HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2020-081 Rainier Court Phases 2,3, & 4 N. 92nd Ave and Summitview Ave.A RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. R-2020-081
approving the Preliminary Long Plat of Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3
& 4, a 78-lot subdivision, located in the vicinity of N 92"d Ave and
Summitview Ave
WHEREAS, On December 3, 2019 applications for Preliminary Long Plat were
submitted by Columbia Ridge Homes LLC c/o Justin Hellem, for a 78-lot single-family
subdivision known as Rainier Court Phases — 2, 3, and 4 (PLP#003-19); and
WHEREAS, SEPA Environmental Review was completed with a Determination of
Nonsignificance issued on January 16, 2020, which was not appealed (SEPA#041-19),
and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2020, the Yakima Planning Commission held an
open record public hearing, which was continued to February 26, 2020, to consider the
proposed Preliminary Plat, hear testimony from the public, and provide a recommendation
to the Yakima City Council, and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, the Yakima Planning Commission issued its
written recommendation for approval of the proposed Preliminary Plat subject to several
conditions, and,
WHEREAS, the proposed Preliminary Plat conforms with the City of Yakima
Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and other applicable land use regulations, and
WHEREAS, at the Closed Record Public Hearing on July 7, 2020, after notice duly
given according to the requirements of the Yakima Municipal Code, the Yakima City
Council adopted the Yakima Planning Commission's Recommendation, and,
j WHEREAS, the City of Yakima has complied with the substantive, procedural, and
notice requirements associated with SEPA, the Growth Management Act, and the Yakima
Municipal Code for the purpose of reviewing the Application, and,
WHEREAS, the Yakima City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City
of Yakima to approve the Preliminary Plat of Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, and 4, now,
therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The above recitals are hereby incorporated
into this resolution.
Section 2. Incorporation of the Planning Commission's Recommendation
and Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission's Recommendation is hereby
adopted and ratified by the Yakima City Council as its conditional decision and approval
of the Application herein A copy of the Recommendation is attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" and fully incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 3. Findings. The Yakima City Council adopts the findings of the
Planning Commission as its own findings herein, and further finds that the requirements
of RCW § 58 17 110 have been met.
Section 4. Approval. The Yakima City Council, after reviewing all the evidence,
the Yakima Planning Commission's Recommendation and conditions of approval, and
adopting the findings as outlined herein, hereby approves the Preliminary Long Plat of
Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, and 4.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence,
clause, or phrase of this resolution is declared invalid or unconstitutional for any reason,
such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 7th day of July, 2020.
4 Z l
a or
/ Patricia Byers,
/ Y
FilEEJ
--- —‚
CITY Of YAKIMA
P anning
Exhibit "A"
DEI'ARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Joan Davenport, AICP, Director
Planning Division
Joseph Calhoun, Manager
129 North Second Street, 2od Floor, Yakima, WA 9890!
ask.planniugyakimawa.gov www yakimawa.gov/services/planning
YAKIMA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION TO THE YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL
FOR
PREUNIINARY LONG PLAT
PLP#003-19 & SEPA#041-19
March 11,2020
WHEREAS, Ori Deceniber 3, 2019 applications for Preliminary Long Plat were
submitted by Columbia Ridge Homes LLC, for the subdivision of three parce!s artd apportion of
a fourth parce!, totaling approximate!y 26 acres into 78 single-family residential lots, in the
Single-Fami!y (R-1) zoning district, parcel numbers 181319-21003, -22005, -23402, and -24009,
and
WHEREAS, the applications were considered complete for processing on December 11,
2019 and public notice was provided, in accordance with the provisions of YMC Ch. 1610, on
December 19, 2019; and
WHEREAS, SEPA Environmental Review was completed with a Determination of
Nonsignificance issued on January 16, 2020, which was not appealed (City File SEPA#041-19);
and
WHEREAS, the proposed Application conforms with the City of Yakima Zoning
Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinarice, and other applicable land use regulations; and
WHEREAS, underthe provisions of YMC Ch. 1420 the Yakima Planning Commission
(YPC) is responsible for the review of a preliminary long plat application and for recommending
the approval, modification or denial of each request; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2020, the Yakima Planrting Commission helcl art open record
public hearing, which was continued to February 26, 2020, to cortsider the appUcation for a 78 lot
single-family subdivision known as Rainier Court — Phases 2, 3, and 4, submitted by Columbia
Ridge Homes LLC c/o Justin Heflem. (PLP #003-19), to hear testimony from the public and
provide a recommendation to the Yakima City Council; and
WHEREAS, the staif report presertted by Community Developmerit Specialist, Colleda
Monick, recommended approval of the proposed 78-lot preliminary p!at, subject to conditions;
and
WHEREAS, based on testimony received at the February 12, 2020 and February 26,
2020 public hearings, the Yakima Planning Commission has recommended approval of the plat,
subject to conditioris.
sak,ma
904
Now therefore, the Yakima City Planning Commission presents the foliowing findings of
fact, conclusions, and recommendation to the Yakima City Council:
APPLICATION #
APPLICANT
APPLICANT ADDRESS:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PARCEL(S):
PLP#003-19, SEPA#041-19
Columbia Ridge Homes LLC, c/o Justin Heliem
404 S 51 Ave., Yakima, WA 98908
Vicinhty of N 92 Ave & Summitview Ave
181319-21003, -22005, -23402, &-24009
L FINDINGS OF FACT
Subsection 14.20.100(1)-- Consistencywith the provisions of theCity's Urban
Area Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed preliminary plat would be consistent with the tntent and character of
the Single Family Residential (R-1) zoning district set forth in Subsection
15 03.020(BC). The single family residential district is intended to
1) Establish new residential neighborhoods for detached single-family
dwellings free from other uses except those which are compatibte with,
and serve the residents of, this district, which may include duplexes and
zero lot lines if established during the subdivision process,
2) reserve 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 1 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 alt necessary performance or design standards asstgned to
them as necessary to mitigate potential impacts to adjacent residences.
2. Subsection 14.20.100(2) -- Consistency with the provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan:
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 residerttial districts.
Policy 2.3 3 Create walkable residential neighborhoods with safe streets and good
connections to schools, parks, transit, and commercial services.
2
Policy 2.3.3.A Construct sidewalks along all new residential streets.
Policy 2.3 3.0 Promote small biock sizes to ensure good connectivity and reduced
waiking distances between residences and schools, parks, and services. Specifically
Low density residential: Blocks between 400- 800 feet long are appropriate.
Mixed residenbal: Blocks between 300-660 feet long are appropriate.
Provide for through public through biock connections for Iarge 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 flexibitty for
private internal streets to meet connectivity objectives.
Goal 5.2. Preserve and improve existing residential neighborhoods.
Policy 5.2.1 lnvest in and improve quality of Iife 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.
3 Subsection 14.20.100(3)-- Consistencywith the provisions of this title, Title 14
entitled "Subdivision 0rd1nance':
All lots in this preliminary plat will have access upon a public street; will be provided
with all necessary public utilities, will exceed the minimum lot size for the R-1 zoning
district of 6000 square feet for single-family residences, and will meet or exceed the
rninimum lot width of 50 feet as measured at the rear of the required front -yard
setback.
4 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(a) — Appropriate provisions for public health, safety and
general welfare:
The construction of new single-family dwellings will complement adjacent uses and
will prornote the public health, safety and general welfare as there is a need in the
community for additional housing and the 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.
5. Subsection 14.20.100(4)(b) -- Appropriate provisions for open spaces:
The proposed lots are larger than the minimum lot size required in the R-1 zoning
district. Lot coverage of 60% or Iess in the R-1 zoning district will provide adequate
Iight and air for future residents iri accordance with the standards in the zoning
ordinance without additional open spaces.
6. Subsection 14.20.100(4)(c) -- Appropriate provisions for drainage ways:
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,
7 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(d) -- Appropriate provisions for streets or roads, alleys
and other public ways:
3
The subject property has frontage upon Summitview Ave. and proposes new public
streets to provide adequate access to all internal lots. A right-of-way vacation wiU be
required for the proposed vacation of the north haif of N. 92 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.
8. Subsection 14.20.100(4)(e) -- Appropriate provisions for transit stops:
Yakima Transit Route 1 passes the proposed subdivision along Summitview Ave.
9 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(f) -- Appropriate provisions for potable water supplies,
irrigation and other water suppliers:
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
10 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(g) -- Appropriate provisions for sanitary waste disposal:
Public sewer is required to service all lots. A City of Vakima sewer main lies within
Summitview Ave. south of the proposed development, and is capable of being
extended to handle the demands of this development.
11 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(h)(i) -- Appropriate provisions for parks and recreation
and playgrounds:
Open space, parks, recreation, and playgrounds are Iocated 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 recreatiori 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 playgrourid areas as needed or desired.
12. Subsection 14.20.100(4)(j) -- Appropriate provisions for schools and school
grounds:
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.
13. Subsection 14.20.100(4)(k) -- Appropriate provisions for sidewalks:
Sidewalks are required and will be provided along this developments frontage.
14 Subsection 14.20.100(4)(l) -- Appropriate provisions for other planning features
that assure safe walking conditions for students who waik to and from school:
Future plans for a Hawk crossing system at No. 88th Ave is required.
15 Subsection 14.20.100(5) -- Public use and interest:
The evidence indicated that this proposed preliminary plat, as conditioned, would be
consistent with neighboring land uses and would help serve the residential needs of
this area. With the recommended conditions, it will comply with the City's zoning
ordinance, subdivision ordinance and comprehensive plan. It will also make
appropriate and adequate provisions for the public health, safety and general
welfare, open spaces, drainage ways, streets, transit stops, potable water, sanitary
waste disposal, parks and recreation, playgrounds and sidewalks, and is in a location
4
where additional provisions for schools or for additional ptanning features for
students who waik to and from school have not been recommended or deemed
necessary
11. Consistencv Anatysis YMC 16.06.020(8).
The foliowing analysis involves the consistency of the preliminary plat with applicable
development regulations, or in the absence of applicable regulations, the adopted
Comprehensive Plan as mandated by the State Growth Management Act and the Yakima
Municipal Code During project review, neither the City nor any subsequent reviewing body
may re-examine alternatives to, or hear appeals on, the following items identified in these
conclusions except for issues of code interpretation:
(1) The type of land use contemplated by the proposal (a residential development in an
R-1 zoning district) is permitted on this site so long as it complies with the conditions
imposed by the Yakima City Council, as well as the regulations of the zoning ordinance,
subdivision ordinance, building codes and other applicable regulations.
(2) The level of development (lot size, contemplated density) would not exceed the
allowable level of developrnent in the Single Family Residential (R-1) zoning district since
the proposed lot sizes satisfy the zoning ordiriance requirements.
(3) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities is not an issue
because the additional infrastructure that would be provided at the applicant's expense
would ensure that adequate infrastructure and public facilities are avaitable for the proposed
preliminary plat.
(4) The character of the proposal, such as the proposal's consistency with applicable
devetopment standards of the City's Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, primarily involves
consideration of specific development standards relating to lot size, access, potable water,
sewage disposal and other features of the proposed preliminary plat which have been
discussed in detail above. With the recommended conditions, the proposed preliminary plat
would be consistent with the development standards of appucable City ordinances.
111. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the foregoing Findings, the YPC reaches the foliowing Conclusions:
1 The YPC has jurisdiction to recommend to the Yakima City Council the approval of a
proposed preliminary plat pursuantto Section 14.20.100 of the subdivision ordinance.
2. Notice of the public hearing senton December 19, 2019, was given in accordance with
applicable requirements
3. The SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for this proposed preliminary plat
was issued on January 16, 2020, and became final without any appeal.
4 The proposed preliminary ptat was reviewed and approved for traffic concurrency under
the Transportation Capacity Management Ordinance on February 4, 2020
5. This preliminary subdivision complies with the goals and objectives of the 2040
5
Comprehensive Plan, the intent and purpose ofthe R-1 zoning district, the provisions of
the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Title 12's Development
Standards and Chapter12.08 TrafficConcurrency Ordinance.
6. This preliminary plat in compliance with the consistency requirements of Subsection
16.06.020(B) of the Yakima Municipal Code.
7 With the recommer,ded conditions, the proposed preliminary plat as described in the
application narrative and preliminary plat received December 3, 2019 and revised on
February 12, 2020 and February 19, 2020, is in compliance with the Citys Urban Area
Comprehensive Plan, subdivision ordinance and zoning ordinance, makes appropriate
and adequate provisions for the pubc health, safety and general welfare and for open
spaces, drainage ways, streets, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes,
parks and recreation, playgrounds and sidewalks; and, according to the weight of the
evidence presented at the hearing, does not require that specific provisions be made for
the other requisite plat considerations such as additional schools, additional school
grounds or additional planning features that assure safe waiking coriditions for students
who waik to and from school; and serves the public use and interest.
IV. PULIC HEARING TESTIWIONY
February 12, 2020, Yakima Planninq Commissjon Minutes:
John Andring, 215 NJ 93rd Ave, asked when soil testing would be done since an orchard
used to occupy the and. 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 requiririg 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 travelirig
up and down the hill on N 92nd Ave in cy conditions and that the new sharp turn onto
Lincoln Ave will create more of a hazard.
Candie Turner, 206 N 93rd Ave, spoke on the 14-foot-tall height restriction for the Reeds
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 concems 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
staif's request is for the public testimony to be Ieft 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
6
Per the Commissions request, staif indicated they will look nto whether the City can make it
a requirement for the developer to have the soil tested and notify potential homeowners af
contaminants.
Chair Liddicoat re -opened the public testimony portion ofthe hearing.
Brian Mauch, 216 N 90th Ave, mentioned thatthe 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 Iead 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 sampUng, documentation, and
potential mitigation of Iead 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
Ianguage froni DOE's comments and put it in staif's recommendation.
Public Hearinq cont. on February 26. 2020, Yakima planninq Commission Minutes:
Tom Durant of PLSA Engineering & Surveying Inc. (applicant's representativelsurveyor),
clarified that the vacation of the northem most portion of N. 92nd Ave cannot be applied for
until Phase 4 of the plat. Durant wanted to state on the record that he disagreed with City
staffs application of RCW 36.70B 040 Determination of Consistency for individual project
review He indicated Columbia Ridge Homes' objection to requiring sampling ofthe soil and
notifying potential buyers of contaminants if above the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA)
cleanup IeveIs. He provided to staif and the Commission a publication from DOE entitled
'Soil Sampling and Safety Guidance for People Concerned about Arsenic and Lead." Durant
clarified that while they do not curreritly intend to have the soil tested, if the soil is tested and
contaminants are above the MTCA cleanup IeveIs, they would notify potential buyers.
However, if contaminants are below the MTCA cleanup IeveIs, they may not notify potential
buyers.
Justin kellem, Columbia Ridge Homes LLC, stated that they will comply with dust control
regutations of the Yakima Regional Clean AirAgency and that someone will be on -call 2417.
Hellem clarified that the properties will have irrigation shares, that their typical construction
hours are from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. and that they will work with the Engineering Division to
determine an appropriate traffic calming measure.
Wayne Morrison, 205 N 93rd Ave, spoke in oppositiori to two-story housing in this
neighborhood and the small lot sizes.
NJeil Hauff, 420 N 92nd Ave, shared his concerns about lack of communication from the
developer, the narrow width of 92nd Ave, the location of the swales, the development's
impact on the aesthetics of the neighborhood, the change in mailing addresses for current
residents, and the lot size and density of the proposed development. He spoke in opposition
7
to the City adopting DOEs language which recommends soil testing and notification to
potential buyers but does not require it.
Michele Hauff, 420 N 92nd Ave, expressed her concern about the allowed construction
hours. She indicated that she spoke with the Yakima Regional Clean Air Agency and was
told there is no after-hours emergency contact; the developer would need to be contacted.
Hauff stated her opposition to the developer not being required to sample the so and notify
potential buyers.
Jamie Evans of Evans & Son Inc. stated that their business mails letters to surrounding
property owners that provides an after-hours contact. He explained their process of watering
down the soil before leaving the site for the day
Chair Liddicoat closed the public testimony at approximately 406 pflm.
Further discussion took place amongst the Commission members regarding the details of
this plat. Calhoun indicated that the next meeting for the regional workgroup that will
address sotl sampling for new residential developments is on March l7th, which is the 2nd
of the 3 workshops that are planned. The next meeting is in late April or early May Planning
Commissions will not have a role in this unless the workgroup makes a recommendation
that would require a change to the zoning ordinance.
In relation to the timing of this plat and the associated permits, Calhoun stated that once the
preliminary plat 5 approved, a construction stormwater water permit from DOE would be
required 30 days prior to any grading on the site. He added that while minor changes cari be
made to the plat as the developer continues to work out the details, the code dictates that
the final plat must be substantially the same as what was preliminarily approved. He added
tbat once this hearing is closed, no new evidence can be submitted when City Council
makes their decision on the Planning Commission's recommendation,
In response to a letter received from neighbors objecting to the vacation of a portion of N
92nc1 Ave, Calhoun specified that the RCW cited in the Ietter (RCW 35.79 020) that would
prohibit the vacation from moving forward is not relevant at this time as this is not the
hearing for the right-of-way vacation. This plat would not vacate that right-of-way; a right-of-
way vacation petition would need to be filed by the developer to begin the application
process.
Discussion took place regarding the retention of stormwater on site and the idea of
connecting Rainier Dr and Lincoln Ave as an intersection.
Discussion took place on the request from some of the neighbors that the height of this
proposed development be further restricted beyond the zoning ordinance standard of 35
feet. It was noted that this would need to be addressed by City Council or the Iegislature
rather than at the Planning Commission level. Per the Commission's request, Justin Helieni
explained that Columbia Ridge Homes mostly builds single -story homes.
Calhoun reiterated that the City would not have authority to enforce that the developer
sample the soil for lead, arsenic, and organochlorine pesticides and notify potential buyers
of any contaminants above the MTCA cleanup levels. It was a recommendation by DOE that
the developer do this but not a requirement; therefore, it would be in DOE's jurisdiction to
enforce.
8
The Commission had consensus for staif to clarify in the Planning Cornmissiori findings
documeiitthatthe site plan submitted on Febwary l2th is the one being recommended for
approval.
It was motioned by Vice -Chair Hughes -Mickel and secorided by Commissioner Rose to
direct staif to draft findings of fact arid forward a recommendation of approval to the Yakima
City Council. The motion carried 5-0, Conimissioner Ostriem absent, Commissioner Place
recused herself from voting.
V. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
Based on the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, it was moved
artd seconded that the City of Yakima Planning Commission draft findings of fact and
forward a recommendation of approval of the Preliminary Long Plat to the Yakima City
Council. The motion carried unanimously
Based upon the findings outlined above, it was moved and seconded that the City of Yakima
Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of this proposed 78-lot preliminary plat in
accordance with the application and related documents submitted for file numbers
PLP#003-19 and SEPA#041-19, and subject to the foliowing conditions.
1 A Right -of -Way Vacation shall be applied for, for the vacation of the northern most
portion of N. 92 Ave. If approved, public access must be provided for the lots using the
ROW to be vacated.
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 imited 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
financial!y 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 welis 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 Easementsfor new and/orfuture 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.
9
8 All public and private utilities shafl be Iocated 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 aII 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. 90th and N. 89 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 shafl 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
owrer within the Plat shall be equally responsible for all drainage swales, and 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 Iocated 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.
15. Fire hydrants shall be placed at the Iocations specified by the Building Codes and
Planning Division and the Yakima Fire Department. All lots must be provided with
adequate fire flow
16 Alt 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 Ecoogy 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 Permitfrom the Washington State
Department of Ecology is required. The permit requires tbat a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (Erosion Sediment Control Plan) is prepared and implemented for alt
permitted construction sites. Perniit 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 ertgineering Division prior to
construction.
10
19. The topography north of the planned development includes a natural hiliside that
appears to dram through Rainier Court. The applicants Drainage Report will need to
address this per YMC 7.83.140
20 A final binding stormwater and drainage control plan for the erttire 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. AU 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 ori 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 identified on the Plat shati be clearly labeled 'unbuildable' for
future development, and shall be used solely for drainage swale and mainteriance
thereof
24 Irrigation approval, if any is required, shall be shown on the face of the final plat.
25. Lightirig shall be provided to illuminate any off street parking or loading spaces used at
night. When provided, lighting shaU 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 orie year
RECOMMENDED this 11th day of March, 2020.
Jacob Liddicoat, Chair
Yakima Planning Commission
11
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 6.
For Meeting of: July 7, 2020
ITEM TITLE: Closed record public hearing and Resolution to consider the
Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the preliminary
plat of Rainier Court Phases 2, 3, and 4, located in the vicinity of N
92nd Ave and Summitview Ave
SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport,Al C P, Community Development Director
Joseph Calhoun, Planning Manager
Colleda Monick, Community Development Specialist(509) 576-
6772
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
Anyone wishing to comment on this public hearing should:
1. Dial 1-877-853-5247 or 1-888-788-0099
2. When prompted for the meeting I D enter 980 1230 6230 #
3. When prompted for the participant ID enter#
4. When prompted for the meeting password enter 709198 #
5. If you wish to speak to the Council during the public hearing press *9 on your phone.
When it is your turn to speak you will hear an automated announcement indicating your
phone has been unmuted and you can now be heard by all participating in the meeting. You
should announce your name and city of residence prior to making your comments. When
your time to speak has expired you will hear an automated announcement indicating your
phone has been muted.
Rainier Court Phases 2, 3 and 4 is a preliminary long plat submitted by Columbia Ridge Homes
LLC that will subdivide three parcels and a portion of a fourth parcel totaling approximately 26
acres into 78 single-family residential lots. This site, which is located in the vicinity of N 92nd Ave
and Summitview Ave, is zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1). The proposed plat includes a
Tract"A" to be subdivided and developed in a future phase.
The plat will include full municipal services including sewer, water, streets with curbs, gutters, and
sidewalks on both sides of the street, and streetlights and is consistent with the city's
development standards.As submitted, this plat complies with the requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Development Standards, and
Traffic Concurrency.
2
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 12, 2020, which was continued to
February 26, 2020. The Commission issued their written recommendation to approve the
proposed preliminary plat on March 11, 2020. Council was provided a complete printed version of
the record on May 5, 2020, for review ahead of the closed record hearing on July 7, 2020
(Council--please bring your packet to the meeting).
The record can be found online
here: https://yakima.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/CoverSheet.aspx?
Item!D=7572&Meeting I D=775
ITEM BUDGETED: NA
STRATEGIC PRIORITY: Neighborhood and Community Building
APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL BY THE CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
D Iti 1 1 Iti