Elementary School exceed health -based comparison values. Lead and arsenic levels also exceed MTCA cleanup values and, in many areas, Ecology's interim action levels for schools. 2. Children who play in contaminated historic orchard soils at Apple Valley Elementary School are exposed to lead and arsenic, especially in situations where they come in contact with unvegetated or bare dirt. The health risk from this exposure is of concern over long periods of time. The likelihood that children's exposure to lead and arsenic will lead to illness depends on the frequency with which they come in contact with the soil and the amount of soil they might ingest. For most children, the long-term health risks are low, but there are some children who may be exposed to lead and arsenic frequently enough to be of concern. Children can be exposed to lead and arsenic by ingestion of contaminated soil in play areas and inside where contaminated soil has been tracked into the school. While most areas have a dense mat of grass that helps limit (but not eliminate) exposure, there are patches of exposed soil that are present on the sports fields, along the perimeter fence, and other locations where exposure to contaminants is more likely. Materials, such as grass and gravel, that are currently covering contaminated soil depend on regular monitoring and maintenance to be effective and may not be reliable in the future. DOH concludes that current and future long-term chemical exposures (> 1 year) at the site could result in harmful health effects in exposed people. Therefore, a current and future public health hazard exists until exposure to contaminated soil is reduced or eliminated. Increased exposures are possible if the school fails to monitor and repair any damage that occurs to the cover materials that currently exist. 4. Although most children's risks are low and manageable, low risks are not zero risks. Regulatory agencies such as Ecology are taking prompt actions to remediate soil lead and arsenic contamination. Ecology has chosen to be proactive and reduce risks to children by cleaning up releases of hazardous materials rather than treat illnesses after they occur. This cleanup effort for schools is also part of the Governor's "Healthy Washington" initiative. DOH is working in partnership with Ecology to address environmental cleanup actions and long-term health risks when children play in contaminated soils. 5. Data are unavailable for additional exposure scenarios such as those at home and child day cares for the same children who attend this school. Homes built on old orchard lands can potentially have elevated levels of these contaminants in the soil. The full extent of soil contamination in residential areas that Apple Valley School serves is unknown because these areas have not been sampled. Consequently, DOH is unable to evaluate the added risks from lead and arsenic contamination in residential areas that may have been built on old orchard lands. 6. Data are unavailable for additional exposure scenarios such as those at home and child day cares for the same children who attend this school. Homes built on old orchard lane can potentially have elevated levels of DDT in the soil. DOH is unable to evaluate the added risks from DDT contamination in residential areas that may have been built on old orchard lands. Recommendations Because lead and arsenic are present in the school playgrounds at levels of health concern, DOH recommends that actions be taken to reduce or eliminate exposure to the contaminants. Permanent actions that effectively reduce or eliminate exposure are preferable to actions that are less effective or permanent. Removal of contaminated soil and replacement with a cover of clean material is the most effective, permanent method to eliminate exposure. Covering contaminated soil with clean material can effectively reduce or eliminate exposure, but may not be a permanent solution because of the potential for the cover to fail in the future. DOH understands that these solutions can be costly and recommends that schools try to integrate actions that mitigate contaminated soil levels with other planned remodeling or renovation activities. 2. Children should be discouraged from playing in areas that have bare soil or that are known to have higher concentrations of lead and arsenic. 3. Until more permanent remedial measures are in place, the West Valley School District and the principal of the Apple Valley Elementary School should monitor grassed and gravel areas, wood bark cover, irrigation systems, and hard surface walkways to confirm that they are in good condition and continue to provide effective reduction of exposure to contaminants that remain on site. Any deficiencies should be corrected. 4. DOH recommends exposure reduction health education efforts for families living within the footprint of old orchard lands. 5. DOH recommends that residents test their soil in homes built on former orchard lands. 6. DOH recommends soil testing in child day cares built on former orchard lands. Public Health Action Plan The Department of Ecology is available to assist the school district with the implementation of remedial activities to reduce exposure of kids to contaminants on- site. DOH, Yakima Health District and school officials will conduct outreach and education activities, as appropriate, to provide concerned citizens with health education information. These activities may include articles in school newsletters, a 18 19 poster presentation to be displayed at public locations, site-specific fact sheets, or attendance at public meetings. Materials and activities will be appropriate for the age and education level of the intended audience. 3. Exposure to contaminants at the school and residential properties can be reduced if children and adults follow the soil safety guidelines below. • Use plenty of soap and water o Wash your hands after playing or working outside, especially before eating. o Launder heavily soiled clothing separately. o Wash children's toys, bedding and pacifiers frequently. • Garden safely o Wear gloves while gardening and wash vegetables before eating them. o Cover up exposed soil in your yard by growing grass on it or cover with mulch. o Avoid muddy soil that clings to clothing, toys, shoes, hands or feet. • Mop, dust and vacuum o Wash anything that has come in contact with soils before entering your home. o Implement regular damp mopping to avoid breathing indoor house dust. o Vacuum carpets and rugs frequently, plus wet mop and/or wet dust all other surfaces in your home. o Remove shoes before entering your home to avoid tracking soil into your house. • Keep pets clean o Wipe down pets before you let them inside. o Keep your pets clean. Brush and bathe them regularly. o Restrict your pets to areas of your home that are free from carpeting and upholstery. Give pets their own sleeping spots. • Eat a healthy diet o Eat healthy. Foods that contain the daily recommended amounts of iron and calcium help to decrease the absorption of lead. o Prevent children from eating dirt. This information will be distributed to parents and community residents living within the school boundaries of Apple Valley Elementary School. The school district and DOH will notify them about these simple steps to reduce and limit exposure to soils at school and at home. 1. DOH will be available to consult on the appropriateness and efficacy of future remedial actions. 2. DOH will analyze aerial photos from historical orchard lands (1940s) to identify how the footprint of former orchard lands match residences within the school boundaries. Once susceptible populations and/or people living in old orchard lands are identified within the school boundaries, DOH will coordinate efforts with school officials to implement outreach and health education activities. 3. DOH will work with Ecology and the Yakima Health District to determine the value and need for additional efforts such as blood lead screening for children and residential soil sampling. 20 21 References 1. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2003. Area -Wide Soil Contamination Task Force Report. hW://www.ecy.wa.goy/i3rogramL&/tcr)/area wide/Final-R ort/PDF/TF- Reoort-final.pdf 2. Calabrese, E. J. Stanek E. J. 1994. Soil Ingestion and recommendations. J.Environ.Sci.Health. A29:517-530. 3. Peryea, F. J. 1-8-1998. Historical use of lead arsenate insecticides, resulting soil contamination and implications for soil remediation. Proceedings, 16th World Congress of Soil Science, Montpellier, France. 20-26. 4. Benson, N. R., Bartram R.D., Moodie C.D., Starr W.A., Blodgett, E., Heinicke, D. R., Reisenauer, H. M., and Viets, F. G. Re-establishing apples orchards in the Chelan -Manson area. 1969. 5. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1-9-2002. Toxicological Profile for DDT, DDE, and DDD, Health Effects. h p://www.atsdr.cdc. og v/toxr)rofiles/ty35.html http://www.atsdr.cdc.goy/toxprofiles/tt)35- c3 Peryea, F. J. and Creger, T. L. 1994. Vertical Distribution of Lead and Arsenic in soils contaminated with lead arsenate pesticide residues. Water, Air and Soil Pollution. 78297- 306. 7. Toxics Cleanup Program Washington State Department of Ecology. Natural Background Soil Metals Concentrations in Washington State. 2004. 94-115. 8. National Toxicology Program, Department of Heath and Human Services. 11 h Report on Carcinogens (RoQ, Lead and Lead Compounds. 1-31-2005. 11th. 9. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1999. Toxicological Profile for Lead (update) PB/99/166704. htto://www.atsdr.cdc.izov/to2iRrofiles/tvl3.ht3il. 10. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Analysis Paper: Impact of Lead - Contaminated Soil on Public Health. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 1992. 11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preventing lead poisoning in young children: a statement by the Centers for Disease Control. 1991. 12. Canfield, R. L., Henderson, C. R., Jr., Cory-Slechta, D. A., Cox, C., Jusko, T. A., and Lanphear, B. P. 4-17-2003. Intellectual impairment in children with blood lead concentrations below 10 microg per deciliter. N.Engl.J Med. 348:1517-1526. 6 13. Canfield, R. L., Gendle, M. H., and Cory-Slechta, D. A. 2004. Impaired neuropsychological functioning in lead -exposed children. Dev.Neuropsychol. 26:513-540. rj 14. Lanphear, B. P., Dietrich, K., Auinger, P., and Cox, C. 2000. Cognitive deficits associated with blood lead concentrations <10 microg/dL in US children and adolescents. Public Health Rep. 115:521-529. 15. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 2000. Lead Toxicity (Case studies in environmental medicine course) SS3059. 16. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model for Lead in Children 2002. 17. Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Guidance Manual for the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model for Lead in Children .(NTIS #PB93-963510): 18. Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Technical Support Document: Parameters and Equations used in the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic (IEUBK) Model for Lead in Children. http://www.gpa. ovg/oMage/sunerfund/pro¢ams/lead/tsd.ndf 19. Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Guidance Manual for the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic Model for Lead in Children .(NTIS #PB93-963510): 20. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. Technical Support Document: Parameters and Equations Used in the Integrated Exposure Uptake Biokinetic (IEUBK) Model for Lead in Children (v 0.99d). 1-4-1994. EPA/540/R-94/040; OSWER 9285.7-22; PB94-963505. 21. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 5-1-1992. Supplemental Guidance to RAGS: Calculating the Concentration Term. hq://www.deg.state.or.us/wmc/tank/documents/epa- ucls.r)df 22. Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Risk Information System. 4-10-1998. Arsenic, Inorganic. httn://www.eoa.gov/iris/subst10278.htin 23. National Research Council. Arsenic in Drinking Water: 2001 Update. 2001. 24. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Arsenic and Clarifications to Compliance and New Source Contaminants Monitoring; Final Rule. 1-16-2001. 25. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Briefing Package. Staff Recommendation to Ban Use of Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) -Treated Wood in Playground Equipment (Petition HP 01-3).2-1-2003. 26. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. A probabilistic Risk Assessment for Children Who Contact CCA -Treated Playsets and Decks. 11-10-2003. 22 23 alz 27. California Environmental Protection Agency. Public Health Goals for Arsenic in Drinking Water. 4-1-2004. 28. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. 4-10-1998. Integrated Risk Information System, Arsenic, Inorganic. http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0278.htin 29. National Center for Environmental Assessment. 1997. Exposure Factors Handbook Volume 1. Washington, D.C.: Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA. 30. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment). h Ifwccv . a c v; suerrrist€asse trEea }ra fid 2C €t4 11101 pW e pdf TOPO! map printed on 02/07/06 from "Untitled,tpo" 120-65000° w a204M-31 .v 120, a 1 : 7" W W .Sg4 120.500001 =s` z iN 0 5 MILE 17Y�. 000 FEET 0 500 1000 MEIM Mep —bd will TOPOI® 020M Na-dOeagnphk (—bn.*.gapb—ftp.) FYgure 1. Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington. 24 25 Figure 2. Fenced area of exposed soil, Apple Valley Elementary School. Figure 4. Exposed soil along perimeter fence, Apple Valley Elementary School. Figure 3. Portable classrooms, Apple Valley Elementary School. Figure 5. Site where children dig in soil, Apple Valley Elementary School. 26 27 Figure 6. Tetherball area, Apple Valley Elementary School. Figure 7. View of dodge ball wall, Apple Valley School. Preparer of Report Joan Hardy Site Assessments Section Office of Environmental Health Assessments Washington State Department of Health Designated Reviewer Wayne Clifford, Manager Site Assessments Section Office of Environmental Health Assessments Washington State Department of Health ATSDR Technical Project Officer Robert Knowles, Commander U.S. Public Health Service National Centers for Environmental Health Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation 28 29 Appendix A This section provides inputs and calculations for the IEUBK model. The following inputs to the model were used to account for exposures at Apple Valley Elementary School and residential areas. The fraction of hours the child is awake and potentially exposed for each location was calculated as follows: Apportioning exposure across locations according to hours of exposure: F doi = 8 hours/day x 5 days/week = 40 = 0.41 14 hours/day x 7 days/week 98 Eight hours/day indicates the amount of time a child spends at school (indoor area and playing in the school grounds). Exposure frequency at home Fh_, = 14 hours/day x 7 days/week = 1 14 hours/day x 7 days/week Apportioning exposure across location according to school and non -school months EF sch-, _ (*school months/ 12 months) = 6/12 = 0.5 * The traditional calendar for Apple Valley Elementary School for 2005 and 2006 instructional calendar corresponds to 180 days. EF home = (1- EFschcot) = 1 - 0.5 = 0.5 The home fraction was calculated by subtracting the fraction of hours spent at other locations from 1.0; thus, the remaining time spent at home is: Fho,,,e=(1.0-0.41) = 0.59 To derive a weighted soil concentration from school and home, DOH used the following equation: PbS = (PbS ch -I x F _hood + (PbS... x Fho, d Where: PbSw = Weighted soil lead concentration from home and site (mg/kg) PbS.,,_, = 95`h % UCL concentration at school and/or mean value at school Fs&_t = Fraction of daily outdoor time spent at school PbSho_ = Average soil lead concentration at home (ppm). (Equals the default value of 200 mg/kg set by EPA) Fh_ = Fraction of daily outdoor time at local background soil lead concentration (equals 1 minus F.h-,) PbS = Soil lead concentration EF home = Exposure frequency at site during vacation time and no school days EF school = Exposure frequency at site during the school (instructional calendar) PbS mw = Soil lead concentration by apportioning total exposure PhS = (359.7 mg/kg x 0.41) + (200 mg/kg x 0.59) PbSw = (147.5 mg/kg) +(118 mg/kg) PbSw = 265.5 mg/kg Soil lead concentration by apportioning total exposure: PBS w,(PBSho,,,e x EF h— / + (PBS x EF _hood =(200x0.5)+(265.5x0.5) = 100 + 132.75 = 232.8 mg/kg The weighted soil lead concentration using the 95th % UCL results in 265.5 mg/kg. The soil lead concentration by apportioning total exposure corresponds to 232.8 mg/kg. This number (232.8 mg/kg) was used to run the IEUBK Model. The IEUBK indoor dust lead levels of 200 mg/kg were used as the default or constant value to run the model (Table Al). The weighted soil lead concentration using the mean value results in (Table A2): PbS = (297.9 mg/kg x 0.41) + (200 mg/kg x 0.59) PbS = (122.2 mg/kg) +(118 mg/kg) PbSw = 240.2 mg/kg Soil lead concentration by apportioning total exposure PBS tows _ (PBShome x EF ho„) + (PBS x EF�hood _ (200 x 0.5) + (240.2 x 0.5) =100 + 120.1 =120.1 mg/kg 30 31 Table Al. IEUBK input parameters and 95h % UCL blood lead concentration values that exceed 10µg/dL within different age ranges at Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington. IEUBK input parameters Derived Weight soil concentration (PbS W1 Values used for le VaB School 232.8' PbS 359.7 mg/kg, PbS s 200 mg/kg - f,d-t 0.41 , dL 0.59 E 0.5 10µg/dL within different age ranges at Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington. 0.5 j Ex sure period 200 days 'This is the i6vaghied soil l d conation based on the calculated 95� % UCL soil lead concentration (359.7 mg/kg). 'Corresponds to indoor dust lead levels (constant value). -M €5 - %'MgY1� W,4 1C G W.i�4Itr FSR LP3-3�- - .. - - - concentration (297.9 mg/kg). s Corresponds to indoor dust lead levels (constant value). IEUBK Output IEUBK On ut' Age range GM %> 10 Age range GM % > 10 months PbB dL months) PbB r dL Table A2. IEUBK input parameters and mean blood lead concentration values that exceed C0- _ 10µg/dL within different age ranges at Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington. _ 3.7 -M €5 - %'MgY1� W,4 1C G W.i�4Itr FSR LP3-3�- - .. - - - concentration (297.9 mg/kg). s Corresponds to indoor dust lead levels (constant value). GM PbB Blond lead gestic mean `Comsponds to tht 4? % UCL soil lead e ns€x ration values that exceed I Ott&L a, Apple Valley Elcmcutary. School. Children's intake of lead from soil and dust sources exhibit blood lead levels greater than l0pg/dL for different age ranges at the school (Table Al). vm rota: atooa teas geometric mean Corresponds to the mean soil lead concentration values that exceed 10 pg/& at Apple Valley Elementary School. Children's intake of lead from soil and dust sources exhibit blood lead levels greater than l0µg/dL for different age ranges at the school (Table A2). 32 33 IEUBK Output IEUBK On ut' Age range GM %> 10 Age range GM % > 10 months PbB dL months) PbB r dL 0-$4 3.3 0.9 0-84 3.3 - 1.06-12 _ 3.7 1.7 6-12 3.8---- 1.8----. -- 12-24 4.1 2.9 12-24 � 4.2 _ 3.2 24-36 3.8 2.0 24-36 3.9 2.2 1 36-48 3.6 1.5 36-48 3.7 - 1.7 48-60 _ 3.0 0.5 48-60 3.0 60-72 2.5 0.2 60-72 2.6 0.2 72-84 2.3 0.1 GM PbB Blond lead gestic mean `Comsponds to tht 4? % UCL soil lead e ns€x ration values that exceed I Ott&L a, Apple Valley Elcmcutary. School. Children's intake of lead from soil and dust sources exhibit blood lead levels greater than l0pg/dL for different age ranges at the school (Table Al). vm rota: atooa teas geometric mean Corresponds to the mean soil lead concentration values that exceed 10 pg/& at Apple Valley Elementary School. Children's intake of lead from soil and dust sources exhibit blood lead levels greater than l0µg/dL for different age ranges at the school (Table A2). 32 33 Appendix B This section provides calculated exposure doses and assumptions used for exposure to chemicals in soil at the Apple Valley Elementary School site. Four different exposure scenarios were developed to model exposures that might occur at the site. These scenarios were devised to represent exposures to: 1) a child (0-2 yrs old), 2) an older child (3-15 yrs old) and 3) an adult teacher. The following exposure parameters and dose equations were used to estimate exposure doses from direct contact with chemicals in soil: Exposure to chemicals in soil via ingestion, inhalation, and dermal absorption. Total dose (n—anm) = Ingested dose + inhaled dose + dermally absorbed dose Ingestion Route Dose(aoaaa (mg/kg -ay) = C x CF x IR x EF x ED BW x AT.__. Cancer Risk = C x CF x IR x EF x CPF x ED BW x ATS Dermal Route Dermal Transfer (DT)= C x AF x ABS x AD x CF ORAF Dose(namKaa (mg/kg -ay) = DT x SA x EF x ED BW x ATn­ Cancer Risk = DT x SA x EF x CPF x ED BW x AT,_,. Inhalation of Particulate from Soil Route Dose—e,(m&g-ay) = C x SMF x IRR x EF x ED x I/PEF BW x AT—, -- Cancer Risk = C x SMF x HM x EF x ED x CPF x 1/PEF – _ BW x AT - Table Bl. Exposure assumptions for exposure to arsenic in soil at Apple Valley Elementary School site – Yakima, Washington. Parameter Value Unit Comments oncentrationC () 56.4 and -g/kg m 95% UCL detected value, and mean value 48.2 respectively Conversion Factor (CF) 0.000001 kg/mg Converts contaminant concentration from m.11. ) to kilo garns; Ingestion Rate (IR). adult 5o Ingestion Rate (IR) — child (5-6 yrs 200 zs old) mg/day Exposure Factors Handbook Ingestion Rate (IR) — child (7-12 yrs 100.......... ld Exposure Frequency 180 days/year Average days in school year 21'5�6D. Exposure Duration (Ed) _.. 6(7-12) ye Number of years at school (child, elementary child, adult - teacher). 14,a- Big we t mo -adult 70 ` Adult mean bodv we& Body Weight (BW) — older gild (5- 21 and 35 kg � Older child mean body weight and 7-12 yrs oid -_ Surface area (SA) - adult 5-7(30 Surface area (SA) — Older child 2900 2 cm 30 Risk Assessment Guidance (EPA) Surface area (SA) — child, preschool 2900 child .73529390 Averaging TimeaPoY.oeQ (AT) days 8 years (K-56 grade) veraein Time (AT) 27375 days 75 vears Cancer PoteM Factor (CPF) 5.7E+00 mr/k -dav CPF are presented in Tables B3 and 134 Source: EPA Chemical Specific 24 hr. absorption factor (ABS) 0.03 Witless Arsenic — 0.03 Inorganic — 0.001 Or c-0.01 Oral route adjustment factor (ORAF) 1 unitless _ Non -cancer (nc) / cancer c) - default Adherence duration (AD) I dans Source: EPA Adherence factor(AF)0-2 Ing .¢ / Child. older child 0.07 Adult Inhalabon rate (M) - adult 142 Inhalation rate OTER) — older child hild Inhalation rate (M) — child, Pre- l4 r m /day Exposure Factors Handbook rs cboolchild 8.3 Soil uratax factor (-S.. I unitless Noncaacer (nc) / cancer c) - default art culate emission factor(PEF) 1.45E 7 _m`/kg....Model Parameters 34 35 Soil Route of Exposure - Non -cancer Table B2. Non -cancer hazard calculations resulting from exposure to arsenic in soil at Apple Valley Elementary School site - Yakima, Washington. - - - Estimated Dose 'Hazard lmI MRL =[Con`Scenuim Total Dose gaotlentte6 ( [ngeauonof cemwet 48.2' l Child 7-12 6.79E-05 1,18E-051 324E-0_7 _ Adult 1.70E-05 4.07E-06- 3.1:!44E-07 8.011E-05 i 2.14E-05 j 0-27 0.07 Arsenic € Child 5-6 2.65E-04 '.2.30E-05, 4,3308 3E� 2.88E-04 ; 0.96 Child 7-12 7,95E-05 1.38E -o 4,60E-07 9.38E-05 031 56.4" - eamic lews 9 E Adult 1.99E-05 4.76E-06 4.03E-07 l 2.50E -OS 0.08 ' corresoonds to the mean san€ trau Sn v&1nr 3,75E-05 € Child 5-6 4.03E-05 3.50E-06 ` corresponds to the 95% UCL concentration value Soil Route of Exposure - Cancer Table B3. Cancer risk resulting from exposure to contaminants of concern in soil samples from Apple Valley Elementary School site (school -aged children) -Yakima, Washington. j EPA Increased Cancer Risk Total E Increased Cancer Risk Cancer UCL Coutunieant _- tra eanccr Groep ry Factor E Scenarios Incidental Damm Risk tion (mys� (mP B�YII sol s co eamic lews 9 soil Child56 3.44E-05 2.99E-06 9.85E-08 3,75E-05 € Child 5-6 4.03E-05 3.50E-06 1.15E-07 E 4.39E-05 Arsenic 1 56.4 A 5.7 Adult 1.87E-05 4.48E-06 3.92E-07 2.36E-05 Child 7-12 3.62E-05 6.31E-06 3.50E-07 4.29E-05 Adult 12.19E-05 5.24E-06 ' 4.59E-07 2,76E-05 Table B4. Cancer risk resulting from exposure to arsenic in soil using the mean concentration at Apple Valley Elementary School site (school age children) - Yakima Washington. Mean EPA ; Caner Increased Cancer Risk Ca comer contandusat'C cancer Potency n Group ... Factor ?. Scenarios maul Denial [ahslatiaa or mgeenm of[ caDLel 33 ratlrnl t. Risk - - Sal reirh Soil Child56 3.44E-05 2.99E-06 9.85E-08 3,75E-05 Arsenic 48.2 A 5.7 Child 7-12 3.10E-05 5.39E-06 ? 2.99E-07 3.67E-05 Adult 1.87E-05 4.48E-06 3.92E-07 2.36E-05 36 37 Certification This Evaluation of Soil Contamination at Apple Valley Elementary School, Yakima, Washington, Public Health Consultation was prepared by the Washington State Department of Health under a cooperative agreement with the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). It was completed in accordance with approved methodology and procedures existing at the time the health consultation was initiated. Editorial review was completed by the Cooperative Agreement partner. Technical Project Officer, CAT, SPAB, DHAC The Division of Health Assessment and Consultation (DHAC) ATSDR, has reviewed this health consultation and concurs with the findings. Team Lead, CAT, SPAB, DHAC, ATSDR 38 Ecology home > CbxicsC i ainup, > SuteS > Apple Valley Elementary School Apple m Tr School 7 N 88th Ave, Yakima, WA 98908 i rE INFORIMATION SITE ESC I I MaLp Schools in Yakima county were sampled for lead and arsenic contamination as art of Ecology's View Electronic Documents p gy's Area -Wide Soil Contamination Project. Soil beneath the grass of the playground at the Apple Valley Elementary School contains lead Clear�up JJpd%hs ftcprt and arsenic; sampling and analysis indicates that contamination exceeds state cleanup levels. Facility Site ID: # 3).46474.;x. Area -wide soil contamination is defined as contamination above state cleanup Cleanup Site ID: 882 levels that is dispersed over a large geographic area. The soil contamination in this case is a result of central Washington's orchard industry. Much of the Location: region consists of current or former orchard land, where long-term pesticide Yakima, Yakima County application has taken its toll. Lead arsenate, a pesticide commonly used Status: Construction between the years of 1905 and 1947 to control the codling moth, has been Complete -Performance identified as the primary source of increased lead and arsenic concentrations. Monitoring Due to their chemical structure, lead and arsenic tend to bond with soil Contacts: particles and often remain at or near ground surface level for decades, Valerie Bound creating an exposure pathway through inhalation and/or ingestion. Site Manager (509)454-7886 Although lead and arsenic are naturally occurring elements, elevated .......................................................................,,...... concentrations have been proven to have a negative impact on human health, Document Repositories: Young children are generally more susceptible than adults, which is why Ecology has focused remediation efforts on schools. Central Regional Office 1250 W Alder St Union Gap, 98903-0009 (509)575-2027 CLEANUP ACTIVITIES Ecology conducted an Interim Action during the summer of 2012. Ecology's preferred cleanup alternative consisted primarily of placing clean soil on top of the existing soil to prevent exposure to contaminated soil and establishing new grass in this clean soil. Playground areas incorporated the geotextile fabric and a minimum of 12" of engineered wood fiber. Bark mulch and rock gravel were used in other landscape areas. A dedicated bus lane was added to the construction contract as a change order and capped contaminated soil under a gravel -base course and asphalt. The plan included modification of the existing irrigation system to maintain the turf grass cover and installation of a storm water drainage system to prevent runoff from the parking area. Ecology determined that this alternative will provide the necessary barrier to prevent human exposure to lead and arsenic. Because all contamination was not removed from the site, an environmental covenant will be filed by the school district to restrict future development or improvements on the Site that could expose contaminated soil. From 1905 to 1947, lead -arsenate pesticides were used in orchards, primarily apple and pear. These pesticides left lasting arsenic and lead contamination in soil. Some former orchards have been turned into neighborhoods, schools, and parks. People living, working, and playing in contaminated soil may be at risk. Our maps are only estimates of potentially affected lands. Check with your local planning department to find out if your neighborhood was built on former orchard lands. We funded cleanups at 26 schools and two parks in Central and Eastern Washington. These cleanups helped protect thousands of children in the places they play. [-_41 l Out , hi hraO!s and ks iave been cleaned U��. want to.,. AS, Protect myself from lead and arsenic in dirt I, Sample my soil 0 Learn about the health effects of arsenic and lead exposure Potentially affected lands Lead -arsenate pesticides were primarily used in apple and pear orchards. The map below provides a general distribution of lead -arsenate pesticide contamination based on where apple and pear trees were located historically. The information is based on the peak -year acreage of apple and pear trees from 1905 to 1947, when lead -arsenate pesticides were used. Number of acres potentially affected in each county Lincoln Elementary after cleanup. Okanogan County li�Jdscz' C'* Spokane County E.mgLe_sa Etemgmi, Ey-Sp—QU.n.e. F-4 Yakima County ry, Yakima 01 gy,, G a _H I e an --- Park, Yakima L+ !7 ,j(j E_b-,rnggtibKy,_Yakima 01 t k Yakima B Kiasel Park, Yakimael hLffld!(�y Yakima B* , y _r , -Yakima C Related links Former orchard lands Dirt Alert program Contact information Jeff Newschwander Area -wide Contamination Coordinator (former orchard lands) 509-454-7842 DC14c, . D LEX" 10 IRI ILA INFORMATION ... . .. . ... ....... .. ..... . .. ... �j rd • School and park cleanups _gq_former orchard lands (jeanUp_arogLarn • Qeanupj*.LjlZjjgr Ste[15 -,,f, i i tj •Dzita Submittal Rg(,jj,iireqients for All CleatiLlp Sites • Toxics Cleanup publications Copyright @ Washington State Department of Ecology. See https://ecology.wa.gov/About-us/Accountability- transparency/Our-website/Copyright-information. CPO ep I N, D 1-0 Potentially affected land per county The table below lists peak -year apple and pear tree acreages by county and compares the total area potentially affected by lead -arsenate pesticides to the total area of each county and the total amount of private land in each county. Data on apple and pear tree acreages is from the Washington State Agricultural Census for 1905-1947; data on public land areas is from Ecology's database of state and federal public lands in Washington. rx:',)C�� wr)v X Total apple & Total county Public land Private land pear tree Percent of Percent of pri, County acreage acreage acreage acreage county affected land affecte ;Adanis 1,23 5,072 80,728 11,154,344 536 0.04 percent 0,05 percent Asotin 1:409,262 108,814 1300,448 501 0.12 percent 0.17 percent Benton 1,122,809 352,563 770,246 7,738 0.69 percent I percent Chelan i1,915,838 1,695,939 i ;219,899 30,,463 1.59 percent 13.85 percent Clallain 1:1,141,042 719,834 1421,208 331 0.03 percent 0,08 pet -cent Clark 410,999 75,462 1:335,537 2,676 0.65 percent O 8 Percent Columbia 556,220 182,342 373,878 1,161 0.21 percent 0,31 percent Cowlitz 731,478 128,115 603,363 1,139 0.16 percent 0.19 percent Douglas 165,502 1,014,193 7,467 0,63 pet -cent 0.74 percent Ferry 1,450,915 '1,246,545 204,370 322 0.02 percent 01.16 percent Franklin 807,391 97,656 709,735 314 0,04 percent 0.04 percent Garfield 459,852 113,200 346,652 749 0.16 percent 10.22 percent Grant 1,786,503 425,765 1,360,738 4,928 0.28 percent 0,36 percent Grays 1,235,289 490,589 744,700 425 0.03 percent 0.06 percent Harbor Island 137,021 14,310 122,711 605 0,44 percent 0.49 percent Jefferson 1,162,696 924,553 238,143 324 0.0,3 percent 0.14 percent King 1,403,508 631,641 771,867 2,700 0,19 percent 0.35 percent Kitsap 255,339 41,354 213,985 969 0.38 percent 0,45 percent Kittitas 1,494,741 1,019,122 475,619 1,642 0.11 percent 01.35 percent Klickitat 1,212,167 238,612 973,555 4,632 0.38 percent 0.48 percent Lewis 1,564,211 669,023 895,188 1,954 0.12 percent 022 pet -cent Lincoln 1,496,674 127,984 1,368,690 1,819 0.12 percent 0,13 percent Mason '620,305 235,033 385,272 416 0,07 percent 0.11 percent Okanogan 3,402,402 2,630,253 772,149 10,608 0.31 percent 1.37 percent Pacific 1597,842 99,369 498,473 238 0.04 percent 0.05 percent Pend Oreille 910,089 613,346 296,743 222 0.02 percent 0.07 percent Pierce 1,080,110 462,343 617,767 2,139 0.2 pet -cent 0.35 percent San Juan 110,755 13,721 97,034 1,407 127 percent, 1.45 percent Skagit 1,127,231 657,007 470,224 941 0.08 percent 0.2 percent rx:',)C�� wr)v X Slcainania 1,072,343 955,884 116,459 2,376 0.22 Percent 2.04 percctit. Snob wish 1,345,933 831,391 514,542 1,670 (1.12 percent 0.32 perect t Spokane 1,138,013 74,600 1,063,413 19,455 1.71 percent 1.83 percent steaells 1,623,630 666,365 957,265 3,542 0.22 perces t 0.37 percent Thurston 1471,388 95,381 375,957 1,075 0.23 percent 029 percent Wahkiakum 165,146 44,341 120,805 195 'Al2 percent 0.16 percem Walla Walla 825,730 34,516 791,214 3,092 =,0.37 percent l 0.39 percent Whatcom 1,390,935 984,655 406,280 1,948 0.14 percoit 0.48 percent Whitman 1,393,456 43,240 1,350,216 6,819 ,0.49 percent 0.51 percent Yaki na ;2,757,047 2,144,184 612,863 58,050 2.11 percent 9.47 percent Statewide 43,201,027 20,135,282 23,065,745 187,588 0.43 percent 0.81 perce 11 Doc. ���� N CLALLAM 331 JEFFERSON 324 SAN JUAN jj407 MASON GRAYS 416 HARBOR 425 WHATCOM 1.948 OKANOGAN SKAGIT 10,608 FERRY 041 322 SNOHOMISH 1,670 CHELAN 30.403 _�UGLAS 969KING LINCOLN 2,700 TSA 7,467 0 A,, 1.819 , GRANT KITTITAS 4,926 P174CE ADAMS HURSTN 2139 AAI� 536 1,075 AC I CUUM 3.642 E W 238 1.FRANKLIN YAKIMA 314 . . . 58.050 . ........ . . ...,"_,j'Nd AHK1 UM WALLA �Xum COWLITZ WALLA 161 1.139 BENTON ISKAMANLA 7.738 3,092 2,376 KLICKITAT 4,632 C, LARK 676 Potentially affected land per county Potentially affected areas of Chelan, Okanogan, and Yakima counties, based on land use These maps show areas that are below 2,500 feet in elevation (2,000 feet for Yakima County) and are not state, federal, or tribal lands. With a few exceptions, fruit trees are unlikely to have been grown on state or federal lands, or at elevations greater than 2,000 or 2,500 feet (based on the highest elevation of historical orchard locations in Yakima and Chelan counties). On the Yakima County map, an area west of Wapato where apple and pear trees were historically grown is shown as potentially affected, even though the Yakama Nation owns it. oft NOR II Yakima County + wre WMWAMwwwwWw r 0 13 26 Scale in Miles = �,,, y, Areas where historical orchards me %'J%% been located Areas where historical orchards are IOUININYMOWU Grandv wwwww #ser. a* WWNWWWWW I FYI,.. Areas where lead -arsenate pesticides were potentially used in Yakima County based on land -use information. Historical orchards in Chelan and Yakima counties, based on 1947 aerial photographs D. CC. INDIIEN in RCW 35.79.020: Notice of hearing—Objections prior to hearing. https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=35.79.020 RCW 35 79.020 Notice of hearing—Objections prior to hearing. Upon the passage of the resolution the city or town clerk shall give twenty days' notice of the pendency of the petition by a written notice posted in three of the most public places in the city or town and a like notice in a conspicuous place on the street or alley sought to be vacated. The said notice shall contain a statement that a petition has been filed to vacate the street or alley described in the notice, together with a statement of the time and place fixed for the hearing of the petition. In all cases where the proceeding is initiated by resolution of the city or town council or similar legislative authority without a petition having been signed by the owners of more than two-thirds of the property abutting upon the part of the street or alley sought to be vacated, in addition to the notice hereinabove required, there shall be given by mail at least fifteen days before the date fixed for the hearing, a similar notice to the owners or reputed owners of all lots, tracts or parcels of land or other property abutting upon any street or alley or any part thereof sought to be vacated, as shown on the rolls of the county treasurer, directed to the address thereon shown: PROVIDED, That if fifty percent of the abutting property owners file written objection to the proposed vacation with the clerk, prior to the time of hearing, the city shall be prohibited from proceeding with the resolution. [ 1965 c 7 § 35.79.020. Prior: 1957 c 156 § 3, 1901 c 84 § 1, part; RRS § 9297, part.] U of 1 12/30/2019, 6:08 PM G Lead -arsenate soils 2 messages michele hauff <shelleyhauff@gmail.com> michele hauff <shelleyhauff@gmail.com> Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 1:30 PM To: jeff.Newschwander@ecy.wa.gov Jeff, Thank you for returning my phone call. The parcels I am interested in are 18131922005, 18131924009, 18131923402. 1 would like to know if any of the parcels were in orchard prior to 1947. These parcels are slated for a housing development with a grading plan. All written comments are due by January 8 2020 so if we could get this information as soon as possible that would be great. Thank you Michele Hauff Newschwander, Jeff (ECY) <jene461 @ecy.wa.gov> To: michele hauff <shelleyhauff@gmail.com> Hi Michele, Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 3:30 PM Attached is a map of the area. The shaded orange footprint was orchard in 1947. Hopefully this will meet your needs. Thank you, Jeff Newschwander WSDOE — CRO TCP From: michele hauff <selleyhu mail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2019 1:30 PM To: Newschwander, Jeff (ECY) <jene61 .'A. V> Subject: Lead -arsenate soils I l HS IP...I III II . OIC IIGII4 w li!!]..l III l ONA UJ ISDIC '11 III: WASI UP,JG I CAIJ "')"IA I III 1::. AAHl SYSTEM... 1rrllre caution riot to atlachrneirits or kirks unless you Ilknow Che sei d r MID were expecting the a ladhiment or the link [Quoted text hidden] 96th and summitview orchard map.jpg 3902K ql„w i ,�, Historic Orchard Footprint IMG-3436jpg https:Hmail.google.com/mail/u/O/ trlw001. ws 11) 1p x o of 1 1/7/2020, 5:51 PM IMG-3439jpg https://mail.google.com/mail/u/O/ lZ Y4 rs, o C 1 of 1 1/7/2020, 5:50 PM IMG_3441.jpg https://mail.google.com/mail/u/O/ log of 1 1/7/2020, 5:56 PM IMG_3440.jpg https://mail.google.com/mail/u/O/ of 1 1/7/2020, 5:58 PM Google stopping distance on icy roads at 10 mph q Q All Q Images E Videos O News Q Shopping : More Settings Tools About 8,030,000 results (0.80 seconds) How to remember stopping distances https://www.broughtonschoolofmotoring.com > ... > Theory test Remember in wet conditions stopping distances are doubled. On snow or icy roads stopping distances can be over 10 times that of normal dry conditions. People also ask What is the stopping distance at 10 mph? What is the braking distance on ice? I., n The Overall Stopping Distances are DOUBLED (x 2) for wet roads and multiplied by TEN (x 10) for snow and icy conditions. 1 m = 3.28 feet. For metres: divide measurement in feet by 3 and take the nearest answer. A reasonable rule to apply with good dry road conditions is a gap of 1 metre per mph of your speed. TYPICAL STOPPING DISTANCES https://www.westssom.com > wp-content > uploads > 2015/03 > Stopping -Di.„. Search for: What is the braking distance on ice? What is the stopping distance for 70mph? v How do road conditions affect stopping distances? v How should you break in icy conditions? v How many feet does it take to stop at 35 mph? v Feedback Stopping distances - Young Driver's Guide - Ingenie https://www.ingenie.com > young -drivers -guide > stopping -distances Mar 4, 2019 - Thinking distance is roughly 1 foot for every 1 mph you are travelling.... This image from the Highway Code gives you an idea of average stopping distances ... in the rain and multiplied by 10 for stopping distances on ice. People also search for stopping distance at 35 mph overall distance what does stopping distance mean is an element of total stopping distance stopping distance on roundabout stopping distance calculator weight Stopping distances made simple I RAC Drive https://www.rac.co.uk > Drive > Advice and guides > Learning to drive Nov 1, 2017 - The Highway Code provides the following thinking distances at ... can be doubled in wet conditions — and multiplied by 10 on snow or ice. Stopping Distances and the Theory Test I Driving Test Success https://www.drivingtestsuccess.com > Blog 9 out of 10 learners pass their Theory Test using nothing but this app.... TIP: thinking distance is approximately 1 foot for every mph you are travelling at.... distracted or impaired, driving a well-maintained vehicle, and normal, dry road conditions.... Weather; is it good and dry, or is it wet or icy; Tyres; are they good tyres and ... %i/7 5'�- D "�a: �0C �.,�� Braking/Stopping Distances SIPPIK For a car traveling 35 mph, the thinking and braking distance increases as weather worsens. DRY ROAD Between 60-100 feet WET ROAD ee# or more'! _i. PACKED SNOW ROAD 100 feet or more 600 feet or more IIS' CR I M wee 1/4/2020 Maws 420 N 92nd Ave 420 N 92nd Ave - Google Maps Imagery ©2020 Maxar Technologies, USDA Farm Service Agency, Map data 02020 500 ft . https://www.google.comlmaps/place/420+N+92nd+Ave,+Yakima,+WA+98908/@46.5966242,-120.6315808,1536mldata=!3m 1 ! 1 e3!4m5!3m4! 1 sOx54976319fNW 6d:Oxa 116dd48332b14ad!8m2!3d... 1/2 Department of Community Development Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, 2nd floor, Yakima WA 98901 Dear Joan Davenport, CITY OF YAKIMA 'CODE An.MIN. DIVISION JAN 0 8 2020 Q RIEI la—pAECC'VD FFAYXED El This letter is concerning file number PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19. We live in the "Reed Addition" development on 93rd Avenue. Our address is 207 N 93rd Ave. The plan provides that the developer can build homes up to 35' tall. We have 2 main concerns regarding the aesthetics of this part of the development. 1) We would ask that all homes on our property line be 1 story, low roof lines as to reduce the impact on our views, thereby impacting our homes value. The view was one of the deciding factors in our decision to build here. 2) We also have concerns about privacy. Anything other than a 1 story, low roofline home would provide viewing access to our back yard. As we are concerned about the enjoy ability of our home and maintaining its value, we would ask that these concerns be addressed with specific proposals. Tha and Debby Runge 0_. 114DEX D 11.1) c I 114DF-X 41 u4 DOC. INDEX � � 0-7-11 ,�+��v� ������M� �� '��"�D gM `kyB1r RFCFjVF:t) JAN 0 a 2020 C4 1 11 ' Ui` YAKIlWit PLAAfAIING D/V, II I' 12."x jl�l 'o r lr-� *:IVED N(lh PI, A ivm,,,,, 116MIDEX 31V 0 C, CODE p AIN DKVMS ON Department of Community Development JAN 0 8 7.020 Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division Ej REC'VD FAXED] 129 N. 2nd Street, 2nd floorUA�•� .,•, ,... `�„ Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Ms. Davenport, This is in reference to file number PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19 We live at 208 North 93rd avenue, Yakima, WA. We are concerned with the development of the lots in the east side of our community. According to the notice that were sent to all the home owners in 93rd avenue, the proposed level of development is 3 units per acre with a final number of units totaling 99 by the end of development. There is a real concern of traffic congestion on Summitview once residents move in. In lieu of this problem, we hope you consider reducing the number of units being developed in these lots. A smaller number of units can not only reduce the congestion but the aesthetics of the development can also be vastly improved (eg. Cramped housing). This brings me to the point of possible obstruction of views on the east side. The covenants that we have for the 93rd avenue does not allow residences taller than 14' from the highest point of the lot. This has kept the houses with low lying roof lines to preserve everyone's views in the development. The developer for the proposed new developments in the vicinity of 93rd and Summitview have recently built one story, one and a half and two story houses on 90th avenue. These homes have taller rooflines and if they adopt the same plans here then it would definitely obstruct east side views of the residences of 93rd avenue and also impact the value of our property. We request specific measures be taken during the planning stages itself that can maintain our property value and also preserve everybody's views of the valley. Thank you, Regards, Sangeetha & Biju Kunhiraman 208 North 93rd Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 Pics: ixl4c. 1NY;'X 1.".,�,Oc. NN N Department of Community Development Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, 2nd floor, Yakima WA 98901 Dear Joan Davenport, This letter is concerning file number PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19. CITY OF YAKIMA CODE AnM!N.DIVISION JAN 0 8 2020 REC'VD FAXED PAID FYI We live at 203 N 93rd Avenue, Yakima, WA and our backyard is adjacent to the new development. We are concerned with the "aesthetics" part of the development. These lots on 93rd Ave were developed with covenanted height restrictions to keep the houses low with low roof lines to preserve the views of the houses built here. There is concern over losing value as well as view of our home especially if there are two story homes built directly behind us that obstruct the view and having several neighbors with direct views into our yards. The lots behind us have little slope from west to east at this point, so the houses behind us would be built on the same level of land as our home. Other homes in the neighborhood this developer recently built (on 90th Ave) are mostly one story homes as well as three 1 V2 story homes and one two story in this development. Some of the one story homes built there have low rooflines as well. It states in the notice they can build 35' tall in the R-1 zone, we ask to have this addressed while in the planning stages. We would request there be specific measures proposed that will preserve our homes value and views as much as possible. This would include one story Domes with low rooflines for the homes that back up to our community lots on 93`1 ,avenue. If they are one story homes with low rooflines we would be able to preserve some of our view and at least maintain some privacy with fencing, which would help with resale value. Thank you Dale and Julie Turner D 0 . l uuID $IF nq���`x.«.w.a�mxxu� w. nrvxw�wmwimw .�p�m CITY OF YAKIMA Department of Community Development LEDR E ADMIN.DIVISION Joan Davenport, AICP, Director JAN 0 8 2020 Planning Division C'VD FAXEDEJ FYI __ 129 N 2nd ST, 2nd floor, Yakima WA 98901Qj Dear Joan Davenport, This letter is concerningfile number PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19. We live at 215 N 9311 Avenue, Yakima, WA. We are troubled with the aesthetics of having homes blocking our views of the valley. We suggest putting one story homes with low roof lines adjacent to our development. We selected our current home location to avoid traffic. We suggest puttingthe access to Tract "A" phase 5 off of 96th. Moving the roundabout towards lots 29 and 30. Who is responsible for maintenance of the land surrounding the proposed roundabout which is not designated as a lot? Lots 85 thru 94 show that they are currently on top of Yakima Tieton Irrigation access road. Orchards on this land in past decades used pesticides containing lead and arsenic. Testing and handling of the soil should be done to protect the public health. The design of the COLUMBIA RIDGE Homes "Rainier Court- phases 2,3,4 & 5 was not mindful of the views and home values of the current home owners in the REED ADDTION on Summitview and 93rd Avenue. Thank you, „ John and Rita Andring No �o s�be DIE LOT , VlE� :ltjc�" �ios T Affb 5OLk-Fk ak S N - � 3/,-,r�- Av�- JAN,' 4n, Id �cv��� _. r/ Vii,,,,, 1� f/�/ /%1�% J11r' VOW i, %/i/i All N 04- o, Lo T �E I �s fj Q -2-)V � aF L.ffz, D � f�, 4 3 AY;,-, RAE N odur(4 (� 6A-lif �7" RECEIVED JAN ® g 2020 CITY IF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. Doc. Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N. 2nd St.; Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Joan, We are writing this letter to voice my concerns about the Columbia Ridge Homes LLC expansion project, PLP#003-19 & SEPA #041-19. We have several concerns about this project, being a homeowner in phase 1 of the development. These are in no particular order. 1. We are concerned that the Yakima-Tieton Irrigation set up is not set up with large enough pumps to support more homes in the development to be on the same system. As is, with just 6 homes fully occupied this summer, any time there was more than one house with sprinklers on, water pressure would drop drastically. We think improvements to the current system are going to be needed to support the additional houses. 2. Living here all summer, and watching homes being built in the I" phase, we never once saw the lots get watered down during construction, and on windy days, those that are south of Summit View got dusted out. We are concerned that the same thing will happen as the land around us gets development. This same developer is developing on 74th Ave and we have driven past that development as well on a windy day was amazed at the amount of dust that blew off that land. It was very apparent that the lots were not watered down there either. 3. With the addition of 30-50 homes that will be accessed via N. 90th Ave, we would like to request that speed bumps be added to the street in phase 1 to slow traffic down coming from and heading down to Summit View. 4. Lack of drainage swales is another concern. Are the proposed drainage swales sufficient to catch all storm water, and snow melt? What other types of drainage will there be? We are downhill of the new development and are concerned about flooding and washouts on our property. 5. We would like to see that the new homes are built at the same standard or higher than the phase 1 homes to protect our investment. 6. One of the questions on the applications under aesthetics is "What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?" We are concerned that if 2 story homes are built on lots 1 through 10, it may block our current view of Mt. Adams, which was one of the selling points when we purchased our home. We would like this evaluated. 7. When we bought the property, we were given covenants for the development, that were intended to protect our investment. One of the covenants states "Lot owners shall screen or garage recreational vehicles, including but not limited to, campers, trailers, all -terrain vehicles, boats, motorcycles, snowmobiles, and motor homes, so as to reasonable conceal such recreational vehicles from the direct view or line of sight of neighboring lots and streets beyond the front face of home or garage." We have emailed the developer to let them know that we have neighbors that are not complying with the covenants and have not received any response to my email about my concern. We believe that it is the developer's responsibility to enforce CIC)C. F" %% the covenants while the development is still growing as the HOA cannot be formed before completion. We are concerned that the developer has no concern for the investment that current residents have made. If they can't enforce the covenants when there are under 10 homes completed, how can we expect that as the development grows that covenants will be enforced to protect our investment. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. Jennifer Wyle and David Smith DOCI INDEX James r. and Laura C. Turner 206 N 93rd Ave. Yakima, WA 98 08 �_ Phone: (509) 3 7-lgff " OF YAKIMA CODE AQkfl .DIVISION January 6, 2018 JAN 0 7 2020 Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director D REC'VD FAXED City of Yakima, Department of Community Development PAID FYI 129 N 2nd St. �. Yakima, WA 98901 Re: File Numbers PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19, Applicant: Columbia Ridge Homes Dear Ms. Davenport, We just received a copy of the Notice of Application and Environmental Review last week for Columbia Ridge Homes relating to subdividing three parcels just east of our property on N 931d Ave. in Yakima. We would like to comment on the proposal. Our house was just completed at the end of October, 2019. The adjacent development that we live in on N 93rd Ave.,' designated as Reed's Addition, has covenants that include a 14' height restriction on roofs and a 12' height restriction on trees to help limit view obstructions for other property owners. The individual lots are also Y2 acre or larger to further limit view obstructions. Our concern deals with the new development limiting our view and our home value if taller houses are built on the adjoining property in the new development, and if they don't have limitations on tree heights. In the Environmental Checklist, Section B. Environmental Elements, Aesthetics (on page 13): While item 1 indicates that the maximum building height standard in the R-1 zone is 35 feet, items 2 and 3 indicate that there should not be any substantial view obstructions and that the development will be consistent in type and style with the surrounding areas. However, item 3 also states that no specific measures are proposed to reduce or control aesthetic impacts. In order for the developer to be truly consistent with surrounding areas they would need to have similar height restrictions to help preserve views especially on the lots designated as lot 1 through 21 and lot 80 which are adjacent to Reed's Addition. It would also be beneficial if the adjacent lots were more like 1/3 acre rather than being less than 1/5 acre to further limit view obstructions and be more consistent with the adjoining property. An easy solution would be to double the lot sizes of the above listed lots, making lot 1 and 2 lot 1, 3 and 4 lot 2, 5 and 6 lot 3, etc. That would also do away with the long driveways currently required for lots 6,7,12 and 13. They could then sell larger houses on those lots. DOC. 11). X This is the type of wording used in our covenants to limit building and tree heights that we had to follow: Height. It is the Declarant's intention to protect and preserve, to the extent possible, the views for all reasonable building sites on the Lots within the Subdivision. In order to accomplish this purpose, no residence, buildings or improvements of any kind shall be placed, constructed or allowed which exceed fourteen (14) feet in height above the highest point on the Lot. Limitations on Landscaping. The use of large trees as part of the Owner's landscaping plan shall be discouraged and no trees, shrub or other planting shall exceed the elevation of twelve (12) feet in height. In the event a Lot Owner's landscaping includes any trees or plants which establish a root system under the Common Areas within the Subdivision, including streets, the subject Lot Owner or Owners shall be solely responsible for all costs incurred to repair any damage caused directly or indirectly by said landscaping. We are requesting that there be specific limitations placed on the lots we described above limiting building heights and tree heights to help preserve our home values and views. In addition, we would prefer those lots to be more like 1/3 acre in order to be more consistent with the adjoining property in Reed's Addition. Sincerely, James F. Turner Laura C. Turner REeEfvP" Wo t)/ DE Wayne L. Morrison and Bette L. Morrison 205 North 93rd Avenue Yakima, WA 98908 January 5, 2020 Joan Davenport AICP, Community Director Development City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 125 North 2nd ST. Yakima, WA 98901 Subject: File Numbers PLP #003-19, SEPA#041-19 Dear Ms. Davenport, CITY OF YAKIMA CODE ADMIN.DIVISION JAN 0 7 2020 REC'VD FAXEDE]' PAID FYI �J It is with great appreciation, that we as nearby homeowners, are given the opportunity to respond to this Notice of Application, Environmental Review and Public Hearing. We do have concerns regarding several items in several areas of the document responses: First, and foremost, for us is the response to ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS, SECTION "B" AESTHETICS (1) tallest height of any proposed structure and principal exterior building materials proposed. "Conventional home construction. The maximum building height standard in R-1 zone is 35 Feet." If this building height maximum is based upon two-story structures, this is completely unacceptable for Phase 2, lots 1-21, 24, 25, and 80. Two-story structures, with roof -lines at a maximum of 35' above high point of a given lot, will obstruct views, particularly to the southeast for residences on the west side of N 93rd Avenue. Additionally, two-story structures will completely take away back yard privacy for these residences and, possibly, even deplete property values. With rooflines at this elevation, there will be no more beautiful morning sunrises visible, except maybe a peek-a-boo view, possibly in the area of 10' property line side setback between structures. Suggested Mitigation of Problem: All structures in the aforementioned phase 2 lots should be held to single -story R-1 height with rooflines held to latest height maximum, which we believe to be 14'. AESTHETICS (2) What views in immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? ...."There should not be any substantial view obstruction." As noted above, but not noted in the document, is the view impact to lots on N 93rd Avenue. Again, a roofline 29' above typical 6 -foot rear fences will completely disrupt existing views to the southeast. AESTHETICS (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impact, if any? "No specific measures proposed. The development will be consistent in type and style with that of surrounding areas." As stated above, there are concerns about loss of view in any way, so mitigation is clearly related to height and roof design. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: TRANSPORTATION, SECTION (6) How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? "990 trips per day..." Mitigation suggestion for traffic: upon commonly used estimate of 10 vehicle trips per day per unit for single family residential, mainly at peak morning and afternoon hours, and only supported by N 89th, 90th, and 92nd, will most likely severely impact traffic in the area from 72nd to N 93rd and beyond on Summitview. An additional signal may be necessary on Summitview, to stage traffic flow better. General Comments: In the future, I would not suggest posting an APPLICATION NOTICE with a 20 - day deadline comment period, beginning December 20th. I believe all adjacent property owners should receive these notices automatically, without having to contact City of Yakima Planning Division. The mail -outs should coincide with delivery, to adjacent residences, with posting of a sign notice: in this case, facing Summitview between N 92nd and N 93rd Avenues. I, also, believe that upon submittal of NOTICE OF APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWAND PUBLIC HEARING, by the developer and/or surveyor, a ranking staff member of Department of Community Development should thoroughly review submittal, to include a walkabout of the area from all angles, especially adjoining properties. You are experts in development submittals, not John Doe public. It has been a pleasure to comment on this notice. JA /V Sincerely, Oily wPZ' 40"D/v " Wayne L. Morrison6tte L. Morrison Department of Community Development Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, 2nd floor Yakima WA 98901 Dear Joan Davenport, ' cielvpt, 'w Prd f This letter is concerning file number PLP#110-19 &amp; SEPA#041-19. We live at 209 N 93rd Avenue, Yakima, WA and our backyard is adjacent to the new development by Cascade Ridge. This development raises a number of concerns by the residents on 93rd Avenue. Of major concern is the height ]imitation of 35' that is proposed for the new development, We feel this will badly obstruct our views, Originally we paid a higher price for these lots for the views ,and obstructing them would obliterate them with 35' tall structures. All the houses in our development have height restrictions and plant restrictions so as not to obstruct the view of the neighbors, With two story houses being built on the smaller Pots„ it would allow neighbors to loop down into our back, yard, significantly decreasing our privacy. Losing our view and privacy would negatively impact property values. As yet, we have not seen an environmental impact statement and we are worried about the hundreds of quail that currently live in the area that will be displaced, and lose valuable nesting habitat as well as other birds and small animals.. We are concerned about the increasing traffic on Summitview Avenue. Perhaps making the lots larger, thus decreasing the amount of homes built, would slightly lessen the impact of traffic in the area. We are requesting there be specific measures proposed that will preserve our homes' value and views as much as possible. This would include one story homes with low rooflines for the homes that back up to our lots on 93rd Avenue. Thank you for your onsideratrons. r Ken and Karen Spanton Department of Community Development Joan Davenport, AICP, Director Planning Division 129 N 2nd St, 2nd floor, Yakima WA 98901 January 4, 2020 RE: PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19 Dear Ms. Davenport, I am a resident of 210 N 93 Id Avenue, Yakima, WA 98908. There is a proposal before the Planning Division regarding the development of an area adjacent to my neighborhood (PLP#110-19 & SEPA#041-19). I am concerned that the proposed development will negatively impinge upon the views from my residence and cause adverse impact to my property value. The restrictions in the Reeds Addition Subdivision (Yakima County Auditor File #7653755) stipulate that no building shall exceed sixteen feet in height above the highest point on the lot. This is done to ensure the views and privacy of the other residences. I would request that a similar restriction be applied to the structures on lots that will back up to our neighborhood. I am further concerned that the residential density of the proposed development will result in traffic problems related to West Valley School District transportation for school bus stops: Summitview is heavily traveled and the developer should provide a setback area that is away from this busy road that the school bus can easily access to safely load and unload children from the new neighborhood. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration, _., Melissa Paul 210 N 93rd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 509-307-2446 January 5, 2020 Joan Davenport, AICP Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 RE: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19, Columbia Ridge Homes Dear Ms. Davenport, Dean & Jan Bass, 303 N 92nd Ave. RE: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 RE"CEIVE-D Ii ))m�� 1 1% I We are Dean and Jan Bass, owners of 303 and 304 N 92"d Avenue. Our family owned the property known to you as Phase 3 and 4 of the Rainier Court Development from 1964 until last year, and farmed it as orchard property. When the family decided to sell the 10 acres of orchard around our 1 acre parcel (303), it was our desire to fit in to the development that would soon surround us, not be boxed in or excluded from it. Many years prior to the sale, we bought the %Z acre parcel west of us (304), with the thought that we would ensure ourselves good access when the land eventually developed, as we had been told by the city that with development 92nd would be moved to align with the street south of Summitview. We are asking for your due diligence in evaluating the problems and concerns we see with the proposed long plat so that a new neighborhood on a wonderful slope in West Valley can be developed in the best way possible for all. We believe there is a responsibility by the city planners and land developer to the existing land owners to treat them with respect and grant them the opportunity to integrate into the new landscape. Thank you in advance for hearing our concerns. Sincerely, Dean and Jan Bass Dean & Jan Bass, 303 N 92nd Ave. RE: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED From Dean & Jan Bass, 303 N 92nd Ave, JAN 0 6 2020 CITY OF YAK11WA PLANNING ply. 1. We are unable to access improved street on the current Long Plat. Based on information gathered in years past that 92nd Avenue would move to align with the 92nd Avenue on the south side of Summitview, we bought the lot to the west of us (304 N 92"d). Our intention has always been to extend our driveway across the south side of the lot when 92nd Avenue became an improved street. The Long Plat is showing a drainage swale across the entire frontage of that lot, blocking our ability to extend the driveway and develop that same lot with street frontage. Neighbors to the north of the development are being provided an alternate route. We want an alternate route also, through our own property (304), to extend our driveway to the improved street. 2. No address change for all existing homeowners. If improved street access was granted for 303 N. 92nd (Bass), and 209 (Dressel), there would be no need to change the name of the street to Rainier, and make us as well as the 3 existing homes north of the development change their addresses. Let's be consistent with street numbers running north and south in the city. Vacate right-of-way south of our property to Summitview. A. In keeping with the known desires of the city to minimize the amount of driveways entering a busy 4 -lane street (40mph) we propose eliminating the 16' right-of-way entrance off Summitview Avenue, as it has shown to be hazardous with a power pole blind spot on the left and high berm with vegetation on the right. There was a fatality accident upon entering Summitview from 92nd in 1999. If the right-of-way was vacated the developer would acquire an additional 8 feet to lots bordering it. B. The potential of 4 families using this one lane right-of-way as their combined access to enter and exit their properties is problematic. Currently we can pull off into the field to pass one another. With the land development this option would not be possible any longer. It would force cars to wait in the lane of traffic on Summitview until their access was clear. Access for emergency responder vehicles is a big concern with no turn- around. C. We will be unable to make the corner off the right-of-way onto our driveway with our truck and trailer. A fire truck or similar size vehicle would have the same problem with this scenario. �Cn IN4w � amw.w�.wxm nu � mm.W�'✓'�uwm Dean & Jan Bass, 303 N 92nd Ave. RE: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 4. Relocate proposed drainage swale to better accommodate the bulk of the runoff which comes down the draw on the upper portion of the hill (north of the proposed development). Our family's 50 -year history here can attest to the water run-off following rain or melting snow as a problem at the north end of the proposed development where the hill and road are steep. We have taken steps to divert water off the current 92nd and over into the area on the north end of the development which was previously orchard. This helped tremendously in avoiding washouts in the road on the lower portion of the slope. It is our belief that a drain swale would benefit the development if it were located at the northern edge, in the vicinity of the access of the three existing residences, not near the bottom of the slope as indicated on the Preliminary Long Plat. 5. Access to utilities for the Macre parcel (304). A. The existing water line in the 16'right-of-way (current 92nd Ave) that services our lot (303), is insufficient to accommodate more than our residence. B.We intend to split the Y2 acre parcel and sell two lots for future homes and need access to the utilities that will be located at the west side of the parcel (new 92nd Ave). C. If utilities are not granted for the Y2 acre parcel off the new 92nd Avenue, excavation of the 16' right-of-way for utilities would prevent entry or exit for residents using the current 92nd during the construction phase. There is no other way in or out. RECEIVED JAN 0 6 2020 CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV. Bean and Megan Manch 216 North 90th Ave.; Yakima, WA 98908 509-949-0488, brian.mauch67@gmail.com F?ece 12/30/2019 I veo Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director w "J. City of Yakima, Department of Community Development � 129 North 2nd Street; Yakima, WA 98901 Dear Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director, The following letter is regarding the Notice of Application, Environmental Review, & Public Hearing that we received in the mail on Dec. 19th, 2019 for the project proposed by Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (files PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19). The notice encouraged us to review the project and comment on the impacts. As residents of "Phase 1" of the Rainier Court project, the following are our comments and concerns. Our first, 2nd, and 3rd concerns are with regards to Lot 39, which is directly to the north of our property. (1) We were under the impression that there would be an easement between our property and the next property. We are wondering about that lane between lot 39 and 40. Is that a driveway or a road? What impacts will that have on the retaining wall we had build in the front half of our property. (2) We are concerned about the privacy of our back yard given the elevation difference of our property and lot 39 and 40, as well as the direction these houses will be facing. (3) The back part of our property does not have a retaining wall, just a steep rock embankment. Therefore, we are also concerned about the water run-off from the properties above us. Note number 5 on the Rainier Court map states that "All storm water generated by new impervious surfaces will be retained on site." There are only 3 drainage swales marked on the map. Two of them are west of us and one is in the northern portion of phase 4. We are concerned about all the water run-off from all of the new impervious surfaces added in phase 3. Our next concern is with regards to the (4) dust produced during construction. The project plan reports that standard practices, such as putting water down on the dirt, will be used to reduce the dust created by construction. We were living in 216 N 90th during most of the construction of the houses south of us and no water was used to control the dust. There was not one drop of water used to control the dust, until it was time to do the landscaping. There is, almost constantly, a strong wind the blows from the north and sweeps down this hill side. We observed dirt constantly blowing down at the houses south of Summitview Ave. That amount of dirt blowing at us during construction to the north of us will be intolerable. If it were guaranteed to be a reasonably short period of time, we might be able to tolerate it. Unfortunately, we have also observed how long the construction site at 74th and Englewood has sat with nothing but terraced dirt. It has been more than 9 months of just dirt. Again, let me stress, blowing dirt for months on end will be intolerable. Another concern (5) is that there remains an unfinished lot on the corner of North 90th and Summitview Ave. that looks like a construction dumping ground. It has piles of fill dirt riddled with rebar, pallets, plastic, chunks of concrete, and other garbage. It is a very ugly entrance to our neighborhood and not a very good representation for Columbia Ridge Homes. If that lot hasn't sold, along with 2 finished houses in this neighborhood, why the push to build so many more houses? All of the lots that are essentially in the backyard of another lot (5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 39, 62, 74, 75) look extremely undesirable to us. They look much more undesirable than a lot on the corner of 90th and Summitview. We do not look forward to more unfinished lots and empty houses around us. The plan shown seems like more houses than there is a demand for as well as too many houses for the space. Finally, (6) we are curious about what happens to the existing North 92nd avenue if Columbia Ridge Homes is relocating it? Thank you for hearing our concerns regarding this project. We appreciate being allowed to give input on the development of our neighborhood. Sill 4 (!rely, Brian and Megan Mauch FJIFCe,Vr Ulry OFl l 11 ll; COLUMBIA RIDGE COMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER Public Notices MEINIMEMESEEMEM H-1 Notice of Complete Application & Request for Additional Info 12/11/2019 H-2...... � Land Use Action Installation Certificate n t e12/16/2019 12/16//22 019 ._...,..........H -3 .............................w ...o f..Application, SEPA & Public Hearin Notice 12/19/201.._..9 H -3a: Legal Ad H -3b: Press Release and Distribution Email H -3c: Parties and Agencies Notified H- d: Affidavit of Mailing . id � ...wm..... H-4 Notice of Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance 01/16/2020 (MDNS) H -4a: Parties and Agencies Notified �.. WW ...... ... �s���� H -4b: Affidavit ofMailingansortation H-5 Notice of Decision for Tr Concurren p cy Analysis 02/04/2020 YPC Agenda an.... ..... .... ........�_���ww d Packet Distribution List _.�� 02/05/2020 H-7 YPC Agenda & Sign -In Sheet 02/12/2020 H-8 . ............................................ YPC Agen.d.a...and......... ...��..�............ Packet Distribution List — 02/21/2020 ��.,..��� .... Conti..n.ued...�Hearing H-9 YPC Agenda — Continued Hearing ...................�................0......2....../. 26 /2020 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT mI0ll0uuml0q Joan Davenport, AICP, Director CITY OF YAKIMA pda.� nglCi�� f�nvi��u4�n j Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2"1 Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov - www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning City of Yakima Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday February 26, 2020 3:00 p.m. — 5:00 p.m. YPC Members: Chair Jacob Liddicoat, Vice -Chair Leanne Hughes -Mickel, Al Rose, Bill Cook, Robert McCormick, Philip Ostriem, and Mary Place Council Liaison: Kay Funk (District 4) Citv Planning Staff: Joan Davenport (Community Development Director), Rosalinda Ibarra (Community Development Administrative Assistant), Joseph Calhoun (Planning Manager), Eric Crowell (Associate Planner), Trevor Martin (Associate Planner), Colleda Monick (Community Development Specialist), and Lisa Maxey (Planning Technician) AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Introduction of New YPC Member - Mary Place IV. Staff Announcements V. Audience Participation (for items not listed on the agenda) VI. Approval of Meeting Minutes of February 12, 2020 VII. Opening of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Process VIII. *CONTINUED* PUBLIC HEARING - Plat of "Rainier Court - Phases 2,3 & 4" Applicant: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC File Numbers: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Site Address: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave Request: Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 78 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. IX. Other Business X. Adjourn Next Meeting. March 11, 2020 Yakima m „ l 2015 1994 ''' YPC Staff Report & Packet Distribution List Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Jake Liddicoait Rob McCormick Eoi)C)rTicqgr!roiicl<aircen'ter.co�ii q_ Mary Place I.Ll q (qj( Le 6��harter.0 __ _ net .. AGENDA & UPDATED STAFF REPORT ONLY: (OWNER –Parcel No. 181319-21003) Patsy Valentine -Wilcox 308 N 88th Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Leanne Hughes -Mickel ,Ieanne,,ic<e me.corn Al Rose Silvrfx4o@lm [ni.net (APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER) Columbia Ridge Homes LLC Attn: Justin Hellem 404 S 51" Ave Yakima, WA 98908 JUS'rtN,!,iC(i)o!,�JM�16RIDGEHOMES,COM Date Distributed: Bill Cook Coo k.w@clh,a,,,r,,t,le,,r,,.n,,e,t Philip Ostriem Philipoqriernm mail.co — (APPLICANT'S REP/SURVEYOR) PLSA Engineering & Surveying Attn: Tom Durant 521 N 20th Ave #3 Yakima, WA 98902 T"IDORA-N,'LE�?,I�,V,S]N,,OFYAI�(IMA-.CO_M DOC. I N MEX H -1 REV'S 0 Ems` tT If 0r NAKI M Ithin, SIGN-IN SHEETi 11 "?� i�ol\ _Z­_ ! �. ., _.. mm.. ,� , 1 � � 9dqbj / m Yv -_J 1 2O3 .. Iflumf� Cim Page 2 02/12/2020rilf M wting Arrrf, , DEP. TMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVED ✓LENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director �U1 a 'kik r gas e'.�FY OF YAKIMA Fl::::i:�uuirig 1D�iivusu�ru: Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2"d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning City of Yakima Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday February 12, 2020 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. YPC Members: Chair Jacob Liddicoat, Vice -Chair Leanne ' J Hughes -Mickel, Al Rose, Bill Cook, Robert McCormick, and Philip Ostriem City Pi411ll n,g Staff: Joan Davenport (Community Development Director), Rosalinda Ibarra (Community Development Administrative Assistant), Joseph Calhoun (Planning Manager), Eric Crowell (Associate Planner), Trevor Martin (Associate Planner), Colleda Monick (Community Development Specialist), and Lisa Maxey (Planning Technician) AGENDA I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Staff Announcements IV. Audience Participation (for items not listed on the agenda) V. Approval of Meeting Minutes of January 22, 2020 VI. PUBLIC HEARING -Plat of "Rainier Court- Phases 2,3 &4" Applicant: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC File Numbers: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Site Address: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave Request: Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. VII. Other Business VIII. Adjourn Next Meeting: February 26, 2020 2 _p 2015 6S" I 1994 YPC Staff Report & Packet Distribution List Columbia Ridge Homes LLC — "Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 YPC PACKET: Jake Liddicoat Leanne Hughes -Mickel Jia @_ dygirna.corni Ieann e, m j c k e I @ Al Rose Ro�aM cCo�m cCcicairecatemmr rwoati m1yrwfx40as �,aNnrw_nv aar704Q@z�gmafI..com (APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER) Columbia Ridge Homes LLC Attn: Justin Hellem 404 S 51St Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Litic'4dcoVnrr:kaarid ehon-tes,com AGENDA & STAFF REPORT ONLY: (OWNER—Parcel No. 181319-21003) (SURVEYOR) Patsy Valentine -Wilcox PLSA Engineering & Surveying 308 N 88th Ave Attn: Tom Durant Yakima, WA 98908 521 N 201h Ave #3 Yakima, WA 98902 t ur nt pN�gp y�aP�,imaLLcom Date Distributed: . ............. ab/au Philip Ostriem Phil r ostrieni gmail.co 000. INDEX DEPARTMEANTOP PUBLIC WORKS Scott Schafer, Director Engineering Division c" " 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington 98901 �, ��)) (509) 575-6111 • Fax (509) 576-6305Uly Of PLA • IG ° 1' January 31, 2020 Patsy J Valentine - Wilcox 308 N 881h Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Subject: Notice of Decision for Transportation Concurrency 210 - Single Family Detached Housing Dear Applicant, Enclosed is the Decision for the Transportation Concurrency Analysis of the construction of 79 single family detached housing units at 92nd and Summitview, within the City of Yakima, Washington. This development has been APPROVED for Concurrency Analysis. Concurrency review determined that reserve capacity is available on all impacted arterial streets. Concurrency review does not evaluate impact to local access streets or street intersections. This review does not include safety or site design issues which will be addressed at the project review level of zoning and SEPA. This review concluded that the proposed development will not exceed the capacity of the arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted arterial streets. Please review the enclosed report. You may appeal the Findings of this report or request Administrative Reconsideration within fifteen (15) days from the date of mailing of this Notice. Appeal forms and procedures are available at the Department of Community Development. If you have any questions, please call me at (509) 576-6797. Sincerely,, Robert Desgrosellier Chief Engineer (Acting) Enclosure cc: Lisa Maxey TC File RECEIVED 0 4 Mo City of Yakima, Washington Engineering Division (0'1ryOff"Lw Its 'jt(g� 16 Transportation Concurrency Analysis /w Date of Review: January 31, 2020 Review Prepared by: Robert Desgrosellier, Chief Engineer, (Acting) (509) 575-6228 Proposed Development: Columbia Ridge homes Subject Address: N 92ND AVE & SUMMITVIEW AVE ITE Land Use: 210 — Single Family Detached Housing Expected Net PM Peak Hour Trip Generation: 79 PM Peak Hour Trips Average Weekday Trips: 752 Summary of Impact: The applicant, Columbia Ridge homes, proposes to construct 79 single family detached housing units at 92nd and Summitview, within the city of Yakima, Washington. Traffic from this new development will enter the Arterial Street system on Summitview Ave. City of Yakima Administrative procedures for Concurrency Analysis use the PM Peak hour trip of the adjacent street for the selected land use category. Based upon local data, City of Yakima Traffic Volumes for PM Peak Hour is assessed as 8.7% of total Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Peak hour reserve capacity includes any vehicle trips previously assigned under the Concurrency Ordinance. City of Yakima Transportation Concurrency assesses arterial street segment capacity only and does not address intersection capacity. tgrtl rt lly..c f,I 1rpJ t i l_ Nle, q °r akrrma Art±:d°t� l t t tom; This application has been reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance. This development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review does not include any site development or safety issues which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. The review does not address intersection level of service. Transportation Capacity Analysis Page I of l LJOC. INDEX Ply,. �� �w ww ^Reserte 0 2201 . . ...... . Scrtton Road nt PVI Pk .i.Pkffi TTC'ChIL0SI-" th TCa tapxity BoH: cap.rd AdGl After TCO aD1� 217 �. Sun=tciev Avenue 89th Aix to 96th Ace 79 9250 3200 7S7 :413 133 2279 0.29 A 201 Surrm""'t a� Areaue .. -- ......... _. S9thArt - 86th Ave 50 11950 3200 1030 .� 2160 93 206' 035 .�... A 'Z9 %thAye rietonDrtoSummttti 202 Summitview Avenue .... 90th ve-'2nd Ave 30 � 11020 3200 959 .. 2:41 283 1955 O. w9 ....... ?. tgrtl rt lly..c f,I 1rpJ t i l_ Nle, q °r akrrma Art±:d°t� l t t tom; This application has been reviewed and approved for consistency with YMC 12.08 Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance. This development will not exceed the PM peak hour capacity of the City Arterial street system and reserve capacity exists on all impacted streets. This review does not include any site development or safety issues which may be discussed at the project level or SEPA review. The review does not address intersection level of service. Transportation Capacity Analysis Page I of l LJOC. INDEX Ply,. �� �w AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Columbia Ridg "Rainier Court - Phase e Homes LLC - "Rami se 2 3 & 4"mm Vic. of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the Yakima City Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS); 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 300 feet of subject property, listed SEPA agencies and all parties of record, that said property owners are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 161h day of TanuaKy 2020. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Lisa Maxey Planning Technician OC. I N ! - " b 18131912002 1813 913001 ������ ����� ����������� � 18131921001 � � CATHOLIC BISHOP OF YAK CORP CATHOL ,,, ISHOP 0 - K CORP CATH LIC BISHOP OF AK -CORP 5301 TIETON DR STE A 5301 TI ETON E A 5301 TIET YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA 989 YA A 98 COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC 1C81319B A RIDG MES LLC � � COLI 1924009 GE HOMES 18131922005 LLC 404 S 51ST AVE 404 S 51 4 1 VE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ' YAKI , WA 908 YAKIMA, WA 9 8 .........._..... _. _ �.... .... ..............wm ..: .. ......... — _-------�......._�.. � ....... �...... ...... 17132411002 18131931519 18131932455 GRAVBROT REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST JRC INC KELLER FAMILY TRUST 10831 SUMMITVIEW RD 209 S 93RD AVE 9202 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 .� m....... . w _ _ _.. ........_.... ................, w 18131924443 18131924444 _....... 18131913409 RAMSEY LIVING TRUST RAMS VIN ST RESERVA LLC 502 N 62ND AVE 502 N 6 E PO BOX 1006 YAKIMA, WA 98908 A, WA 98 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 18131924431 .... ................... 18131924432��e.18131924433 SUMMIT CREST CONSTRUCTION LLC >AKIMA, T CONSTRUCTION LLC SU ST CONSTRUCTION LLC 4702 SUMMITVIEW AVE STE 100 ISI EW AVE STE 100 2 SU ITVIEW AVE STE 100 YAKIMA, WA 98908 WA 9890 YAKIMA, WA 8 ........._.. .. _ ....... _ ............ m ��...... 181 1924434 18131 2.4435 18131924436 SUM IT CREST CO TION LLC SUMMI CONSTRUCTION LLC S MIT CREST SRUCTION LLC 4702S AVE STE 100 4702 MI W AVE STE 100 4702 ITVIEW AVE STE 100 YAK 8908 YA MA, WA 9890 KIMA, W 908 . 18131924437 ��� ����������. . � ������������ �� 181319244 38 .. ... w 181319..........�.. .. 24439 SUMMIT CREST CO CTION LLC SUM CREST CO RUCTION LLC SU IT CRES NSTRUCTION LLC 4702 W AVE STE 100 4702 SU IEW AVE STE 100 4702 ITVIEW AVE STE 100 YAKI 08 YAM., WA 08 IMA, WA 08 �_ ..�.... ... ...._ m,, . .. ................ _......�_. 18131924449 18131924450 18 1924451 S ITC CONSTRUCTION LLC SU T CRImm CIJSTRUCTION LLC SUM C CONSTRUCTION LLC 4702 ITVIEW AVE STE 100 4702 S I'TVIEW AVE STE 100 470 IEW AVE STE 100 MA, WA 9 8 A, WA 8 YAKIMA, WA 98 ..... �� _....._......_..._... _ . ...... �............... _...... 18131924452 18131923406 17132414436 SU MITCREST NCTIIN LLC WAYNE AND BETTE MORRISON LIVING AMANDA J & MIKE STEVENS 47'02 ITVIEW AVE STE 100 TRUST 307 N 3RD ST STE 3 KIMA, 908 205 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98901 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924440.....______ 18131923416 .... 1713241��... �� ...��..... ._._ . ��.. 1001 BARBARA BOUTAINE BIJU P & SANGEETHA KUNHIRAMAN BRANDON CAMPBELL 215 SUMMIT CREST WAY 208 N 93RD AVE 1000 S 91ST AVE #2 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98LQCe iv.µ,. a �� .18131924462m181... _W.. �...�.__ 31924428 . W ............. . .....mw. _... 18131931517 BRIAN & MEGAN MAUCH CARLENE K HOWARD CASEY & ALYSSA B WILKERSON 216 N 90TH AVE 224 N 89TH AVE 118 N 91ST AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 .......... _....18131923410 ... w ............. .. ........, a 181319134-2, ... 18131923405 CHRISTOPHER C & JENNICA C CORRY CHRISTOPHER R & AMY LYNN A TREAT DALE J & JULIE A TURNER 213 N 93RD AVE 8703 KAIL DR 203 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932477 18131932475 18131924463 DANNY & GAIL MCLAUGHLIN DARRYL S TOM DAVID A BRUSH 114 N 93RD AVE 113 N 93RD AVE 215 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 . .... � .._........ 18131924429 ....._._ _... 18131913423 ......... _... ..... .. .... ------- 18131924464 DEAN OTTINGER DEBORAH L WOODS DENNIS DALE & MELANIE JEANNE 8819 KAIL DR 8703 JUANITA DR MATSON YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 213 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131922004 1924459 � .. _._.......1813 1813- .. _ .,�........ 193 2431 DIANA ALVAREZ DONALD D & SHERRY L DONOVAN DOUGLAS J & REBECCA JONES 406 N 92ND AVE 210 N 90TH AVE 120 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131931518........ . 17132414437._ ......... ...w ,.�... _..m 18131923013.........._ ............... ................. .....e........ ,........... ............... DOUGLAS L KELLER TRUSTEE DOUGLAS L PEGGY KEITHLY DOUGLAS L PEGGY KEITHLY 9202 SUMMITVIEW AVE 306 N 96TH AVE 307 N 96TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923415 _. 18131923003 1... X.......✓ 81319322 458 ERIC R & MELISSA N PAUL ERICA MENDOZA GARY R & ROBERTA L PETERSON 210 N 93RD AVE 9307 SUMMITVIEW AVE PO BOX 933 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 NACHES, WA 98937 18131924424 18131923407 m.,A„.. ........ ....._ 18131924430 ..... GAYLAND G & MARY HONORAH GERALD & DEBORAH RUNGE HEIDI R RIKARD PEDHIRNEY 207 N 93RD AVE 8817 KAIL DR 216 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 --------.__— ........... . ...... a 18131923414 ...._. .. ... ------ 18131923417 .. .... .........._........a .. . 18131924427 JAMES A 1R & MARICELLA V BENFIET JAMES F & LAURA C TURNER JASON S & JENNIFER L THOMPSON PO BOX 9913 7800 W MEAD AVE 222 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98909 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 181319..... _.... 24461 .... _w ._.._._......... _... 18131924453 �................ w_�........ 18131924454 JENNIFER M WYLE JERRY BALL JE Y BALL' 214 N 90TH AVE 229 N 40TH AVE APT 306 229 N> TIT306 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 A INE! 18131932432 18131924460 18131923411 JESUS M & MARIA CASTANEDA JOE L PEREZ JOHN & RITA E ANDRING 116 N 92ND AVE 212 N 90TH AVE 215 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923401 JUSTIN BOESER 9203 SUMMITVIEW YAKIMA, WA 98908 __....18131924442 .. _ ,,, ....._. LAURIE DILBECK 8803 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131922002 MARC HAL TYLER 416 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 � ..... ..w. —.. .... .. 18131924445 NUNO A FERNANDES 8810 KAIL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932476 PAUL & LINDA M KOVERMAN 116 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 --.------- .. — _------------- .... 18131923011 R DEAN & JANET R BASS 303 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 �.............­.................. 18131913407 ROBERT G & MARY K VELIKANJE 8711 HAWTHORN DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924465 RONNIE L & BONNIE G BLOXHAM 211 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924446 _ SCOTT E & LESLIE ANN GEER 8812 KAIL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923408 KAREN JOHNSON 209 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924001 LONNIE A & REBECCA S WISEMAN 310 N 88TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923012 MICHAEL A GEERTSMA 6400 W 20TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 18131921003 PATSY J VALENTINE—WILCOX 308:N 88TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ..... .. .... 18131924447 PHILLIP E LUTHER 1330 DAZET RD YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924010 R DE>92N ET R 303 YA',890 18131913408 ROB G & MARY ANJE 8711 HA I N DR 14K A, WA 9 18131924002 SAM IA SAE 110 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932473 SHARON B EVANS 109 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924441 LAURIE DILBECK 8801 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 ......�............. �.. 18131913410 MARC L & HEIDI ANN BOURCIER 8604 HAWTHORNE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131922001 NEIL D & MICHELE D HAUFF 420 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 __ .... e ..... .. _. 18131924007 PAUL DRESSEL JR 209 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924448 Pi 1P E LUTH 133 RD AKIMA, W 08 18131913422 ROBERT & PAM WILCOX 8711 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923404.....................................�.... ,_.............._ ROBERT J. REED 216 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ...18131923412 �.............................____.��.�.�.._ SANDRA & DEREK BIRLEY 216 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 _. .................................... 18131924466 STEPHEN L KAUFFMAN 209 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 989 C. -, 18131924425 18131924426 18131913420 TERRY MCLEOD THOMAS W & MARCELLA E OLIVER TIMOTHY M & LISA C FOSS 218 N 89TH AVE 220 N 89TH AVE 19043 86TH AVE NE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 BOTHELL, WA 98011 18131932474 WILLIAM & DOROTHY FORD 111 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923409 ZAINE L & ASHLEY M BRALEY 211 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924423 WILLIAM H & BONNIE J BETTERTON 214 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 97 Total Parcels - Columbia Ridge Homes LLC - "Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4" - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 18131923413 WILLIAM J & JUDITH A FRODSHAM 214 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 Am Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant Cascade Natural Gas Century Link 10705-B Gilbert Road 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Manager Yakima, WA 98903-9203 Kennewick, WA 99336 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 bethb„@ahtanum.net Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications City of Union Gap Chamber of Commerce Manager g Dennis Henne, Development Director 10 North 9th Street 1005 North 16th Ave .. POBox 3008 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Union Gap, WA 98903 charnberj2yakin a, rg Dennis.henne union a wa. ov Department of Agriculture Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Department of Commerce Kelly McLain 1063 S Capitol Way, Ste 106 Review Team PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 1011 Plum St SE Olympia, WA 98504 5e a dah .wa. fav Olympia, WA 98504-3172 kmcla.i gr.w. ,goo revievatearrr cornrrrerce.wa, try Department of Ecology Department of Fish and Wildlife Annie Szvetecz, SEPA Policy Lead Department of Ecology Eric Bartrand P.O. Box 47703 Gwen Clear, Central Regional Coordinator 1701 South 24th Ave Olympia, WA 98504-7703 1250 West Alder Street Yakima, WA 98902 se are inter ee . Union Gap, WA 98903 Ertc.8artrand@dfw.wa.gcry ov Ior if ec w Aori wkr�t ecv wa.frgy cross accaordlnator r ec ,wa, ov __ tt.Do ne Scott.Doyunes�d w wa ra r ........_uu _ ...... _. ___ .. Te dfw.wa. ov _. Department of Fish and Wildlife Department of Health Department of Natural Resources SEPA Desk Kelly Cooper SEPA Center PO Box 43200 PO Box 47820 PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98504 SEPAdeskdfw.wa.e.ov Kollyr.coope dol�.wa,gov s acenter ?dnr.wa.gav Department of Social & Health Services Robert Hubenthal Environmental Protection Agency Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council -EFSEC Office of Capital Programs NEPA Review Unit Stephen Posner, SEPA Officer P.O. Box 45848 1200 6th Ave #155, 14 D-12 PO Box 43172 Olympia, WA 98504 Seattle, WA 98101 Olympia, WA 98504-3172 obert.V wisc�x th l„ d hs„ a. oy s�oLner utc:w_ ate. ,try Engineering Division Bob Desgrosellier, Senior Engineer Federal Aviation Administration Governor's Office of Indian Affairs 129 N 2nd Street 2200 W. Washington Ave PO Box 40909 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 bob,des r°osselier akirxrawa. ov Nob Hill Water Association Office of Rural and Farm Worker Housing Bob Irving, Engineering Technician Marty Miller Pacific Power 6111 Tieton Drive 1400 Summitview Ave, Ste# 203 Mike Paulson Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98902 500 North Keys RdYakima, bob r�obhillwater.or Ma�rru �orfh,org WA 98901 Parks & Recreation Commission Jessica Logan North Yakima Conservation District Yakima Valley Trolleys PO Box 42650 Manager Paul Edmondson Olympia, WA 98504 1606 Perry Street, Ste. C 313 North 3rd Street jessica.lo anarks.w- Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 ............. .,.._.... _. _ „G Yakima Valley Trolleys United States Postal Service US Army Corps of Engineers q PO Box 796 Maintenance Department Seattle District, Regulatory Branch 4 P.O. Box 3755 Yakima, WA 98907 205 W Washington Ave Seattle, WA 98124-3755 info a ir�raavall rolle §.org Yakima, WA 98903 Wore 24-3e.a[My.r eattle, ril WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water Wastewater Division WA State Attorney General's Office Jamie Gardipe Marc Cawley and Dana Kallevig 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 16201 E Indiana Ave, Ste# 1500 2220 East Viola Ave Yakima, WA 98902 Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Yakima, WA 98901 SEPA.reviewteam@doh.WAZqy marc.cawley2yaLimawqggv Jia mie.g rdioe6Ddoh.wa.eov dinaka0evjg@yAkhmawa. oy West Valley School District West Valley School District Angela Von Essen, Asst. Supt. Of Business & Mike Brophy, Superintendent WSDOT Finance 8902 Zier Road Paul Gonseth, Planning Engineer 8902 Zier Road Yakima, WA 98908-9299 2809 Rudkin Road Yakima, WA 98908-9299 Union Gap, WA 98903 von!2ssena_@wvsd2O8,org ...... . . . ........ . rrwsetDi _sdot.gov . . . . ........... WSDOT, Aviation Division Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs WSDOT Patrick Wright Rocco Clark, Environmental Coordinator South Central Region) Planning Office 7702 Terminal St SW P.O. Box 632 SCDlanning(&wsdp1.wa.& Qv rn Tuwater, WA 98501 Toppenish, WA 98948 WrAthtP clot.wa.gov Rocco.cLar Yakama Nation Environmental Mgmt Program Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries Project Yakima Air Terminal Elizabeth Sanchey, Environmental Review Coordinator John Marvin Robert Peterson, Airport Asst Manager P.O. Box 151 760 Pence Road 2400 West Washington Ave Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98909 Yakima, WA 98903 esp n_qh P Ry9k rn1 c rrr. `marvin@yakaryla.com robert.peteqon@ _yLkiMaWg gov _ Yakima County Building Department 7Comissioners . . .. ....... Yakima County Health District Harold Maclean Ryan lbach, Director of Environmental Health 128 North 2nd Street, 41h Floor Yakima County 1210 Ahta n u m Ridge Dr Ste#200 Yakima, WA 98901 !�DmnfMiQn r�L %MLb yakir`n4.LA@.US t Union Gap, WA 98903 Harol�di.Macleon@co.yakima,w�a.us K_ _ _ ybA@co.ya irr4.�Ma.qs rvanAb LcbP_co._y�L_kLrng.yaa.us Yakima County Flood Control District . . .......... Yakima County Planning .._.M......._. Terry Keenhan & Dianna Woods Lynn Deitrick &Jason Earles Yakima County Public Services 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Lisa Freund, Public Services Director Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor TerryXeenh@0@Lc.o y.Lk�rna.wa.us Lynn. Deltrick@Mya kiMzLwa.us Yakima, WA 98901 Dianna.Woods Pcg,vak!tj2_0,Waus ....... . ....................... . . .............. . . . Jason.Earl[es@gq.yakirna.wa, is I i sa fre u n d ra)�c�a ki rn �a. y�a. u s Yakima Greenway Foundation Yakama Indian Nation Kellie Connaughton, Executive Director Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Yakama Indian Nation 111 South 18th Street Program Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council Yakima, WA 98901 P.O. Box 151 P.O. Box 151 kellietftaknnLeenk qy.,jpfg Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Toppenish, WA 98948 . .............. ..................... Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency ....... . .... ........... ...... Hasan Tahat, Compliance, Engineering & Yakima School District Yakima School District Planning Division Supervisor Trevor Greene, Superintendent Scott lzutsu , Associate Superintendent 186 Iron Horse Ct # 101 104 North 4th Ave 104 N 4ffi Ave Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98902 _as_a n—@� Lr C —aa 1 0 r 9 . . ..... . . ............................. greene. trevo r eya ki mAa§sgchngpo1I &Mor izutsu.scott@ygk!maschoqIs,or& Yakima School District . . ....... Chuck Doan, Director of Maintenance & Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Yakima Valley Canal Co Operations Sandra Hull Robert Smoot 104 N 4th Ave 470 Camp 4 Rd 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 cloan.chuck@ygk . ...... . . . .................................. . . ......... Yakima Valley Conference of Governments Yakima Valley Museum Peter Arnold, Executive Director Yakima Waste Systems , 4 Mike Shuttleworth, Planning Manager 2105 Tieton Drive Keith Kovalenko, District Manager 311 North 4th Street, Ste# 202 PO Box 2830 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98907 Mike.shuttleworthOvvcog.org peter@Vvmuse9M,_0—r9 I keitlik@wasteconnections.coni Ahtanum Irrigation District Cascade Natural Gas Century Link Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Manager 10705-B Gilbert Road Kennewick, WA 99336 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 Yakima, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications City of Union Gap Department of Agriculture Manager Dennis Henne, Development Director Kelly McLain 1005 North 16th Ave P.O. Box 3008 P.O. Box 42560 Yakima, WA 98902 Union Gap, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 Environmental Protection Agency NEPA Review Unit Federal Aviation Administration Governor's Office of Indian Affairs 1200 6th Ave #155, 14 D-12 2200 W. Washington Ave PO Box 40909 Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 Pacific Power North Yakima Conservation District Yakima Valley Trolleys Mike Paulson Manager Paul Edmondson 500 North Keys Rd 1606 Perry Street, Ste. C 313 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 .ww....._.M................................ ... ............ ........ United States Postal Service .M ..................................................... ......... US Army Corps of Engineers Yakima Valle Trolleys Y Y Seattle District PO Box 796 Maintenance Deptartment Regulatory Branch Yakima, WA 98907 205 W Washington Ave P.O. Box 3755 Yakima, WA 98903 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Yakama Indian Nation WA State Attorney General's Office Superintendent Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 Program Yakima, WA 98902 P.O. Box 632 P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Nation Yakima School District Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council Trevor Greene, Superintendent Sandra Hull P.O. Box 151 104 North 4th Ave 470 Camp 4 Rd Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima Valley Canal Co Robert Smoot 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98908 \\Apollo\Shared\Planning\Asslgnments-Planning\LABELS and FORMS\SEPA REVIEWING AGENCIES _updated 01.16.20- Form List.docx Type of Notice: N%t> N S File Number:*00 ( Ao� -' -1 Date of Mailing: Parties of Recoi-- Rainier Court Phase 2, 3 & 4 — PLP#003-1 x SEPA#041-19 WEngineering mm_............... Columbia Ridge Homes LLC PLSA & Surve ingBrian & Me anMauch Neil &Michele Hauff.. Attn: Justin Hellem Attn: Tom Durant 216 N 90°i Ave 420 N 92"d Ave 404 S 51" Ave 521 N 20' Ave #3 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 - Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98902 Irorrwr7,grotatd IY �latgatixpiq,w.rrosLro xYv�9tlylrow�t,uPliigit,gnail.com aapstppa p9at�cpgparra� carat. _-:....:::.www d ncit'lu 61,cl.f'nudu,l„c rzaa � ......._-.. leehomes.com ttlalraata�sr, w�staaal mkp�pa,a",w�Aa�_W_�-.. Diana Alvarez & Noe Guizar Ken & Karen Spanton Melissa Paul Maricella Benfiet 406 N 92"d Ave 209 N 93`d Ave 210 N 93`d AVC,. 212 N 93`d Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 g law}�tsel�n��at7gorptlyq,cslcry mellpaulnamsn.com vaGq�:atcNusv <iEz4�Go�:ut0c�tpra auusl�af1�ear�di&roQi�---.-..... -m m -..--..._w .............. Patsy Valentine-Wilcox Dean & Jan Bass Wayne & Bette Morrison James & Laura Turner 308 N 881h Ave 303 N 92"d Ave 205 N 93`d Ave 206 N 93rd Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Jen N 90 Ave& David Smith John & 215 N 9RiitaAAndri _W. Wyle ..�------- n 03 N 93 Ave 2�-�-�-�-�-�.............. �,W __m..�............ ._ --- ve g &Julie Tumer Sangeetha & Biju Kunhiraman `d 08 N 93`d Ave Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Jerry Y .ung.... Barbara Boutaine David Brush Robin Gravbrot Je & Debby Runge 207 N 93`d Ave 215 Summit Crest Way 215 N 90°i Ave 10831 Summitview Rd Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 In-House Distribution E-mail List Revised 09/2019 Name Divi .:�....�..__��....... �...... .......... �_�.........�.�.�. sion E-mail Address Carolyn Belles Code Administr..ti -WWW inistration � �rarlyJa fie] I lt,;�,ra�y akp pia ���awvpa tap sv Glenn m , ;, Glenn Denman Code Administration WW .- u.-.- .. nistration telt.man.lluaaaaataawtttyakgnaaawaa.gway John bw.l l Code Administration laalan a �b�litlr„y aukpnp�awvta,. ov - Kelli Horton Code Administration _...............�..._...--.-...---................. lwc9lp19criom�rr_I,AGr�svvsp rr:v — - _...-.---Linda Rossignol Code Administration 1,inda.l¢ t� al ayakimawa.gov Crra ..-..-- Pedrooneas _.......-._..W..__...._W Code Administration Pcdrt),C tapagrapaa ttr alaipnaaava.gaww Suzanne DeBusschere Code Administration-� 4u rla;°.ic 1Jti,%�psu9�s rr�'{y,.ul�i..��tswaj.g,rv_ n -----_ -.... .. _....____.. ...m -�- _..... ick,i,'. Iy; oad$rpyaakin'akpyva,k�ary Vick De0choa ^^ ............ Code Admmastration .. WW .............��. WYWu Joan Davenport Community Development Joan have platprq y,akinaaawa,gov Joa i Rosalinda lbarra Community Development Rosab'ndalbtrrl( a,kini awl,g,oy Bob glher Engineeringga w Dan Riddle Engineering [yata l Wdle it yakfinaawxa.,goy ._ ...�.�........-.. .. �m� yler �m�.. Engineering ly9t:r. ptttaulaat,r,, t,oy y akppaaaawaraa kla� Fire - - Aaron M ar.................... n,.. - _--__ ... .... Arpp°opw.quaarklaawaaa�arkyakiapara a�g Pat Read . Fir.. �.,�y rlaawa.laas.�� :..... -- cal tr ak w e Pat. R�' r Jeff Cutter. ...... �.,,� Legal lCrCClit tcr,r+,y ak0n awa m.....� .__-...-- _ ..�.... k stay Sara Watkins Le �. _ _al .. �� _W........ sra�a.'4�alkuaa�,r�rt.. ..� .....�._...._ ............�_ __ g ,yakipawaeyup taa�y. Aa't hiL M _W.. _-............w�----�- c. atthews ONDS A ra Itpa., �atl d,9lcwy'w�r;y:akiaa_iawvazgov ---......_.e-__ ...�....._ � .. � Joseph Calhoun Planning Garst ial�(_ Jataplgalei;yakiraagwa.y,gov a sa Maxey Planning l asau.iwLascyn,yk�aamdwat,aawr, Matt MurrayPolice Mat I¢aaryv.mnrra�ygyak10law u p,imv Scott Schafer Public Worm ...._ .✓ .......-_- ks taatl. cls p9a r eyaaknnwawtgp Loretta Zammar...i p.aaa°ctla,.Zcananaa rd,ii� �"yak IITt �tl%yogagy fuse Rand Layman chi Refuse�._-.� ........_ -_ __-- ... Y Y Rtandyrl ayna<aqur,yakaaan�ww a gor .... Gregory Story Transit t.iregrary 41apr rrwy aknat awy p y:aav James Dean Utilities James.Dean n yakimawa.gov mm µµµWWW Dana IZaffevij Wastewater l capon. oq�cy,a z xiyakinaawkl,gov Randy Meloy Wastewater 1�ppacky,Multa arMyaakiaaiawvaa l tay .. Dave Brown Water/Irrigation is avpd,Br1m's'w yrcaknaa y-a' goy _... g ---. y .----�-� --... Mike Shane Water/Irri ation MaltaIrapat rrt 4kpau pwva Lwav Outside Distribution Revised 02/2019 Name Address InIn Mailing? m...m_.---...�...- ..... _ ,� �-....-.- ---------- .. .......................----------... � �. ... Pacific Power.. "Attn: Estimating Department 500 N Keys Rd, Yakima, WA 98901 Yes ❑ No Y �Subdivrsron notices ONLY),�.�..\\.�n_ _._.....-.....�.�_...Q. ..�....-...-.. �_ � �.. ' Type of Notice: IV� Of MbNZ File Number: Date of Mailing: DO'Co .- CA_ Max!Z, Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 11:51 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Contreras, Pedro; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; DeOchoa, Vick; Desgrosellier, Bob; Horton, Kelli; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Layman, Randy; Markham, Aaron; Matthews, Archie; Maxey, Lisa; Meloy, Randy; Murray, Matthew; Reid, Patrick; Riddle, Dan; Rossignol, Linda; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Story, Gregory; Watkins, Sara; Witthuhn, Tyler; Zabell, John; Zammarchi, Loretta; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte; Cawley, Marc; Chamber of Commerce; Chuck Doan - Yakima School District; Department of Agriculture; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team; Department of Ecology; Department of Ecology - Lori White; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator; Department of Fish and Wildlife; Department of Fish and Wildlife; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes; Department of Natural Resources; Dept of Social & Health Svcs - Robert Hubenthal; Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review; Desgrosellier, Bob; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner; Henne, Dennis; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller; Peterson, Robert; Riddle, Dan; Scott Izutsu - Yakima School District; Trevor Greene - Yakima School District; US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore; WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water; WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth; WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office; WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright; WVSD - Angela Watts, Asst Supt of Bus/Fin; WVSD - Mike Brophy, Supt.; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin; Yakima County Building Official - Harold Maclean; Yakima County Commissioners; Yakima County Flood Control District - Dianna Woods; Yakima County Flood Control District - Terry Keenhan; Yakima County Health District; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach; Yakima County Planning - Zoning/Sub - Jason Earles; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick; Yakima County Public Svcs Director, Lisa Freund; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat; Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth; Yakima Valley Museum - Peter Arnold, Exec Director; Yakima Valley Trolleys; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko Cc: Monick, Colleda Subject: Notice of MDNS - Rainier Court Phases 2-4 - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Attachments: NOTICE OF MDNS Rainier Ct Ph 2-4 - PLP SEPA.PDF Attached is a Notice of Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) regarding the above -entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal, please contact assigned planner Colleda Monick at (509) 576-6772 or email to: olleda.monick akimawa. ov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Technician City of Yakima Planning Division p: 509.576.6669 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington, 98901 " Cj!1. Gl S a asp DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director alkik �,JTY OF YAKIMA Planning Division n n n g Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2°d Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON January 16, 2020 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. (SEPA#041-19) LOCATION: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave and Summitview Ave PARCEL NUMBER: 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 PROPONENT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC c/o Justin Hellem PROPERTY OWNERS: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC & Patsy Valentine -Wilcox LEAD AGENCY: City of Yakima FILE NUMBERS: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 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. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND IDENTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES: This Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) is hereby conditioned upon the following mitigated measures, as authorized under WAC 197-11-660 and Yakima Municipal Code YMC § 6.88.160, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, which contains goals, policies, and regulations which provide substantive authority to require mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). I. FINDINGS A. Project History 1. On December 3, 2019, Justin Hellem, on behalf of Columbia Ridge Homes, submitted an Environmental Review (SEPA#041-19) for a review of a proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. 2. The application for the Preliminary Long Plat was received on December 3, 2019. 3. The applications were deemed complete for processing on December 11, 2019. 4. Public Notice for this application and hearing was provided in accordance with: YMC Title 14, Subdivision Ordinance; YMC Title 15, Urban Area Zoning Ordinance and YMC Title 16, Development Permit Regulations and include the following actions and dates: Yakima j C lip u " 2013 a. Date of Application: December 3, 2019 b. Date of Developer's Notice of Complete Application: December 11, 2019 c. Date of Posting of Land Use Action Sign on Property: December 16, 2019 d. Date of Notice of Application: December 19, 2019 e. Date Public Comment Period Ends: January 8, 2020 B. On December 20, 2019, the Yakima Clean Air Agency (YCAA) provided written comments which stated: 1. Contractors doing demolition, excavation, clearing, construction, or landscaping work must file a Dust Control Plan with YRCAA and get approval, prior to the start of any work; and 2. This project is located within Yakima's Urban Growth Area; therefore, burning is prohibited at all times. C. On January 3, 2020, the State of Washington Department of Ecology (WSDOE) provided written comments which stated: 1. Based on the historical agricultural use of this land, there is a possibility the soil contains residual concentrations of pesticides. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence. 2. If the project anticipates disturbing ground with the potential for stormwater discharge off-site, the NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit is recommended. This permit requires that the SEPA checklist fully disclose anticipated activities including building, road construction and utility placements. Obtaining a permit may take 38- 60 days. 3. The permit requires that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) shall be prepared and implemented for all permitted construction sites. These control measures must be able to prevent soil from being carried into surface water and storm drains by stormwater runoff. Permit coverage and erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. 4. In the event that an unpermitted Stormwater discharge does occur off-site, it is a violation of Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control and is subject to enforcement action. II. CONCLUSIONS: A. A Notice of Application was sent out on December 19, 2019. Two SEPA agency comments were received. B. As mitigated, this proposal will have no adverse environmental impacts,. Ill. REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Applicant shall file a Dust Control Plan with YRCAA and get approval, prior to the start of any work; and 2. Ecology recommends that the soils be sampled and analyzed for lead and arsenic, and for organochlorine pesticides. If these contaminants are found at concentrations Columbia Ridge Homes "(°). PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19 11 X 2 above the Model Toxics Control Act cleanup levels Ecology recommends that potential buyers be notified of their occurrence; and 3. An NPDES Construction SW General Permit shall be obtained through the Washington State Department of Ecology prior to any grading or construction, if there is potential for stormwater discharge off-site. ® This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the MDNS. Responsible Official: Joan Davenport Position/Title: SEPA Responsible Official Phone (509) 575-6183 Address: 129 N. 2nd Street Yakima WA 98901 Date: January 16, 2020 Signatur', ® You may appeal this determinatio Joan Davenport, AICP, Director of Community Development, at 129 N. 2nd Street, Yakima, WA 98901. No later than January 30, 2020. By method: Complete appeal application form and a ment of $580,00 appeal fee.. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the City of Yakima Planning Division to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. Columbia Ridge Homes PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19'x" 3 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF YAKIMA RE: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Columbia Ridge Homes LLC - "Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4" Vic. of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave I, Lisa Maxey, as an employee of the City of Yakima Planning Division, have dispatched through the United States Mails, a Notice of Application, Environmental Review, and Public Hearing; a true and correct copy of which is enclosed herewith; that said notice was addressed to the applicant, all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of subject property, and SEPA reviewing agencies; that said parties are individually listed on the mailing list retained by the Planning Division, and that said notices were mailed by me on the 19th day of December, 2019. That I mailed said notices in the manner herein set forth and that all of the statements made herein are just and true. Lisa Maxey Planning Technician INDEX . �.. .--. 18131912002 CATHOLIC BISHOP OF YAK CORP 5301 TIETON DR STE A YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131922005 COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC 404 S 51ST AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ....., ..................... 17132411002 GRAVBROT REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 10831 SUMMITVIEW RD YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924443 RAMSEY LIVING TRUST 502 N 62ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924431 � SUMMIT CREST CONSTRUCTION LLC 4702 SUMMITVIEW AVE STE 100 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131913001 CATH IC BISHOP OF CORP 5301 TIE ZD11 A YAKIMA. 18131923402 COL' IA RI �;OMES LLC 404551 YA'' A, WA 98908 18131931519 JRC INC 209 S 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924444 ERA MNG 502 N 6 A, WA 9890 18131924432 SU ORES NSTRUCTION LLC 4702 SU TVI'EW AVE STE 100 Y A, WA 9 8 18131924434 18131924435 SUM TCRESTCONST CTION LLC SUMM EST CONS N LLC 4702 SU IT AVE STE 100 4702 SUMM AVE STE 100 YAKI YAKI A 9890 1813 1924437 1. 18131924438 jN CREST UCTION LLC SUM T CREST C CTION LLC ITV'IEW AVE STE 100 4702 SU IEW AVE STE 100 98908 Y� A, WA 8 18131924449 n E'98F908 T�T'ION LLC VE STE 100 18131924452 SUMMI E I�RUCTION LLC 4702 IEW AVE STE 100 YAKIMA, WA 989 18131924440 BARBARA BOUTAINE 215 SUMMIT CREST WAY YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924450 i E908 ONSTRUCTION LLC 702 IEW AVE STE 100 IMA, 18131923406 WAYNE AND BETTE MORRISON LIVING TRUST 205 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923416 BIJU P & SANGEETHA KUNHIRAMAN 208 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131921001 HOP OF YAK CORP DR STE A YAKIMA, WA 18131924009 COL HOMES LLC 4 IST A YAKIMA, WA 98,908 �._....._....�.__. ......w� �........ 18131932455 KELLER FAMILY TRUST 9202 SUMMITVIEW AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 .�u18131913409...................................... � � ............_ RESERVA LLC PO BOX 1006 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 ........m.. .m. ......... .... 18131924433 SUMMIT CREST CONSTRUCTION LLC 47 SUMMI TE 100 YA A 98908 18 924436 SUMM RES ITR11CTION LLC 470 >'VIEW AVE STE 100 KIMA, WA 98 18131924439 S IT CR<A8 CTIOIN LLC 4702 SUE STE 100 Y , W 1,131924451 �...� ��.._�.................................... SU IIT CRE T CTION LLC 470 ITVIEW AVE STE 100 AKIMA, WA 908 ...._......................... . .... 17132414436 AMANDA J & MIKE STEVENS 307 N 3RD ST STE 3 YAKIMA, WA 98901 2411001 BRANDON CAMPBELL 1000 S 91ST AVE #2 YAKIMA, WA 9C. 18131924462 181 .......................... 31924428 18131931517 BRIAN & MEGAN MAUCH CARLENE K HOWARD CASEY & ALYSSA B WILKERSON 216 N 90TH AVE 224 N 89TH AVE 118 N 91ST AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923410 _ _..........�..............�. a-18131913421_.......................... .81.,........................w..........e................................. ....._�......... 31923405 CHRISTOPHER C & JENNICA C CORRY CHRISTOPHER R & AMY LYNN A TREAT DALE J & JULIE A TURNER 213 N 93RD AVE 8703 KAIL DR 203 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932477 18131932475 m ................ 18131924463..... DANNY & GAIL MCLAUGHLIN DARRYL S TOM DAVID A BRUSH 114 N 93RD AVE 113 N 93RD AVE 215 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 ..._2442........................r 18131 9 9 ......................................................... 18131913423 .................................... .......... ._............. ....._w.,.................................. 18131924464 DEAN OTTINGER DEBORAH L WOODS DENNIS DALE & MELANIE JEANNE 8819 KAIL DR 8703 JUANITA DR MATSON YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 213 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131922004 _....... .. 181... .__..._ �..... 31924459 r_ . _ 18131932431 DIANA ALVAREZ DONALD D & SHERRY L DONOVAN DOUGLAS J & REBECCA JONES 406 N 92ND AVE 210 N 90TH AVE 120 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 _..m......�� 18131931518 —---------- �.. �.......... _„�. mm 17132414437 . 18131923013 DOUGLAS L KELLER TRUSTEE DOUGLAS L PEGGY KEITHLY DOUGLAS L PEGGY KEITHLY 9202 SUMMITVIEW AVE 306 N 96TH AVE 307 N 96TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 �...._ _�— .. ............_ 18131923415 ��...... _. 18131923003 ------- -.-.-,,A,...,. .. ..� ... 18131932458 ERIC R & MELISSA N PAUL ERICA MENDOZA GARY R & ROBERTA L PETERSON 210 N 93RD AVE 9307 SUMMITVIEW AVE PO BOX 933 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 NACHES, WA 98937 18131924424 .�. - ......w - 18131923407 � ................. _ � 1� 8131924430 GAYLAND G & MARY HONORAH GERALD & DEBORAH RUNGE HEIDI R RIKARD PEDHIRNEY 207 N 93RD AVE 8817 KAIL DR 216 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 1813192341 4 _.................,......_�...�_Y 18131923417 .... .�....................m 18131924427 JAMES A JR & MARICELLA V BENFIET JAMES F & LAURA C TURNER JASON S & JENNIFER L THOMPSON PO BOX 9913 7800 W MEAD AVE 222 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98909 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924461..�.�..... .. _.�.� .. _W......_.......�..�...... _..�.. ...�._mm....�..�.._ 18131924453 .. �_��..�... 18 1924454 JENNIFER M WYLE JERRY BALL JERKLL 214 N 90TH AVE 229 N 40TH AVE APT 306 229 E APT 306 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98 ma a H 3 C .m 18131932432 18131924460 18131923411 JESUS M & MARIA CASTANEDA JOE L PEREZ JOHN & RITA E ANDRING 116 N 92ND AVE 212 N 90TH AVE 215 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923401............ _.........�...�... ,..�...................... _.............. JUSTIN BOESER 9203 SUMMITVIEW YAKIMA, WA 98908 1813192444........_ - ............................. LAURIE DILBECK 8803 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 ..........18131922002 ....�.........�..................................... MARCHAL TYLER 416 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924445 NUNO A FERNANDES 8810 KAIL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932476 � PAULJ & LINDA M KOVERMAN 116 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923011 R DEAN & JANET R BASS 303 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131913407 ROBERT G & MARY K VELIKANJE 8711 HAWTHORN DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924465. �........................� RONNIE L & BONNIE G BLOXHAM 211 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924446� SCOTT E & LESLIE ANN GEER 8812 KAIL DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923408 KAREN JOHNSON 209 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924001 LONNIE A & REBECCA S WISEMAN 310 N 88TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923012 MICHAEL A GEERTSMA 6400 W 20TH AVE KENNEWICK, WA 99338 18131921003 PATSYJ VALENTINE-WILCOX 308 N 88TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924447 PHILLIP E LUTHER 1330 DAZET RD YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924010 R DEAN &N 303 N 92 YAKI , WA 1813191 408 " ROBERT G ELIKANJE 8711 H DR Y A, WA 9890 18131924002 SAM IA SAED 110 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131932473 SHARON B EVANS 109 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924441 LAURIE DILBECK 8801 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131913410 MARC L & HEIDI ANN BOURCIER 8604 HAWTHORNE DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 ..... 18131922001...._ ..................................._......._ .� _�.. NEIL D & MICHELE D HAUFF 420 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924007 PAUL DRESSELJR 209 N 92ND AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 ... ..... �_..... 18131924448 PH' E LUTHER 1330 DA. Y A, WA 9 18 .m _ ... _ �...�. ... �..._ 131913422 ROBERT & PAM WILCOX 8711 JUANITA DR YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923404 .... _..................�_ ROBERT J. REED 216 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 1813192341.2 ...�___......�................� ._... SANDRA & DEREK BIRLEY 216 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 131924466 STEPHEN L KAUFFMAN 209 N 90TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98!or H,- �- 18131924425 18131924426 18131913420 TERRY MCLEOD THOMAS W & MARCELLA E OLIVER TIMOTHY M & LISA C FOSS 218 N 89TH AVE 220 N 89TH AVE 19043 86TH AVE NE YAKIMA, WA 98908 YAKIMA, WA 98908 BOTHELL, WA 98011 18131932474 WILLIAM & DOROTHY FORD 111 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131923409 ZAINE L & ASHLEY M BRALEY 211 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 18131924423 WILLIAM H & BONNIE J BETTERTON 214 N 89TH AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 97 Total Parcels - Columbia Ridge Homes LLC - "Rainier Court - Phases 2, 3 & 4" - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 18131923413 WILLIAM J & JUDITH A FRODSHAM 214 N 93RD AVE YAKIMA, WA 98908 Doci Ahtanum Irrigation District Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant Cascade Natural Gas Century Link 10705-B Gilbert Road 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Manager Yakima, WA 98903-9203 Kennewick, WA 99336 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 bethb °ahtanu(ji.jL , __. Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications City of Union Gap Chamber of Commerce Kevin Chilcote Dennis Henne, Development Director 10 North 9th Street 1005 North 16th Ave P.O. Box 3008 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Union Gap, WA 98903 chamber "YaklrrJ, or D nnis.henne uniongapAp g v Department of Agriculture Dept of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Department of Commerce Kelly McLain 1063 S Capitol Way, Ste 106 Review Team PO Box 42560 Olympia, WA 98504 8343 1011 Plum St SE Olympia, WA 98504 S�ep��dah{�.wa,�t�v Olympia, WA 98504-3172 Itrnp9a�r{ . j AE.W"per+ reviewteamAccommerce.wa.eo_v Department of Ecology Department of Ecology Department of Fish and Wildlife Annie Szvetecz, SEPA Policy Lead Gwen Clear, Regional Coordinator Eric Bartrand P.O. Box 47703 1250 West Alder Street 1701 South 24th Ave Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WA 98902 5 aare8isteri ey y Union Gap, WAYakima, 98903 9 @gc-y {e dfw. se 61! ec ,wa ov {orimwhit _ :e cy.wa. p crosepacoordin a Aqy ric,B 1 r,� nrtra wa, y Department of Fish and Wildlife Department of Health Department of Natural Resources SEPA Desk Kelly Cooper SEPA Center PO Box 43200 PO Box 47820 PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98504 EPAdesk dfw..wa,gov. Kill .coo er dtgh w „ftorae acent r�dnr.wa,Rov Department of Social & Health Services Robert Hubenthal Environmental Protection Agency Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council -EFSEC Stephen Posner, SEPA Officer Office of Capital Programs NEPA Review Unit PO Box 43172 P.O. Box 45848 1200 6th Ave #155 Olympia, WA 98504 3172 Olympia, Seattle, WA 98101 Robert Ma bgrha &ihw %q, g — s osn#wr utc.w Engineering Division Bob Desgrosellier Federal Aviation Administration Governor's Office of Indian Affairs 129 N 2nd Street 2200 W. Washington Ave PO Box 40909 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 bob e%Lq�se83 re r kGr a a&qy Nob Hill Water Association Office of Rural and Farm Worker Housing Bob Irving, Engineering Technician Marty Miller Pacific Power 6111 Tieton Drive 1400 Summitview Ave, Ste# 203 Mike Paulson Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98902 500 North h K K Keys Rd o� a n,gb11iRw—ater.gtg� Martym2@orfh.ora Yakima, 98901 Parks & Recreation Commission Jessica Logan Soil Conservation District Trolleys PO Box 42560 Ray Wondercheck Paul Edmondson Olympia, WA 98504 1606 Perry Street, Ste. F 313 North 3rd Street ,N�ssk„10g��r�.�!.Aa�rk� +4Wgt�; Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 United States Postal Service US Army Corps of Engineers Maintenance Department Seattle District, Regulatory Branch WA State Attorney General's Office 205 W Washington Ave P.O. Box 3755 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste#102 Yakima, WA 98903 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Yakima, WA 9890"4) . flewadiace.army' ruiwl N M 's ....m WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water Wastewater Division West Valley School District Jamie Gardipe Marc Cawley or Dana Kallevig Angela Watts, Asst. Supt. Of Business & 16201 E Indiana Ave, Ste# 1500 2220 East Viola Ave Operations Spokane valley, WA 99216 Yakima, WA 98901 8902 Zier Road St PA rev,iewte rip aJ�d i wa„ga rnarc caw9ey.@,yaki m a�NLa Yakima, WA 98908-9299 armuie ardi seC Joh wL„ uav rana.kal9 v "a errma va gay wattsa@wvsd2rwti�8.gT WSDOT WSDOT, Aviation Division Paul Gonseth, Planning Engineer WSDOT Patrick Wright 2809 Rudkin Road South Central Regionl Planning Office 7702 Terminal St SW Union Gap, WA 98903 SC lannonR wsdot,,wa�Rov; Tumwater, WA 98501 gqnstm� _A_ tt.,g�av, tri htP wsdo�crv, Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Yakama Nation Environmental Mgmt Program Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries Project Rocco Clark, Environmental Coordinator Elizabeth Sanchey, Environmental Review John Marvin P.O. Box 632 Coordinator 760 Pence Road Toppenish, WA 98948 P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98909 RoccoAark biaAov ehey�arkaama ccwmq mrrbarvY)_ywakarna._com Yakima Air Terminal Yakima County Building Department Robert Peterson, Airport Asst Manager Harold Maclean 2400 West Washington Ave 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Yakima County Commissioners Yakima, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98901 CommGsssorrers.webco.yakirna;v us robq.ti.p L5. rtakirria Av gav;HaroldJNtc@patm�� kfrnra.wa.us Yakima County Health District �...........w _w .._.. Yakima Count Flood Control District ....................... Yakima County Planning Ryan Ibach, Director of Environmental Health Terry Keenhan & Dianna Woods Lynn Deitrick & Jason Earles 1210 Ahtanum Ridge Dr Ste#200 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor Union Gap, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 ybA@Sq.yLkJjma.wa.us TPtr�r^y. eu< han co.yj wjj l w1 .tasyr�r�.�LgLt lck c� akvrnl ,was myanmmi A hPco.yakima.wa us Dianna.Wo2dso c?.yAL1(! a ag.g.sumko ��r1�s�ct� yak6rrrsr raaa�u�;s Yakima County Public Services Yakima Greenway Foundation Yakama Indian Nation Lisa Freund, Public Services Director Kellie Connaughton, Executive Director Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources 128 North 2nd Street, 4th Floor 111 South 18th Street Program Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98901 P.O. Box 151 ak5 r 'urrrd� :t :y lr a�ww • as: kellie akinia reariway,,o,rt; Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakama Indian Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency Yakama Indian Nation Hasan Tahat, Compliance, Engineering & Yakima School District Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council Planning Division Supervisor Trevor Greene, Superintendent P.O. Box 151 186 Iron Horse Ct # 101 104 North 4th Ave Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 hasan@yrc,agr, ---------------- Yakima School District Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Yakima Valley Canal Co Scott Izutsu , Associate Superintendent Sandra Hull Robert Smoot 104 N 4th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 470 Camp 4 Rd 1640 Garretson Lane izua1su.sc'olt ya Mama chools.or Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 ...- Yakima Valley Conference of Governments �...... .......... ...._ Yakima Valley Museum Yakima Waste Systems Mike Shuttleworth, Planning Manager Peter Arnold, Executive Director Keith Kovalenko, District Manager 311 North 4th Street, Ste# 202 2105 Tieton Drive 2812 1/2 Terrace Heights Dr. Yakima WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 j! ik hutklev�Carth o vc;�,g_ r;,g �u��akir�naval ley iuSem�rm� �Jr�g Bmr hthktcawasteaonnection5. i r Ahtanum Irrigation District Cascade Natural Gas Century Link Beth Ann Brulotte, Executive Assistant 8113 W Grandridge Blvd Manager 10705-B Gilbert Road Kennewick, WA 99336 8 South 2nd Ave, Rm#304 Yakima, WA 98903 Yakima, WA 98902 Charter Communications City of Union Gap Department of Agriculture Kevin Chilcote Dennis Henne, Development Director Kelly McLain 1005 North 16th Ave P.O. Box 3008 P.O. Box 42560 Yakima, WA 98902 Union Gap, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 Environmental Protection Agency NEPA Review Unit Federal Aviation Administration Governor's Office of Indian Affairs 1200 6th Ave #155 2200 W. Washington Ave PO Box 40909 Seattle, WA 98101 Yakima, WA 98903 Olympia, WA 98504 Pacific Power Soil Conservation District Trolleys Mike Paulson Ray Wondercheck Paul Edmondson 500 North Keys Rd 1606 Perry Street, Ste. F 313 North 3rd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98901 United States Postal Service US Army Corps of Engineers Maintenance Deptartment Seattle District WA State Attorney General's Office 205 W Washington Ave Regulatory Branch 1433 Lakeside Court, Ste# 102 Yakima, WA 98903 P.O. Box 3755 Yakima, WA 98902 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs Yakama Indian Nation Yakama Indian Nation Superintendent Johnson Meninick, Cultural Resources Ruth Jim, Yakima Tribal Council P.O. Box 632 Program P.O. Box 151 To enish, WA 98948 pp P.O. Box 151 To ppenish, WA 98948 Toppenish, WA 98948 Yakima School District Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Yakima Valley Canal Co Trevor Greene, Superintendent Sandra Hull Robert Smoot 104 North 4th Ave 470 Camp 4 Rd 1640 Garretson Lane Yakima, WA 98902 Yakima, WA 98908 Yakima, WA 98908 \\Apollo\Shared\Planning\Assignments-Planning\LABELS and FORMS\SEPA REVIEWING AGENCIES _updated 07.03.19 -Form List.docx Type of Notice: 4' File Number: 4014 1 1 Date of Mailing: �a Outside Distribution Revised 02/2019 Name Address _. . _____..__. Included _..___._ _._6 In Mailing? Pacific Power Attn: EstimatingDepartment e_ Yes...._...... p t 500 N Keys Rd, Yakima, WA 98901 ❑ No (Subdivision notices ONLY) Type of Notice: _. File Number(s): Date of Mailing: [10(.111C. INDEX In -House Distribution E-mail List Revised 09/2019 Name .. ... Division . E-mail Address Caroh y n Belles es Code Administration ion ("sr«,9,yo lJolq..rryalasttav±.aov Glenn Denman Code Administration is„geat.Ir Ieiun)aim(ciyali,lriawa.gov _John Zabell �................ C �. ode Administration ��.... Johnn abell@),yakaan a v a ga.ly Kelli Ho.. rton Code Administration m....""K--,clli m ................ l Norte al ri yak ma%ya g y ......._���....._ Linda Rossignol ....... �.. ............ Code Administration _.�.. a .... I oiI ,zi.,l ws)sagrlol(wryak,arl�awa,:gpy Pedro Contreras Code Administration _ I'qd o�,C aaa1(lormaS�,i,�iyakgoiuiawa, g<�y Suzanne DeBusschere Code Ad � ministration Suzanne.Debusschere�yakam,,,awa.gov_ Vick DeOchoa Code Administration Vlilck ,I)e()claoa(C�?,y akiiiiawa gary Joan Davenport ..... �..�_ Community Development Joan. Davenport(a yakimawa.goy Rosalind a Ibarra Community Development lo�aa�,;tla�(Yea„[b�,ataa��)r�,l��)�¢�tva��� gov° Bob Desgrosellier Engineeringl3oh .............m....... Iia,sga°tasellacrttyakaar)wiwga: gape Dan Riddle �..... � ..._ ........ Engineering ....,,,, m _...���.... Dan 1� id lle(q yakjanavy4._gpy Tyler Witthuhn Engineering 1 yirr,+ oltl)tpda)ya�i,m wa gtaaa Aaron Markham Fire Aaron in ukhani@ya uprra.wa goy Pat Reid Fire'xt Iepwllya,kir�awu;a.gcJv Jeff ___........ ....... Legal w.,v.......... _.................... ..�.�.�.� ....� Sara Watkins mm ��_......., Legal __n...__�•__ Sara ' tkioi,s@jy4jSj r awa go,,,v Archie Matthews ONDS Archil e.I lttlaoww@),yalkaari ava,a..gca; Joseph Calhoun p Planning g Jomc r I a a» �aq„I„Ira�7alr�yalaaplu�m^wwa,g��r Lisa Maxey ..... Planning 1 es a.u�l�seydayElkatir�wya,gcty �...... Matt Murray Police Matthew.murrayyakimaw,,,a,,goy Scott Schafer Public Works Scott Schal"cr(iyakin� awa i„wiy Loretta Zammarchi � ......... Refuse to lanrorts�aryhari%y,lgct�aavya.lw Rand Y Layman ,_Refuse 1(ava,rly,.1 yu��rr�a�lc�lyakini, . g. Gregory Gre or Story Transit ------------ ----------- Ciw pySwry�ya1d'1mWag Kp�ry James Dean Utilities Jrd9 Sa azi T tak@6�0.r4iV�4 gw Dana Kallevig _.._. __...... ..... ...._ Wastewater ��� _..... l �ana.KalI vig(wr;yakaacsawa.gov Randy Meloy � � Wastewater R ndy s cloy!, y,akinxaawgoy ave Brown ......—............ Water/Irrigation 15avid J3row n((i)yakirnawa gov Mike Shane _ ................w Water/Irrigationiiq�r_ _........ _ .. .....w� �"whait, cataa))a Mwa.go Outside Distribution Revised 02/2019 Name Address _. . _____..__. Included _..___._ _._6 In Mailing? Pacific Power Attn: EstimatingDepartment e_ Yes...._...... p t 500 N Keys Rd, Yakima, WA 98901 ❑ No (Subdivision notices ONLY) Type of Notice: _. File Number(s): Date of Mailing: [10(.111C. INDEX Maxe , Lisa From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2019 11:36 AM To: Belles, Carolyn; Brown, David; Calhoun, Joseph; Contreras, Pedro; Cutter, Jeff; Davenport, Joan; Dean, James; DeBusschere, Suzanne; Denman, Glenn; DeOchoa, Vick; Desgrosellier, Bob; Horton, Kelli; Ibarra, Rosalinda; Kallevig, Dana; Layman, Randy; Markham, Aaron; Matthews, Archie; Meloy, Randy; Murray, Matthew; Reid, Patrick; Riddle, Dan; Rossignol, Linda; Schafer, Scott; Shane, Mike; Story, Gregory; Watkins, Sara; Witthuhn, Tyler; Zabell, John; Zammarchi, Loretta; 'Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte'; Cawley, Marc; 'Chamber of Commerce'; 'Department of Agriculture'; 'Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team'; 'Department of Ecology'; 'Department of Ecology - Lori White'; 'Department of Ecology - SEPA Register'; 'Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand'; 'Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes'; 'Department of Natural Resources'; 'Dept of Social & Health Svcs - Robert Hubenthal'; 'Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review'; 'Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner'; Henne, Dennis; 'Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving'; 'Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller'; Peterson, Robert; 'Scott Izutsu - Yakima School District'; 'Trevor Greene - Yakima School District'; 'US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore'; 'WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water'; 'WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water'; 'WA State Parks & Recreation Commission'; 'West Valley School District - Angela Watts'; 'WSDOT - Paul Gonseth'; 'WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office'; 'WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright'; 'Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark'; 'Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey'; 'Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin'; 'Yakima County Building Official - Harold Maclean'; 'Yakima County Commissioners'; 'Yakima County Flood Control District - Dianna Woods'; 'Yakima County Flood Control District - Terry Keenhan'; 'Yakima County Health District'; 'Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach'; 'Yakima County Planning - Zoning/Sub - Jason Earles'; 'Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick'; 'Yakima County Public Svcs Director, Lisa Freund'; 'Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton'; 'Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat'; 'Yakima Valley Conference of Governments - Mike Shuttleworth'; 'Yakima Valley Museum - Peter Arnold'; 'Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko'; Brown, Michael; Davido, Sean; 'EI Mundo'; 'EI Sol de Yakima'; Fannin, John; 'Hispanic Chamber of Commerce'; 'KAPP TV News'; 'KBBO-KRSE Radio - manager'; 'KDNA Noticias'; 'KDNA Radio - Francisco Rios'; 'KEPR TV News'; 'KIMA TV News'; 'KIT News'; 'KIT/KATS/DMVW/KFFM - Lance Tormey'; 'KNDO TV News'; 'KNDU TV News'; 'KUNW-TV Univision'; 'KVEW TV News'; 'La Casa Hogar'; 'La Voz'; Lozano, Bonnie; 'NWCN News'; 'NWPR - Anna King'; 'Randy Luvaas - Yakima Business Times'; 'RCDR - Maria DJ Rodriguez'; 'Reed C. Pell'; 'Tu Decides'; 'Tu Decides - Albert Torres'; 'Yakima Herald Republic - Mai Hoang'; 'Yakima Herald Republic Newspaper'; 'Yakima Valley Business Times'; Beehler, Randy; 'Al Rose'; 'Alfred A. Rose (silvrfx40 @bmi.net)'; 'Jacob Liddicoat'; 'Leanne Hughes -Mickel'; 'Philip Ostriem'; 'Rob McCormick'; 'William Cook (cook.w@charter.net)' Cc: Monick, Colleda Subject: RE: Notice of Application, SEPA & Public Hearing - Rainier Court Phases 2-4 - PLP# 003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Attachments: NOTICE OF APPLICATION, SEPA & HEARING -Rainier Ct Ph 2-4 - PLP#003-19 & 5 .... pdf Notice revised to indicate a public hearing time of 3:00 p.m. The corrected notice is attached. Thanks! 00C. 1 INDEX Lisa Maxey Planning Technician City of Yakima Planning Division p: 509.576.6669 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington, 98901 From: Maxey, Lisa Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2019 10:28 AM To: Belles, Carolyn <Carolyn.Belles@yakimawa.gov>; Brown, David <David.Brown @yakimawa.gov>; Calhoun, Joseph <Joseph.Calhoun@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Contreras, Pedro <Pedro.Contreras@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Cutter, Jeff <Jeff.Cutter@yakimawa.gov>; Davenport, Joan <Joan.Davenport@yakimawa.gov>; Dean, James <James.Dean@yakimawa.gov>; DeBusschere, Suzanne<suzanne.debusschere@yakimawa.gov>; Denman, Glenn <Glenn.Denman@yakimawa.gov>; DeOchoa, Vick <Vick. DeOchoa @YAKI MAWA.GOV>; Desgrosellier, Bob <Bob.Desgrosellier@yakimawa.gov>; Horton, Kelli <Kelli.Horton@yakimawa.gov>; Ibarra, Rosalinda <Rosalinda.lbarra@yakimawa.gov>; Kallevig, Dana <Dana.Kallevig@yakimawa.gov>; Layman, Randy <Randy.Layman @yakimawa.gov>; Markham, Aaron <aaron.markham@yakimawa.gov>; Matthews, Archie <Archie.Matthews @yakimawa.gov>; Maxey, Lisa <Lisa. Maxey@YAKI MAWA.GOV>; Meloy, Randy <Randy.Meloy@yakimawa.gov>; Murray, Matthew <matt.murray@yakimawa.gov>; Reid, Patrick <pat.reid@yakimawa.gov>; Riddle, Dan <Dan.Riddle@yakimawa.gov>; Rossignol, Linda <Linda.Rossignol@yakimawa.gov>; Schafer, Scott <Scott.Schafer@yakimawa.gov>; Shane, Mike <Mike.Shane@yakimawa.gov>; Story, Gregory <Gregory.Story@yakimawa.gov>; Watkins, Sara <Sara.Watkins@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Witthuhn, Tyler <Tyler.Witthuhn@yakimawa.gov>; Zabell, John <John.Zabell @yakimawa.gov>; Zammarchi, Loretta <Loretta.Zammarchi@YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Ahtanum Irrigation District - Beth Ann Brulotte <bethb@ahtanum.net>; Cawley, Marc <Marc.Cawley@yakimawa.gov>; Chamber of Commerce <chamber@yakima.org>; Department of Agriculture <kmclain@agr.wa.gov>; Department of Commerce (CTED) - Review Team <reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology <sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology - Lori White <lori.white@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology - SEPA Register <separegister@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Ecology -CRO Coordinator<crosepacoordinator@ecy.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife <SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Eric Bartrand <Eric. Bartra nd @dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Fish and Wildlife - Scott Downes <Scott.Downes@dfw.wa.gov>; Department of Natural Resources <sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov>; Dept of Social & Health Svcs - Robert Hubenthal <Robert.HubenthaI@dshs.wa.gov>; Dept. Archaeology & Historic Preservation - SEPA Review <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council - Stephen Posner <sposner@utc.wa.gov>; Henne, Dennis <Dennis.Hen ne@uniongapwa.gov>; Nob Hill Water - Bob Irving <bob@nobhillwater.org>; Office of Rural & Farmworker Housing - Marty Miller <martym@orfh.org>; Peterson, Robert <Rob.Peterson@yakimaairterminal.com>; Scott Izutsu - Yakima School District <izutsu.scott@yakimaschools.org>; Trevor Greene - Yakima School District<greene.trevor@yakimaschools.org>; US Army Corps of Engineers - David Moore <david.j.moore@usace.army.mil>; WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water <SEPA.reviewteam@doh.wa.gov>; WA State Dept of Health, Office of Drinking Water <jamie.gardipe@doh.wa.gov>; WA State Parks & Recreation Commission <jessica.logan@parks.wa.gov>; West Valley School District - Angela Watts <wattsa@wvsd208.org>; WSDOT - Paul Gonseth <Gonsetp@wsdot.wa.gov>; WSDOT - South Central Regional Planning Office <SCplanning@wsdot.wa.gov>; WSDOT Aviation - Patrick Wright <wright p@wsdot.wa.gov>; Yakama Bureau of Indian Affairs - Rocco Clark <rocco.clark@bia.gov>; Yakama Nation Environmental Management Program - Elizabeth Sanchey <esanchey@yakama.com>; Yakama-Klickitat Fisheries - John Marvin <jmarvin@yakama.com>; Yakima County Building Official - Harold Maclean <Harold.maclean@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Commissioners <commissioners.web@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Flood Control District - Dianna Woods <dianna.woods@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Flood Control District - Terry Keenhan <terry.keen han@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Health District <yhd@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Health District - Ryan Ibach <ryan.ibach@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Planning - Zoning/Sub -Jason Earles <jason.earles@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Planning Director - Lynn Deitrick<Lynn.Deitrick@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima County Public Svcs Director, Lisa Freund <lisa.freund@co.yakima.wa.us>; Yakima Greenway Foundation - Kellie Connaughton <Kellie@yakimagreenway.org>; Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency - Hasan Tahat <hasanjM,*.org>; Yakima Valley Conference of Govern_. nts - Mike Shuttleworth <mike.shuttlewo� _i@yvcog.org>; Yakima Valley Museum - Peter Arnold <peter@yakimavalleymuseum.org>; Yakima Waste Systems - Keith Kovalenko <keithk@wasteconnections.com>; Brown, Michael <Michae1.Brown @yakimawa.gov>; Davido, Sean <Sean.David o@yakimawa.gov>; El Mundo <info@elmundous.com>; EI Sol de Yakima <gibanez@yakimaherald.com>; Fannin, John <John.Fannin @YAKIMAWA.GOV>; Hispanic Chamber of Commerce<yakimahispanicchamber@rcdr.biz>; KAPP TV News <kappnews@kapptv.com>; KBBO-KRSE Radio - manager <kellyg@yakimaradiogroup.com>; KDNA Noticias <info@kdna.org>; KDNA Radio - Francisco Rios <frios@kdna.org>; KEPR TV News <newsroom@keprtv.com>; KIMA TV News <tips@kimatv.com>; KIT News <kitnews@townsquaremedia.com>; KIT/KATS/DMVW/KFFM - Lance Tormey <lancetormey@townsquaremedia.com>; KNDO TV News <news@kndo.com>; KNDU TV News <news@kndu.com>; KUNW-TV Univision <noticias@kunwtv.com>; KVEW TV News <kvewnews@kvewtv.com>; La Casa Hogar <info@lacasahogar.org>; La Voz <lavoznewspaper@gmail.com>; Lozano, Bonnie <Bonnie.Lozano@yakimawa.gov>; NWCN News <nwnews@nwcn.com>; NWPR - Anna King <aking@wsu.edu>; Randy Luvaas - Yakima Business Times <rluvaas@yvpub.com>; RCDR - Maria DJ Rodriguez <mdjrodriguez@rcdr.biz>; Reed C. Pell <reed@reedcpel1.net>; Tu Decides <info@tudecidesmedia.com>; Tu Decides - Albert Torres <albert@tudecidesmedia.com>; Yakima Herald Republic - Mai Hoang <maihoang@yakimaherald.com>; Yakima Herald Republic Newspaper <news@yakimaherald.com>; Yakima Valley Business Times <news@yvpub.com>; YPAC - Randy Beehler <rbeehler@ci.yakima.wa.us>; Al Rose <aar7040@gmail.com>; Alfred A. Rose (silvrfx40@bmi.net) <silvrfx40@bmi.net>; Jacob Liddicoat <jake@3dyakima.com>; Leanne Hughes -Mickel <leanne.mickel@me.com>; Philip Ostriem <Philipostriem@gmaii.com>; Rob McCormick <rob@mccormickaircenter.com>; William Cook (cook.w@charter.net) <cook.w@charter.net> Cc: Monick, Colleda <Colleda.Monick@YAKIMAWA.GOV> Subject: Notice of Application, SEPA & Public Hearing - Rainier Court Phases 2-4 - PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 Attached is a Notice of Application, SEPA Environmental Review, and Public Hearing regarding the above - entitled project. If you have any questions about this proposal, please contact assigned planner Colleda Monick at (509) 576-6772 or email to: colleda.monick(cD-yakimawa.gov. Thank you! Lisa Maxey Planning Technician City of Yakima Planning Division p: 509.576.6669 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington, 98901 nor me» WE TEILL YOUR STORIES - • • • • . This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please proof read notice carefully to check spelling and run dates, if you need to make changes Date: 12/17/19 Account #: 110358 Company Name: CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING Contact: ROSALINDA IBARRA,AP Address: 129 N 2ND STREET Stop: YAKIMA, WA 98901-2720 Telephone: (509) 575-6164 Fax: Account Rep: Simon Sizer Phone # (509) 577-7740 Email: ssizer@yakimaherald.com Ad ID: 924131 Start: 12/19/19 Stop: 12/19/19 Total Cost: $313.90 Lines: 172.0 # of Inserts: 1 Ad Class: 6021 Run Dates: Yakima Herald -Republic 12/19/19 CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, & PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 12/19/2019; FROM: Joan Davenport, AICP, Com- munity Development Director; APPLICANT': Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (404 S 51st. Ave. Yakima„ WA 98908); FILE. NUM- BER: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-119; LOCATION: Vtcfnify of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave.; TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S): 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009; DATE OF APPLICATION: 12/03/2019; DATE OF COMPLETENESS: 12/11/2019; PROJEDT-06-SCRIPTION Proposal to subdivide three parcels and'a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approxi- mately 26 acres into 79 single -family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. DETERMINA- 'j;j,O P" ST00 Pursuant to YMC § 16.06.020(A), tate project considerations are determined to be consistent with appffc:able development regulations, as foleows�� (1)The type of land use• Preliminary Long Plat for 79 single -family lots; (2) Level of Development: 79 single -family blots on 26 acres; Approx. 3 units/acre; (3) Infrastructure and public facilities: The subject property is able to be served by public streets, water garbage collection, etc.; and (4) Characteristics of development: 79 single -family homes on lots ranging from 7,839 Io 21,754 square feet. Pursuant to YMC § 16.0.8.020(6), the development regulations and comprehensive plan con- siderations are found to be consistent, as follows: ('1) The type of land use: Preliminary Long Plat for 79 single-fancily lots; (2) Density of Development: 3,03 dwelling units per net residen- tial acre; and (3) Availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public utilities: The subject property is able to be served by public facilities t T;I P QE..PNVI &.4 .p PUNTAL EL V1 This is to notify agencies with jurisdiction and environmental expertise and the public that the City of Yakima„ Planning Division„ bas been established as the lead agency, under WAC § 197-11.9P8 totthis project, The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse envi- ronmental impacts and expects to issue a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) per WAC § 197.11-355. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes and the project review process may incorporate or require mwt'iga- tion measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequentSEPA threshold determination will be mailed to parties of record and entities who were provided this notice and may be appealed pursuant to YMC § 6.88.170. Required Permits: The following local, stale, and federal permitsl&approvals may or will be needed for this project: Building Permit, Grading Permit, Critical Areas Permit, Traffic Concurrency; Required Studies: N/A; Existing Environ- mental Documents: None; Development Regulations for Project Mitigation and Consistency Include: the State Environmental Policy Act, the Yakima. Urban Area Zoning Ordinance„ YMC Title 12—Development Standards, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. REQUEST FOR WRjri OMfIII�.I1 ��(I® rf E,OF, P L1 _Hr==A 1NQ Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed project and its probable envi- ronmental impacts. There is a 20-day comment period for this review. This may be your only opportunity to comment. All written comments received by 5:00 p.m. on January 8, 2020, will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determina- tion. This request requires that the Planning Commission hold an open record public hearing, which is scheduled for February 12, 2020 at 9:00 a.m., in the City of Yakima Coun- cil Chambers, City Hall, 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA. Any person desiring to express their views on the matter is invited to attend the hearing to provide testimony. Please reference the numbers (PLP# 003-19, SEPA 11104 I-t9) and applicant's name (Columbia Ridge Homes) in any correspond you submit. You can mail your comments to: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director, City of Yakima, Department of Community Development, 129 N. 2nd St.; Yakima, WA 98901 (,f 7; ; i yq,Pp.PN) _A_TMN Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission will issue its recommendation to the City Council within ten (10) business days. When available, a copy of the recommenda- tion will be mailed to parties of record and entities who were provided this notice once it is rendered. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, City Hall –2nd Ftoor, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington. If you have questions regarding this proposal please call Colleda Monick, Commu- nity Development Specialist, at (509) 576-6772, or email to: t�.�ttlledxt ms���t�b�"a^�V�n>�a+�a gqy (924131) December 19, 2019 Courtesy of Yakima Herald -Republic '` D ®® ®"- r i IIIl1r�...... ,,,,,. . ®® , it I�IICIi ®..® Vi Iv,l �W� II CITY OF YAKIMA NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, & PUBLIC HEARING n. This !`OqUeSt reqUff0S that the Planning Commission ld an open reco d bltAei ng, which is scheduled for, F bruary12,2020a 9:00a.m. In the City of Yakima Coun- Chambers, City I -Ila A -Ind St., Yakima, WA. Any rson desiring to express their views on the matter is invited 12 business clays, When avallable,'a copy of the recornmendii lion will be malted to partles W record and entities who wore r3rovidod thiq nnfinr4 onnn it it rnnr1PrPrFThia ffln,r,nnfraininm regarding'this proposal, ,Tease call Cofleda Monick,'Corrimu niWital WWAMUIMM11140. ilv. J"q WWV­J*MT­Rq* I 1-z' ......... nity Development Specialist, at (509) 576-6772, or email to: Project Mh1gation and C011ole tency Include the SWO, ordinance,Standard , (924131) December 19, 2019 Yaldma Urban Area Cornr)rohensive Plan. R FOR ? �4 M2 PANE iee7ST-707 73 WE TELL YOUR STORIES YAKIMAHERALD.COM El S01 de Yakima -Ad Proof - This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please confirm placement prior to deadline, by contacting your account rep at (509) 577-7740. Date: 12/19/19 Account #: 110358 Company Name: CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING Contact: ROSALINDA IBARRA,AP Address: 129 N 2ND STREET Account Rep: YAKIMA, WA 98901-2720 Telephone: (509)575-6164 Fax: ssizerayakimaherald.com Start: 12/23/19 Stop: 12/23/19 Total Cost: $113.15 # of Inserts: 2 Lines: 61.0 Ad Class: 6021 Ad Class Name: Public Legal Notices Account Rep: Simon Sizer Phone # (509) 577-7740 Email: ssizerayakimaherald.com Run Dates: Yakima Herald -Republic 12/23/19 YakimaHerald.com 12/23/19 Ad Proof CITY OF YAKIMA "CORRECTED" NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVI- RONMENTAL REVIEW, & PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 12/23/2019; FROM: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director; APPLICANT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (404 S 51st Ave, Yakima, WA 98908); FILE NUMBER: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041- 19; LOCATION: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summit - view Ave.; TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S): 181319- 21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009; DATE OF APPLICA- TION: 12/03/2019; DATE OF COMPLETENESS: 12/11/2019; PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. COR- RECTED,NOTICE OF PUB- LIC HEARING This request requires that the Planning Commission hold an open record public hearing, which is scheduled for February 12, 2020 at 3:00 p.m., in the City of Yakima Council Chambers, City Hall, 129 N. 2nd St.., Yakima, WA. Any person desiring to express their views on the matter is invited to attend the hearing to provide testimony. Please reference file numbers (PLP#003-19, SEPA#041- 19) and applicant's name (Columbia Ridge Homes) in any correspondence you submit, You can mail your comments to: Joan Dav- enport, AICP, Community Development Director, City of Yakima, Department of Community Development, 129 N. 2nd St.; Yakima, WA 98901. (924701) December 23, 2019 j b I c JL ei` " " ", I i , gz ntircic , " CITY OF YAKIMA *CORRECTED* NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVI- RONMENTAL REVIEW, & PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 12/23/201,9; FROM: Joan Davenport, AlCP, Community Development Director; APPLICANT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (404 S 51st Ave, Yakima, WA 98908); FILE NUMBER: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041- 19; LOCATION: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summit - view Ave.; TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S): 181319- 21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009; DATE OF APPLICA- TION: 12/03/2019; DATE OF COMPLETENESS: 12/11/2019; PROJECT RES -CMP -TION, Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "N'to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. COR'- LIC OR- LIC HEARING This request requires that the Planning Commission hold an open record public hearing, which is sobodulKI for February 12, 2020,at 3;QUjn,, In the City of Yakima Council Chambers, City Hall, 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA. Any person desiring to express their views on the matter is invited to attend the hearing to provide testimony. Please referprice the numbers (PLP#003-19, SEPA#041- 19) and applicant's name (Columbia Ridge Homes) in any correspondence you submit. You can mail your comments to: Joan Dav- enport, AIC!P, Community Development Director, City of Yakima, Department of Community Development, 129 N. 2nd St.; Yakima, WA 98901.1 (924701) December 23, 2019 DEPA nTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPM. ENT O e % Vk Joan . venport, AICP, Director Ars, M III IL%Nl Planning Division cb Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning NOTICE OF APPLICATION, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, & PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 19, 2019 TO: SEPA Reviewing Agencies, Applicant, and Adjoining Property Owners FROM: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director APPLICANT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (404 S 51 st Ave, Yakima, WA 98908) FILE NUMBER: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 LOCATION: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave. TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S): 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 DATE OF APPLICATION: December 3, 2019 DATE OF COMPLETENESS: December 11, 2019 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposal to subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26 acres into 79 single-family residential lots in the R-1 zoning district. The proposed plat includes a Tract "A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase. DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY Pursuant to YMC § 16.06.020(A), the project considerations are determined to be consistent with applicable development regulations, as follows: 1. The type of land use: Preliminary Long Plat for 79 single-family lots 2. Level of Development: 79 single-family lots on 26 acres; Approx. 3 units/acre 3. Infrastructure and public facilities: The subject property is able to be served by public streets, water garbage collection, etc. 4. Characteristics of development: 79 single-family homes on lots ranging from 7,839 to 21,754 square feet. Pursuant to YMC § 16.06.020(B), the development regulations and comprehensive plan considerations are found to be consistent, as follows: 1. The type of land use: Preliminary Long Plat for 79 single-family lots. 2, Density of Development: 3.03 dwelling units per net residential acre 3. Availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public utilities: The subject property is able to be served by public facilities. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is to notify agencies with jurisdiction and environmental expertise and the public that the City of Yakima, Planning Division, has been established as the lead agency, under WAC § 197-11-928 for this project. The City of Yakima has reviewed the proposed project for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) per WAC § 197-11-355. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared. A copy of the subsequent SEPA threshold determination will be mailed to parties of record and entities who were provided this notice and may be appealed pursuant to YMC § 6.88.170. Required Permits: The following local, state, and federal permits/approvals may or will be needed for this project: Building Permit, Grading Permit, Critical Areas Permit, Traffic Concurrency Required Studies: N/A Existing Environmental Documents: None Development Regulations for Project Mitigation and Consistency Include: the State Environmental Policy Act, the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, YMC Title 12—Development Standards, and the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. REQUEST FOR WRITTEN COMMENT AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Agencies, tribes, and the public are encouraged to review and comment on the proposed project and its probable environmental Yakima r � 2015 1994 impacts. There is a 20 -day comment period for this review. This may be your only opportunity to comment. All written comments received by 5:00 p.m. on January 8, 2020, will be considered prior to issuing the final SEPA determination. This request requires that the Planning Commission hold an open record public hearing, which is scheduled for February 12, 2020 at 3:00 p.m., in the City of Yakima Council Chambers, City Hall, 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA. Any person desiring to express their views on the matter is invited to attend the hearing to provide testimony. Please reference file numbers (PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19) and applicant's name (Columbia Ridge Homes) in any correspondence you submit. You can mail your comments to: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N. 2nd St.; Yakima, WA 98901 NOTICE OF RECOMMENDATION Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission will issue its recommendation to the City Council within ten (10) business days. When available, a copy of the recommendation will be mailed to parties of record and entities who were provided this notice once it is rendered. The file containing the complete application is available for public review at the City of Yakima Planning Division, City Hall — 2nd Floor, 129 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington. If you have questions regarding this proposal, please call Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist, at (509) 576-6772, or email to: coll.Oa,rgoni k@ a rawa.ov. Enclosed: Narratives, Project Descriptions, SEPA Checklist, Site Plan, and Vicinity Map 1-1101C. Igo. DEPA-' ,TMENTO DE DESARROLLO COMF`tITARIO Joan . venport, AICP, Directora Division de Planificaci6n Joseph Calhoun, Gerente r o r w 129 Norte Calle 2a, 2° Piso, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov v�� Lv y IC In +Mv ga � cryia esdla� �� ttlg AVISO DE APLICACION, REVISION AMBIENTAL, Y AUDIENCIA PUBLICA EI Departamento de Desarrollo Comunitario de la Ciudad de Yakima ha recibido una aplicaci6n por parte de un pro pietario/solicitante y este es un aviso sobre esa solicitud. Informaci6n sobre la ubicaci6n de la propiedad en cuesti6n y la solicitud es la siguiente: FECHA OTORGADA: 19 de diciembre, 2019 PARA: Agencias de Revisi6n Ambiental, Solicitante y Propietarios Adyacentes DE: Joan Davenport, AICP, Directora de Desarrollo Comunitario SOLICITANTE: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC (404 S 51 st Ave, Yakima, WA 98908) No. DE ARCHIVO: PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 UBICACION: Vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave No. DE PARCELA(S): 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, & -24009 FECHA DE APLICACION: 3 de diciembre, 2019 FECHA DE APLICAC16N COMPLETA: 11 de diciembre, 2019 DESCRIPCION DEL PROYECTO: Propuesta para subdividir tres parcelas y una porci6n de una cuarta parcela, total de aproximadamente 26 acres, en 79 lotes de vivienda unifamiliar en la zona residencial R- 1. La subdivisi6n propuesta incluye "Tracto A" que se subdividira y desarrollara en una fase futura. DETERMINACION CIE LA CONSISTENCIA Conforme al C6digo Municipal YMC §16.06.020(A), las consideraciones del proyecto se determinan consistentes a las siguientes normas aplicables: 1. EI tipo de use terrenal: Subdivisi6n Preliminar para 79 lotes residenciales de vivienda unifamiliares 2. Nivel de desarrollo: 79 lotes residenciales unifamiliares en 26 acres; aprox. 3 unidades/acre 3. Infraestructura a instalaciones publicas: La propiedad en cuesti6n puede ser servida por calles publicas, agua, drenaje, recolecci6n de basura, etc... 4. Caracteristicas del desarrollo: 79 viviendas unifamiliares en lotes que miden desde 7,839 a 21,754 pies cuadrados. Conforme al C6digo Municipal YMC §16.06.020(8), los reglamentos de desarrollo y las consideraciones del plan comprehensivo son coherentes, de la siguiente manera: 1. EI tipo del use terrenal: Subdivisi6n Preliminar para 79 lotes residenciales de vivienda unifamiliares 2. Densidad del desarrollo: 3.03 unidades de vivienda por acre residencial 3. Disponibilidad y adecuaci6n de infraestructura y servicios publicos: La propiedad en cuesti6n puede ser servida por instalaciones publicas. AVISO DE REVISION AMBIENTAL: Esto es para notificar a las agencias con jurisdicci6n y experiencia ambiental y al publico que la Ciudad de Yakima, Division de Planificaci6n, se establece como la agencia principal, de acuerdo con la Ley Estatal de Politica Ambiental de Washington (SEPA) bajo WAC §197-11-928 para la revision de este proyecto. La Ciudad de Yakima ha revisado el proyecto propuesto para posibles impactos ambientales adversos y espera emitir una Determinaci6n de No-Significancia (DNS) para este proyecto conforme al proceso DNS opcional en WAC § 197-11-355. La propuesta puede incluir medidas de mitigaci6n bajo los c6digos aplicables y el proceso de revisi6n del proyecto puede incorporar o requerir medidas de mitigaci6n in depend ientemente de si se prepara un EIS (Declaraci6n de Impacto Ambiental). Una copia de la determinaci6n de umbral posterior se enviara a las personas y agencias que comentaron y que recibieron este aviso, y se puede apelar de acuerdo con el C6digo Municipal de Yakima YMC § 6.88.170. Permisos Requeridos: Los siguientes permisos/aprobaciones locales, estatales, y federales pueden o seran necesarios para este proyecto: Permiso de Construcci6n, Permiso de Nivelaci6n Terrenal, Permiso de Areas Criticas, Concurrencia de Trafico Estudios Requeridos: N/A Documentos Ambientales Existentes: Ninguno 00C. Yakima , j aw�:�015 2 2015 3.— 1444 Los Reglamentos de Desarrollo para la Mitigaci6n y Consistencia de Proyectos Incluyen: La Ley Estatal de Politica Ambiental de Washington, La Ordenanza de Zonificaci6n del Area Urbana de Yakima, Los Estandares de Desarrollo del Titulo 12, y el Plan Integral del Area Urbana de Yakima. SOLICITUD DE COMENTARIOS ESCRITOS Y AVISO DE AUDIENCIA PUBLICA: Se anima a las agencias, tribus, y el publico a revisar y comentar sobre el proyecto y sobre sus probables impactos ambientales. Habra un periodo de veinte dias para hacer sus comentarios. Este podria ser su unica oportunidad para comentar. Todos los comentarios recibidos por escrito antes de las 5:00 p.m. el 8 de enero, 2020 seran considerados antes de emitir la decisi6n final sobre esta solicitud. Esta propuesta requiere una audiencia publica con registro abierto con la Comisi6n de Planificaci6n. Por to tanto, una audiencia publica se Ilevara a cabo el 12 de febrero, 2020 comenzando a las 3:00 p.m. en el Ayuntamiento de la Ciudad de Yakima ubicado en el 129 N 2nd Street, Yakima, WA. Se le invita a cualquier persona que desee expresar sus opiniones sobre este caso a asistir a la audiencia publica o a presentar comentarios por escrito. Por favor de hacer referencia al numero de archivo (PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19, TCO#010- 19) o al nombre del solicitante (Columbia Ridge Homes) en cualquier correspondencia que envi6. Por favor de enviar sus comentarios sobre esta propuesta a: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director City of Yakima, Department of Community Development 129 N. 2nd St., Yakima, WA 98901 AVISO DE LA DECISION/RECOMENDACION FINAL: Despues de la audiencia publica, el Examinador de Audiencias emitira su decisi6n o recomendaci6n dentro de diez (10) dias habiles. Cuando la decisi6n final sea emitida, una Copia sera enviada a las personas que mandaron comentarios o que recibieron este aviso. EI archivo que contiene la aplicaci6n completa esta disponible para inspecci6n publica en la Oficina de Planificaci6n de la Ciudad de Yakima en el 129 al Norte la Calle 2da, Yakima, WA. Si tiene cualquier pregunta sobre esta propuesta, puede contactar a la Oficina de Planificaci6n al (509) 575-6183 o por correo electr6nico al: askaskplan ning@yaki na!A+aMv Adjuntes: Narrativo, Descripci6n del Proyecto, Lista de SEPA, Plan de Sitio, Mapa AWOM Ilk% CITY OF YAKIMA pri(w lJt CITY Of 'YAKIMA LAND USE ACTION INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE PLANNM 1 cess: Date. of Posting:. Land Use Sign ID#(s)• Location of Installation (Check One): Land Use Action Sign is installed per standards described in YMC §15.11.080(C). Land Use Action Sign is installed in an alternate location on the site. Note: this alternate location (if not pre -approved by the Planning Manager) may not be acceptable by the Planning Division and is subject to relocation (at the owner's expense) to a more visible site on the property. The alternative location is: The required notice of application will be sent to the applicant and property owners within a 300 -foot radius after the Planning Division has received this Land Use Action Installation Certification. Failure to post a Land Use Action sign and return this form signed in a timely manner may cause a delay in the application review process. I hereby testify that the installed sign fully complies with the Land Use Action sign installation standards (see pg. 2), that the sign will be maintained until a decision has been rendered, and that the sign will be returned within 30 days from the date the rinal decision is issued. pplicant's Signature Date -� - �_411 i J_ �_..... ..................... _(50<0 i Applicant's Name (Please Print) Applicant's Phone Number Please fill out and sign the above certification after posting and deliver to the City of Yakima Planning Division via email to ask.planning@yakimawa.gov or in person/by mail to: City of Yakima, Planning Division, 129 North 21' ,.� Street, Yakima, WA 98901. Page - 1 Revised 04/2019 Sw1k REtz JIREMENTS FOR POSTING OF PRIV rE PROPERTY FOR LAND USE ACTION d, �1� City of Yakima Community Development Department, Planning Division 129 N 211 St, Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 575-6183 as,k,.pNanrl;irl„g �yakir t ry oy GENERAL INFORMATION The Land Use Action posted signage shall serve as a method of notification to the public that a land use application has been submitted to the City for a proposed change to the property. The Land Use Action sign shall be known in this section as the "sign” referred to in YMC § 15.11.080(C) as the official signage for application of the following land use matters: o Class 3 Public Hearings; o Preliminary Long Subdivisions; o Rezones; o Right -of -Way Vacations; o Appeals; o Interpretation (if required) o Comprehensive Plan Amendments as indicated in YMC Ch. 16.10; o Environmental Review, except for a categorically exempt application; and, o Annexation of property by the City. For the above land use matters it is required to post one sign and in some cases more than one sign on the site or in a location immediately adjacent to the site that provides visibility to motorists using adjacent streets. The Planning Manager has established standards for size, color, layout, design, and wording of the signs which the Planning Division will supply to the applicant. The Planning Division sends a reminder to the applicant and/or property owner via an insert in the notice of decision mailing to remove the land use action sign(s) and return them to the Planning Division after the appeal period has lapsed. SIGNAGE INSTALLATION The applicant shall install the Land Use Action sign(s) in accordance with these provisions: o Signs shall be located at the midpoint on the street frontage from which the site is addressed or as otherwise directed by the Planning staff; o Signs shall be located 10 feet back from the property line; o Signs structurally attached to an existing building shall be exempt from the setback requirement, provided that no sign is located further than 10 feet from the property line without written approval from Planning staff, o The top of the signs shall be positioned between 5 and 6 feet above grade; o Signs shall be posted on the subject property so as to be clearly seen from each right-of-way providing primary vehicular access to the subject property as stated in YMC §I5.11.080(C); and o The sign can be easily read from the adjacent street and/or sidewalk. Page — 2 Revised 04/2019 l C DEP. TMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELt ✓TENT Joan Davenport, AICP, Director � �TY O �"C�KIMA. Planning Division Joseph Calhoun, Manager 129 North Second Street, 2nd Floor, Yakima, WA 98901 ask.planning@yakimawa.gov • www.yakimawa.gov/services/planning December 11, 2019 FILE NUMBERS: PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19, TCO#010-19 APPLICANT: Columbia Ridge Homes LLC c/o Justin Hellem APPLICANT ADDRESS: 404 S 51 It Ave., Yakima, WA 98908 PROJECT LOCATION: N 92nd Ave. & Summitview Ave. TAX PARCEL NO: 181319-21003, -22005, -23402 & -24009 DATE OF REQUEST: December 3, 2019 SUBJECT: Notice of Complete Application and Request for Additional Information Mr. Hellem; The application for your Preliminary Long Plat, Environmental Review, and Transportation Concurrency for the vicinity of N 92nd Ave & Summitview Ave. was received on December 3, 2019. As of December 11, 2019, your application is considered complete as required by the City of Yakima's Municipal Code (YMC) and site plan checklist, as referenced in YMC § 14.20.030. However, additional information is being requested for processing. Please submit a full scale Preliminary Plat. Finally, a land use action sign needs to be posted at the site. Please come to the Planning Division at your earliest convenience to pick up the sign and Land Use Installation Certificate. Please return the requested information to the Planning Division by December 26, 2019, two weeks from today. Once the additional information is received, along with the completed and signed Land Use Installation Certificate, the application will continue to be set up for public notice. If you have any questions regarding this matter please call me at (509) 576-6772. Sincerely, Colleda Monick Community Development Specialist Yakima 2015 1994 COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHA.;PTER I Supplemental Information PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4 IN THE NW 1/4 SEC, 19, T-13 N, R-18 E,WM T A LE.L oEAL« .­ XZ111111�rml ZZ �r Y �l7 Y A�l t I sa cwm: was weew unou wo,ae ric xo +a e� umus r r.wA .., IM1C VIVUA v: P11, LIT 41 ra m„ J Nk N T r5 TYICAE IN TERIOR ROADWAY SECTION I. � �t�i�i SITE � �,) I i J aPll'�!a IC t,1AP__ ab I Ir �bIIY �l'I I,. NOTES ICT 11 �YpJ�ppp�l�n1pp�1�r¢,i, Ngbwu'MA�P,4WRYmNT�MeJ1�ltl{ ; ­ N.ka y nai a v a o s 71,11T LAT rnnsmc li P x I � PHASEMRu ss am nxs oASE3 Uzi —3 jf -1 11 Mw s3 iG9 f� HASE -0 OWNER/DEVEL i �r Y 1 ssa irw �a NO en /� T Np DDIEO THIS MINARY AT J all � �, .(�� n :".amu' Ip1N�/ i'. 2LT VJ 9 //(lll�//!/l0/O d b /. L(;. {� 6I� �%/�11�/101�JILGY' //1z._L'�.�JY _ ..:.:: -{,n - I c J l ���� '""���� """ ""` �" S�tMMITYIHW 'wYENU6 � + xcTr� oazoe I PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RAINIER COURT - PHASES Z, 3 & 4 IN THE NW 1/4, SEC. 19, T-13 N, R-18 E,WM nit � •1Yr TYPICAL INTERIOfl ROADWAY SECTION I A III i. -r i JA, i fl\ ictly NOTES � �� hb9W�dPW %,,r �/ Jyv Fh mfi , •� --I4� �� � �I, T *wnwo.9 toxo. *o c n a. r2wma m � 5 IAT PHASING IEER/SURVE— .,... PHAGE iSxu A 11 ER 6Y E PHAp 5 (NOT INCLUDED IT H9 REI—Of x sx�xa COLUMBIA RIDGE HOMES LLC — "RAINIER COURT — PHASES 2, 3 & 4" PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER J Exhibits Submitted At or After Public Hearing PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RAINIER COURT - PHASES icy 3 & 4 IN THE NW 1/4, SEC. 19, T-13 N, R-18 E,WM FED 19 Z02o CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV, Z' 11.1.1 7, -T I—— J —E 2 E-NEER/-VEYOR -1Z T ".T T 9 j PHASE TMi -T 'T 'n:lE-lNAlY ILATI V — ---------rs- "i"iFi'v, TRA�iCt",'"'A"', TRIO j 1I XMI, f,j I I Y 6114 IA ­ I. 11 L l FED 19 Z02o CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING DIV, Z' 11.1.1 7, -T I—— J —E 2 E-NEER/-VEYOR -1Z T ".T T 9 j PHASE TMi -T 'T 'n:lE-lNAlY ILATI V — ---------rs- "i"iFi'v, IMP L B A ENGINEERING & SURVEYING SCOTT D. GARLAND, P.E. ROBERT J. SCOTT, P.E. RICHARD L. WEHR, PLS JOSEPH W. BAKER, PLS THOMAS R. DURANT, PLANNING February 12, 2020 RECEIVED Yakima Planning Commission FEB 12 2020 c/o Colleda Monick r OF YAMwm Yakima Department of Community Development PLANNING DIV. 129 N. 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Rainier Court Phases 2, 3 & 4 Preliminary Plat; staff recommended changes Dear Commissioners: As requested by staff, the preliminary plat has been revised to provide a public street connection to the unopened right-of-way north of the site allowing for the rest of the unopened right-of-way for 92nd Avenue to be vacated. This is to address a concern raised by City Legal staff and included in the staff report as condition `10' which does not allow a private road to be the sole access to a public road (or in this case, public right-of-way). As revised, Lincoln Avenue would be extended west to connect to the right-of-way on the north property line, allowing for continuous public access to the properties to the north. Condition `1' in the staff report would need to be revised, because as proposed, there is no need to use the right-of-way being vacated for access. The following are the effects of the revisions on the preliminary plat and other changes that have been made as recommended by staff. It also describes minor deviations from the preliminary plat that may occur in part to address specific design considerations. 1. Lincoln Avenue is a Phase 3 improvement. So, the right-of-way vacation of the northern- most portion of N. 92nd Avenue (condition `1') should be required for Phase 3. 2. Tract `B' is an open area available for any of the following: a. Provide an area, if necessary, to reduce the effect of the right-angle turn from Lincoln to the 92nd Avenue right-of-way. b. Provide a right-of-way connection for future road extension to the undeveloped property to the north. INMX 521 North 20th Avenue, Suite 3 • Yakima, Washington 98902 • (509) 575-6990 • info@plsaofyakima.com c. Accommodate sewer and water extension to the undeveloped property to the north. Tract `B' may become part of the right-of-way for Lincoln Avenue and Lot 31 may be enlarged by extending its property line farther west. 3. If the right-of-way vacation doesn't take place until Phase 3, two Phase 2 lots, 23 and 25, will be slightly narrower than shown on the preliminary plat due to the existing right-of- way along their east boundaries. Presumably, this area will be incorporated in the lots when the right-of-way is vacated. 4. At least one of the future Phase 5 lots will likely be accessed from Lincoln rather than Rainier Drive. At the request of staff, the drainage swales have been labeled "drainage tracts". These tracts will be numbered on the final plat and the numbering of tracts on the final plat may not be the same as it is on the preliminary plat. There will also be one or two tracts for the future phases. Phases 3 and 4 may each have its own tract. 6. As advised by City staff, a turnaround, permanent or temporary is not required at the end of Lincoln Avenue extended as shown by the revised preliminary plat. Sincerely, . I �,/� e "� J &4444- Ljq�-j Thomas R. Durant Planning Manager RECE ED FER 12 2020 CITY OF PLANNI7d PRELIMINARY PLAT OF RAINIER COURT - PHASES a, 3 & 4 IN THE NW 1/4, SEC. 19, T-13 N, R-18 E,WM z, TRACT "A", ANS Wlr-1-1111 7W, -=7SE r I'A= 7. f f 'T IA" X \1 TYPICAL INTEflIOR FOADWAY SECTION, Jj I T" /"PLAT T. "4 1HA T � NA , B S TFRELI-ARY FL - L co --- ------- -