The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/17/2015 07 Crown Point Phase 2, Final Long Plat, Cottonwood Partners, LLCBUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 7. For Meeting of February 17, 2015 ITEM TITLE: Public meeting and resolution for approval of the Final Long Plat Cottonwood Partners LLC "Crown Point Phase 2" located in the vicinity of 7602 Coolidge Road SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, AICP, Director of Community Development Trevor Martin, Assistant Planner (509) 575 -6162 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Bill Hordan, on behalf of Cottonwood Partners LLC, submitted the final plat for Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of a 33 lot residential subdivision located in the vicinity of the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Ave. within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road This plat received preliminary approval on November 18, 2008 by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners. This subdivision is now ready for Council's consideration and approval. Resolution: X Other (Specify): Contract: Start Date: Item Budgeted: Funding Source /Fiscal Impact: Strategic Priority: Insurance Required? No Mail to: Phone: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: RECOMMENDATION: Ordinance: Contract Term: End Date: Amount: Improve the Built Environment 1, City Manager Staff recommends City Council approve the final plat of Cottonwood Partners LLC "Crown Point Phase 2" and adopt the accompanying resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the plat. ATTACHMENTS: Description Upload Date Type L-1 resolution 212012.015 Cover Meir•o ❑ full report 212012.015 Cover Meir•o RESOLUTION NO. R -2015- A RESOLUTION approving the final plat of Crown Point Phase 2 and authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat. WHEREAS, the preliminary plat of Crown Point, is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase 2 constitutes 33 Lots, which was submitted by Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services on behalf of Cottonwood Partners, LLC to Yakima County Public Services (County File Numbers SUB 06- 0162, PRJ 06- 01817, and SEP 06 -062) while the subject property was in the County; and, WHEREAS, the subject property was annexed into the City of Yakima in 2007; and, WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider the preliminary plat; and, WHEREAS, on April 21, 2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his Recommendation for approval of the proposed plat subject to conditions; WHEREAS, at its public meeting on May 13, 2008, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners considered the plat of Crown Point, and by resolution on November 18, 2008, approved said plat Recommending that the finding and recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be affirmed and adopted; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has approved and accepted all plans and designs for the improvements required in the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat, and the applicant has constructed or financially secured all such improvements; and WHEREAS, as this final plat comes before City Council for review, each member declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the final plat, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The proposed final plat of Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of three sheets depicting a subdivision located in the general vicinity of the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Ave. within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road. Parcel No. 181332 - 33436, is hereby approved and the mayor is hereby authorized to sign the final plat. The applicant shall file the final plat of Crown Point Phase 2 for record in the Yakima County Auditor's Office immediately, or as soon thereafter as possible, and the applicant shall be responsible for all filing fees. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 17th day of February, 2015. ATTEST:. City Clerk Micah Cawley, Mayor COTTONWOOD PARTNERS LLC "Crown Point - Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST City Council Public Meeting February 17, 2015 Applicant: Cottonwood Partners LLC File Number: FLP #001 -15 Site Address: Vic. of Coolidge Road and South 80t` Avenue Staff Contact: Trevor Martin, Assistant Planner Table of Contents CHAPTER A Resolution CHAPTER B Staff Report CHAPTER C Yakima County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation CHAPTER D Vicinity Map CHAPTER E Final Plat — Crown Point, Phase 2 COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC "Crown Point — Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER A Resolution :,,� ,,,,,,,,,� � , r� r� A -1 Agenda Statement: City Council Public Meeting — Final Plat 02/03/2015 of Crown Point Phase 2 A -2 Proposed Resolution — Crown Point Phase 2 02/17/2015 ._ _ �.... .............. RESOLUTION NO. R -2015- A RESOLUTION approving the final plat of Crown Point Phase 2 and authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat. WHEREAS, the preliminary plat of Crown Point, is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase 2 constitutes 33 Lots, which was submitted by Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services on behalf of Cottonwood Partners, LLC to Yakima County Public Services (County File Numbers SUB 06- 0162, PRJ 06- 01817, and SEP 06 -062) while the subject property was in the County; and, WHEREAS, the subject property was annexed into the City of Yakima in 2007; and, WHEREAS, on July 5, 2007, the Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to consider the preliminary plat; and, WHEREAS, on April 21, 2008, the Hearing Examiner issued his Recommendation for approval of the proposed plat subject to conditions; WHEREAS, at its public meeting on May 13, 2008, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners considered the plat of Crown Point, and by resolution on November 18, 2008, approved said plat Recommending that the finding and recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be affirmed and adopted; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has approved and accepted all plans and designs for the improvements required in the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat, and the applicant has constructed or financially secured all such improvements; and WHEREAS, as this final plat comes before City Council for review, each member declares that he has had no contact with either the applicant or opponents of the final plat, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The proposed final plat of Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of three sheets depicting a subdivision located in the general vicinity of the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Ave. within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road. Parcel No. 181332- 33436, is hereby approved and the mayor is hereby authorized to sign the final plat. The applicant shall file the final plat of Crown Point Phase 2 for record in the Yakima County Auditor's Office immediately, or as soon thereafter as possible, and the applicant shall be responsible for all filing fees. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 17th day of February, 2015, ATTEST: City Clerk Micah Cawley, Mayor DOC. INDEX # A1Z BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 5.13. For Meeting of February 03, 2015 ITEM TITLE: Set February 17, 2015 as the date for a public meeting before City Council to consider the final plat approval of Cottonwood Partners LLC "Crown Point Phase 2" located in the vicinity of 7602 Coolidge Road SUBMITTED BY: Joan Davenport, AICP, Community Development Director Trevor Martin, Assistant Planner (509) 575 -6162 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Bill Hordan, on behalf of Cottonwood Partners LLC, submitted the final plat for Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of a 33 lot residential subdivision located in the vicinity of the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Ave. about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road. This plat received preliminary plat approval on November 18, 2008 by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners. Resolution: Other (Specify): Set Date Contract: Start Date: Item Budgeted: Funding Source /Fiscal Impact: Strategic Priority: Insurance Required? No Mail to: Phone: APPROVEDFOR SUBMITTAL: Ordinance: Contract Term: End Date: Amount: Improve the Built Environment ��IIIVui City Manager DOC. INDEX A -1 COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC "Crown Point -- Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER B Staff Report B -1 Staff Report 02/17/2015 . _.w.w_ ..................................... .. . .... City of Yakima, Washington Department of Community Development Planning Division Final Plat Staff Report City Council Public Meeting February 17, 2015 Final Plat Application ) FLP #001 -15 For a 33 -Lot subdivision ) Staff Contact: Known as Crown Point Phase 2 ) Trevor Martin, Assistant Planner (509) 575 -6162 BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF REQUEST Crown Point is a 61 -lot subdivision of which Phase 2 constitutes 33 lots of record that were recommended for approval by the Hearing Examiner on April 21, 2008. The subject plat is generally located on the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Ave. within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road. Parcel No. 18133233436. The Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on May 13, 2008, to review the preliminary plat and the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. The plat was approved by the Board of County Commissioners by Resolution (RESO 477 -2008) on November 18, 2008. (Yakima County Planning assigned file numbers: SUB 06 -0162, and PRJ 06- 01817). The City Engineer's office has reviewed and approved all necessary designs and engineering and indicates that the required improvements are installed and inspected or that the required financial security is in place to secure their installation. The City Engineer has signed the plat in affirmation of this fact. The Planning Division has similarly reviewed the final plat and found it to be in substantial conformance with the terms and conditions of the preliminary plat approval. The Planning Manager has signed the final plat. Staff, therefore, recommends acceptance of the final plat and the adoption of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approved preliminary plat required the applicant to complete all site improvements listed as conditions in the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation of April 21, 2008. The conditions that must be met before the final plat can be approved consist of the following matters: General 1. Compliance with the SEPA Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated May 22, 2007 (with the $550.00 per lot contribution amount set forth in Mitigation Measure B2 reduced by the amount required by the decision) shall be required. The Determination and the Mitigation measures thereof are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference. Status: Achieved 2. All proposed lots must be provided with adequate fire flow in accordance with the adopted fire code prior to final plat approval. Status: Achieved DOC. INDEX #�' - 3. Unless construction is concurrent or incorporated into other approvals and dust control requirements of Crown Point, a method of dust control for the construction phase of phase1 and phase 2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority. A copy of the approval must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division prior to any construction activities. Status: Achieved 4. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in Section 14.32.020 of the Yakima County Code. The monuments must be protected by cases and covers as approved by the County Engineer. Status: Achieved Streets 5. Interior and all dead -end streets may be constructed with rolled mountable curbs. The curb radii at all intersections and interior corners shall be constructed with barrier curbs from the property lines of the corner lots. (YCC 14.52.1000). Status: Achieved 6. The plans for all public road improvements must be designed to Yakima County standards, including applicable standards and mitigation measures of the revised MDNS herein, prepared by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the County Engineer prior to construction. Status: Achieved 7. Dedicated 30 -foot by 30 -foot clear sight triangles must be provided at all intersection corners within the plat. Equivalent alternative plans supporting a reduction in distance may be submitted to the County Engineer for approval. Status: Achieved B. Street names shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Services Department prior to final plat approval. Street signs area required for this development. The signs will be installed by Public Services prior to acceptance of roads and all costs associated with supplying and installing the signs must be reimbursed to Yakima County by the developer. Status: Achieved Utilities 9. All public and private utilities located within interior easements or right -of -ways must be constructed prior to road construction. Status: Achieved 10. Installation of power and phone facilities must be completed, or arranged with the provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval. 2 DOC. INDEX # ` -i Status: Achieved 11. All public and private utilities must be located underground with the exception of the standard telephone box, transmission box, and similar structures. Status: Achieved 12. Public utility easement must be provided adjacent to the interior access easement of right -of- way, and as specified by the utility providers. If the easement / right -of -way is 50 feet in width, the easement shall be 10 feet in width. If the right -of -way is 60 feet in width the easement shall be 8 feet in width. Minimum width for utility easements that are also utilized for irrigation is generally 15 feet. Status: Achieved 13. All lots shall be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association system. No new individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification must be provided to the Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating the ability to provide domestic water, that any necessary easements are provided for, and that all associated fees have been paid. Status: Achieved 14. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service from the Yakima Regional Wastewater system. Prior to final plat approval, the developer must submit to the Public Services Department Planning Division a written from verification the City of Yakima that demonstrates that the system has will serve all lots within the subdivision, that any necessary easements have been established, and any required fees have been paid. Status. Achieved Plat Notes 15. Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street Names and numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County Public Services Department upon issuance of an approved building permit. 16. 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. 17. All lots of this subdivision have been provided with public sewer. All lots have been provided with public water connections. Status: Achieved. All applicable plat notes are shown Timing 18. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid, together with any required pre - payment amount prior to final plat approval. 19. Prior to recording the final plat or issuance of building permits, either: 3 D ®C. INDEX a. All required plat improvements, i.e. street, sidewalks, utilities, and drainage facilities must be in place; or, b. An escrow account established or a bond provided in an amount and with conditions acceptable to the County Engineer to assure installation of all remaining required improvements. If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required roadway improvements, and fails to complete these improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond agreement, the County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance of building or occupancy permits until the required road and drainage improvements area accepted as satisfactorily completed. The County Engineer may issue building permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is determined that building construction will not interfere with utility and roadway construction. 20. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum five year time period prescribed by the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 58.17.140. Any extension beyond the five year time period is subject to the provisions of Section 14.24 of the Yakima County Code. Status: Achieved: All applicable timing conditions have been met or are otherwise provided for FINDINGS 1. The preliminary plat was reviewed, processed and approved by Yakima County, 2. The final plat is in general conformance with the preliminary plat and conditions of approval. 3. The applicant has built or financially secured the construction of the required improvements necessary for final plat approval. RECOMMENDATION The City of Yakima, Department of Community Development's, Planning Division, recommends that City Council accept the final plat of Crown Point Phase 2 and pass a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the final plat. 4 DOC. INDEX COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC "Crown Point — Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER C Hearing Examiner's Recommendation f1 rr Xr' 'a/ s ffill17 ✓ � !,� <; ,,, ,,. ,,,� .,, , ., , . // , ,% � %ii/fi' , �%/ � / � 1 �„ / /f , � / �� / / , // / ✓ / / - i / i / /i ,i, ,. G /f i /� � / /� / i� i C -1 Yakima County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Dated 07/19/2007 C -2 Yakima County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Dated 07/31/2007 C -3 Yakima County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Dated 04/21/2008 C -4 Yakima �..�._......__.... _� County Hearing Examiner's Recommendation Dated 05/12/2008 BOARD OF YAKIMA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN THE MATTER OF APPROVAL OF ) PRELIMINARY PLAT NO. SUB 06 -0162 / ) Resolution No. 477 -2008 SEP 06 -062/PRJ 06 -01817 KNOWN AS ) "CROWN POINTE" l WHEREAS, according to Yaldma County Ordinance No. 10 -1974 relating to platting, subdivision and the dedication of land adopted pursuant to RCW 58.17, a public hearing was held on May 13, 2008 for the purpose of considering Preliminary Plat No. SUB 06- 0162/SEP 06-062/PRJ 06-01817 known as "Crown Pointe'; and, WHEREAS, testimony was taken from those persons present who wished to be heard; and, WHEREAS, due notice of the hearing was given as required by law, and the necessary inquiry has been made into the public use and interest to be served by such platting; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners has considered the preliminary plat and finds that the 9 lot layout is in compliance with the Hearing Examiner recommendation; and, WHEREAS, the Board of Yakima County Commissioners has considered elements of public health, safety and general welfare pertaining to the preliminary plat; now, therefore, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners that the findings and recommendation for conditional approval of the Hearing Examiner for Preliminary Plat No. SUB 06 -0162/SEP 06- 0621PRJ 06-01817 designated as "Crown Pointe", be adopted as attached hereto. Done this 18`h day November, 2008. kwltt9Ntt1p! n» 0 mw: * A Cta6itiaa teint.�r, Clerk of the Board COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON HEARING EXAMINER'S FINAL DECISION RE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION May 12, 2008 In the Matter of Application for } Preliminary Plat Approval ) Submitted by: ) } Cottonwood Partners, LLC ) } For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be ) Known as "Crown Pointe" which ) Involves a SEPA MIDNS Appeal ) FILE NOS. SUB06 -162 SEP06.062 PRJ2006 -1817 Introduction. The Examiner issued a SEPA MDNS appeal decision on April 21, 2008. The Examiner received the City of Yakima's Request for Reconsideration of Hearing Examiner's Decision & Recommendation in SEPA Appeal on April 30, 2008. An Interim Decision was issued on May 1, 2008 which allowed the parties five business days to respond to enumerated issues. The Examiner received responses from Yakima County SEPA Responsible Official Steven Erickson and the applicant's attorney James Carmody on May 8, 2008 and from Senior Assistant Yakima City Attorney Jeff Cutter on May 9, 2008. The Request for Reconsideration, the Interim Decision, the three responses and Cottonwood Partners, LLC 1 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Final Decision re Reconsideration Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 i �T this Final Decision regarding the Request for Reconsideration will be added as additional exhibits in the record of this SEPA appeal. Final Decision on Request for Reconsideration. After considering the City of Yakima's Request for Reconsideration and the information provided in response to the Examiner's Interim Decision regarding the City's Request for Reconsideration, the additional arguments and facts presented have led the Examiner to find and conclude as follows in regard to said request: 1) The Examiner's SEPA appeal decision adopted the most important details of the SEPA Responsible Official's recommendation in this matter. Section 16B.06.070 of the Yakima County Code entitled "Appeals of SEPA Determinations" provides in subsection (E)(4) that "The determination of the responsible official shall carry substantial weight." The disputes as to the appropriate street improvement requirements for this preliminary plat arise in part as a result of vesting provisions in an interlocal agreement between the City of Yakima (City) and Yakima County (County). The agreement provides that preliminary plat applications will at the option of the applicant continue to be processed under County procedures and County regulations if completed applications are submitted to the County before the property is annexed into the City. In those instances, as here, the County's SEPA Responsible Official is responsible for prescribing SEPA traffic impact mitigation measures consistent with the County's procedures and regulations even though the property is within the City and even though the County's procedures and regulations in that regard are different from the City's procedures and regulations. 2) The Examiner's April 21, 2008 SEPA appeal decision upheld the County SEPA Responsible Official's agreement to support a revised voluntary agreement which he had solicited from the applicant and believed was reasonable. In his recommendation of March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steven Erickson stated that "Mr. Carmody has indicated that his clients are willing to make good their offer, but want to be compensated for legal costs and the traffic analysis." Mr. Carmody confirmed in his letter of April 7, 2008 that his clients' proposal was "to accept the original voluntary Cottonwood Partners, LLC "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Final Decision re Reconsideration Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06.0162; SEP06 -062 i �i agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues." He indicated that the offer was accepted insofar as "Mr. Erickson advised that that proposal was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County." 3) The only detail in the Examiner's decision that differed from the SEPA Responsible Official's recommendation was the suggested mechanism for deducting the costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and in addressing the appeal issues. The Responsible Official recommended that "You may direct the parties to resolve whether and how to resolve the costs of the traffic analysis and legal fees; that is beyond the scope of the MDNS." The Examiner directed the applicant to submit itemized statements for those costs and fees to the SEPA Responsible Official with proof of payment or verification that they will be paid since "those costs are what they are" and "They have already been incurred and have probably already been paid." The Examiner allowed that reimbursement to be accomplished within the MDNS context because of the simplicity and efficiency of that approach when compared with other procedures that the parties could be directed to pursue outside the SEPA process to achieve the same result. 4) The original voluntary agreement was to pay $550 per lot as required by the MDNS Mitigation Measure B -2. The applicant is also required to dedicate the right -of- way needed for future street improvements described in the MDNS Mitigation Measure B -3. The SEPA Responsible Official did not believe the per lot amount was proportional. It was based on a calculated share of agreed road improvement costs for other plats. So far as the Examiner can determine, it appears that the comparative analysis on page 4 of Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response states that the deduction of the costs and fees per his clients' proposal would reduce the amount in Mitigation Measure B -2 from $550 per lot to $252.86 per lot ($15,424.69 divided by 61 equals $252.86). If that is the correct amount, costs and fees of $18,125.31 ($297.14 per lot) would be deducted from the original agreed $33,550 ($550 per lot) contribution to arrive at that amount. Whatever amount is substantiated, additional deductions for future similar costs and fees related to any future appeals will not be allowed unless ordered by a future decisionmaker. The revised voluntary agreement should speak as of the time of its acceptance by the Examiner absent a decision otherwise by a future decisionmaker. 5) Insofar as the analysis on page 4 of Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response may be interpreted to indicate that the $126,500 [sic. $126,650] value of the right -of -way dedications required by Mitigation Measure B -3 would also be deducted or that the right - of -way dedication requirements in that mitigation measure would be eliminated, the terms of the applicant's revised voluntary agreement proposed after receipt of the traffic impact analysis as represented to the Examiner by both the SEPA Responsible Official and the applicant did not include a deduction of that value or elimination of that requirement. According to the evidence submitted in that regard, the revised voluntary agreement which the applicant proposed, which the SEPA Responsible Official agreed was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County, and which the Examiner adopted, only required deduction of the traffic impact analysis and appeal costs from the original voluntary agreement amount. It did not require deduction of the value of the right -of -way dedications required by SEPA Mitigation Measure B-3 or eliminate those dedication requirements. 6) The applicant's argument that the evidence in the record does not support more than a $13.61 per lot contribution without any dedication of right-of-way overlooks or minimizes the applicant's reasons for communicating its proposal for the revised voluntary agreement to the SEPA Responsible Official. More specifically, whatever those reasons were, that argument overlooks or minimizes (i) the appellant City's arguments critical of the traffic impact analysis and in favor of a greater contribution; (ii) the SEPA Responsible Official's concerns about the traffic impact analysis; (iii) the fact that there is value in achieving the type of certainty for planning purposes that can be achieved by a voluntary agreement; and (iv) the fact that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners on appeal or the Examiner on remand would have the authority to request additional information such as a traffic impact analysis from the City which could contradict the traffic impact analysis submitted by the applicant if there were a need to determine those issues raised in this appeal which the revised voluntary agreement otherwise renders irrelevant. On the other hand, the appellant City's argument that the evidence in the record does not support a deduction of the applicant's traffic impact analysis cost and legal costs for the appeal from the original voluntary agreement's per lot contribution amount overlooks or minimizes the fact that (i) the deduction of those costs was a requisite component of the revised voluntary agreement solicited by the SEPA Responsible Official and proposed by the applicant after receipt of the traffic impact analysis and (ii) the expenditure of those costs by the applicant in connection with the SEPA appeal resulted in factual information and expert opinions supporting the applicant's position to the effect that absent a voluntary agreement otherwise the $550 per lot contribution should be reduced to $13.61 per lot without any right -of -way dedications in order to satisfy the applicant's proportional SEPA traffic impact mitigation obligations for all likely direct traffic impacts of the plat on the plat's frontage roads. 7) The Examiner's adoption of the applicant's revised voluntary agreement which the SEPA Responsible Official determined was reasonable and worthy of support made it unnecessary to determine some of the issues that would otherwise need to be determined in this appeal absent such a voluntary agreement. For example, the proper treatment of frontage property dedications did not need to be determined because the revised voluntary agreement did not affect them. The traffic impact analysis, the information from the parties submitted after the traffic impact analysis and the Examiner's review of pertinent court cases subsequently cast sufficient light on the relevant issues included in the Examiner's August 20, 2007 decision to allow for a meaningful review of the SEPA Responsible Official's determination that the revised voluntary agreement was reasonable and worthy of his support. The fact that some of the issues raised in this matter remained disputed and that some of them have not been definitively answered by court cases did not prevent the Examiner from deciding the limited number of issues that were relevant to the SEPA Responsible Official's decision to support the revised voluntary agreement. 8) The Examiner's April 21, 2008 appeal decision gave substantial weight to the SEPA Responsible Official's determination as required by Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(4) of the Yakima County Code. The negotiation process between the SEPA decisionmaker and the applicant to mitigate probable significant adverse environmental impacts was termed "eminently sensible" in the case of Hayden v. City of Port Townsend, 93 Wn.2d 870, 880, 613 P.2d 1164 (1980). The case of Victoria Partnership v. City of Seattle, 59 Wn.App. 592, 603, 800 P.2d 380 (1990), stated the quite basic principle that mitigation measures are only required to make the project as a whole acceptable and are not required to eradicate all adverse environmental impacts. The Examiner's April 21, 2008 decision upholding the County SEPA Responsible Official's agreement to support the revised voluntary agreement was not issued in disregard of the facts and issues in this matter. The revised voluntary agreement preserves traffic impact mitigation requirements by way of per lot contributions and right -of -way dedications that are well in excess of what would be required under the facts and expert opinions expressed in the traffic impact analysis. Although those facts and expert opinions have been questioned and criticized, the record is lacking facts and expert opinions in support of any specific traffic impacts that would require any specific per lot contributions or right-of-way dedications in excess of those requirements preserved by the revised voluntary agreement. The fact that the County's procedural and regulatory means for exacting street frontage improvements are more limited than those of the City does not change the fact that the County's SEPA Responsible Official must act within the parameters of the County's procedures and Cottonwood Partners, LLC "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Final Decision re Reconsideration Coolidge Rd. & So. 800 Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 DOC. INDEX regulations in that regard. The adequacy of the traffic impact mitigation measures in the revised voluntary agreement had to be evaluated in the context of existing County procedures and regulations rather than those of the City. The applicant's requirement that any voluntary agreement after receipt of the traffic impact analysis include a deduction of those costs and the legal fees related to the appeal did not make the agreement unreasonable. The deduction of those costs and fees represents a comparatively small decrease in the total traffic impact mitigation requirements if the $126,650 value of the right -of -way dedication requirement in Mitigation Measure B -3 is added to the new per lot contribution amount. Even if the amount of the per lot contribution in the revised voluntary agreement is considered alone, the revised amount would be roughly midway between the original $550 amount and the $13.61 amount suggested by the traffic impact analysis if the per lot contribution amount is to be reduced from $33,550 to $15,424.69 or to some similar substantiated amount. These factors allowed the Examiner to decide this SEPA appeal without having to resolve issues that would only need to be resolved if there were no voluntary agreement. These factors also convinced the Examiner that the revised voluntary agreement for this preliminary plat is within the range of rough proportionality under the evidence presented in this matter and that the SEPA Responsible Official acted reasonably within the parameters of the County's procedures and regulations in agreeing to support the revised voluntary agreement. 9) Since there has been no opposition to approval of this preliminary plat other than the dispute involving the SEPA traffic impact mitigation measures, the Examiner expressed the hope in his July 19, 2007 decision, which is expressed by Mr. Erickson and by Mr. Carmody in their May 8, 2008 responses, that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners might consider approving this preliminary plat prior to a final determination of the SEPA appeal. Mr. Erickson's May 8, 2008 response indicates that the Examiner's recommendation regarding this preliminary plat is currently scheduled before the Board of Yakima County Commissioners for a closed record public hearing on May 13, 2008. The time period for appeal of the Examiner's SEPA appeal decision to the Board will not have expired by that date. Thus any approval of the preliminary plat should be subject to the additional condition that the applicant comply with the final determination regarding the SEPA MDNS traffic impact mitigation measures prior to requesting final plat approval. The MDNS could not be changed by the Board to add a Mitigation Measure for the Board to retain jurisdiction similar to B -4 in the Examiner's July 19, 2007 decision until after a further SEPA appeal to the Board is filed, and that type of additional mitigation measure would not be necessary if the Board has already Cottonwood Partners, LLC 6 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Final Decision re Reconsideration Coolidge Rd. & So. 8& Ave. DOC. SUB06 -0162; SEP06-062 INDEX c— approved the preliminary plat subject to the recommended condition before considering the possible fiiture SEPA appeal. That condition is also advisable due to the fact that appropriate plat provisions for streets, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school would only be satisfied by compliance with the final SEPA MDNS appeal determination prior to final plat approval because the SEPA MDNS is the sole mechanism that was utilized by the County to- the street fl•ontage improvement requirements for this plat. 10) The Examiner's Apn1 21, 2008 SEPA appeal decision maybe the subject of further appeals by either party or both parties regarding the propriety of the determination on the part of the SEPA Responsible Official and the Examiner to adopt the applicant's revised voluntary agreement. The Examiner will be conducting further MDNS appeal proceedings in this matter in the future if further SEPA MDNS appeals to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and possibly to the courts result in a,. reversal of that determination or in a remand to the Examiner for further proceedings. At that time, the decision requested of Yakima County by Mr. Cutter's May 9, 2008 response can be made as to whether a replacement Examiner should be selected to conduct those proceedings. 11) The Examiner's decision of April 21, 2008 provides that it is subject to appeal within 14 days of the date when the SEPA Responsible Official mails notice to the parties of the net pel':1ot contribution amount. Mr. Carmody's May 8, 2008 response seems to p lo-t contribution amount if Mr. Carmody's reference to $15,424.69 86 er for street 11con ..._. rtbuti,ons in that response is the amount remaining after deduction of the traffic impact analysis and appeal costs fiom the original $33,550 amount and if the procedure specified in the Examiner's April 21, 2008 SEPA appeal decision for determining the new per lot contribution amount confirms that amount. Whatever amount is substantiated, the amount of the new per lot contribution amount determined by the SEPA Responsible Official by that procedure and mailed to the parties will not change in the future unless a future decisionmaker changes the amount. The right -of -way dedication requirements of MDNS Mitigation Measure B -3 were not affected by the Examiner's April 21, 2008 decision adopting the revised voluntary agreement. DATED this 12"' day of May, 2008, Cottorwood'Partners, LLC 7 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Final becision re Reconsideration Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 w r Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner Ni t, SERVICE, z VA**gC g MA April 25, 2008 TO: FROM: RE: I Public Services 128 North Second Street - Fourth Floor Courthouse - Yakima, Washington 98901 (509) 574 -2300 - 1- 800 -572 -7354 - FAX (509) 574 -2301 - wwwco.yakima.wa.us VERN M. REDIFER, P.E. - Director - ... - -.. Cottonwood Partners, LLC & Parties of Steve Erickson, Planning Official Hearing Examiner Decision/Recommendation -- File Nos. SUB06- 0162 /SEP06 -062 On April 21, 2008 the Yakima County Hearing Examiner issued his decision on SEP 06 -062 and a recommendation on SUB 06 -0162. The Examiner's decision/recommendation is`enclosed. The bearing Examiner decision regarding SEE 06-062 the may be appealed to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration at a closed record public hearing. Appeals must be filed in the office of the Yakima County Public Services Department - Planning Division, 0 Floor County Courthouse, by 4 :30 p.m. on May 9, 2008. The filing fee is $320.00. If you have any questions on the decision or the appeal process, please contact Carol Faith at 574 -2300. Encl.: Hearing Examiner Decision Cy: Parties of Record H: IDevelopmenl Services6SUBDIVISIONIHEARING EXAWMRLSUB 06 -0162 Crown PointeM LtrAPL.doc u *� (11fry 01 DOC. INDEX r�r BOARD OF YAKIMA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NOTICE OF CLOSED RECORD PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners will hold a closed record public hearing on n sd''ayy May 13, 2008 at 10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible in Room B -33 of the Yakima County urthou !ty , t6.eOttder•the tlaminendation issued by the Yakima County Hearing Examiner for the following proposal: FILE NOS.: SUB 06- 0162 /SEP 06- 062 /PRJ 06 -01817 PROPONENT: Cottonwood Partners, LLC PROPOSAL: To subdivide approximately 17 acres into 61 single - family residential lots entitled "Crown Pointe "'. The property is located on the southeast corner of Coolidge Load and South 80d` Avenue Within about the 7700 block of Coolidge load. Parcel Nos. 181332 - 33436. The _complete application may be reviewed during normal County business hours at the Yakima County Public Services, Planning Department, on the 4` h Floor of the County Courthouse. If you have any questions on the proposal, please give Carol Faith, Senior Project Coordinator, a call at 574 -2300. Dated this 22 "d day of April, 2008. Publish: . 2008 Bill. Acct. #10826, Planning DOC. INDEX C -?) Public ServiceSAN / Gary M. Cuillier APR 2 1 2008 ATTORNEY AT LAW Vern ._Gary..__.Dan, -_ Steve.^.. 3IM ,SECOND STREET BIII^„pave— Lisa— Carman YAKIMA, WASHINGTON 98901 (509) 575 -1800 FAX: (509) 452 -4601 HAND DELIVERED April 21, 2008 Vicki Adams u, �n v VA WMA Yakima County Planning Division 128 North Second Street Room 417 Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Hearing Examiner's Decision & Recommendation Cottonwood Partners, LLC, FILE NOS. SUB06 -162, SEP06 -062, PRJ2006 -1817 Dear Vicki.: Enclosed is the Hearing Examiner's Decision & Recommendation regarding the above - entitled matter. The hearing was held on July 5, 2007 and was left open until the last letter was received on April 7, 2008. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Very truly yours, �' c 111t�� GARY M. CUILLIER GMC:bw Enclosure cc: Rosalinda Ibarra, w/ Enclosure Pat Spurgin, Yakima City Pro Tem Hearing Examiner, w/ Enclosure DOC. INDEX # 6r Public Services ��!! APIA 2 1 2008 Vern,_._,GarY.._....Don_p gtv,ur,_ COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON -Dave- Lis4_ CarmE—;. _ HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION & RECOMMENDATION April 21, 2008 In the Matter of Application for Preliminary Plat Approval Submitted by: ) FILE NOS. SUB06 -162 SEP06 -062 Cottonwood Partners, LLC ) PRJ2006 -1817 For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be ) Known as "Crown Pointe" which ) Involves a SEPA MDNS Appeal ) Introduction. The history of this matter may be summarized as follows: 1) The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing on July 5, 2007. Yakima County Planning Division Project Planner Scott Stiltner presented the staff report that recommended approval of the proposed preliminary plat with conditions. Yakima County SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson testified in favor of the proposed preliminary plat and explained his reason for changing the SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) road frontage improvement requirements. County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent McHenry, explained the origin of the per -lot fee amount offered by the applicant for road frontage improvements. City of Yakima (City) Mayor Dave Edler, City Code Administration and Planning Manager Doug Maples and City Senior Assistant City Attorney Jeff Otter were not opposed to approval of the preliminary plat, but presented evidence in support of the City's appeal of the SEPA MDNS by emphasizing the need for the applicant to contribute its fair or proportional share toward road frontage improvements. The applicant's representatives, James Carmody of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., Bill Hordan- of Hordan Planning Services and Rich Hochrein of Cottonwood Partners, LLC, testified in support of the proposed preliminary plat and Cottonwood Partners, LLC 1 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 8& Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # G presented testimony to the effect that the MDNS requires the applicant to contribute more than its fair or proportional share of street frontage improvements. 2) No one testified in opposition to the proposed preliminary plat. 3) The Hearing Examiner issued -a- SEPA *Appeal Decision requesting additional information and a Preliminary Plat Recommendation dated July 19, 2007. The Summary of Decision and Recommendation stated: "The Hearing Examiner revises the MDNS to allow the preliminary plat process to proceed and this appeal hearing to be continued to adjust the MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements if a different share is shown to be fair and proportional through a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official and recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that possible adjustment through this appeal process and the other conditions stated in the modified MDNS and in this recommendation." The SEPA appeal decision stated in part: "It is important to the Examiner that a determination -of the applicant's fair and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the additional information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the required amount of property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed dismissal of this appeal or by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any aspect of the MDNS other than the applicant's future dedication and/or monetary contribution obligations. The additional mitigation measure will therefore read as follows: `Mitigation Measure B4: The above - referenced MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official. The dedication and payment obligations set forth herein or as adjusted shall be made as provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval.' " The procedure to finalize the decision was specified as follows: "The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal for the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested and Cottonwood Partners, LLC 2 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80111 Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 R• scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this appeal. Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either dismissed by agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedication of property and payment of funds for road frontage- improvements are finally determined." 4) On July 30, 2007, the City submitted a Request for Reconsideration containing a comprehensive discussion of many points and authorities involved in this appeal. 5) On July 31, 2007, the Examiner issued an Interim Decision inquiring as to whether SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson or the applicant's attorney James Carmody would be addressing the issues raised in the Request for Reconsideration. 6) On July 31, 2007, a letter from Mr. Erickson advised of the applicant's agreement to provide a traffic impact analysis by a traffic engineering consultant acceptable to the County Engineer. 7) After receiving a letter from Mr. Carmody dated August 3, 2007 and a letter from Mr. Cutter dated August 7, 2007, the Examiner issued his Decision re Request for Reconsideration of SEPA Appeal Decision dated August 20, 2007 which listed 12 disputed and/or unclear issues raised by the SEPA appeal that \required further information to answer. Besides affirming the need for additional information by way of a traffic impact analysis, that decision regarding the request for reconsideration held that a further SEPA appeal was not required until after issuance of a future final decision regarding the exact amount required to be paid for road improvements. 8) By Mr. Carmody's letter dated February 5, 2008, a traffic impact analysis prepared by Sunburst Engineering, P.S. was submitted to Mr. Erickson and the Examiner. By a follow -up letter from Mr. Carmody dated February 21, 2008, Mr. Carmody indicated that he was unclear on the procedure to be followed and suggested that the Examiner could review the materials and issue a modified recommendation. By a letter dated February 25, 2008, Mr. Cutter argued that the traffic impact analysis had several shortcomings and that the applicant's demand for reduction of the mitigation should be denied. By letter dated March 13, 2008, Mr. Carmody addressed Mr. Cutter's objections to the traffic impact analysis and argued that the contribution based on that analysis should be $13.61 per lot with no required right -of -way dedication. 9) By letter dated March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson indicated that the County Transportation Division had some questions about the methodology and findings of the traffic impact analysis which arguably supported only a total of $13.61 per lot toward road improvements because the Sunburst team did not consult with the County Transportation Division as directed in the preparation of the analysis. Mr. Erickson also pointed to issues raised by Mr. Cutter and the City's tacit agreement not to pursue greater mitigation payment than the original amount offered by the applicant. Mr. Erickson finally indicated that the applicant is still willing to make Cottonwood Partners, LLC 3 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat SUB 6 -0 62 ve. ; SEP06 062 ,� .M good its offer, but with a reduction for its legal and traffic impact analysis costs. Based on these factors, Mr. Erickson asserted that the applicant's original offer set forth in MDNS Mitigation Measure B2 should be required and that the Examiner may direct the parties to resolve the legal and traffic impact analysis costs. • ; 10) By letter dated April 7, 2008, 1W. Carmody disputed the assertions of SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson. Specifically he indicated that returning to the original MDNS is not fair, reasonable or supported by applicable law or fact; that Sunburst Engineering did in fact consult with the County Transportation Division and at that Division's direction consulted with the City's comparable Division because the area has been annexed; that the study's methodology complies with all applicable traffic engineering standards in all respects; that the applicant has incurred the expense of the traffic study, incurred expenses with respect to the appeal, has been delayed in the construction of the project, faces significantly higher construction and development costs, and faces deteriorated market conditions (including the mortgage market) for total losses exceeding $100,000; that Mr. Erickson's letter did not support the applicant's "middle ground" proposal to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues; and that a decision should be issued immediately and the matter should be scheduled for hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 11) No continued hearing has been requested or scheduled for the Examiner per the procedure specified in the July 19, 2007 decision and recommendation. The parties seem to be requesting the Examiner to make a final SEPA appeal decision without a continued hearing or any further clarifying information. This SEPA appeal decision and preliminary plat recommendation is therefore being issued within ten business days of the last letter ,in this matter which was from Mr. Carmody dated April 7, 2008 because it is still important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat. 12) Since the preliminary plat recommendation of July 19, 2007 was not submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for decision pending determination and payment of the exact per lot contribution of the MDNS prior to final plat approval, the same preliminary plat recommendation is repeated here. Summary of Decision and Recommendation. Since all parties seem to be asking the Examiner to issue a final SEPA appeal decision without having answers to all the questions in his decision regarding the request for reconsideration dated August 20, 2007 Cottonwood Partners, LLC 4 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # C-3, and without having information to clarify some of the assertions submitted since then which could be obtained by means of a continued hearing or additional submittals, the Examiner will issue his final SEPA appeal decision and reissue his preliminary ,plat recommendation which may both be summarized as follows: 1) The Examiner will accept the applicant's statements as to the need to avoid further delay and the applicant's description of its "middle ground" proposal relayed to Mr. Erickson. That proposal was "to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and in addressing the appeal issues." Since Mr. Erickson recommended determining the amount of costs and expenses to be deducted in some manner separate from the MDNS process and since Mr. Carmody's final letter characterized that detail as showing lack of support for the proposal, the amount to be deducted will be determined as part of the SEPA process by submittal of itemized statements of the costs and expenses described by Mr. Carmody to SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson for deduction of same from the original voluntary agreement. 2) The Examiner recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that revision of the MDNS and the other conditions stated in the MDNS and in this recommendation. Basis for Decision and Recommendation. Based on a consideration of the staff report, exhibits, sworn testimony and other evidence presented at the open record public hearing on July 5, 2007; views of the site on July 17, 2007 and prior to that date with no one else present; the written evidence submitted and decisions issued since the decision of July 19, 2007 which are summarized above in the introduction and which shall be additional exhibits in the record of this matter; the applicable SEPA MDNS review requirements; the applicable subdivision requirements; the applicable comprehensive plan provisions; the applicable zoning ordinance requirements; the applicable development standards; and the requisite consistency criteria; the Hearing Examiner makes the following: Cottonwood Partners, LLC 5 DO C. Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # FINDINGS I. Applicant/Pronerty Owner. The applicant and property owner is Cottonwood Partners, LLC, P.O. Box 8353, Yakima, Washington 98907. II. Applicant's Representatives. The applicant's representatives are James Carmody of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., 405 East Lincoln Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98901 and Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, 410 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington 98901. III. Location. The proposed preliminary plat is located on the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road and the parcel number is 181332- 33436. The property was annexed into the City on April 8, 2007, but the subdivision will continue to be processed to completion by Yakima County under County laws at the applicant's request as allowed by an interlocal agreement between those two municipalities. IV. Proposal. The proposed preliminary plat would divide about 17.04 acres into 61 single - family residential lots ranging in size from 8,001 square feet to 12,726 square feet and averaging 8,992 square feet. The subdivision itself is proposed to be accomplished in two phases. Phase 1 is proposed to consist of 33 lots and Phase 2 is proposed to consist of 28 lots. The proposed lots are intended for future single - family residential development that will be served by extended existing utilities including public water and sewer. Proposed access is from South 80th Avenue (one driveway) and Coolidge Road (one driveway). Cottonwood Partners, LLC 6 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80" Ave. � SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 V. Proiect Description. - Currently the project site is an alfalfa field. The project site is relatively flat with a slope of approximately 0 to 2 %. There are no designated critical areas on or immediately adjacent to the site, but the property is located within the Wide Hollow Creek Watershed which is a floodprone basin per the Yakima County Engineer. VI. Jurisdiction. A preliminary plat is classified and processed as a Type IV review. The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing regarding this preliminary plat application pursuant to Title 16B of the Yakima County Code and has. formulated this SEPA MDNS appeal decision that may be appealed to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and this preliminary plat recommendation that will be considered by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners at a closed record public hearing. RCW 58.17.110(2) provides: "A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and 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) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication." VII. Notices. Notices were given in the following manner: Mailing of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review: December 13, 2006 Publication of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review: December 16, 2006 Mailing of Notice of Preliminary MDNS: February 14, 2007 Publication of Notice of Preliminary MDNS: February 18, 2007 Mailing of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing: May 23, 2007 Publication of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing: May 26, 2007 Posting of Notice of Hearing on Property: June 20, 2007 Cottonwood Partners, LLC 7 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 801 Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 VIII. Environmental Review and SEPA MDNS Appeal. The Examiner's findings relative to the County's environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act which is the subject of the City's appeal are as follows: 1) The County as lead agency determined that the environmental impacts associated with Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed preliminary plat'warrant mitigation for significant and nonsignificant impacts derived from WAC 197 -11 -660, Section 16.04.230 of the Yakima County Code (YCC) and the policies contained in the Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and Plan 2015. A preliminary MDNS was issued on February 13, 2007 which required stormwater mitigation measures and the following transportation mitigation measure: "Mitigation Measure BI: Street improvements are required for the proposed development. The developer shall improve (or Bond) both Coolidge Road and S. 80a` Avenue along the property frontage. The requirement is for a Collector Arterial road per County Roadway Section No. 2 including sidewalk and street illumination (70' right -of -way). Accompanying stormwater facilities must also be provided." 2) By letter to the County SEPA Responsible Official dated April 3, 2007, applicant's attorney James Carmody argued that full road frontage improvements could not be required of the applicant for four reasons: "(1) the mitigation is improperly imposed to correct pre - existing road deficiencies; (2) the exaction violates constitutional mandates and limitations; (3) mitigation violates RCW 82.02.020; and (4) imposition of the off -site improvement requirements is inconsistent with prior practice." 3) SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson was advised by Yakima County's Corporate Counsel Terry Austin that Mr. Carmody's position is correct, but Mr. Erickson does not recall any legal advice or discussion with Mr. Austin regarding proportionality. 4) The SEPA .Responsible Official accepted the applicant's offer to dedicate 14,900 square feet of frontage along Coolidge Road and South 80`h Avenue to allow the roads to be widened to County standards in the future and to also pay $550.00. per lot toward the cost of improving the Coolidge Road frontage in the future to the County urban road standard which was adopted for that road in 2003. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 8 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 8& Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 C^ 5) The County's final SEPA MDNS issued on May 22, 2007 contains the following findings and mitigation measures: "Stormwater (Ground and Surface water) The 61 proposed lots in Phases 1 & 2 are located within- the Wide Hollow Creek Watershed, which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to be a flood -prone basin. On -site stormwater retention is required on the development to prevent adverse impacts to surface water. Excavation, site development, subsequent lot layout and stormwater management needs to be done in a manner so drainage facilities and adjacent property owners are not negatively impacted by stormwater runoff. Based on a variety of information, depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system performance and design, and can effect the plat layout. Given the variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater, and infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, it is recommended that this data be obtained prior to preliminary plat. They should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including long -term inspection and maintenance. Public stormwater facilities are reviewed and approved by County Roads. Depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system design and potentially the preliminary plat layout. Given the observed variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater, infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, the type and depth of geological matrix, depth to groundwater, and infiltration capacity should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including allowances and easements for proper long -term inspection and maintenance by private or public entities. Please consult the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (Ecology, September 2004), the recently revised Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program rule (Chapter 173 -218 WAC), and Ecology's draft document entitled Determination of Treatment and Source Control for UIC Well in Cottonwood Partners, LLC 9 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 Washington State (Ecology, July 2005). The information contained in these documents will aid the designer in choosing the appropriate stonnwater facilities and/or treatment facilities for the particular project. Please note: Operators of the following construction activities are required to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit for Stormwatef Discharge Associated with Construction Activity (Ecology, November 2005): Clearing, grading and/or excavation which results in disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state; and clearing, grading and/or excavation on sites smaller than one acre which are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, if the common plan of development or sale will ultimately disturb one acre or more, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state. Mitigation Measure Al: To adequately control post- construction surface water runoff, a Stormwater Management Plan, meeting the design stani ards below, shall be submitted for review by Yakima, County Public Services prior to grading the property, any road development, or approval of building permits. 1. Full retention of runoff for the 25 year design storm event is required. 2. The stormwater management plan shall describe existing conditions, including drainage facilities, surface water features, soil types, geotechnical conditions, infiltration rates and seasonal high groundwater depth. 3. A professional engineer registered in the State of Washington shall design all drainage facilities and components using best management practices. Plans, drawings and geotechnical information shall be sealed, signed and dated by a professional engineer. 4. All Underground Injection Control (UIC) devices must be designed in accordance with the Department of Ecology UIC guidelines. 5. For public stormwater facilities, allowances and access shall be made for proper long -term inspection and maintenance, to be provided to the County. MitiLyation Measure A2: Because this development exceeds one acre of disturbed land,' it is- likely that stormwater will cause erosion and other surface water problems during the course of construction. To address such issues, the proponent must submit a Construction Stormwater General Permit application to the WA Dept. of Ecology, obtain appropriate reviews or approvals and provide evidence of DOE's approval to the Building Official prior to construction. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 10 DOM "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. Wh Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 ., Transportation The property is bordered on the north by Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue on the west. Both are now city - maintained paved (BST) roads built to rural standards with side ditches. Access to the plat is proposed from both roads. The federal funding functional classification of the roads changed _ from rural to urban standards in 2003. County -wide Planning Policies, both adopted Urban Area and County comprehensive plans and development standards specify the need for urban standards (which in this case would mean curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights for local access streets and collector arterials serving an urban subdivision). Both roads in their current condition are inconsistent with adopted urban standards. Yakima County comprehensive plan policy provides that projects requiring improvements in advance of the TIP are responsible for providing those improvements concurrent with development. While the additionW 610 additional vehicle trips per day would not bring traffic levels of service below adopted standards, a probable significant adverse impact to air quality and road maintenance will likely result from the project if adopted urban standards are not required concurrent with this development, as well as from increased construction and maintenance costs arising from the shift of a private cost to the public sector and increased costs arising from deferral of the requirements. The total cost of frontage improvements was estimated by Yakima County to be $2,723 per lot. However, relevant court decisions preclude requirement of frontage improvements given the circumstances of this project. The applicant has, however volunteered to contribute $550 per lot toward the future upgrading of Coolidge Road. This amount constitutes an approximate proportional fair share of twenty (20) percent of the costs of the project. Mitieation Measure Bl: Street improvements are required for the proposed development. The developer shall improve each access onto Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue with curb, gutter and sidewalk and any stormwater drainage facilities through the radius of the intersection. Mitigation Measure B2: The developer will contribute to future upgrading of Coolidge Road to an Urban Standard with curb, gutter and asphalt surfacing. The Cottonwood Partners, LLC 11 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. W Ave. #C-3 SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay $550.00 per lot toward the improvement of Coolidge Road due by final plat approval. Mitigation Measure B3: The developer shall dedicate the appropriate right -of- way to accommodate curb, gutter, sidewalks, stormwater facilities and streetlights along the full frontage of the subdivision. Coolidge Road right -of -way dedication shall be based on County Collector Arterial built to County Urban Roadway Section No. 2 or the closest equivalent City of Yakima Standard. South 80" Avenue right -of -way dedication shall be sufficient to meet County Local Access street requirements, including curb, gutter and sidewalk or the closest City of Yakima Standard." 6) On June 5, 2007, the City of Yakima appealed the SEPA MDNS to the Hearing Examiner. The hearing regarding the appeal was held at the same time as the hearing regarding the preliminary plat. 7) The City claimed in its appeal and testimony that changing the MDNS to accept the applicant's offer relative to frontage improvements is contrary to the rough proportionality requirement although the City was not prepared to say what percentage short of a requirement for full frontage improvements' would satisfy the rough proportionality test. The City emphasized the need for developers to pay their fair share of needed street improvements. The City indicated that this is a subdivision which will directly impact two substandard rural streets with increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic, particularly students walking to and from school, in a rapidly growing portion of the City. The City asserted that the mitigation measures required by the County in the preliminary MDNS are appropriate and mandated to preserve the public safety and welfare for developments within the City that are subject to the rapid urbanization currently occurring in the Crown Pointe area. The Examiner was unable to confirm by site visits where or if school busses pick up school children in the vicinity of the proposed preliminary plat. 8) The applicant's attorney agreed with the obligation of developers to pay their fair share or rough proportionality of needed street improvements, but claimed that the applicant has offered more than its fair share in the form of right -of -way dedication allegedly having a value of $126,650.00 and $550.00 per lot ($33,550.00). He reached this conclusion by reliance upon the City of Yakima transportation capacity standard for urban roads of 800 vehicle trips per peak hour per lane in Subsection 12.08.020(G) of the Yakima Municipal Code. He argued that since this subdivision will only generate a maximum peak hour traffic addition of 62 trips, the applicant should only be required to contribute 62/800 of the estimated street frontage improvement costs ($211.03 per lot Cottonwood Partners, LLC 12 DOc "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Rd. & So. 80" Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # �• rather than the $550.00 per lot offered or the $2,723.00 per lot total cost). That figure does not include right -of -way acquisition which Mr. Carmody valued at $8.50 per square foot for a total of $126,650.00 based on the estimated value of a building site rather than raw land. 9) County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent McHenry, testified that he has not addressed the proportionality issue relative to this subdivision. He indicated that the $550.00 per lot amount that Cottonwood Partners were required to pay on two other subdivisions to upgrade the gravel segment of Coolidge Road to the west of this subdivision was not based on a proportionality analysis, but was rather based on the number of lots that would ultimately share in the expense for that upgrading that was not covered by the contribution required of the Apple Tree development, a totally different situation than this subdivision. He did not have information regarding current traffic counts on Coolidge Road or South 80t' Avenue, but indicated that they currently operate at level of service (LOS) A or B and would not operate below the acceptable LOS C as a result of this subdivision. 10) The County's SEPA Responsible Official testified that he determined that the applicant's $550.00 per lot payment would be about 20% of the total cost. To reach that conclusion, he subtracted the $24,500.00 sidewalk and streetlight costs for South 80th Avenue from the total $190,600.00 estimated road frontage improvement costs on both streets based on his understanding that those improvements would likely be on the other side of that street. He changed his findings relative to the need for the applicant to provide full road frontage improvements per the preliminary MDNS based on the legal advice he received from the County's attorney relative to the points asserted in Mr. Carmody's letter, but, as previously noted, he recalls no discussion as to proportionality. 11) Without deciding whether Mr. Carmody's method of deternmining proportionality was correct or incorrect, the Examiner noted in his July 19, 2007 SEPA appeal decision that in other SEPA appeals he had been provided information regarding the likely traffic impacts of proposed subdivisions and the road improvements that should be required as a result. He further noted that most MDNS mitigating measures for road improvements become final without an appeal before the preliminary plat hearing and that there are therefore differences in how SEPA is applied under the individualized approach that is required in such reviews. But when there is a dispute about what road improvements should be required as a result of a SEPA MDNS appeal, the Examiner has had the assistance of expert opinions and facts such as current vehicular and pedestrian traffic counts and characteristics for the impacted streets to compare with the likely traffic impacts of the proposed subdivision on those streets. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) has been prepared either by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant that has expertise in determining the extent of likely direct traffic impacts and the fair and Cottonwood Partners, LLC 13 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat DOC. Coolidge Rd. & So. ,80 Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX proportional amount that should be paid or the land that should be dedicated as a result. This is not necessarily an exact science and only rough proportionality is required. But here it appeared that the applicant's offer had been accepted without that type of traffic impact analysis. The Examiner therefore held that where, as here, there is a dispute as to whether the offer is more than required or less than required to be fair and proportional, a TIA from the City, the applicant and/or the County as directed by the SEPA Responsible Official should be required. That would help him address proportionality with appropriate facts, figures and opinions. It would also help both the applicant and the public be assured that a fair and proportional road frontage improvement obligation is imposed for the direct impacts of the subdivision. Requesting additional information for that purpose is authorized by Section 16.04.090 of the YCC which adopts by reference the following mandatory language in WAC 197 -11 -335: "The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal." Revising an MDNS to request additional information is also within the authorized functions of the Hearing Examiner which are detailed in Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(5) of the YCC: "The Hearing Examiner may affirm, modify or reverse the determination of the responsible official and may issue a revised DS, DNS or MDNS. The Hearing Examiner may also request additional information pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 335." 12) The July 19, 2007 SEPA appeal decision therefore suggested the following approach for processing this preliminary plat application: "12) It is important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the additional information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the required amount of property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed dismissal of this appeal or by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any aspect of the MDNS other than the applicant's future dedication and/or monetary contribution obligations. The additional mitigation measure will therefore'read as follows: Cottonwood Partners, LLC 14 DOC, "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # ' 'Mitigation Measure B4: The above - referenced MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in, the pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official. The dedication and payment obligations set forth herein or as adjusted shall be made or provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval.' "13) The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal. for the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested and scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this appeal. Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either dismissed by agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedicatonn of property and payment of funds for road frontage improvements are finally determined." 13) On July 30, 2007, the City submitted a Request for Reconsideration. On July 31, the Examiner issued an Interim Decision inquiring as to whether SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson or the applicant's attorney James Carmody would be addressing the issues raised in the Request for Reconsideration. On that same date a letter from Mr. Erickson advised of the applicant's agreement to provide a traffic impact analysis by a traffic engineering consultant acceptable to the County Engineer. After receiving a letter from Mr. Carmody dated August 3, 2007 and a letter from Mr. Cutter dated August 7, 2007, the Examiner issued his Decision re Request for Reconsideration of'' SEPA Appeal Decision dated August 20, 2007 which listed 12 disputed and unclear :issues raised by the SEPA appeal that required further information to answer. Besides affirming the need for additional information by way of a traffic impact analysis, that decision regarding the request for reconsideration held that a further SEPA appeal. to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners was not required until after issuance of a future final decision regarding the exact amount required to be paid for road improvements. 14) By Mr. Carmody's letter dated February 5, 2008, a traffic impact analysis prepared by Sunburst Engineering, P.S. was submitted to Mr. Erickson and the Examiner. By a follow -up letter from Mr. Carmody dated February 21, 2008, Mr. Carmody questioned the procedure to be followed after submission of the traffic impact analysis and suggested that the Examiner could review the materials and issue a modified Cottonwood Partners, LLC 15 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 G _ recommendation. By a letter dated February 25, 2008, Mr. Cutter submitted arguments critical of the traffic impact analysis, suggested that it would be inappropriate and wrong to rely on the report, emphasized the inadequacy of SEPA to provide for the appropriate development of an urban residential subdivision, and opposed any reduction in the applicant's agreed voluntary mitigation amount. By letter dated March 13, 2008, Mr. Carmody defended using the minimal peak hour trips along the frontage of the subdivision to arrive at $13.61 per lot with no required right -of -way dedication rather than using the number of such trips to and from the subdivision because the access points are at opposite ends of the subdivision, and argued that Mr. Cutter's other criticisms of the traffic impact analysis are unjustified and inappropriate. 15) By letter dated March 28, 2008, SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson indicated that the County Transportation Division questioned the methodology and findings of the traffic impact analysis which arguably supported only a total of $13.61 per lot toward road improvements because the Sunburst team did not consult with the County Transportation Division. He indicated that despite the issues that City and County staff have with the traffic impact analysis, no public purpose would be serv&d by delaying this project to allow further study. He referred to the City's tacit agreement not to pursue greater mitigation payment than the original amount offered by the applicant and the applicant's willingness to make good on its offer if compensated for legal and traffic analysis costs. He recommended that the original MDNS should stand as written and that the Examiner may direct the parties to resolve whether and how to resolve the legal and traffic analysis costs which are beyond the scope of the MDNS. 16) By letter dated April 7, 2008, Mr. Carmody disputed some of the assertions of SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson. Specifically he indicated that Sunburst Engineering did in fact consult with the County Transportation Division and at that Division's direction consulted with the City's comparable Division because the area has been annexed; that the study's methodology complies with all applicable traffic engineering standards in all respects; that the voluntary agreement was not intended to apply in the event of an appeal; and that the applicant has incurred the expense of the traffic study, incurred expenses with respect to the appeal, has been delayed in the construction of the project, faces significantly higher construction and development costs, and faces deteriorated market conditions (including the mortgage market) for total losses exceeding $100,000. 'He also asserted that Mr. Erickson's letter improperly disclosed the applicant's "middle ground" settlement proposal because Mr. Erickson did not recommend acceptance of the proposal. Instead of recommending the "settlement proposal to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues," he recommended imposition of the original MDNS requirements with a possible unrelated Cottonwood Partners, LLC 16 DOGo "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. S& Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # G process to be prescribed by the Examiner for resolving whether and how to resolve legal and traffic analysis costs. Mr. Carmody's letter further indicates that Mr. Erickson initially solicited the applicant's consideration of a "middle ground" which would be acceptable to Yakima County in an effort to resolve the matter and subsequently advised that the proposal was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County. Mr. Carmody's letter finally asserted that since Mr. Erickson's letter did not include support for the "middle ground" settlement proposal, it should not have disclosed the settlement proposal as a statement of position, and the required contribution should therefore be $13.47 per lot without any dedication of property. 17) Even though no continued hearing has been requested or scheduled for the Examiner per the procedure specified in the July 19, 2007 decision and recommendation, the parties seem to be requesting the Examiner to make a final SEPA appeal decision . without a continued hearing or further information. This SEPA appeal decision and preliminary plat recommendation is being issued within ten business days of the last letter in this matter which was from Mr. Carmody dated April 7, 2008 because it is still important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair\and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat. All delays to this point have been the result of the need for additional information and arguments from the parties to the appeal and from the SEPA Responsible Official to determine the issues presented by the SEPA appeal. The traffic impact analysis and subsequent information and arguments presented by the parties and by the SEPA Responsible Official failed to definitively or authoritatively answer most of the Examiner's 12 specific questions listed in his August 20, 2007 decision regarding the request for reconsideration. Nevertheless, the Examiner is willing to accommodate the desire of the SEPA Responsible Official and the parties to have a decision from the Examiner based on what information is available. 18) One thing that is clear in this record is that the SEPA Responsible Official took the initiative to solicit from the applicant a "middle ground" which would be acceptable to Yakima County in an effort to resolve this matter. Another thing which is clear in this record is that the applicant took the initiative to offer a middle ground settlement proposal. Since the SEPA Responsible Official did not respond to the April 7, 2008 characterization of the settlement proposal, it is undisputed that the offer was "to accept the original voluntary agreement less all costs and expenses incurred in preparation of the engineering study and addressing the appeal issues." It is further undisputed that "Mr. Erickson advised that that proposal was reasonable and would be supported by Yakima County." Without deciding whether it was improper to disclose that settlement proposal if it was not being recommended, the Examiner agrees with the SEPA Responsible Official that under the circumstances and the time constraints here Cottonwood Partners, LLC 17 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 DOC. INDEX G 3 presented the proposal was reasonable and worthy of support. Since the SEPA Responsible Official suggested that the Examiner may direct the parties whether and how to resolve the legal and traffic analysis costs of the SEPA appeal in a process separate from the MDNS appeal, Mr. Carmody correctly asserted that that suggestion differs- from the settlement proposal he described. But the Examiner will implement that suggestion in a way that does not differ from the settlement proposal he described. Specifically, the Examiner suggests that those costs are what they are. They have already been incurred and have probably already been paid. They cannot be changed now after the fact. The itemized statements for the applicant's traffic impact analysis costs and legal expenses to address the appeal issues should merely be submitted to the SEPA Responsible Official with proof of payment or verification that they will be paid. The $550.00 per lot voluntary agreement amount in SEPA MDNS Mitigation Measure B2 should be reduced by 1161 of those costs and expenses. The time period for further appeal by any party of the SEPA appeal to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners should be within 14 days after notice is mailed of the new per lot amount in SEPA MitiLyation Measure B2 that reflects the middle ground settlement proposal amount unless It parties sooner advise the SEPA Responsible Official of a decision not to further appeal the matter. Mitigation Measure B4 used to request additional information in the July 19, 2007 SEPA appeal decision should not be included in the final MDNS. 19) Since the preliminary plat recommendation of July 19, 2007 was not submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for decision pending determination of the exact per lot contribution required by the MDNS prior to final plat approval, the same preliminary plat recommendation is here repeated for consideration by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners. IX. Approvriatg SMbdivision. Provisions for Public Ideal b afe and figneral Welfare Through Zoning and Land. Use Re uirements for the Site and Adjacent Properties. The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as it satisfies the intent and minimum lot size; requirements of the Single - Family Residential (R -1) zoning district and is compatible with adjacent land uses. The surrounding uses are residences on lots ranging from 0.25 acres to 2.6 acres immediately to the north and south. The lots immediately to the south are in a conventional subdivision with urban -level services. Property to the east Cottonwood Partners, LLC 18 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80" Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 ' is orchard and a single family residence on a large lot. To the west is orchard. The property is within the City of Yakima as a result of recent annexation, but this proposed subdivision will continue to be processed subject to the provisions of the Yakima Utan Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (Title 15A of the Yakima County Code) because an applicant may elect under the interlocal agreement to continue the subdivision to completion under the County's direction and subject to existing County development codes when a completed subdivision application is submitted to the County prior to annexation. The property and surrounding area is designated as Low Density Residential under the Comprehensive Plan. Low Density Residential is primarily planned for single - family, detached residences. Net residential density before considering roads and rights -of -way is less than 7 dwelling units per acre, which is considered the lowest residential density to efficiently support public services. The Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation is implemented by the UAZO which designates the subject area as a Single - Family Residential (R -1) zoning district. The intent of the R -1 zone is to provide a variety of residential lifestyles with densities generally ranging from 2 units per net residential acre to 7 units per net residential acre. The higher densities are permitted when public water and public sewer systems are used. X. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health Saitly and General We] are __Through Development Standards and Requirements. The lot configuration of the proposed preliminary plat allows for development consistent with the following development standards and requirements that have been established to promote the public health, safety and general welfare: Cottonwood Partners; LLC 19 DO(r, "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 1) Density/Lot Size. The proposed lots are larger than the minimum size required m the R -1 zoning district where public water and sewer services are utilized as proposed here. Subsection 15A.05.030(b) of the UAZO provides that the "Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Permitted per Net Residential Acre" within a single subdivision and other types of residential developments allow no more than 7.0 units per net residential acre. The specific minimum residential lot sizes are dependent on. the applicable zoning designation and various situations. Within the R -1 zone, the minimum lot size for a situation where a public or community water system and the regional or an approved community sewer system is available is specifically set at a minimum 7,000 square feet per lot under Table 5 -2 of the UAZO. The smallest proposed minimum lot size is 8,001 square feet which complies with the 7,000 square foot minimum requirement for individual lots. Calculations based on parcel information and dimensions shown on the preliminary plat indicate an overall density of 3.51 units per acre which is about half of the maximum density of 7 units per acre. 2) Setbacks: In accordance with Table 5 -1 in Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO, the required front yard structural setback from Coolidge Road is 65 feet `from the right -of- way centerline. For lots abutting South Se Avenue, the setback will be 65 feet from centerline. For lots that abut interior streets, the setback will be 50 feet from centerline. The minimum structural setback requirement for side yards not bordering a street is 5 feet. A setback of 10 feet from the property line is required for side yards that border a right -of -way. A setback of 20 feet from the property line is required for rear yards not bordering a street. Any rear yards bordering a street will have the same setback requirement as the front yard. The proposed preliminary plat will have large enough lots to accommodate all front, rear and side structural setbacks with normally -sized residential dwellings. Even though adjustments to standards are sometimes granted and the standards themselves could always change, these standards may be required to be shown on the final plat. 3) Lot Coverage The lots are of such a size that normally -sized residential structures with accessory buildings can be constructed on the lots without exceeding the 45% maximum lot coverage in the R -1 zoning district. The estimated maximum lot coverage proposed as a part of SEPA environmental review for this proposal is 35 %. 4,1 Lot Dimensions: In addition to the required minimum lot area as described above, minimum lot width within the R -1 zone is 50 feet provided the lots are served by a public or community water system and the regional sewer system. The preliminary plat indicates all proposed lots exceed 50 feet of width. All of the proposed lots will have frontage and access by way of the interior roads. The easements are being proposed to provide for both access and utilities. The proposed dimensions of the lots comply with Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO required in the R -1 zoning district. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 20 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave. # r3 SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 5) Site Screening; -Site screening is not proposed or required for the proposed plat. Table 7 -1 in Chapter 15A.07 of the UAZO generally does not require sitescreening for this type of proposal. Xl. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Open Spaces. Provisions for common open space, as may be required by Section 15A.09.030 of the UAZO, are not deemed necessary for this proposed preliminary plat. The evidence submitted at the hearing indicates that the proposed preliminary plat contains sufficient lot sizes and is in an area that has sufficient open spaces without dedication of land for open space, public park or recreational purposes. The requirement in Section 14.28.070 of the YCC to dedicate up to five percent of a proposed subdivision area for either private or public parks or recreational areas or to contribute funds for park purposes\ is not typically invoked by the County unless there is a significant lack of open space within a development or to replace a park or recreational area that will be lost due to development. As proposed, the project density of the subject development is 3.51 lots per acre which is much lower than the 7 lots per acre allowed in the R-1 zone. The proposed subdivision will have a maximum lot coverage of 45% and will not displace any known recreational land or recreational use. Therefore, additional land for open space or for replacing parks and recreational areas will not be necessary. XII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Drainage Ways. All stormwater runoff will have to be retained on site. Section 14.48, 100 of the YCC requires an acceptable drainage plan. The County has determined that potentially significant adverse impacts could be caused by the development unless storm and ground water is properly managed. Mitigation measures Al and A2 of the MDNS have been required in order to ensure the proposed plat adequately provides for suitable drainage without causing undue Cottonwood Partners, LLC 21 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 8& Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 —^ adverse impacts. Erosion- control measures, an NPDES stormwater construction permit and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan are Department of Ecology requirements that may take 45 to 60 days to process. XIII. ApproonWe Subdiviaj2n Provisions for Potable'Water, Su lies. Section 14.52.130 of the YCC requires a plat to be connected to an existing municipal public water system or a large Group A water purveyor when available. The proposal is to utilize water provided by the Nob Hill Water Association. The proposed water system will comply with public water system requirements although there is no verification that the Nob Hill Water Association is able to serve this subdivision. The Department of Ecology commented that the purveyor of water is responsible for ensuring that the uses are within the limitations of its water rights. XIV. AiDvroujafe Subdivision Provisions for 5anitan, 'Wastes. Section 14.52.130 of the YCC requires on -site sewage disposal systems for all new lots unless municipal or public sewer service is available. Section 15.20.032 of the YCC requires that development connect to public sewer service where available. The proposed source of sewage disposal is through the Yakima Regional Wastewater Facility ( YRWWF) in accordance with City of Yakima standards. As proposed, connection to the YRWWF will comply with sewage disposal requirements of the YCC and the Yakima urban area development standards, but verification of service availability to this subdivision has not been confirmed. XV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions f r Public Ways, Sidewalks and other ElInning Features for Childrgn who Talk to and from School, Title 10 and Title 14 of the YCC provide minimum street standards and requirements for subdivision development including those for project site and fire access, interior and frontage improvements, right -of -way standards and other necessary transportation elements. The 61 new lots of Crown Pointe are proposed to access Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue through two individual driveways. Transportation impacts identified for Crown Pointe are also applicable to environmental impacts attributable to the subdivision and are substantively incorporated as Mitigation Measures B1, B2 and B3, including the revision to the $550.00 per lot figure in B2 as a result of this SEPA appeal decision. Compliance with the conditions of approval and the mitigation measures described within the final revised MDNS will satisfy required criteria for transportation and public safety standards applicable to this project. XVI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Transit Stops, Playgrounds, Schools and SchoolLyrounds. Under the evidence presented at the hearing, the size, location and nature of the proposed preliminary plat do not require special provisions for these other features required by RCW 58.17.110(2) to be considered such as transit stops, playgrounds, schools or schoolgrounds. XVII. AXpropriale Subdivision Provisions for Other Features of the Pro osal. Other features of the proposed preliminary plat that are provided in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare include the following: (a) FIRE PROTECTION: Section 13.09.070 of the YCC and the International Fire Code specify fire flow and hydrant requirements which are required for new development. It is standard practice for the Nob Hill Water Association to coordinate fire hydrant locations with the Yakima County Fire Marshall. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 23 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06- 0162.; SEP06 -062 # (b) IRRIGATION: Section 14.48.045 of the YCC requires that provisions be made for irrigation water. The subject property is within the Yakima - Tieton Irrigation District and the applicant proposes to provide irrigation water from that District to all 61 lots. (c) DUST CONTROL: The Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority has submitted comments indicating that the developer must file and gain approval for a dust control plan prior to commencing any construction or grading activities: . (d) TOXIC SUBSTANCES: The Department of Ecology has submitted comments recommending that soils be analyzed for lead, arsenic and organochlorine pesticides and that potential buyers be notified if they are found in concentrations exceeding MTCA clean up levels. (e) ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE AND GARBAGE SERVICE: Electrical service, telephone service and garbage service are available in the area. Installation of the power' and telephone facilities must be completed, or contracted with the provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval. XVIII. ar tert nal siS under Section 16ll.06.020 of the Yakima Couan Code. The following analysis involves the application's consistency 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 County Code. During project review, neither Yakima County nor any subsequent reviewing body may re- examine alternatives to, or hear appeals on, the items identified in these conclusions except for issues of code interpretation: a) THE TYPE OF LAND USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE PROPOSAL (a residential development) is permitted on this site so long as it complies with the zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, building codes and other applicable regulations. b) THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT (lot size, contemplated density, population, transportation, etc.) will not exceed the allowable limit in the R -1 zoning district. c) THE AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC FACILITIES allow the proposed preliminary plat to be approved. Adequate infrastructure and public facilities such as water, sewer, garbage, telephone and electricity are available, or will be available at the time of development. d) TEX CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSAL, as conditioned, -will be consistent with the development standards for residential subdivisions. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 24 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave. # C SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 CONCLUSIONS Based on the above findings, the Examiner reaches the following conclusions: 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to decide SEPA MDNS appeal issues and make recommendations regarding applications for preliminary plat approval. 2. The SEPA MDNS for this proposal should be revised without delaying the processing of this preliminary plat to reduce the $550.00 per lot figure in Mitigation Measure 132 by 1/61 of the amount of the applicant's traffic impact analysis costs and legal expenses to address the appeal issues. 3. After inquiring into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication, the Hearing Examineurecon mends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" with the conditions detailed in this recommendation which make appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, public ways, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, sidewalks and, to the extent necessary, other requisite statutory considerations such as transit stops, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school, and which conditions also ensure that the public interest will be served. 4. The preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" can be adequately conditioned by the SEPA MDNS requirements as revised by this decision and the plat conditions set forth in this recommendation so as to ensure compatibility, compliance and consistency with the provisions of the zoning district and with the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan and so as to satisfy all the applicable County and State plat law requirements. 5. The SEPA MDNS decision herein may be appealed to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners within 14 days after the parties are mailed notice of the revised per lot contribution amount in Mitigation Measure B2 unless parties sooner advise the SEPA Responsible Official that there will be no further appeal of the SEPA MDNS. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 25 DOC. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # — DECISION & RECOMMENDATION The Hearing Examiner affirms the SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignifi6ance as revised by this decision and recommends to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners that the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" described in the application and in the related documents assigned file numbers SUB06 -162, SEP06 -062 and PRJ2006 -1817 be APPROVED, subject to compliance with the following conditions: General 1. Compliance with the SEPA Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated May 22, 2007 (with the $550.00 per lot contribution amount set forth in Mitigation Measure B2 reduced by the amount required by this decision) shall be required. The Determination and the Mitigation measures thereof are hereby adopted and incorpporated liereia by this reference. 2. All proposed lots must be provided with adequate fire flow in accordance with the adopted fire code prior to final plat approval. 3. Unless construction is concurrent or incorporated into other approvals and dust control requirements of Crown Pointe, a method of dust control for the construction phase of phase 1 and phase 2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority. A copy of the approval must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division prior to any construction activities. 4. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in Section 14.32.020 of the Yakima County Code. The monuments must be protected by cases and covers as approved by the County Engineer. Streets 5. Interior and dead -end streets may be constructed with rolled mountable curbs. The curb radii at all intersections and interior corners shall be constructed with barrier curbs from the property lines of the corner lots. (YCC 14.52. 100 Q. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 26 DOC "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 8e Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # L --3 6. The plans for all public road improvements must be designed to Yakima County standards, including applicable standards and mitigation measures of the revised MDNS herein, prepared by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the County Engineer prior to construction. 7. Dedicated 30 -foot by 30 -foot clear sight triangles must be provided at all intersection corners within the plat. Equivalent alternative plans supporting a reduction in distance may be submitted to the County Engineer for approval. 8. Street. names shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Services Department prior to fral plat approval. Street signs are required for this development. The signs will be installed by Public Services prior to acceptance of roads and all costs associated, with supplying and installing the signs must be reimbursed to Yakima County by the developer. Utilities 9. All public and private utilities located within interior easements or rights -of -way must be constructed prior to any road construction. 10. Installation of power and telephone facilities must be completed, or arranged with the provider -to be completed, prior to final plat approval. 11. All public and private utilities must be located underground with the exception of the standard telephone box, transmission box and similar structures. 12. Public utility easements must be provided for the two proposed shared interior access easements. If the easement is 50 feet or less, the utility easements shall be 10 feet in width or as specified by the utility providers. Minimum width for utility easements that are also utilized for irrigation is generally 15 feet. 13. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association system. No new individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification must be provided to the Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating the ability to provide domestic water, demonstrating that any necessary easements are provided for and demonstrating that all associated fees have been paid. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 27 DOM "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd.& So. 80'x' Ave. SUB06 -0162• ' SEP06 -062 14. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service fiom the Yakima Regional Wastewater system. Prior to final plat approval, written verification from the City of Yakima must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating that the system will serve all lots within the subdivision, that any necessary easements have been established, and that any required fees have been paid. Plat Notes 15. Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street names and numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County Public Services Department upon issuance of an approved Building Permit. 16. 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. 17. All lots of this subdivision have been provided with public sewer. ,All lots have been provided with public water connections. Timin 18. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid, together with any required pre - payment amount prior to final plat approval. 19. Prior to recording the final plat or issuance of building permits, either: (a) All required plat improvements, i.e. streets, sidewalks, utilities and drainage facilities, must be in place; or, (b) An escrow account must be established or a bond provided in an amount and with conditions acceptable to the Yakima County Engineer to assure installation of all remaining required improvements. If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required roadway improvements, and fails to complete these improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond agreement, the County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance. of building or occupancy permits until the required road and drainage improvements are accepted as satisfactorily completed. The County Engineer may issue building pein its on a lot- by-lot basis when it is determined that building construction will not intei -fere with utility and roadway construction. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 28 DOCi. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 20. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum five -year time period prescribed by Section 58.17.140 of the Revised Code of Washington. Any extension beyond the five -year time period is subject to the provisions of Chapter 14.24 of the Yakima County Code. DATED this 21" day of April, 2008. Gary M. Cuiilier, Hearing Examiner Cottonwood Partners, LLC 29 DOS. "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat INDEX Coolidge Rd. & So. 80" Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 # G _3 COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON HEARING EXAMINER'S INTERIM DECISION RE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SEPA APPEAL DECISION - July 31, 2007 In the Matter of the SEPA ) MDNS Appeal regarding the ) Preliminary Plat Submitted by: ) Cottonwood Partners, LLC ) For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be ) Known as "Crown Pointe" ) FILE NOS. SEP06 -062 PRJ2006 -1817 & SUB06 -162 Introduction. The Hearing Examiner received a document dated July 30, 2007 entitled "City of Yakima's Request for Reconsideration of Hearing Examiner's Decision in SEPA Appeal" submitted by the legal representative of appellant City of Yakima, Jeff Cutter, Senior Assistant City Attorney. It was served on N. Bunger for the applicant's legal representative, James Carmody, on that date. The Examiner is desirous of knowing whether Mr. Carmody and/or SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson intend to address the points raised in that document and, if so, how much time is needed for that purpose. Cottonwood Partners, LLC SEPA MDNS Appeal Interim Decision re Reconsideration "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. SEP06 -062; SLTB06 -0162 1 DOC. INDEX # —- Interim Decision re Request for Reconsideration. The Examiner requests a written indication from Mr. Carmody and Mr. Erickson as to whether they wish to request an opportunity to respond in writing to the City's request for reconsideration and, if so, how much time they request to do so. This information should be submitted to the Examiner by 5:00 p.m. on this Friday, August 3; 2007. A copy of each response should be provided to the other two individuals mentioned herein who represent the parties to this appeal. If the County's attorney should become involved in this SEPA MDNS appeal proceeding, he should also be added to the list of persons to receive a copy of any correspondence or submittals to the Examiner in this matter. DATED this 31st day of July, 2007. Cottonwood Partners, LLC SEPA MDNS Appeal Interim Decision re Reconsideration "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SEP06 -062; SUB06 -0162 2 � 1-n M Gary M. Cuillier, Hearing Examiner DOC. INDEX # Cr CITY OF YAKIMA PLANNING f_]IV, COUNTY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION & RECOMMENDATION July 19, 2007 In the Matter of Application for ) Preliminary Plat Approval ) Submitted by: ) FILE NOS. PRJ2006 -1817 SUB06 -162 Cottonwood Partners, LLC ) SEP06 -062 For a 61 -Lot Subdivision to be ) Known as "Crown Pointe" which ) Involves a SEPA MDNS Appeal ) Introduction. The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing on July 5, 2007 and this recommendation has been submitted within ten business days of the hearing. Yakima County Planning Division Project Planner Scott Stiltner presented the staff report that recommended approval of the proposed preliminary plat with conditions. Yakima County SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson testified in favor of the proposed preliminary plat and explained his reason for changing the SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) road frontage improvement requirements. County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent McHenry, explained the origin of the per -lot fee amount offered by the applicant for road frontage improvements. City of Yakima (City) Mayor Dave Edler, City Code Administration and Planning Manager Doug Maples and City Senior Assistant City Attorney Jeff Cutter were not opposed to approval of the preliminary plat, but presented evidence in support of the City's appeal of the SEPA MDNS by emphasizing the need for the applicant to contribute its fair or proportional share toward road frontage improvements. The applicant's representatives, James Carmody of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services and Rich Hochrein of Cottonwood Partners, LLC testified in support of the proposed preliminary plat and presented testimony to the effect that the MDNS requires the applicant to contribute more than its fair or proportional share of street frontage improvements. No one testified in opposition to the proposed preliminary plat. Summary of Decision and Recommendation. The Hearing Examiner revises the MDNS to allow the preliminary plat process to proceed and this appeal hearing to be continued to adjust the MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements if a different share is shown to be fair and proportional through a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official and recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve this proposed preliminary plat subject to that possible adjustment through this appeal process and the other conditions stated in the modified MDNS and in this recommendation. Basis for Decision and Recommendation. Based on a consideration of the staff report, exhibits, sworn testimony and other evidence presented at the open record public hearing on July 5, 2007; views of the site on July 17, 2007 and prior to that date with no one else present; the subdivision requirements; the applicable comprehensive plan provisions; the applicable zoning ordinance requirements; the applicable development standards; and the requisite consistency criteria; the Hearing Examiner makes the following: FINDINGS, I. Applicant/Property Owner. The applicant and property owner is Cottonwood Partners, LLC, P.O. Box 8353, Yakima, Washington 98907. II. Applicant's Representatives. The applicant's representatives are James Carmody of the law firm of Velikanje Halverson P.C., 405 East Lincoln Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98901 and Bill Hordan of Hordan Planning Services, 410 North 2nd Street, Yakima, Washington 98901. III. Location. The proposed preliminary plat is located on the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South 80a' Avenue within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road and the parcel number is 181332- 33436. The property was annexed into the City on April 8, 2007, but the subdivision will continue to be processed to completion by Yakima County under County laws at the applicant's request as allowed by an interlocal agreement between those two municipalities. IV. Proposal. The proposed preliminary plat would divide about 17.04 acres into 61 single- family residential lots ranging in size from 8,001 square feet to 12,726 square feet and averaging 8,992 square feet. The subdivision itself is proposed to be accomplished in Cottonwood Partners, LLC 3 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 ! f two phases. Phase 1 is proposed to consist of 33 lots and Phase 2 is proposed to consist of 28 lots. The proposed lots are intended for future single - family residential development that will be served by extended existing utilities including public water and sewer. Proposed access is from South 80'' Avenue (one driveway) and Coolidge Road (one driveway). V. Proiect Description. Currently the project site is an alfalfa field. The project site is relatively flat with a slope of approximately 0 to 2 %. There are no designated critical areas on or immediately adjacent to the site, but the property is located within the Wide Hollow Creek Watershed which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to be a floodprone basin. VI. Jurisdiction. A preliminary plat is classified and processed as a Type IV review. The Hearing Examiner conducted an open record public hearing regarding this preliminary plat application pursuant to Title 16B of the Yakima County Code and has formulated this SEPA MDNS appeal decision that may be appealed to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners and this preliminary plat recommendation that will be considered by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners at a closed record public hearing. In accordance with RCW 58.17.110(2), "A proposed subdivision and dedication shall not be approved unless the city, town, or county legislative body makes written findings that: (a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only Cottonwood Partners, LLC 4 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 8& Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 1N • : walk to and from school; and (b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and dedication." The subdivision standards and conditions of a subdivision approval are intended to ensure appropriate provisions are made for all of the above items. VII. Notices. Notices were given in the following manner: Mailing of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review: December 13, 2006 Publication of Notice of Completeness & SEPA review: December 16, 2006 Mailing of Notice of Preliminary MDNS: February 14, 2007 Publication of Notice of Preliminary MDNS: February 18, 2007 Mailing of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing: May 23, 2007 Publication of Notice of Final MDNS & Hearing: May 26, 2007 Posting of Notice of Hearing on Property: June 20, 2007 VIII. Environmental Review and SEPA MDNS Appeal. The Examiner's findings relative to the County's environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act which is the subject of the City's appeal are as follows: 1) The County as lead agency determined that the environmental impacts associated with Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed preliminary plat warrant mitigation for significant and nonsignificant impacts derived from WAC 197 -11 -660, Section 16.04.230 of the Yakima County Code (YCC) and the policies contained in the Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and Plan 2015. A preliminary MDNS was issued on February 13, 2007 which required stormwater mitigation measures and the following transportation mitigation measure: 80th Avenue along the property frontage. The requirement is for a Collector Arterial road per County Roadway Section No. 2 including sidewalk and street illumination (70' right -of -way). Accompanying stormwater facilities must also be provided." 2) By letter to the County SEPA Responsible Official dated April 3, 2007, applicant's attorney James Carmody argued that full road frontage improvements could not be required of the applicant for four reasons: "(1) the mitigation is improperly imposed to correct pre - existing road deficiencies; (2) the exaction violates constitutional mandates and limitations; (3) mitigation violates RCW 82.02.020; and (4) imposition of the off -site improvement requirements is inconsistent with prior practice." 3) SEPA Responsible Official Steve Erickson was advised by Yakima County's Corporate Counsel Terry Austin that Mr. Carmody's position is correct, but Mr. Erickson does not recall any legal advice or discussion with Mr. Austin regarding proportionality. 4) The SEPA Responsible Official accepted the applicant's offer to dedicate 14,900 square feet of frontage along Coolidge Road and South 801h Avenue to allow the roads to be widened to County standards in the future and to also pay $550.00 per lot toward the cost of improving the Coolidge Road frontage in the future to the County urban road standard which was adopted for that road in 2003. 5) The County's final SEPA MDNS issued on May 22, 2007 contains the following findings and mitigation measures: "Stormwater (Ground and Surface water) The 61 proposed lots in Phases 1 & 2 are located within the Wide Hollow Creek Watershed, which has been determined by the Yakima County Engineer to be a Cottonwood Partners, LLC 6 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX "- flood -prone basin. On -site stormwater retention is required on the development to prevent adverse impacts to surface water. Excavation, site development, subsequent lot layout and stormwater management needs to be done in a manner so drainage facilities and adjacent property owners are not negatively impacted by stormwater runoff. Based on a variety of information, depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system performance and design, and can effect the plat layout. Given the variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater, and infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, it is recommended that this data be obtained prior to preliminary plat. They should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including long -term inspection and maintenance. Public stormwater facilities are reviewed and approved by County Roads. Depth to seasonal groundwater and soil type, character and depth all have a direct influence on stormwater system design and potentially the preliminary plat layout. Given the observed variability in local subsurface geology, depths to groundwater, infiltration capacities of Yakima County soils, the type and depth of geological matrix, depth to groundwater, and infiltration capacity should be determined prior to final lot layout and design in order to ensure that adequate space (above ground or below ground) is provided for stormwater facilities, including allowances and easements for proper long -term inspection and maintenance by private or public entities. Please consult the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (Ecology, September 2004), the recently revised Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program rule (Chapter 173 -218 WAC), and Ecology's draft document entitled Determination of Treatment and Source Control for UIC Well in Washington State (Ecology, July 2005). The information contained in these documents will aid the designer in choosing the appropriate stormwater facilities and/or treatment facilities for the particular project. Please note: Operators of the following construction activities are required to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Construction Activity (Ecology, November 2005): Clearing, grading and/or Cottonwood Partners, LLC 7 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80" Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX r r.— ) excavation which results in disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state; and clearing, grading and /or excavation on sites smaller than one acre which are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, if the common plan of development or sale will ultimately disturb one acre or more, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state. Mitigation Measure Al: To adequately control post - construction surface water runoff, a Stormwater Management Plan, meeting the design standards below, shall be submitted for review by Yakima County Public Services prior to grading the property, any road development, or approval of building permits. 1. Full retention of runoff for the 25 year design storm event is required. 2. The stormwater management plan shall describe existing conditions, including drainage facilities, surface water features, soil types, geotechnical conditions, infiltration rates and seasonal high groundwater depth. 3. A professional engineer registered in the State of Washington shall design all drainage facilities and components using best management practices. Plans, drawings and geotechnical information shall be sealed, signed and dated by a professional engineer. 4. All Underground Injection Control (UIC) devices must be designed in accordance with the Department of Ecology UIC guidelines. 5. For public stormwater facilities, allowances and access shall be made for proper long -term inspection and maintenance, to be provided to the County. Mitigation Measure A2: Because this development exceeds one acre of disturbed land, it is likely that stormwater will cause erosion and other surface water problems during the course of construction. To address such issues, the proponent must submit a Construction - Stormwater General Permit application to the WA Dept. of Ecology, obtain appropriate reviews or approvals and provide evidence of DOE's approval to the Building Official prior to construction. Transportation The property is bordered on the north by Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue on the west. Both are now city - maintained paved (BST) roads built to rural standards with side ditches. Access to the plat is proposed from both roads. The federal funding functional classification of the roads changed from rural to urban standards in 2003. County -wide Planning Policies, both adopted Urban Area and County comprehensive plans and development standards specify the need for Cottonwood Partners, LLC 8 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. DOC. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX urban standards (which in this case would mean curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights for local access streets and collector arterials serving an urban subdivision). Both roads in their current condition are inconsistent with adopted urban standards. Yakima County comprehensive plan policy provides that projects requiring improvements in advance of the TIP are responsible for providing those improvements concurrent with development. While the addition of 610 additional vehicle trips per day would not bring traffic levels of service below adopted standards, a probable significant adverse impact to air quality and road maintenance will likely result from the project if adopted urban standards are not required concurrent with this development, as well as from increased construction and maintenance costs arising from the shift of a private cost to the public sector and increased costs arising from deferral of the requirements. The total cost of frontage improvements was estimated by Yakima County to be $2,723 per lot. However, relevant court decisions preclude requirement of frontage improvements given the circumstances of this project. The applicant has, however volunteered to contribute $550 per lot toward the future upgrading of Coolidge Road. This amount constitutes an approximate proportional fair share of twenty (20) percent of the costs of the project. Mitigation Measure B1: Street improvements are required for the proposed development. The developer shall improve each access onto Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue with curb, gutter and sidewalk and any stormwater drainage facilities through the radius of the intersection. Mitigation Measure B2: The developer will contribute to future upgrading of Coolidge Road to an Urban Standard with curb, gutter and asphalt surfacing. The applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay $550.00 per lot toward the improvement of Coolidge Road due by final plat approval. Mitigation Measure B3: The developer shall dedicate the appropriate right -of- way to accommodate curb, gutter, sidewalks, stormwater facilities and streetlights along the full frontage of the subdivision. Coolidge Road right -of -way dedication shall be based on County Collector Arterial built to County Urban Roadway Section No. 2 or the closest equivalent City of Yakima Standard. South 80th Avenue right -of -way dedication shall be sufficient to meet County Local Access Cottonwood Partners, LLC 9 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'x' Ave. DOC- SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX street requirements, including curb, gutter and sidewalk or the closest City of Yakima Standard." 6) On June 5, 2007, the City of Yakima appealed the SEPA MDNS to the Hearing Examiner. The hearing regarding the appeal was held at the same time as the hearing regarding the preliminary plat. 7) The City claimed in its appeal and testimony that changing the MDNS to accept the applicant's offer relative to frontage improvements is contrary to the rough proportionality requirement although the City was not prepared to say what percentage short of a requirement for full frontage improvements would satisfy the rough proportionality test. The City emphasized the need for developers to pay their fair share of needed street improvements. The City indicated that this is a subdivision which will directly impact two substandard rural streets with increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic, particularly students walking to and from school, in a rapidly growing portion of the City. The City asserts that the mitigation measures required by the County in the preliminary MDNS are appropriate and mandated to preserve the public safety and welfare for developments within the City that are subject to the rapid urbanization currently occurring in the Crown Pointe area. The Examiner was unable to confmn by site visits that the proposed subdivision is less than one mile from the West Valley Middle School by way of existing roads or where school busses pick up school children in the vicinity of the proposed preliminary plat. 8) The applicant's attorney agreed with the obligation of developers to pay their fair share or rough proportionality of needed street improvements, but claimed that the applicant has offered more than its fair share in the form of right - of-way dedication allegedly having a value of $126,650.00 and $550.00 per lot ($33,550.00). He reached this conclusion by reliance upon the City of Yakima transportation capacity standard for Cottonwood Partners, LLC 10 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80th Ave. DOM SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX # G -1 urban roads of 800 vehicle trips per peak hour per lane in Subsection 12.08.020(G) of the Yakima Municipal Code. He argued that since this subdivision will only generate a maximum peak hour traffic addition of 62 trips, the applicant should only be required to contribute 62/800 of the estimated street frontage improvement costs ($211.03 per lot rather than the $550.00 per lot offered or the $2,723.00 per lat total cost). That figure does not include right -of -way acquisition which Mr. Carmody valued at $8.50 per square foot for a total of $126,650.00 based on the estimated value of a building site rather than raw land. 9) County Transportation Engineering Manager for Yakima County Public Services, Kent McHenry, testified that he has not addressed the proportionality issue relative to this subdivision. He indicated that the $550.00 per lot amount that Cottonwood Partners were required to pay on two other subdivisions to upgrade the gravel segment of Coolidge Road to the west of this subdivision was not based on a proportionality analysis, but was rather based on the number of lots that would ultimately share in the expense for that upgrading that was not covered by the contribution required of the Apple Tree development, a totally different situation than this subdivision. He did not have information regarding current traffic counts on Coolidge Road or South 80th Avenue, but indicated that they currently operate at level of service (LOS) A or B and would not operate below the acceptable LOS C as a result of this subdivision. 10) The County's SEPA Responsible Official testified that he determined that the applicant's $550.00 per lot payment would be about 20% of the total cost. To reach that conclusion, he subtracted the $24,500.00 sidewalk and streetlight costs for South 801h Avenue from the total $190,600.00 estimated road frontage improvement costs on both streets based on his understanding that those improvements would likely be on the other side of that street. He changed his findings relative to the need for the applicant to Cottonwood Partners, LLC 11 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'x' Ave. DM- SUB06-0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX �µ provide full road frontage improvements per the preliminary MDNS based on the legal advice he received from the County's attorney relative to the points asserted in Mr. Carmody's letter, but as previously noted, he recalls no discussion as to proportionality. 11) Without deciding whether Mr. Carmody's method of determining proportionality is correct or incorrect, the Examiner finds at this point that it is different from what he has been provided in other SEPA appeals regarding the likely traffic impacts of proposed subdivisions and the road improvements that should be required as a result. The Examiner's experience is that most MDNS mitigating measures for road improvements become final without an appeal before the preliminary plat hearing and that there are therefore differences in how SEPA is applied under the individualized approach that is required in such reviews. But when there is a dispute about what road improvements should be required as a result of a SEPA MDNS appeal, the Examiner has had the assistance of expert opinions and facts such as current vehicular and pedestrian traffic counts and characteristics for the impacted streets to compare with the likely traffic impacts of the proposed subdivision on those streets. A traffic impact analysis (TIA) has been prepared either by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant that has expertise in determining the extent of likely direct traffic impacts and the fair and proportional amount that should be paid or the land that should be dedicated as a result. This is not necessarily an exact science and only rough proportionality is required. But here it appears that the applicant's offer has been accepted without that type of traffic impact analysis. Where, as here, there is a dispute as to whether the offer is more than required or less than required to be fair and proportional, a TIA from the City, the applicant and/or the County as directed by the SEPA Responsible Official to help him address proportionality with appropriate facts, figures and opinions would help both the applicant and the public be assured that a fair and proportional road frontage Cottonwood Partners, LLC 12 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. DOCR SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX improvement obligation is imposed for the direct impacts of the subdivision. Requesting additional information for that purpose is authorized by Section 16.04.090 of the YCC which adopts by reference the following mandatory language in WAC 197 -11 -335: "The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal." Revising an MDNS to request additional information is also within the authorized functions of the Hearing Examiner which are detailed in Subsection 16B.06.070(E)(5) of the YCC; the Hearing Examiner may affirm, modify or reverse the determination of the responsible official and may issue a revised DS, DNS or MDNS. The Hearing Examiner pray also request additional information pursuant to WAC 197 -11- 335." 12) It is important to the Examiner that a determination of the applicant's fair and proportional share of road frontage improvements not delay the processing of this preliminary plat. Therefore, the MDNS is merely revised to request the additional information that may lead to a possible future adjustment of the required amount of property dedication and/or per lot payment by either an agreed dismissal of this appeal or by a final decision in this appeal without affecting any aspect of the MDNS other than the applicant's future dedication and/or monetary contribution obligations. The additional mitigation measure will therefore read as follows: "Mitigation Measure B4: The above- referenced MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or iinprovernents may be reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional sbare thereof as' determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official. The dedication and payment obligations set forth herein or as adjusted shall be made or provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval." 13) The Hearing Examiner will retain jurisdiction over this SEPA MDNS appeal for the limited purpose of performing such hearing functions as may be requested and scheduled by the SEPA Responsible Official with notice to the parties to this appeal. Jurisdiction will be retained until such time as this appeal is either dismissed by agreement of the parties or the issues as to dedication of property and payment of funds for road frontage improvements are finally determined. IX. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Public Health, Safety and General Welfare Through Zoning and land Use Re uirements for the Site and Adiacent Properties. The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare insofar as it satisfies the intent and minimum lot size requirements of the Single - Family Residential (R -1) zoning district and is compatible with adjacent land uses. The surrounding uses are residences on lots ranging from 0.25 acres to 2.6 acres immediately to the north and south. The lots immediately to the south are in a conventional subdivision with urban-level services. Property to the east is orchard and a single family residence on a large lot. To the west is orchard. The property is within the City of Yakima as a result of recent annexation, but this proposed subdivision will continue to be processed subject to the provisions of the Yakima Urban Area Comprehensive Plan and the Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance (Title 15A of the Yakima County Code) because an applicant may elect under the interlocal agreement to continue the subdivision to completion under the County's direction and subject to existing County development codes when a completed subdivision application is submitted to the County prior to annexation. The property and surrounding area is designated as Low Density Residential under the Comprehensive Plan. Low Density Residential is primarily planned for single - family, detached residences. Net residential density before considering roads and rights -of -way is less than 7 dwelling units per acre, which is considered the lowest residential density to efficiently support public services. The Low Density Residential comprehensive plan designation is implemented by the UAZO which designates the subject area as a Single - Family Residential (R -1) zoning district. The intent of the R -1 zone is to provide a variety of residential lifestyles with densities generally ranging from 2 units per net residential acre to 7 units per net residential acre. The higher densities are permitted when public water and public sewer systems are used. X. A r pro riate Subdivision Provisions for Ptiblie Health Safe acrd General Welfare Through Develo anent Standards and 1 e uircments. The lot configuration of the proposed preliminary plat allows for development consistent with the following development standards and requirements that have been established to promote the public health, safety and general welfare: 1) Densit of Size: The proposed lots are larger than the minimum size required in the R -1 zoning district where public water and sewer services are utilized as proposed here. Subsection 15A.05.030(b) of the UAZO provides that the "Maximum Number of Dwelling Units Permitted per Net Residential Acre" within a single subdivision and other types of residential developments allow no more than 7.0 units per net residential acre. The specific minimum residential lot sizes are dependant on the applicable zoning Cottonwood Partners, LLC 15 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80 'h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 designation and various situations. Within the R -1 zone, the minimum lot size for a situation where a public or community water system and the regional or an approved community sewer system is available is specifically set at a minimum 7,000 square feet per lot under Table 5 -2 of the UAZO. The smallest proposed minimum lot size is 8,001 square feet which complies with the 7,000 square foot minimum requirement for individual lots. Calculations based on parcel information and dimensions shown on the preliminary plat indicate an overall density of 3.51 units per acre which is about half of the maximum density of 7 units per acre. 2) Setbacks: In accordance with Table 5 -1 in Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO, the required front yard structural setback from Coolidge Road is 65 feet from the right -of- way centerline. For lots abutting South 80th Avenue, the setback will be 65 feet from centerline. For lots that abut interior streets, the setback will be 50 feet from centerline. The minimum structural setback requirement for side yards not bordering a street is 5 feet. A setback of 10 feet from the property line is required for side yards that border a right -of -way. A setback of 20 feet from the property line is required for rear yards not bordering a street. Any rear yards bordering a street will have the same setback requirement as the front yard. The proposed preliminary plat will have large enough lots to accommodate all front, rear and side structural setbacks with normally -sized residential dwellings. Even though adjustments to standards are sometimes granted and the standards themselves could always change, these standards may be required to be shown on the final plat. 3) Lot Coverage: The lots are of such a size that normally -sized residential structures with accessory buildings can be constructed on the lots without exceeding the 45% maximum lot coverage in the R -1 zoning district. The estimated maximum lot coverage proposed as a part of SEPA environmental review for this proposal is 35% 4) Lot Dimensions: In addition to the required minimum lot area as described above, minimum lot width within the R -1 zone is 50 feet provided the lots are served by a public or community water system and the regional sewer system. The preliminary plat indicates all proposed lots exceed 50 feet of width. All of the proposed lots will have frontage and access by way of the interior roads. The easements are being proposed to provide for both access and utilities. The proposed dimensions of the lots comply with Chapter 15A.05 of the UAZO required in the R -1 zoning district. 5) Site Screening: Site screening is not proposed or required for the proposed plat. Table 7 -1 in Chapter 15A.07 of the UAZO generally does not require sitescreening for this type of proposal. XI. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Open Spaces. Provisions for common open space, as may be required by Section 15A.09.030 of the UAZO, are not deemed necessary for this proposed preliminary plat. The evidence submitted at the hearing indicates that the proposed preliminary plat contains sufficient lot sizes and is in an area that has sufficient open spaces without dedication of land for open space, public park or recreational purposes. The requirement in Section 14.28.070 of the YCC to dedicate up to five percent of a proposed subdivision area for either private or public parks or recreational areas or to contribute funds for park purposes is not typically invoked by the County unless there is a significant lack of open space within a development or to replace a park or recreational area that will be lost due to development. As proposed, the project density of the subject development is 3.51 lots per acre which is much lower than the 7 lots per acre allowed in the R -1 zone. The proposed subdivision will have a maximum lot coverage of 45% and will not displace any known recreational Cottonwood Partners, LLC 17 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 801" Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 DOC. INDEX use. Therefore, additional land for open space or for replacing parks and recreational areas will not be necessary. XII. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Drainaze Ways. All stormwater runoff will have to be retained on site. Section 14.48.100 of the YCC requires an acceptable drainage plan. The County has determined that potentially significant adverse impacts could be caused by the development unless storm and ground water is properly managed. Mitigation measures Al and A2 of the MDNS have been required in order to ensure the proposed plat adequately provides for suitable drainage without causing undue adverse impacts. Erosion control measures, an NPDES stormwater construction permit and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan are Department of Ecology requirements that may take 45 to 60 days to process. XIII. Anpropriate Subdivision Provisions for Potable ^"ater s. lies. Section 14.52.130 of the YCC requires a plat to be connected to an existing municipal public water system or a large Group A water purveyor when available. The proposal is to utilize water provided by the Nob HiII Water Association. The proposed water system will comply with public water system requirements although there is no verification that the Nob Hill Water Association is able to serve this subdivision. The Department of Ecology commented that the purveyor of water is responsible for ensuring that the uses are within the limitations of its water rights. XIV. Appropriate Subdivision Provisions for Sanitary Wastes. Section 14.52.130 of the YCC requires on -site sewage disposal systems for all new lots unless municipal or public sewer service is available. Section 15.20.032 of the YCC requires Cottonwood Partners, LLC 18 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80'h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX that development connect to public sewer service where available. The proposed source of sewage disposal is through the Yakima Regional Wastewater Facility (YRWWF) in accordance with City of Yakima standards. As proposed, connection to the YRWWF will comply with sewage disposal requirements of the YCC and the Yakima urban area development standards, but verification of service availability to this subdivision has not been confirmed, XV. . ro priate Subdivision :Provisions for Public ""teas Sidewalks and other Pin unin features for C;hildrerr who Walk to and irorn S pool. Title 10 and Title 14 of the YCC provide minimum street standards and requirements for subdivision development including those for project site and fire access, interior and frontage improvements, right -of -way standards and other necessary transportation elements. The 61 new lots of Crown Pointe are proposed to access Coolidge Road and South 80th Avenue through two individual driveways. Transportation impacts identified for Crown Pointe are also applicable to environmental impacts attributable to the subdivision and are substantively incorporated as Mitigation Measures B 1, B2 and B3 plus the revision to add B4 as a result of this SEPA appeal decision. Compliance with the conditions of approval and the mitigation measures described within the final revised MDNS will satisfy required criteria for transportation and public safety standards applicable to this project. XVI. A r ro riatre Subdivision Provisions far 'Transit Stops, Phlyg rounds Schools and Schoolgrounds. Under the evidence presented at the hearing, the size, location and nature of the proposed preliminary plat do not require special provisions for Cottonwood Partners, LLC 19 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 800' Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 N these other features required by RCW 58.17.110(2) to be considered such as transit stops, playgrounds, schools or schoolgrounds. XVII. A pro riate Subdivision Provisions for Other Featui -es of the Proposal. Other features of the proposed preliminary plat that are provided in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare include the following: (a) FIRE PROTECTION: Section 13.09.070 of the YCC and the International Fire Code specify fire flow and hydrant requirements which are required for new development. It is standard practice for the Nob Hill Water Association to coordinate fire hydrant locations with the Yakima County Fire Marshall. (b) IRRIGATION: Section 14.48.045 of the YCC requires that provisions be made for irrigation water. The subject property is within the Yakima - Tieton Irrigation District and the applicant proposes to provide irrigation water from that District to all 61 lots. (c) DUST CONTROL: The Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority has submitted comments indicating that the developer must file and gain approval for a dust control plan prior to commencing any construction or grading activities. (d) TOXIC SUBSTANCES: The Department of Ecology has submitted comments recommending that soils be analyzed for lead, arsenic and organochlorine pesticides and that potential buyers be notified if they are found in concentrations exceeding MTCA clean up levels. (e) ELECTRICAL, TELEPHONE AND GARBAGE SERVICE: Electrical service, telephone service and garbage service are available in the area. Installation of the power and telephone facilities must be completed, or contracted with the provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 20 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat DOC. Coolidge Rd. & So. W' Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 - I XVIII. Consistengy Analysis under- Section 16& 06.020 of the Yalkima Corn Code. The following analysis involves the application's consistency 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 County Code. During project review, neither Yakima County nor any subsequent reviewing body may re- examine alternatives to, or hear appeals on, the items identified in these conclusions except for issues of code interpretation. a) THE TYPE OF LAND USE CONTEMPLATED BY THE PROPOSAL (a residential development) is permitted on this site so long as it complies with the zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, building codes and other applicable regulations. b) THE LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT (lot size, contemplated density, population, transportation, etc.) will not exceed the allowable limit in the R -1 zoning district. C) THE AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC FACILITIES allow the proposed preliminary plat to be approved. Adequate infrastructure and public facilities such as water, sewer, garbage, telephone and electricity are available, or will be available at the time of development. d) THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSAL, as conditioned, will be consistent with the development standards for residential subdivisions. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to decide SEPA MDNS appeal issues and make recommendations regarding applications for preliminary plat approval. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 21 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 2. The SEPA MDNS for this proposal should be revised without delaying the processing of this preliminary plat to add a Mitigation Measure B4 which provides that the specified MDNS amount of the applicant's share of road frontage dedications and/or improvements may be reduced or increased to reflect the fair and proportional share thereof as determined by the SEPA Responsible Official or Hearing Examiner in the pending SEPA MDNS appeal process after consideration of a traffic impact analysis prepared by a transportation engineer or traffic consultant to be provided by the City, the applicant and/or the County as may be directed by the SEPA Responsible Official. Mitigation Measure 4 should further provide that the MDNS dedication and payment obligations set forth in the MDNS or adjusted through the pending appeal process shall be made or provided for to the satisfaction of the County prior to final plat approval. 3. After inquiring into the public use and interest proposed to be served by the establishment of the subdivision and dedication, the Hearing Examiner recommends that the Board of Yakima County Commissioners approve the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" with the conditions detailed in this recommendation which make appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, public ways, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, sidewalks and, to the extent necessary, other requisite statutory considerations such as transit stops, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school, and which conditions also ensure that the public interest will be served. 4. The preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" can be adequately conditioned by the SEPA MDNS requirements as revised by this decision and the plat conditions set forth in this recommendation so as to ensure compatibility, compliance and consistency with the provisions of the zoning district and with the goals, objectives and policies of the Cottonwood Partners, LLC 22 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave. DOC- SUIB06-0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX �� comprehensive plan and so as to satisfy all the applicable County and State plat law requirements. 5. The SEPA MDNS decision herein may be appealed to the Yakima County Board of County Commissioners within the timeframe and in the manner required by applicable County ordinance provisions. DECISION RECOMMENDATION The Hearing Examiner affirms the SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance as revised by this decision and recommends to the Board of Yakima County Commissioners that the preliminary plat of "Crown Pointe" described in the application and in the related documents which are assigned file numbers PRJ2006 -1817, SUB06 -162 and SEP06 -062 be APPROVED, subject to compliance with the following conditions: General 1. Compliance with the SEPA Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated May 22, 2007 as revised by this decision shall be required. The Determination and the Mitigation measures thereof are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All proposed lots must be provided with adequate fire flow in accordance with the adopted fire code prior to final plat approval. 3. Unless construction is concurrent or incorporated into other approvals and dust control requirements of Crown Pointe, a method of dust control for the construction phase of phase 1 and phase 2 shall be submitted to and approved by the Yakima Cottonwood Partners, LLC 23 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat DOC- Coolidge Rd. & So, 80`" Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 Regional Clean Air Authority. A copy of the approval must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division prior to any construction activities. 4. Monuments must be placed at street intersections and curvature points as specified in Section 14.32.020 of the Yakima County Code. The monuments must be protected by cases and covers as approved by the County Engineer. Streets 5. Interior and dead -end streets may be constructed with rolled mountable curbs. The curb radii at all intersections and interior corners shall be constructed with barrier curbs from the property lines of the corner lots. (YCC 14.52. 100 C), 6. The plans for all public road improvements must be designed to Yakima County standards, including applicable standards and mitigation measures of the revised MDNS herein, prepared by a licensed professional engineer and approved by the County Engineer prior to construction. 7. Dedicated 30 -foot by 30 -foot clear sight triangles must be provided at all intersection corners within the plat. Equivalent alternative plans supporting a reduction in distance may be submitted to the County Engineer for approval. 8. Street names shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Services Department prior to final plat approval. Street signs are required for this development. The signs will be installed by Public Services prior to acceptance of roads and all costs associated with supplying and installing the signs must be reimbursed to Yakima County by the developer. Utilities 9. All public and private utilities located within interior easements or rights -of -way must be constructed prior to final plat approval. 10. Installation of power and telephone facilities must be completed, or arranged with the provider to be completed, prior to final plat approval. 11. All public and private utilities must be located underground with the exception of the standard telephone box, transmission box and similar structures. Cottonwood Partners, LLC 24 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd. & So. 80`h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 INDEX 12. Public utility easements must be provided for the two proposed shared interior access easements. If the easement is 50 feet or less, the utility easements shall be 10 feet in width or as specified by the utility providers. Minimum width for utility easements that are also utilized for irrigation is generally 15 feet. 13. All lots must be served with public water from the Nob Hill Water Association system. No new individual domestic or irrigation wells shall be permitted for any of the lots. Prior to final plat approval, written verification must be provided to the Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating the ability to provide domestic water, demonstrating that any necessary easements are provided for and demonstrating that all associated fees have been paid. 14. All lots shall be provided with public sewer service from the Yakima Regional Wastewater system. Prior to fmal plat approval, written verification from the City of Yakima must be submitted to the Public Services Department Planning Division demonstrating that the system will serve all lots within the subdivision, that any necessary easements have been established, and that any required fees have been paid. Plat Notes 15. Yakima County has in place an urban and rural addressing system. Street names and numbers for lots within this plat are issued by the Yakima County Public Services Department upon issuance of an approved Building Permit. 16. 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. 17. All lots of this subdivision have been provided with public sewer. All lots have been provided with public water connections. Timin 18. All property taxes and special assessments for the entire tax year must be paid, together with any required pre - payment amount prior to final plat approval. 19. Prior to recording the final plat or issuance of building permits, either: Cottonwood Partners, LLC 25 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat DOM Coolidge Rd. & So. 80"' Ave. INDEX SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 (a) All required plat improvements, i.e. streets, sidewalks, utilities and drainage facilities, must be in place; or, (b) An escrow account must be established or a bond provided in an amount and with conditions acceptable to the Yakima County Engineer to assure installation of all remaining required improvements. If the developer elects to escrow or bond for the required roadway improvements, and fails to complete these improvements in the time specified in the escrow or bond agreement, the County Engineer shall have the authority to suspend issuance of building or occupancy permits until the required road and drainage improvements are accepted as satisfactorily completed. The County Engineer may issue building permits on a lot -by -lot basis when it is determined that building construction will not interfere with utility and roadway construction. 20. The total project must be completed and the final plat submitted within the maximum five -year time period prescribed by Section 58.17.140 of the Revised Code of Washington. Any extension beyond the five -year time period is subject to the provisions of Chapter 14.24 of the Yakima County Code. DATED this 19th day of July, 2007, Cottonwood Partners, LLC 26 "Crown Pointe" Preliminary Plat Coolidge Rd, & So. 80`h Ave. SUB06 -0162; SEP06 -062 Gary M. Cuu Tier, Hearing Examiner NN COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC "Crown Point — Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER D Vicinity Map D -1 Vicinity Map 02/04/2014 ....... ------ Project Vicinity Map FLP#001 =1 5 Related Projects: Applicant: HORDAN PLANNING SERVICES Location: VIC. 7602 COOLIDGE ROAD Wednesday - 02/04/2015 - 01:41:11 Contact City of Yakima Planning Division at 509 - 575 -6183 City of Yakima - Geographic Information Sevices 0 1:10,000 •arr�- Ih1 i,dR. R, s K Site 4 n..'r n.rr a1.Rrl �• A nr "d- Sources: Esri, Del-orme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, , and the GIS User Community;,; Proposal: Final Long Plat approval for Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of 33 residential lots in the R -1 zoning district. DOC. INDEX # ._1L --1 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. COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC "Crown Point — Phase 2" FLP #001 -15 EXHIBIT LIST CHAPTER E Final Plat — "Crown Point — Phase 2" rr +4 "�Y, ME er r �M 1 �� i E -1 Final Plat — Crown Pointe Phase 2 01/07/2015 _ ..... . ............ . ........�.� rk LIJ O v 1 Lu N N f Q l z� , Y00,01' 1 00 -Lfi` 0 2 12 : 100 ' # i 842 Ml 1 3 a' i - s y € : � LOT28 } LOT27 F ±t (4' LOT22 LOT21 € °ASEC, w [ - 115 - F . i D.S78SF c 85555F , O . Q - 6521SF P 8498SF F y _ NI.i 10'43`E p 1x22' \ I- y �tE 47'1 rP a N45'iG43'E S!d' 116 € # Nt5'181J'E p § € C u ttl1ANDC 25` 115' xe I € w 12.22' 1 i .t2? 42.22° -° ' 3 4 € LOT 15 _pL Z L3 PL`'ffc__- 70:00` 7 :a 0:o 7 I ' _ . € � NOTE; LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ARE FOR Q 9 _ --- R01` i9@ 50', TOTAL LENGTH OF LINE, UNLESS NOTED 0i' MOH. TO MON.- _e_�e &_.e_�._a_�_�m_.�.m�_a.,,_e� —Fe�a �_� _�__.___,,_x. v s � LYON9 LANE S89'Z873'E � zs ` OTHERWISE. OFFSET CORNERS ARE Sf3,5dY! MEASURED ALONG.LOTLINE FROM END o OFL'OTLINE 4° a —. 15 FT. PUBLIC UTUTY AND JR.RIGA710,4 EASEMENT (TYR) I LOTi8 LOT2 Sys; LOTS glF LOT4 LOT5 LOT& LOT 7 W LOT II SQXSJ� E g 90505E o 9050w o E g 90505E e I �� t F $: � itdk30 _.9 -, 90..50 ti C S:H-4 S i= S.H. L6 Sa9 °2833 E _. f A. CE SNOW HILL AFN7467431 �T• '�` d.3,_ �� z , � =�R�a�° PANEL 13� 5 k= ors, " - Asa r( ' �' .SEE DETAIL Y TH/S SHEET (] E L S 7 t. L6 SET i, _ ENCROA CWFS 1,2 FEET PLAT OF ORCHARD ESTATES AFN71675 64 SURVEYORS CERTIFICATIONS t- �je Cy 0 r �y cur, €c r f0 rwrli�oy c ty . __i�, Oct O 01i-"�-czg = cc-FC ^0-ce art h sou r -arc a °va on., :a i s n i �R t; 3 = Z.�S ' S r ip Reccrcit^q Rum Ha s c esm or o.t wvcN Angled s x roe- co r r VoWmb_" 2014. - co- Is Ve S� va . _ P w RdardC Mp&d - Cw** Nm 388S3 UDIT ❑R'S CERTIF TCATE FT LED FOR RECORD THIS ____ _ DAY O _ _ 20 _ _ AT K R ALD ?7R'S r ?L2 NUMBER ----------- CORDS OF V^A'KNA COUNTY, WASHINGTON: tKFA CO6� AUDTTOR Y 1IC�U 4AN 0 1 DETAIL Y CROWMPOWTIPIVISE2 LEGEND ? 8BI6APlAT0FTR V1ATOF=W11fP'M9E1 x _ 0 FOUND REDAR /CA? AS DESCRIBED X FGJND REBAR /CAP PER PLAT Q- CROWN POINT PHASE I 0 SE REBA /LAP `SAN PEIL WA t``as 11 WAS SET BRASS CAP MONUME NT 'SAN ` Vcd P7IL _ S 36493` . ? A `il .€ 'K' n OF ND BRASS CAP MQRUME4T E CROWN PER PLAT F PINT PHASE % sir, ova b Poll beftg PLAT OF CROWN POINT, PHASE Z TW;°k� Wl IN SW114 SW114 SECTION 32, TWP.13 N, RANGE 18 EAST, W.M. ? q PLAT =- R7 N PAINT PH: CPOFYMMA YAKIMACOUNTY WASHINGTON a. C PH! '2G _C.P. $ PHI L21 a A" L^ Cam L- POINT PHI LE - g _ - , �. _- S 1in" 100.01` S8 "151 °E Y_M*r ' ! LOT31 z O a e c $ 80015E tz a LOT39 Z. o ° W a 800 }SF LOT25 � z= LOT24 LOT Y9 80015E ^� �, '"'1 m3 a - 80015E 80015E - LOT 18 • p%QQJJ lIl A W W' i _ ! 1 I Q; �.. 1 L9 H - .5 SCty . 0- 100.D1' }} '100.0'1' m 10&03` ®= ZZ c 0 LOT32 80015E I "' g Q €.. LOT 29 8 "11 W '"� 80015f t °# LOT 28 fz W t2 ❑!.` ?1 ¢ '$ g O sp - LOT23 _ LOT 20 E-iASE 1 a� € C}. 80015E €F mo #Z - 801?iS€8 80015E €�q... LOT17 f Q l z� , Y00,01' 1 00 -Lfi` 0 2 12 : 100 ' # i 842 Ml 1 3 a' i - s y € : � LOT28 } LOT27 F ±t (4' LOT22 LOT21 € °ASEC, w [ - 115 - F . i D.S78SF c 85555F , O . Q - 6521SF P 8498SF F y _ NI.i 10'43`E p 1x22' \ I- y �tE 47'1 rP a N45'iG43'E S!d' 116 € # Nt5'181J'E p § € C u ttl1ANDC 25` 115' xe I € w 12.22' 1 i .t2? 42.22° -° ' 3 4 € LOT 15 _pL Z L3 PL`'ffc__- 70:00` 7 :a 0:o 7 I ' _ . € � NOTE; LOT LINE DIMENSIONS ARE FOR Q 9 _ --- R01` i9@ 50', TOTAL LENGTH OF LINE, UNLESS NOTED 0i' MOH. TO MON.- _e_�e &_.e_�._a_�_�m_.�.m�_a.,,_e� —Fe�a �_� _�__.___,,_x. v s � LYON9 LANE S89'Z873'E � zs ` OTHERWISE. OFFSET CORNERS ARE Sf3,5dY! MEASURED ALONG.LOTLINE FROM END o OFL'OTLINE 4° a —. 15 FT. PUBLIC UTUTY AND JR.RIGA710,4 EASEMENT (TYR) I LOTi8 LOT2 Sys; LOTS glF LOT4 LOT5 LOT& LOT 7 W LOT II SQXSJ� E g 90505E o 9050w o E g 90505E e I �� t F $: � itdk30 _.9 -, 90..50 ti C S:H-4 S i= S.H. L6 Sa9 °2833 E _. f A. CE SNOW HILL AFN7467431 �T• '�` d.3,_ �� z , � =�R�a�° PANEL 13� 5 k= ors, " - Asa r( ' �' .SEE DETAIL Y TH/S SHEET (] E L S 7 t. L6 SET i, _ ENCROA CWFS 1,2 FEET PLAT OF ORCHARD ESTATES AFN71675 64 SURVEYORS CERTIFICATIONS t- �je Cy 0 r �y cur, €c r f0 rwrli�oy c ty . __i�, Oct O 01i-"�-czg = cc-FC ^0-ce art h sou r -arc a °va on., :a i s n i �R t; 3 = Z.�S ' S r ip Reccrcit^q Rum Ha s c esm or o.t wvcN Angled s x roe- co r r VoWmb_" 2014. - co- Is Ve S� va . _ P w RdardC Mp&d - Cw** Nm 388S3 UDIT ❑R'S CERTIF TCATE FT LED FOR RECORD THIS ____ _ DAY O _ _ 20 _ _ AT K R ALD ?7R'S r ?L2 NUMBER ----------- CORDS OF V^A'KNA COUNTY, WASHINGTON: tKFA CO6� AUDTTOR Y 1IC�U 4AN 0 1 DETAIL Y CROWMPOWTIPIVISE2 LEGEND ? 8BI6APlAT0FTR V1ATOF=W11fP'M9E1 x _ 0 FOUND REDAR /CA? AS DESCRIBED X FGJND REBAR /CAP PER PLAT Q- CROWN POINT PHASE I 0 SE REBA /LAP `SAN PEIL WA t``as 11 WAS SET BRASS CAP MONUME NT 'SAN ` Vcd P7IL _ S 36493` . ? A `il .€ 'K' n OF ND BRASS CAP MQRUME4T E CROWN PER PLAT F PINT PHASE % sir, ova b Poll beftg LOT ADDRESSES LDT NUMBER ADDRESS ' 7902 LYONS LANE 2 7810 LYONS LANE 3 7808 LYONS LANE 4 7806 LYONS LANE 5 7804 LYONS LANE 6 7602 LYONS LANE 7 7800 LYONS LANE 8 7710 LYONS LANE 9 7708 LYONS LANE 10 7706 LYONS LANE 12 7704 LYONS LANE 12 7702 LYONS LANE 13 7701 LYONS LANE 14 7703 LYONS LANE 15 7705 LYONS LANE 16 2112 SOUTH 76TH AVENUE 17 2110 SOUTH 78TH AVENUE 18 2108 SOUTH 78TH AVENUE 19 2107 SOUTH 78TH AVENUE 20 2109 SOUTH 78TH AVENUE 21 2111 SOUTH 7871H AVENUE 22 2112 DIAMOND WAY 23 2110 DIAMOND WAY 24 2108 DIAMOND WAY 25 2107 DIAMOND WAY 26 2109 DIAMOND WAY 27 2111 DIAMOND WAY 28 2'112 SOUTH 79TH AVENUE 29 2430 SOUTH 79TH AVENUE 30 2106 SOUTH 79TH AVENUE 31 2107 SOUTH 79TH AVENUE 32 2109 SOUTH 779TH AVENUE 33 2111 SOUTH 79TH AVENUE PLAT OF CROWN POINT, PHASE 2 IN SW114 SWI14 SECTION 32, TWP.13 N, RANGE 18 EAST, W.M. CITY OF YAKIK YAMMA COUNTY, WASHINGTON NOTE; LOT UNE DIMENSIONS ARE FOR TOTAL LENGTH OF LWE� UNLESS NOTED PLAT OF CROWN PC1NT PH-1 OTHERWISE. OFFSETCORNERS ARE MEASURED ALONG LOT LINE FROM END C P. PH1 L24 . C.P. PH.1 L25 OFLOTLMIE�— NOTES: 1. THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITH A LEICA T -1000 3 SECOND TOTAL STATION AND WILD DI -1600 EDM WITH A PUBLISHED ACCURACY OF+I{3MM*2PPM). RESULTING CLOSURES EXCEED THE STANDARDS SET FORTH BY WAC 3m430. 2. EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES USED CONFORM TO ALL APPLICABLE ROW AND WAC REQUIREMENTS. 3. BASIS OF BEARINGS - YAVJMA COUNTY SHORT PLAT TS12612 -SOUTHWEST SECTION CORNER TO WEST QUARTER CORNER BEARING NO'00'00"E. 4. SUBDIVISION PER AFN 7167!04 - VERIFIED WITHIN REQUIRED LIMITS AND ACCEPTED. 3. EXISTING MONUMENTS SHOWN OR REFERENCED ON THIS PLAT WERE VISITED IN JULY, 2014. LOT 19 'rte S 1� saz LOT 20 Kl tu X ate} LOT 2f m 5 t V 8 w. LOT 18 Sn 8682SF e SET!'OFFSSET t ° i CORNER LOT17 a( ®1 8066SF leg a 1 W LOT to A 1 WISF el 533': 1S FT Dust 7:.83 S89'2699'E 90.:6 1115 FT. PUBLIC L FAID 1 "OFFSET 0 50 100 CORNER PER C.P.PH.1 SCALE I' = 50 MERIDIAN PLAT OF CROWN POINT, PHASE 1 LOT 1 S.P. AFN 7512612 FOUND REBAR/CAP AT PROP. CORNER "BELL 18894" —@ FOUND REBARICAP UNDER FENCE ,. AT PROP. CORNER 'BELL 18894' j-O ;4, WT 13 W sa€{3 LOT 18 iAdf sF ass szw g, 6425 C w� & '[ I tu I — a z DESCRIBED 0 FOUND REBA4R /CAP PER PLAT OF tip PLS 38493' JAN0720B ®SET BRASS CAP MONUMENT "SAN _ ?, OTYI Y POLL LS 38493° 9" 2 V q LOTS $ $ LOTS$ PER PLAT OF CROWN POINT 1- a 9050SF �; 8121SF ;a LS7Tf0 V `TS $. 2'OFFT fJDIPN6tS7SSF LL LOT 12 LOTff fOft -4. L - _ T ❑F ORCHARD TATtS 4 071 NOTE. NORTH FACE OF RR TIE WALL FOR ( OE, L7 - LOT 6OF ORCHARD ESTATES ISA7 FOUND REBARICAP AT PROPERTY PROPERTY LINE +/- VERTICAL ANCHOR TIES ENCROACH ON LOTS CORNER 'UPTON 12398' 8 AND 9 UP TO 00. CENTER OF MAPLE AND ASPEN TREES ENCROACH UP TO 2.1' ONTO LOTS BAND 9. LEGEND O FOUND REBAR /CAP AS DESCRIBED 0 FOUND REBA4R /CAP PER PLAT OF CROWN POINT PHASE 1 RECEM ® SET REBAR /CAF 'SAN POIL WA PLS 38493' JAN0720B ®SET BRASS CAP MONUMENT "SAN _ ?, OTYI Y POLL LS 38493° 9" GFND. BRASS CAP MONUMENT - - -- - -- PER PLAT OF CROWN POINT -- PHASE 1 SU20F3 w r s La � 2 r z: s z a L 0 a UNPLATTED CRONMPOIIf,PWl4E2 BBl6 A PIAi OF TW k Pur OF CROAK PONS PPol4E 1 a�dr�,r��w�gIII r wA (5P9)1&F m San Pa! beyN Q� CZ O N m�R oo110LAS HUGHES, MEMBER COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, I.I.C. RICH HOCHREM, NENBJN COTTONWOOD PARTNERS, LLC. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) RE COUNTY OF VAIBIA ) 1 CERVIFT THAT 1 HMON.OR HAVE SATWFACTORY EIEEICE THAT DOUGLAS MUCHEA IS THE PEYMM WNW APPEARED BEFORE ME, AND SAID PlREOM ACKMOWL=aft THAT ME HONED THIS INSTRULENT, ON OATH STATES THAT. NE WAE AUTROSIZED TO THE IM3TRUlWWr AND IT AS OP VA _ . I.I.C. TO G& "ll PIUM ARM} VOIAINTArrA&TOf SUCWP11R4T FOR TM USER AGO III. THE Ie.. - .. VATED -- NOTARY►UMIC -. c.... MY :I STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS -. COUNTY OF -- --TANOHA ) 1 CERTIFY THAT I IDNOTF OM NAVE SATIMFACVOIIY IWEOICB THAT RICA IIDGMREM E T". witimm WIND A/PBABEO RIGORS RM AND aAD PERSON ACIONOTMAMM TKATRE NONED THIS MBTRIIrWT. ON ORTN OTATTE THAT RE WAS AUTNEGZ ®TO EIIEGITE TIRII NA f TIVJMB ALE ACKNOWLEDGES F" AS A SERE OF COTTONWOOD PANMEIE. LLC. TO ME THE FRED AYE VOLUIITARY ACT OF SUCH PARTY FOR THE USES AND PUMOGM WWWION M THE INSTRUI�_ NOTARY PUELIC AIY _ _ _ - PLAT OF CROWN POINT, PHASE Z IN SW114 SW1I4 SECTION 32, TWP.13 N, RANGE 18 EAST, W.M. CITY OF YAKMAJAKIMACOUNTY, WASHINGTON YAKIMA- TIETOI( IRRIGATION DISTRICT THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED NEIEON W LOCATED WHOLLY OR IN PART FDTHIN vt4fi _. 0 - OF THE YNO ON MA -TEN IRRIGATION OISTNCT: ARC ALL L O" TWTRRITR PLAT ARE SUBJECT TO TNT TUMfk CONDITIONIk RESERI ATIONS AND TTLRRS IN THY= ATE3 TAITLNIWe -. IRRIGATION HATER RICRLAF.NAY AND HASt�7G AS MAY RE D POSED BY SAM N WI 11" DEC. IN ACCORDACE TH THE LAW. 1 HERESY CERTIFY THAT THE IRRIGATION EASEMENTS A"10001SOF VPLT SHOW01 ON TTY? PLAT ARE ADVAJATS TO SERVE ALL LOT'S LOCATT3€ iT[4%IM TWITS PLAT WYIICIa ARE OTHERWISE 01TITLIED TO IRSTOATHIN WATM THE OPEIIA_TNIORLILEA AINO R£G- CIF T% ..N ALSO CERTIFY THA`rTft [RRSOA§4ON AID iDOfITS OP WAY ARE ADEDUATS; TO YRJAMI T IRRIGATION RATER THROUGH THIS PLAT TQ OTHER ADJACENT LAND ENTITLED TO IRRIOATNIN WATER UNDER THE OPERATING FARM AND REOULATONB OF THE pSTRICT. 1 FURIMB CERTIP/ THAT _7. THIS PLAT COMTAMS COWFLET®I WMOIRTMN DISTASMTON FACLTLS M ACCORDANCE IWTH VMS o1STIjNCrs STANDARD4 OR --2- PROVIEIONi ACCEPTAMLE TO THIS oRTRIer NAYS BEEN MADE BY COVENANT 4 AOREEML/R FOR COMPLETED IRRIGATION DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES TO ALL LOTS; SMD AGREEMENT IS PLED "PPLEM TAL TO THIS RAT. ON 9. THE EXISTING 9 MAATp1 MSTMOLMON FACILITY IS AMr4ATE TO MEET TMM REQUIREMENT OR 4 LOl7 _ AREINW WXSOMMSPMVNOT CAgIFISO AS-WA NUILE LAMP BY THIS DISTRICT A01130011 ARE RIOT Cumtsw LY ENTITLED TO MoGGATION WATER MERE THE OPERATING ERNS AM REGULATIONS OF TIMES 01ETlU". YAAM4TIETON�T I`RiH DRITACT 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL CHARGEABLE REGULAR ADD SPECIAL ASSESSME"" COLLECTIBLE BY THIS OFFICE THAT ARE DUE AND OWING ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HaWAU 999P H. -.,. —JA TI,F..ASURS0 YAItd( TTI IRRIGATION! NOTES: I - "M A DDRESS" SHOWN ON Thin PLAYA= ACCURATE AS OF THY DATE OF RECORDING, BUT MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE THE CITY OF TAMMA CODE ADMINISTRATION OMSION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COMPOSEATNIN ORREMSbNImIT OFADDOMMATTRTM OF NL EIBBw PEow t6S11ANOL &THE OWNIMIS _ IHIOWH HITMOK TH11MORANTIM AM A334GREM A INTEREST HEREBY COVENANT AND AGREE TO RETAIN ALL SURFACE WATER WITHIN THE PAT ON-WM D. ALL LOTS OF TEOA 111UNOWISH04N HAVE . WGMN PROVIDED WITH PURUZ WATER AND SEWER COMEECrMK& APPROVALS APPROVEDTRIG Cr" OF YAKIMA 0WORNMAR .,.. _. -._... �m. .. V€D 1-108 _ OAV O= CITY OF YAKIMA SUIRRVUROM .. _ -. TOR APPROVE) THIS _ DAY OF __ To— VAKIMA CITY COUNCIL MAYOR _ _ TREASURERS CERTIFICATE 1 HERBY CERTIFY THAT ALL CHARGEABLE REGULAR AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS COLLECTIBLE BY THIS OFFICE THAT ARE DUE AND OWIMO ON THE PHOPERIY DESCRIBED HEREN ON DATE Of VMS CERTIFICATIONS HAVE SEER PAID. YRYRnf;M11'I11A1C2 BNANTOFTRACTk PIATOFCliOR11PONTPRIl4E 1 c4dPahrg aNNco"Iilk sHEEr3oF3 San Poil beNng t,WA { =2'fl y BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No 7 ForMeedug of February 17, 2015 ITEM TITLE Public meeting and resolution for approval of the Final Long Plat Cottonwood Partners LLC"Crown Point Phase 2" located In the vicinity of 7602 Coolidge Road SUBMITTED BY Joan Davenport ,AICP, Director of Community Development Trevor Martn, Assistant Planner (509) 57561 62 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: Bill Jordan, on behalf of Cottonwood Partners LLC submitted the final plat for Crown Point Phase 2, consisting of a 33 lot residential subdivision located In the vicinity of the southeast corner of Coolidge Road and South Fifth Ave. within about the 7700 block of Coolidge Road This plat received preliminary approval on November 13, 2003 by the Board of Yakima County Commissioners. This subdivision is now ready for Council's consideration and approval. Resolution :A Ordinance: Other (Specify): Contract Contract Term: Start Date: End Date: Item Budgeted: Amount: Funding Source/Fiscal Impact: Strategic Pnority: Improve the Built Environment Insurance Required? No Mail to Phone: APPROVED FORM• City Manager SUBMITTAL: RECOMMENDATION: